Search results

The purpose of this paper is to give an updated overview over the development of employee-ownership in Italy, France, Spain including Mondragon, the UK and the US with relatively many employee-owned firms. How have the barriers for employee-ownership been overcome in these countries?

The overview is based on updated descriptions of the development of employee-ownership included in this special issue. The analysis follows the structure of overcoming five barriers: the organization problem; the problem of entry and exit of employee-owners; the startup and takeover problem; the capital- and the risk problem.

Italy, France and Spain have overcome the barriers by specific legislation for worker cooperatives, this includes rules for entry and exit of employee members. Cooperative support organizations play an important role for monitoring and managing the startup problem and for access to capital. The Mondragon model includes individual ownership elements and a group structure of cooperatives. The EOT and ESOP models are well suited for employee takeovers, financing are eased by tax advantages and they are all-employee schemes. While the EOT has no individual risks, the ESOP model has the possibility for capital gains for employees but also the risk of losing these gains.

Comprehensive and updated overview of the development in employee-ownership in the five countries to identify successful formats of employee-ownership for implementation in countries with few employee-owned firms.

As a financial policy, dividend policy significantly affects firm value. This chapter analyzes how stock prices react to dividend decisions. First, a dividend payment is an extraction of value; therefore, stock price theoretically drops by the dividend amount on the ex-dividend day. In practice, the price drop and the dividend magnitude are not equal because of tax clientele, short-term trading, and market microstructure. Investors are indifferent in trading stocks before and after stocks go ex-dividend if they obtain equal marginal benefits from the two trading times. The difference in tax rates on dividends and capital gains leads to the gap between the price drop and the dividend amount. Moreover, if transaction costs are considerable, investors have high incentives to short-sell stocks until they cannot obtain more profits. The final outcome of this short-term trading is the difference between the price drop and the dividend amount. Furthermore, market microstructure factors such as limit orders, bid-ask spread, and price discreteness also create this gap. Second, dividend announcements convey valuable information to outsiders. When firms announce increases (decreases) in dividends, their stock prices tend to increase (decrease). Third, dividend policy is negatively related to stock price volatility. This negative relationship is explained by duration effect, rate of return effect, arbitrage realization effect, and information effect. Empirical evidence for this relationship is found in many countries. Finally, dividend smoothing is also considered as a signal about firms' future earnings. Consequently, firms with stable dividends have higher market value. In other words, dividend stability has a positive effect on stock prices.

The purpose of this paper is to compare three models of employee ownership and to identify pros and cons in relation to how the models can overcome the barriers. Which choices are important when defining the overall rules around the models and the specific possibilities for variations and combinations and what are the pros and cons for these choices?

The comparison is based on the three main models of employee ownership identified from the country descriptions in this special issue.

The models do not exclude each other. The models can all be promoted in a specific country, leaving the choice of specific model to the stakeholders involved in the establishment of the employee-owned company. The article also shows the possibility of combining different models and in this way to adjust to specific preferences and conditions – e.g. whether employees and other stakeholders want collective or individual ownership and whether it concerns a start-up or a succession company.

This paper identified the key differences and similarities of different models for employee ownership including pros and cons of worker cooperative vs the Employee Ownership Trust (EOT) and the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) models.

This paper aims to address the fundamentals of tax planning and seeks to focus on the opportunities and root causes for tax planning.

The paper reviews the current state of tax planning with case studies that reveal fundamental statutory structural opportunities.

While some, possibly many, tax advisers lack integrity and recommend tax structures to their clients that are inconsistent with reasonable interpretations of the tax law, most advisers, even very aggressive and creative advisers, probably do not. The paper suggests that it may be futile to seek to deter tax professionals from designing and marketing tax plans unless legislation makes tax advisers jointly responsible with their clients for their clients’ tax underpayments.

Short of such a radical approach, governments must commit first to altering the basic structure of their tax laws to make aggressive tax planning uninviting.

The paper offers original insights into the inseparability of the legislative process from the creation of unnecessary tax planning opportunities.

