Search results

This chapter applies an “integrative” model to examine the impact and interaction of economic and moral/social factors in the corporate tax compliance context. More specifically, it examines whether social norms moderate the effect of economic factors in this context.

Fifty-five MBA students assumed corporate CFO roles and analyzed a proposed aggressive corporate tax shelter transaction (“tax shelter”). Participants indicated whether they would recommend the tax shelter and answered questions regarding the transaction and their corporate tax compliance views.

Hierarchical Regression results indicate that, in the corporate tax compliance context, decision makers’ norms (moral/social factors) moderate the effect of perceived expected value of aggressive tax transactions (economic factors). More specifically, results indicate that (1) perceived legality of aggressive corporate tax transactions significantly impacts willingness of corporate decision makers to recommend them, even when controlling for perceived economic effect of the transaction, and (2) due to moral/social factors, corporate decision makers often may not support aggressive tax treatments with material positive expected values.

Accordingly, (1) custom and social factors should be integrated into the corporate tax compliance decision-making framework, and (2) campaigns to strengthen corporate tax compliance should focus on the law’s text and intent as well as upon sanctions for noncompliance.

This paper investigates the significant increase in S corporation banks converting to C corporations following the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) and the shift in motivations behind these conversions.

The paper uses bank-level panel data from Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Call Reports to analyze the determinants of S bank conversions after the TCJA, comparing post-TCJA conversion trends with pre-TCJA trends utilizing an ordinary least squares (OLS) and logistics model.

The study finds that post-TCJA conversions are primarily driven by financially stable banks seeking improved tax conditions and relaxed shareholder restrictions as C corporations. This contrasts with pre-TCJA conversions, which were predominantly driven by financially distressed S corporation banks seeking new equity capital to maintain solvency.

The findings necessitate a comprehensive reconsideration of the Subchapter S status' sustained relevance for smaller institutions, especially in light of the comparative benefits now offered by the C corporation status post-TCJA. The results underscore the importance of ongoing academic investigation to deepen the understanding of the evolving fiscal landscape's effects on community banks, thereby contributing to the knowledge of the resilience and health of the US economy.

This research nudges policymakers and regulators to contemplate the ongoing relevance and advantages of the S corporation status. Given the substantial benefits conferred by the C corporation status in the post-TCJA environment, this study suggests that retaining the S corporation status may not offer the same appeal for smaller community banks as it once did.

This paper contributes to the broader understanding of the impact of tax policy on businesses' organizational choices, particularly in the banking industry and emphasizes the need for a comprehensive review of the S corporation status to assess its ongoing applicability in fostering small and community-focused financial institutions in light of the evolved corporate tax landscape.

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test legitimacy theory by comparing the corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures of tax aggressive corporations with those of non‐tax aggressive corporations in Australia.

A unique sample of 20 Australian corporations accused by the Australian Taxation Office of engaging in tax aggressive activities during the 2001‐2006 period was hand‐collected. These 20 tax aggressive corporations were then matched with 20 non‐tax aggressive corporations (based on industry classification, corporation size and time period). This process generated a choice‐based sample of 40 corporations for empirical analysis. Using content analysis techniques, financial accounting data were gathered from the Aspect‐Huntley database and CSR disclosures were individually measured for each corporation in the sample. Various statistical techniques were then used (e.g. paired sample statistics, Pearson correlation analysis and ordinary least squares regression analysis) to test legitimacy theory.

Overall, the empirical results consistently show a positive and statistically significant association between corporate tax aggressiveness and CSR disclosure, thereby confirming legitimacy theory in the context of corporate tax aggressiveness.

The paper provides empirical evidence in support of legitimacy theory as an explanation for why specific corporations disclose more CSR‐related information than others. Additionally, to the best of the authors' knowledge, the paper is one of the first to document an empirical association between corporate tax aggressiveness and CSR in the literature.

This study analyses the threshold for debt of corporations under the debt-bias corporate tax system. We adopt a contingent claim model of the corporation to reflect the incentive effect of the debt-bias corporate tax system. This framework is based on aspiration level theory and the required probability for the successful completion of a project that is identical to decision weight probability in prospect theory. The proposed framework incorporates the debt-bias tax regulations prevailing in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. When the OECD countries’ financial and non-financial corporation data were applied into framework, we observe that the government achieve equilibrium by employing contradictory corporate tax regulations. Moreover, we observe that corporations are intrinsically equity-loving, although the debt-bias corporate tax system stimulates corporations toward debt. This situation makes the government corporate revenue sensitive by placing it at the disposal of corporations’ financing choice instead of corporate profitability. The corporations’ threshold for debt assists in distinguishing between debt and equity-loving corporations. Moreover, corporations’ threshold for debt assists policy makers in deciding the appropriate combination of such reform policies as the Allowance on Corporate Equity and Comprehensive Business Income Tax. A transition from debt-oriented capital structure to equity-oriented capital structure may play an important role in promoting Islamic finance.

This paper suggests that the proliferation of highly sophisticated corporate tax shelters has been a major reason for the decline of corporate income tax as a percentage of GDP and of total Federal receipts. Many of these shelters have extended beyond solid tax planning and into the realm of subversion. The controversy surrounding possible remedies for these abuses is just as lively as the debates surrounding the tax shelters themselves. This article explores the nature of a variety of tax shelters in an effort to illustrate the insidious nature of the corporate tax shelter problem and then discusses solutions, both legislative and nonlegislative, designed to curb these abuses.

The purpose of this paper is to warn policymakers, by examining certain aspects of policy, possibly overlooked, against overestimating the power of corporate social responsibility (CSR) idea to inhibit tax avoidance by the multinationals.

