-
Business consulting services
Our business consulting services can help you improve your operational performance and productivity, adding value throughout your growth life cycle.
-
Business process solutions
We can help you identify, understand and manage potential risks to safeguard your business and comply with regulatory requirements.
-
Business risk services
The relationship between a company and its auditor has changed. Organisations must understand and manage risk and seek an appropriate balance between risk and opportunities.
-
Cybersecurity
As organisations become increasingly dependent on digital technology, the opportunities for cyber criminals continue to grow.
-
Forensic and investigation services
At Grant Thornton, we have a wealth of knowledge in forensic services and can support you with issues such as dispute resolution, fraud and insurance claims.
-
Mergers and acquisitions
Globalisation and company growth ambitions are driving an increase in M&A activity worldwide. We work with entrepreneurial businesses in the mid-market to help them assess the true commercial potential of their planned acquisition and understand how the purchase might serve their longer- term strategic goals.
-
Recovery and reorganisation
Workable solutions to maximise your value and deliver sustainable recovery
-
Transactional advisory services
We can support you throughout the transaction process – helping achieve the best possible outcome at the point of the transaction and in the longer term.
-
Valuations
We provide a wide range of services to recovery and reorganisation professionals, companies and their stakeholders.
-
IFRS
The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) are a set of global accounting standards developed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) for the preparation of public company financial statements. At Grant Thornton, our IFRS advisers can help you navigate the complexity of financial reporting from IFRS 1 to IFRS 17 and IAS 1 to IAS 41.
-
Audit quality monitoring
Having a robust process of quality control is one of the most effective ways to guarantee we deliver high-quality services to our clients.
-
Global audit technology
We apply our global audit methodology through an integrated set of software tools known as the Voyager suite.
-
Corporate and business tax
Our trusted teams can prepare corporate tax files and ruling requests, support you with deferrals, accounting procedures and legitimate tax benefits.
-
Direct international tax
Our teams have in-depth knowledge of the relationship between domestic and international tax laws.
-
Global mobility services
Through our global organisation of member firms, we support both companies and individuals, providing insightful solutions to minimise the tax burden for both parties.
-
Indirect international tax
Using our finely tuned local knowledge, teams from our global organisation of member firms help you understand and comply with often complex and time-consuming regulations.
-
Innovation and investment incentives
Dynamic businesses must continually innovate to maintain competitiveness, evolve and grow. Valuable tax reliefs are available to support innovative activities, irrespective of your tax profile.
-
Private client services
Our solutions include dealing with emigration and tax mitigation on the income and capital growth of overseas assets.
-
Transfer pricing
The laws surrounding transfer pricing are becoming ever more complex, as tax affairs of multinational companies are facing scrutiny from media, regulators and the public
-
Tax policy
Tax policies are constantly evolving and there are a number of complex changes on the horizon that could significantly affect your business.

To find out more, register to see the webcast for free.
Pillar 2 seeks to end the ‘race to the bottom’ on tax rates worldwide. In a further clampdown on aggressive tax planning, Pillar 2 would also make it much harder to minimise tax by recording profits in low tax jurisdictions and costs in high tax counterparts. But agreement in principle is one thing. Enacting Pillar 2 in national legislation and applying it in practice is another.
Even with the latest OECD Pillar 2 guidelines (Model Rules), there is considerable room for divergence in interpretation and implementation in different jurisdictions. The complexities of imposing a globally binding minimum tax rate and sharing tax rights across multiple jurisdictions, subsidiaries and affiliates are heightened by conflicting priorities both between and within signatory states.
The result is continuing uncertainty and legislative delays, with few countries on track to enact and implement Pillar 2— and its sister Pillar 1, which aims to reallocate taxing rights to reflect an increasingly digitized global economy — by the 2023 target. In turn, the differences in interpretation, application, and legislative timetables may open up a serious risk of tax disputes and double-taxation.
The OECD’s model rules on Pillar 2 bring together two interlocking measures:
- The income inclusion rule (IIR): A top-up tax on the ultimate parent entity of a low-taxed foreign subsidiary.
- Undertaxed payment rule (UTPR): The UTPR requires a UTPR taxpayer that is a member of an MNE Group to make an adjustment in respect of any top-up tax that is allocated to that taxpayer from a low-tax Constituent Entity of the same group.
The big questions are how and when different countries will build these measures into their tax frameworks.
The U.S.
President Joe Biden’s administration is one of the key drivers of the Pillar 2 agreement. While the existing global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) framework is conceptually similar to Pillar 2, it appears it would not fully comply in practice. The administration and congressional Democrats have therefore drafted legislation to largely align GILTI with Pillar 2. At a headline level, this includes increasing the GILTI tax rate to align with the Pillar 2 minimum requirement of a 15% rate. At an operational level, this includes a range of convergence measures such as aligning GILTI with the IIR by moving to apply it on a country-by-country basis. However, the proposed legislation stops far short of complete convergence.
