Search results

This paper examines the optimal use of tax incentives relating to the Hawaii sales, use and excise tax. While many states offer exemptions to these taxes, Hawaii is the only known state that ties its excise tax credit to the depreciation method used on the state income tax return. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to use the Hawaii business tax context to illustrate the complex trade-offs and year-by-year analyses that small businesses often must employ in the presence of shifting federal tax policy that indirectly influences state tax structures because of tax coupling. Federal and Hawaii taxpayers can elect to expense depreciable property using the 179 expensing provision or to depreciate using the modified accelerated cost recovery system (MACRS). We develop a model that will help non-corporate small businesses in Hawaii determine their optimal tax cost recovery strategy: (1) Utilize Hawaii Section 179 immediate expensing on purchases of tangible personal property, or alternatively (2) Employ MACRS depreciation on these purchases combined with the Hawaii Capital Goods Excise Credit. Our modeling separately considers the possibility that the proprietor jointly makes the federal and Hawaii cost recovery decision, as well as the alternative possibility that these cost recovery decisions are made independently.

The study illustrates that the interaction of federal and state law differences exacerbated by frequent tax changes may cause significant tax compliance complexity and resulting confusion for small non-corporate business taxpayers who are generally not equipped to wrestle with such issues. From a policy perspective, states may wish to minimize complexity using coupling efforts with federal law or otherwise routinely revisit outdated state tax statutes that indirectly cause unintended tax consequences. States must be cognizant, however, that their own budget constraints may worsen if they fully couple with recent generous federal Section 179 expensing limits.

The purpose of this case is to allow students the opportunity to examine how the recent changes to depreciation incentives in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-97, Dec. 22, 2017) may affect the purchase of capital assets. Bonus depreciation has been extended to allow an immediate 100% deduction for eligible property, which also now includes used property. This bonus depreciation will be phased out over a nine-year period. Additionally, the progressive marginal tax rate used for business income has been eliminated and replaced by a flat 21% tax rate, representing a 14% drop in the tax rate on businesses.

Specifically, this case will examine how a change from 50% to 100% bonus depreciation affects purchasing decisions between asset classes, due to the exaggerated impact on the net present value for longer lived assets. In keeping with the evolution of accounting in academia, students will be asked both to solve a realistic problem and to communicate their investment decisions effectively. To prepare students for the assignment, the informational building blocks are presented in modules following Bloom’s taxonomy – culminating in the application of the concepts in a decision-making scenario. The learning method applied in this case has been tested in the classroom, with quantifiable results showing a positive learning outcome. Pre- and post-case assessment questions were administered with significant improvement in students reported understanding across all six measures. Based on these results, this case achieves the dual goals of teaching students how to apply the concept of bonus depreciation to maximize value and how to communicate this information effectively.

Bonus depreciation was enacted by the United States Congress and signed into law in 2002 largely in response to the economic malaise that engulfed the U.S. economy after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. We investigate whether bonus depreciation, a capital asset expensing allowance under the U.S. federal income tax code, impacts the level of business investment in property, plant, and equipment in the time periods that followed 9-11 in comparison to other earlier time periods. Based on the empirical evidence, the bonus depreciation policy has a positive effect on capital expenditures only in the period in which this policy was legislatively anticipated, specifically the period spanning the last quarter of 2001 and the first quarter of 2002. Otherwise, we find no significant increase in capital expenditures during the period that this special depreciation provision policy is initially in place from 2002 to 2005. Although bonus depreciation is re-enacted in response to the fiscal distress and recession that began in 2007, capital expenditures actually decline during the recovery era, a period following the post-2008 subprime mortgage crisis. Though Congress continues to temporarily re-enact bonus depreciation on an annual basis through December 31, 2014, there is no strong evidence that capital investment is positively impacted. Instead, the empirical results show that factors that positively affect the level of companies’ capital expenditures include capital intensity, cost of capital, amount of cash holdings, changes in sales and loans. Our empirical results invite the question of Congress’ intended goal in re-instating bonus depreciation for 2015 through 2019.

This chapter describes a project used in an entity tax class to engage students in developing several competencies that are valued by academics and the professional accounting community. Instructors provide students with a single set of data from which to prepare tax returns based on three separate assumptions about the entity: it is (1) a partnership, (2) a C corporation, or (3) an S corporation. Instructors play the role of a tax supervisor in a professional firm and students play the role of junior tax professionals. The student must communicate with the instructor to obtain necessary information (beyond the facts listed in the project description) to complete the tax engagement. Completed manually at first, the project reinforces material learned in class, encourages professional communication, and deepens the students’ understanding of how the choice of entity affects business taxation. Once the manual preparation is completed, students prepare the same returns using a computerized tax preparation tool to enhance their learning with technology.

South Africa’s mixed, pluralistic legal order demands a nuanced approach to cultural expertise in litigation. Culture in general and cultural expertise in particular have always played an important role in all areas of law, both state and non-state, and a rich collection of jurisprudence is available to serve as illustration. Even though both the common law and the customary law are both recognized legal systems, they are treated differently by the judiciary. The general rule is that judicial notice must be taken of the common law rules and that judicial notice of customary law may only be taken “in so far as such law can be ascertained readily and with sufficient certainty.” The ascertainment of customary law provides a challenge to the judiciary because of its adaptive inherent flexibility and indeterminate nature, especially where the rules are oral or so-called “living” customary law. Cultural expertise also plays an important role in the case of non-state law. A considerable quantity of case law exists where the courts have considered expert evidence regarding the content of certain religious legal systems to provide protection to litigants claiming that they are subject to those systems. The aim of this contribution is to investigate the diverse approaches of the South African courts when it comes to the admissibility of expert evidence in cases where culture (both custom and religion in both state and non-state law) is relevant. The fact that the South African legal system has its roots firmly in Western law and has been confronted with cultural diversity for a very long time might provide some lessons to the Western world, even if those lessons are only to prevent it from making the same mistakes as the South African legal system has made or might still be doing.

This paper investigates whether tax incentives can effectively promote capital investment and research spending simultaneously. Tax history provides the experimental setting to compare the influences of these tax initiatives. Analysis shows that firms respond to the research tax incentives by increasing R&D spending but do not significantly react to the policies promoting greater capital investment. More importantly, the results indicate that the tax incentives are negatively related to other types of investment with reduced R&D spending in the presence of incentives for capital investment and capital expenditures decreasing when research is encouraged by tax policy.

This research quantifies the economic impact of regional tax policy incentives included in the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of 2005.

This research utilized linear mixed-effects modeling and multiple regression procedures with a matched sample panel dataset from 2002 through 2008 containing real-world county-level economic data.

The results indicated that the regional tax incentives provided by the GO Zone Act did not generate significant increases in key economic indicators included in this study. These tax incentives were intended to spur economic recovery, but based on research findings, they do not appear to have had the impact desired by Congress.

Archival empirical data for the affected region make this study possible but also limit the ability to generalize these results to other regions. In addition, empirical research utilizing real-world data can be prone to internal validity issues that exist due to lack of environmental controls and other possible causal factors.

This research adds to the existing literature by using real-world county-level economic indicators to test the impact of tax policy investment incentives at the regional level and minimizes some of the issues addressed by prior empirical research and provides evidence on the effectiveness of tax policy investment incentives at the regional level.