This chapter analyzes how firms conduct their dividend policy around the world. In principles, firms are free to pay or not to pay dividends and choose dividend levels. However, in some countries, the government requires firms to pay dividends annually in order to protect minority shareholders. Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Greece, and Venezuela are five countries of mandatory dividend payments. In addition, using the Compustat database, we investigate how nonfinancial firms pay dividends over the period 2001–2020. The percentage of payers tends to decrease across four time periods including 2001–2005, 2006–2010, 2011–2015, and 2016–2020. Newly listed firms are less likely to distribute dividends than old firms. “Payers,” “Always payers,” and “Former payers” have positive earnings while “Nonpayers” and “Never payers” experience negative earnings. “Never payers” have the highest level of cash while “Always payers” and “Former payers” have the smallest cash reserves. Moreover, Asia-Pacific has the largest proportion of payers but it tends to decrease. America has the lowest proportion of dividend payers, but it tends to increase. Firms in developing countries are more likely to pay dividends. Both the proportion of payers and the average payout ratio of civil law countries are much higher than those of common law countries. The United States has the lowest percentage of paying firms and dividend payouts. Furthermore, construction and wholesale trade industries have the highest proportions of payers and payout ratios. Mineral and services industries are less likely to pay dividends. Tax rates for dividends and capital gains are diverse across countries.

As this article reports, in recent years most legislative activities focused on start-ups, with as many as 12 European Union (EU) Member States having introduced tax incentives for employee share ownership (ESO) in this type of small and middle-sized enterprise (SME). But incentivising ESO in SMEs should be extended to all SMEs, the engine of the European economy, including those from the social economy, having shown their crucial function for the resilience of our societies during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Against the background of this recent and very dynamic development this article, it provides an overview of the start-up business segment in comparison to other types of companies, particularly focusing on differences with the SME sector; examines the legal regulations that hinder a broader adoption of ESO in European start-ups; presents best-practice examples to demonstrate the favourable conditions already established in some EU Member States and discussed whether these reforms and best practice examples could be extended and – as is already the case in some countries – applied to the whole SME population including social economy enterprises.

Since the European Commission launched the 2011 Social Business Initiative (SBI) followed by the 2016 Start-up and Scale-up initiative, many actions to support social enterprises in view of their potential to address societal challenges and contribute to sustainable economic growth have followed. Most recently, the 2021 Social Economy Action Plan of the European Commission gave important impulses. The potential of employee buyouts offering a continuation perspective to SMEs owners looking for successors was highlighted in the 2022 EC report “Transition Pathway for Proximity and Social Economy,” calling for the implementation of Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs).

The situation of employee share ownership in start-ups has some parallels with that in traditional SMEs, but in many respects, they differ fundamentally. Although, on the other hand, social enterprises may also have to compete with large firms for qualified staff and face challenges when growing or scaling their activities, the reason why ESO in this enterprise segment is not widespread in the EU is altogether different. In the absence of a prescribed legal form of incorporation, social enterprises operate in various forms (be it for profit or non-profit), e.g. cooperatives, closely held limited liability companies, mutuals, associations, voluntary organisations or foundations. Therefore, this article looks into the extension of the incentives for ESO to social enterprises inasmuch as they are organised in legal forms allowing for share ownership, above all in the form of limited liability companies.

The present research identifies a total of nine factors influencing tax avoidance under the international taxation regime of the developing countries and establishes a hierarchical relationship through modeling of the identified factors using modified-total interpretive structural modeling (M-TISM).

Due to “scale without mass” properties of the digital economy, businesses reduce their physical presence in the countries of economic activities. Aided with digital features, multinational enterprises (MNEs) avoid, abolish, or adopt flexible tax burden in the developing nations through by-passing the permanent establishment condition for company taxes or the income characterization prerequisite for royalty taxation. The present research endeavors to identify the drivers of tax avoidance in the developing countries, especially exacerbated due to digital technologies (economy). In addition, the authors also examine the hierarchical relation between the extracted drivers of tax avoidance.

This research presents a considerable driving force of elements like historical foundation of tax-treaties, dominance of the developed countries, influence of trade bodies in policy matters and finally information and communications technologies (ICTs).

