August 6, 1999
IBM Is Being Probed by the U.K.
Over Allegedly Low Tax Payments
By JON G. AUERBACH
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL
Britain's tax authority is seeking to determine whether International Business Machines
Corp. improperly avoided taxes in that country by having its British unit
pay artificially high royalties to the parent company, according to people
familiar with the matter.
Inland Revenue, the United Kingdom's equivalent of the Internal Revenue
Service, has been examining IBM's books for about two years, these people
said. The inquiry has centered on fluctuations in royalty payments between
about 1991 and about 1996, these people said.
The inquiry was sparked by allegations made to Inland Revenue by a
former IBM U.K. employee, Gerard M. Churchhouse. Mr. Churchhouse, who had
been a manager in sales and marketing, alleged that IBM avoided paying as
much as about $500 million in U.K. taxes between 1991 and 1996 by raising
to 12% from 8% the royalties paid to the U.S. parent on goods and services
sold in the U.K.
Such an allegation, if true, would lower the operating profit of the
British unit, thereby lowering British taxes. It would also have improved
operating results at IBM's U.S. unit. However, IBM did not pay taxes on its
U.S. operations between 1991 and 1993 because the company was posting
losses. U.S. operations returned to profitability in 1994.
IBM confirmed that the computer maker is being audited by Inland
Revenue. IBM spokesman Rob Wilson called the audit "normal and routine,"
adding that the company is "cooperating fully with the tax
authorities."
Mr. Churchhouse was dismissed by IBM in 1995. His allegations on U.K.
taxes were also outlined in a lawsuit he subsequently filed against the
company in New York's Supreme Court, alleging, among other things, that his
dismissal was in retaliation for his unearthing of corruption. The suit was
dismissed earlier this year on grounds that Mr. Churchhouse had already
reached a dismissal settlement with IBM in the U.K. in 1995. The court did
not specifically address the merits of his tax allegations.
Mr. Churchhouse alleged that IBM's U.K. unit was ordered by the parent
company to boost its royalty payments in 1991. He said the
four-percentage-point increase in 1991 translated into 160 million in extra
transfer payments, or about $260 million at current exchange rates.
Mr. Churchhouse said the royalty remained at 12% through 1993, then
dipped, only to bounce back around 1995. He estimated that the total amount
of royalty increases between 1991 and 1996 reached about 900 million, and
that IBM thus avoided paying roughly 300 million of taxes over the
period.
Mr. Wilson, the IBM spokesman, declined to comment on the allegations,
the level of royalty payments or any reason they might have increased.
In 1991, the corporate tax rate in the U.K. was about 35%, and has
declined since then to its current rate of about 31%. According to IBM's
annual reports, its U.S. tax provision as a proportion of U.S. operating
profit was 18% in 1994, 27% in 1995 and 37.5% in 1996. (IBM paid no U.S.
income taxes from 1991 to 1993 because of the losses.)
Mr. Churchhouse alleged that he approached Inland Revenue after he was
fired, because of tax issues related to his severance payment. Around this
time, Mr. Churchhouse said he also began to look into the alleged royalty
scheme, conducting interviews with IBM officials and pulling IBM corporate
filings in the U.K. He said he compiled a report laying out the alleged
royalty deviations, which he said he submitted to Inland Revenue in
1997.
Analysts have generally lauded IBM's chairman and chief executive
officer, Louis V. Gerstner, for lowering the company's tax rate since he
took over in 1993. They have said Mr. Gerstner accomplished this by moving
production to areas with more attractive tax regimes such as Mexico and
Singapore.
In 1994, for instance, IBM's overall tax rate was 41.4%. Since then, it
has fallen each year, reaching about 30% last year. Analysts estimate that
the tax rate will drop to about 29.8% this year.
Copyright © 1999 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.