By examining, with narrative and qualitative means, existing insights such as ones with regard to the inefficiency of the public sector.

Implication that the following three factors could not co-exist: promoting CSR activities, which include moral tax payment by the multinational corporations; requiring the multinationals to refrain from immorally reducing effective tax rates and keeping the current level of public utilities.

To sound an alarm to tax policymakers who are particularly addicted to the base erosion and profit shifting by multinational enterprises recently by this new implication mixing up with existing findings with regard to the CSR idea and cost-inefficiency character of the public sector activities.

From time to time we have had occasion to refer to earnings per share in terms of the new ‘imputation’ system of company taxation. This is a somewhat complex system and we have asked our Financial Correspondent to explain in some detail what is involved. In attempting an explanation, he has found it useful to compare the present system not only, as others have done, with the preceding corporation tax system inaugurated by Mr Callaghan in his 1965 Budget, but also with the earlier profits‐cum‐ income tax system. There are of course many other systems of company taxation, but for purposes of explanation a comparison of the three systems — profits‐plus‐income tax, the Callaghan‐type corporation tax, and the imputation system—is sufficient.

This paper is an effort to demystify tax havens – what they mean, what they offer and why they are harmful. It offers a detailed analysis of abusive tax planning by multinational corporations, involving the use of tax havens, shedding light on how corporations use “egregious” tax-sheltering techniques right from their incorporation to avoid payment of income taxes. The paper also discusses global efforts against the phenomenon and policy recommendations.

The paper brings together definitions from various sources to accurately define and identify tax haven economies. The key contribution of the paper is to diagrammatically explain the use of tax havens by MNCs right from the time they are incorporated. It explains how every big and small corporate decision is motivated by the desire to save taxes and how tax havens come in handy for such corporations.

This paper finds that base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) is a pervasive phenomenon, largely due to the suppliers of tax haven operations. Here, corporate decisions are divided into strategic and operational and further subdivided into investing, operating and financing activities, and provide real-life corporate examples of how tax havens fit into almost every corporate decision. This is the key contribution of the paper.

This is a review paper that sums up knowledge about tax havens and their use by MNCs. It does not, however, use empirical data to corroborate its findings. It would be interesting to see empirically whether MNCs with greater tax haven operations actually have lower effective tax rates.

The paper can provide a framework for designing tax policies in a manner that geographical arbitrage can be minimized. It can enable formulation of the necessary incentive structures in the form of penalties, rewards and the like for both the users and providers of tax haven services to curb massive base and profit shifting out of high-tax countries.

The paper is one small step in the direction of bringing about equality in tax payments, i.e. to align real tax systems with the canon of equality that Adam Smith once dreamt of. Taxes should be progressive in nature, implying that the amount of taxes paid should increase with one’s income. However, with the advent of offshore financial centres and egregious tax planning techniques, only the smaller corporations and middle-class individuals end up paying taxes, while the rich and bigger corporations get away easily.

The paper explores in detail the manner in which MNCs use, rather exploit, regulatory loopholes in tax systems of different countries to save on tax payments. By shifting their tax base from one country to another, MNCs not only hamper Treasury collections but also breed disrespect for the global tax system. The paper can help in designing tax laws in tune with such corporate motives.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the profitability of different ownership forms of banks. The two ownership forms are corporations that elect to be taxed as a Subchapter S corporation (limited to 100 shareholders) as opposed to those corporations that do not make this election. The impact this election has on the dividends paid to the investors is examined.

This paper uses Call Report Data on Wisconsin banks as collected by SNL Securities as its database. The research methodology uses two measures of performance: dividend ratio and accounting return on assets (ROA). The dividend ratio is defined as dividends as a percentage of net income (dividends/net income). Accounting return on investment is net income as a percentage of total assets (net income/total assets) and is a measure of profitability. A number of regressions were created with these as the endogenenous variables and a heteroskedasticity‐corrected ordinary least squares (OLS) model was used.

Subchapter S banks were found to be more profitable (as measured by ROA). However, when taxes are taken into account, there is no practical difference in profitability between the two types of corporate structure.

By limiting the analysis to Wisconsin, a single state, confusion that may be caused by both state laws (personal and corporate) and local corporate cultures is avoided.

The practical implications of this research can guide the federal government in determining whether this form of stock ownership is a device that reduces or increases federal tax revenues. It can also provide insight to the stockholders of these banks into the differences in profitability these corporate forms offer.

While earlier literature has reviewed the concept of Subchapter S corporations and its theoretical impact, little research has been conducted that tests the actual results. Due to the private nature of the corporate form (these types of corporations are often not publicly traded and have no incentive to reveal private financial records), this original research is the result of the public nature of banks that provide a rich dataset for us to examine.

This study examines the importance of income income-shifting arrangements of US multinational corporations (MNCs) on future stock price crash risk.

This study employs a sample of 7,641 corporation-year observations over the 2005–2017 period and uses ordinary least squares regression analysis.

The authors find that the income-shifting arrangements of MNCs are positively and significantly associated with stock price crash risk after controlling for corporate tax avoidance and other known determinants of stock price crash risk in the regression model. This result is robust to alternative measures of stock price crash risk and income-shifting, and several endogeneity tests. The authors also observe that income-shifting arrangements increase stock price crash risk both directly and indirectly through the information opacity channel. Finally, in cross-sectional analyses, the authors find that the positive association between income-shifting and stock price crash risk is more pronounced for MNCs that use tax haven subsidiaries and have weak corporate governance mechanisms.

The authors provide new empirical evidence that MNCs will likely face significant capital market consequences regarding their income-shifting arrangements.