Identified elements drive the actors like professional enablers, tax havens, international organizations, and intangible assets in the form of intellectual properties (IPs) which act upon tax arbitrage situations both under the domestic and treaty regulations, finally culminating into profit shifting, tax manipulations or avoidance.

Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) initial public offerings (IPOs) are an important source of early-stage capital and have also driven a substantial increase in main-board listed companies post-millennium. By contrast, Australian venture capital (VC) funding has remained largely dormant. The opposite has occurred in the US: IPOs have fallen by half, and VC funding has surged. The authors examine the reason for this divergence between ASX IPO and US VC systems that, with their supporting ecosystems, have many features in common and function similarly. The authors explore the potential factors that could explain the US VC surge vis-à-vis Australia's VC stagnation.

The authors’ analysis is predominantly qualitative. The authors describe the Australian listing process and its similar features and functions as for the prototypical VC. The authors also describe the developments in US VC driving its recent exceptional surge and highlight that such developments have not yet materialised on the Australian scene, where early-stage IPOs have served as a substitute.

The ASX's structure and ecosystem have been critical to its success in fostering early-stage main-board listings. While the US has succeeded in alternatively growing VC, there is an increasing concern that the latter has occurred partially because valuations are stretched, tax concessions for carried-interest capital gains are too high and corporate control benefits are becoming increasingly diluted. These developments could have important implications for Australia, where VC structures are currently being reviewed.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no prior study has attempted to bridge the broad differences in IPO and VC funding trends for early-stage companies in Australia and the USA.

The primary goal of this paper is to investigate the relationship between stock market liquidity and firm dividend policy within a market implementing the tax imputation system. The main aim is to understand how the tax imputation system influences the relationship between firm dividend policy and stock market liquidity within a cross-sectional framework.

This paper investigates the relationship between stock market liquidity and the dividend payout policy under the full tax imputation system in the Australian market. This study uses the Generalized Least Squares regressions with firm- and year-fixed effects.

In contrast to the negative relationship between the liquidity of common shares and the firms' dividends documented in countries with the double tax system, the study reveals that in Australia, the dividend payout ratios are positively associated with liquidity after controlling for various explanatory variables with both the contemporaneous and lagged time periods. Such a finding is robust to the use of alternative liquidity proxies and to the sub-period tests and remains during the COVID-19 pandemic period.

The insights derived from this study have significant implications for various stakeholders within the economy. The findings provide regulators with valuable insights to conduct a more holistic assessment of how the tax system impacts the economy, especially concerning the dividend choices of firms. Within the context of a full tax imputation system, investors can make investment decisions without factoring in the taxation impact. Simultaneously, firms can be relieved of concerns about losing investors who prioritize liquidity, particularly when a high dividend payout might not align optimally with their financial strategy.

This study contributes to the literature by extending the literature on the tax clientele effects on dividend policy, providing evidence that the tax imputation system can moderate the impact of liquidity on dividend policy. This study examines the impact of the dividend tax imputation system on the substitution effect between dividends and liquidity.

This paper aims to explore how the expansion in cryptocurrency users affects the country's research and development (R&D) investments.

The analysis covers 53 countries over the period 2019–2022. The empirical methodology implements an instrumental variable approach to overcome endogeneity and omitted variable bias issues. In particular, this study introduces novel instruments developed from Google data, specifically related to trends observed in the cryptocurrency markets.

The results show that macroeconomic and institutional factors, as well as technology infrastructure affect the country's R&D expenditure, as previously noted in the literature. The country's R&D spending significantly responds to cryptocurrency expansions. Conspicuously, each 10% increase in cryptocurrency market users boosts the ratio of R&D to GDP by 1.35%. The countries that have imposed an adequate taxation policy on cryptocurrency gains experienced more improvement in their R&D budget, in contrast to those that forced aggressive tax brackets or did not apply adequate policies. Cryptocurrency dynamics affect both religiously regulated and nonreligious countries.

This study has three main contributions. First, it introduces the role of the cryptocurrency market as one of the leading global trends to affect the countries’ R&D budget. Second, this paper documents the importance of forcing an adequate tax policy on cryptocurrency capital gains. Third, the results of this paper serve as guidelines for governments to face the challenges raised by the cryptocurrency market.