Senate Panel to Look at Caterpillar Tax Strategy

By James R. Hagerty 

A U.S. Senate panel scheduled a hearing for April 1 on Caterpillar Inc.'s offshore tax strategy.

The hearing of the Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, starting at 9:30 a.m. EDT in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, is the latest in a series of efforts by the panel to examine how U.S.-based companies allocate income among their foreign subsidiaries and how those decisions are influenced by federal tax rules. The committee previously has examined tax practices of Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Hewlett-Packard Co.

Caterpillar, the world's largest maker of construction and mining equipment, released a statement saying it has agreed to testify before the subcommittee. The Peoria, Ill.-based company said the inquiry is "focusing on how our international business operations may impact the U.S. taxes paid by Caterpillar."

Caterpillar said its effective tax rate averages about 29%. That is "relatively high for a company with substantial earnings generated from business activities outside the U.S.," the company said.

Plans for the hearing were first reported by the Bloomberg news service.

In a Feb. 18 securities filing, Caterpillar said the Internal Revenue Service was examining its tax returns for 2007 to 2009 and had sought adjustments related to overseas operations and foreign tax credits. "We disagree with these proposed adjustments," Caterpillar said, adding that it would "vigorously contest" any decision by the IRS to impose them. Caterpillar said it believed this tax examination wouldn't have "a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position.

Daniel J. Schlicksup, who had worked as a Caterpillar tax manager, filed a lawsuit in U.S. district court in Peoria in June 2009 alleging that the company shifted profits to offshore companies to avoid more than $2 billion of U.S. federal income tax in what the suit described as a "tax dodge." Caterpillar denied it had violated tax rules. Caterpillar and Mr. Schlicksup reached a confidential settlement of the case in February 2012.

Write to James R. Hagerty at [e-mail]