The problem is that the legislative changes needed to enact Pillar 1 are wrapped up in a larger Democratic economic package dubbed Build Back Better (BBB). With some Democrats still opposed, the bill is currently stalled within the Senate. Negotiations with hold-out senators on a smaller package that would include international reform continue, so enactment in the next few months is still conceivable. But with mid-term elections coming up later in the year, time for enactment is running out. It will only become harder next year if Republicans take control of at least one chamber of Congress, as many expect.
Failure to move Pillar 2 into law in the U.S.—in an economy with such scale and global reach—would be a serious blow to the OECD. It could also expose U.S. MNEs to the risk of double taxation when operating in countries that do adopt Pillar 2. A possible example of the collateral effects would be a U.S. headquartered business with a holding company in the U.K. The U.S. tax authorities would apply GILTI for the whole group, but the U.K. could insist on an IIR for the subsidiaries of the U.K. holding company.
In practice, many U.S. companies are likely to balk at the anomalies and resulting competitive disadvantages of operating on either side of the Pillar 2 divide. These businesses could therefore put added pressure on Congress to bring the U.S. tax framework into line with other major economies.
Ireland
Given Ireland’s current corporate tax rate of 12.5%, Pillar 2’s proposed 15% minimum rate could erode some of Ireland’s tax advantages. Nonetheless, Irish policymakers have broadly welcomed the Pillar 2 agreement as it removes the once muted possibility of even higher rate increases. At 15%, Ireland’s tax rate would still be competitive when compared to rising rates in the U.K. and other major economies. Moreover, the existing 12.5% rate will be retained for groups with global turnover of less than €750 million.
Like other E.U. members, Ireland’s legislation will be based on a common E.U. directive. With several technical and political issues still to be resolved, E.U.-wide agreement and enactment of national legislation by 2023 appear increasingly unlikely. While there has been no formal announcement, 2024 is a more realistic expectation.
With a significant number of U.S. corporations basing their European operations in Ireland, developments in the U.S. are also being closely monitored.
U.K.
The U.K. is a supporter of Pillar 2 and could be one of the first countries to implement the measures. Current plans include introducing a domestic minimum tax to complement the Pillar 2 rules.
Following consultations earlier in the year, legislation is due to go before Parliament in the Autumn, followed by the publication of the implementation framework at the end of 2022.
However, the consultations have highlighted corporate concerns over both the complexities of Pillar 2 and the need for clarification of a number of grey areas. An example would be the potential for top up tax for loss making companies and the apparent discrepancy between treatment of tax incentives, the benefits of tax credits for research and development looking to be largely preserved, whilst patent box may not.
In addition to the tight timetable for implementation, many U.K. businesses are worried that early implementation in the U.K. would mean that it’s out of step with other major economies. A delay until 2024 would allow more time to prepare and alleviate some of the anomalies.
Germany
As a high tax economy, there is strong political backing in Germany for a measure that would reduce rate differential—and potential disadvantages—when competing against low-tax jurisdictions.
Still, many corporations are concerned about moving to Pillar 2 in 2023. In part, this is because the E.U. directive is still being drafted, leaving little time to prepare. In addition, based on past experiences, many businesses are also worried that German implementation of the directive may be stricter than other E.U. states and the punishments for non-compliance harsher.
The concerns are heightened by some of the complexities and potential for conflict when building Pillar 2 into German tax codes. A clear case in point is how the Pillar 2 top-up tax would work alongside current controlled foreign corporation (CFC) regulations. At present, the CFC is triggered when tax falls below 25%—much higher than the 15% threshold in Pillar 2. Even if the thresholds are aligned, differences in computation between Pillar 2 and German CFC rules could lead to double top-up taxation.
Many corporations would welcome a delay in 2024 or later as it would give more time to iron out such issues and prepare for the new compliance demands.
Japan
Like the U.K. and Germany, Japan is a keen advocate of Pillar 2, believing it could improve the competitiveness of Japanese companies.
But like these other states, the complexities and conflicts have raised concerns. A particular focus is the risk of double taxation when applying the Pillar 2 rules alongside Japan’s own CFC regulations.
Further concerns centre on whether the accounting rules in the consolidated financial statements used in Pillar 2 can be reconciled with local generally accepted accounting principles without incurring considerable extra cost and risk.
The other big uncertainty is whether the necessary legislation and implementation measures will be ready in time to introduce Pillar 2 in 2023. Therefore there are concerns as to whether introduction next year is really feasible.
The way forward
With so much still to be agreed upon and so many grey areas to be resolved, the key take-away from the webcast is the need to watch developments closely. While there may be a temptation to leave preparations until everything is set in stone, this would leave your business with dangerously little time to get ready for what is a major overhaul ahead.
To find out more about what’s coming and what it means for your business, log into the webcast