Transforming International Taxation in the Digital Economy: A Systematic Literature Review of Digital Services Tax and OECD Pillar One and Pillar Two
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61231/rr497z34Keywords:
Digital Service Tax, OECD Pillar One and Pillar Two, International TaxationAbstract
The shift from unilateral Digital Services Taxes (DST) to the OECD's multilateral Pillar One and Pillar Two framework is a major development in international taxation, yet systematic syntheses of this transition remain limited. This study aims to map the academic literature on this transition through a Systematic Literature Review of Scopus-indexed articles following PRISMA guidelines, which yielded eleven eligible articles. The findings show that unilateral DSTs are consistently associated with legal uncertainty and compliance complexity, driving the need for a multilateral solution. Most studies (64%) use qualitative legal and policy analysis, while quantitative evidence on the fiscal impact of both Pillars remains scarce. The discourse is therefore still largely normative. This review offers a literature map for future research and a reference for tax authorities.
References
Avi-Yonah, R. S., & Salaimi, M. (2022). Minimum taxation in the United States in the context of GloBE. Intertax, 50(10), 673–677. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4085875
Barake, M., & Le Pouhaër, E. (2025). Tax revenue from Pillar One Amount A: Country-by-country estimates. International Tax and Public Finance, 32(3), 680–740. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-024-09859-4
Escribano, E. (2021). Day 1 of the Spanish digital services tax: And now what? A wave of tax policy, legal interpretation and compliance challenges. Intertax, 49(6–7), 517–531. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3859891
Hak, M., Šostar, M., & Andrlić, B. (2025). Tax implications of business digitalization in multinational enterprises: A comparative study of OECD and EU countries. WSEAS Transactions on Business and Economics, 22, 1850–1858. https://doi.org/10.37394/23207.2025.22.147
Hines, J. R. (2023). Digital tax arithmetic. National Tax Journal, 76(1), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1086/723179
Liang, Y. (2024). The impact of the global minimum tax reform on China and its countermeasures. Economics, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1515/econ-2022-0104
Linnenluecke, M. K., Marrone, M., & Singh, A. K. (2020). Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678
Listokin, S. (2025). New rationales for taxing the digital economy: Lessons from the OECD Pillar One consultations. Frontiers in Political Science, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2025.1561283
McAllister, J. T., Lennertz, L., & Atencio Mojica, Z. (2022). Mapping a discipline: A guide to using VOSviewer for bibliometric and visual analysis. Science & Technology Libraries, 41(3), 319–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/0194262X.2021.1991547
OECD. (2021). Tax challenges arising from digitalisation of the economy – Global anti-base erosion model rules (Pillar Two). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/782bac33-en
OECD. (2025). Tax challenges arising from the digitalisation of the economy – Consolidated commentary to the global anti-base erosion model rules (2025). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a551b351-en
Paskaleva, M., & Stoykova, A. (2025). International tax reform in the digital economy: Theoretical framework and empirical simulation of multi-factor allocation systems. Journal of Tax Reform, 11(3), 612–642. https://doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2025.11.3.219
Peters, C. (2023). The legitimacy of the OECD’s work on Pillar Two: An analysis of the overconfidence in a ‘devilish logic.’ Intertax, 51(8–9), 554–571. https://doi.org/10.54648/taxi2023057
Plekhanova, V., & Noonan, C. (2023). Strategic narratives in international tax policy making: BEPS Action 1 and the stability argument. Canadian Tax Journal, 71(2), 355–386. https://doi.org/10.32721/ctj.2023.71.2.plekhanova
Polezharova, L. V., & Krasnobaeva, A. M. (2020). E-commerce taxation in Russia: Problems and approaches. Journal of Tax Reform, 6(2), 104–123. https://doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2020.6.2.077
Ponomareva, K. (2023). Сравнительный анализ опыта введения налога на цифровые услуги в зарубежных странах [Comparative analysis of the experience of introducing a digital services tax in foreign countries]. Law Journal of the Higher School of Economics, (4), 334–356. https://doi.org/10.17323/2072-8166.2023.4.334.356
Rigó, C. B., & Tóth, A. (2021). The symbolic significance of digital services tax and its practical consequences. Public Finance Quarterly, 65(4), 515–530. https://doi.org/10.35551/PFQ_2020_4_5
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3
Wang, J. (2024). New pillar to address tax challenges arising from digitalization of the economy. Florida Tax Review, 26(2). https://doi.org/10.5744/ftr.2023.2005
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rochma Sudiati, Syalu Syaola Kamila
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
