Search results

This study investigates the relation between residential property values and both property taxes and public services in Georgia’s counties. Capitalization theory predicts that property values relate negatively to property taxes, and positively to public services. Palmon and Smith (1998) state that errors in public service measures create a capitalization coefficient bias that makes it difficult to isolate tax effects from public service effects. This paper is a first step in defining and quantifying public services and their marginal effect on housing values. It develops public service measures in four quality-of-life areas – economy, education, health, and public safety. The models suggest a strong negative relation between effective tax rates and property values, and a significant positive association between the public service measures and property values. Analyses indicate that property taxes are capitalized into housing prices at greater than 100%, suggesting prior underestimations based on measurement errors in public service variables.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the extent to which UK equity prices reflect shareholder level taxation on dividends (dividend tax capitalisation). Despite an extensive theoretical and empirical literature controversy exists.

Using a sample of UK firm year ends from 1991 to 2007 archival accounting and share price data are used to test for the presence or otherwise of dividend tax capitalisation.

The paper finds evidence of equity values reflecting shareholder level dividend taxation. In particular, a significant reduction in the valuation of retained earnings, a measure of dividend paying potential, is observed around the July 1997 abolition of the repayment of dividend tax credits to tax exempt shareholders. This suggests a link between shareholder level taxation of dividends and firms’ cost of capital.

The analysis focuses on share prices and is therefore subject to an underlying assumption of shareholders’ understanding tax and other potential relevant information.

The taxation of dividends is an important issue because of the potential for it to influence firms’ cost of capital and therefore investment decisions. Further, non-tax costs may be incurred to the extent that attempts are made to mitigate any “adverse” tax effects.

The results indicate that taxation of dividends and share prices are associated and therefore also indirectly firms’ cost of capital. This linkage has implications for investment appraisal and the allocation of capital between competing demands.

In using an asset valuation approach the limitations of alternate methods of examining shareholder level taxation of dividends are avoided, e.g. analysis of dividend drop of ratios.

This paper investigates whether board composition, a family chief executive officer (CEO) and the firm's managerial capabilities affect proactive tax management in family small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The main statement is that the professionalisation of corporate government and management practices explains the difference in tax avoidance behaviour in closely held family SMEs.

Using the 2012 Spanish thin-capitalisation rule as a quasi-experiment, the authors estimate panel regressions with firm fixed effects and robust standard errors. This model represents a triple difference-in-differences combined with propensity score matching (PSM-DID).

Analysis shows that having a high proportion of non-family board members and a high endowment of managerial capabilities lead to tax liability optimisation in family SMEs. Conversely, familial boards and family SMEs with low managerial capabilities lack enough expertise to weigh the costs of tax avoidance over the benefits, resulting in a reluctance to engage in tax optimisation behaviours. Alike, results show no significant relation between CEO's family affiliation and tax management behaviour.

When implementing fiscal policies, the specific needs of family SMEs should be considered, and how these needs interact with corporate governance and managerial mechanisms. Moreover, policymakers need a deeper understanding of family SMEs in order to develop policies appropriate to their characteristics. A more comprehensive knowledge of how family firm heterogeneity affects corporate decisions, such as indebtedness and fiscal decisions, may improve public policies.

This study addresses the issue of tax behaviour in family SMEs in a particular event that implies a specific logic to weigh the pros and cons of each alternative: reducing debt or paying more taxes. This study’s conclusions are based on a model that deals with potential endogeneity problems, which avoids bias in the findings.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the determinants of tax-haven use of publicly listed Canadian firms.

Based on alternative measures of tax havens (TH) and referring to a sample of 235 Canadian firms over the period of 2014–2015, probit-regression analyses are used to examine the determinants of tax-haven use.

The authors provide evidence that multinationality, intangible assets, thin capitalization, withholding taxes, equity-based management remuneration and tax fees paid to auditing firms are positively associated with TH use. Furthermore, the authors show that the variable relating to R&D intensity is positively associated with TH use. The authors also document that strong corporate-governance structures are negatively associated with TH use.

This study is only limited to Canadian firms, so the results may not be generalizable to other countries.

The results may assist tax watchdogs in their efforts to understand the tax behavior held by Canadian firms. They may also be interesting for tax authorities in planning enforcement activities.

This study uses a sample from publicly listed financial and non-financial firms. It also uses various lists of TH published by various competent sources (IMF, 2000, 2007; TJN, 2005; OECD, 2012). The findings corroborate the recent media attention about the extensive use of TH by Canadian firms.

This article explores the impact of property tax abatements on tax rates. Using the case study approach, the research uses data from Monroe County, Indiana, and finds that the impact of abatements on tax rates is negligible. The method consists essentially of calculating the difference between actual tax rates and hypothetical tax rates assuming abatement are not awarded. The results suggest that public officials may see in abatements a symbolic and relatively harmless policy tool for purposes of garnering political support from businesses and citizens. The article discusses these findings in light of current law suits brought against prominent abatement programs.

A tax based on land value is in many ways ideal, but many economists dismiss it by assuming it could not raise enough revenue. Standard sources of data omit much of the potential tax base, and undervalue what they do measure. The purpose of this paper is to present more comprehensive and accurate measures of land rents and values, and several modes of raising revenues from them besides the conventional property tax.

The paper identifies 16 elements of land's taxable capacity that received authorities either trivialize or omit. These 16 elements come in four groups.

In Group A, Elements 1‐4 correct for the downward bias in standard sources. In Group B, Elements 5‐10 broaden the concepts of land and rent beyond the conventional narrow perception, while Elements 11‐12 estimate rents to be gained by abating other kinds of taxes. In Group C, Elements 13‐14 explain how using the land tax, since it has no excess burden, uncaps feasible tax rates. In Group D, Elements 15‐16 define some moot possibilities that may warrant further exploration.

This paper shows how previous estimates of rent and land values have been narrowly limited to a fraction of the whole, thus giving a false impression that the tax capacity is low. The paper adds 14 elements to the traditional narrow “single tax” base, plus two moot elements advanced for future consideration. Any one of these 16 elements indicates a much higher land tax base than economists commonly recognize today. Taken together they are overwhelming, and cast an entirely new light on this subject.

The purpose of this paper is to examine current thinking and evidence on the extent to which taxation is, or should be, an influence upon dividend policy. To this end, the paper has been divided into two parts. The first reviews the range of normative stances and the empirical evidence in respect of each stance. Discussion mainly addresses large listed companies in the US and, to a lesser extent, the UK. The second part of the paper is based on more practical issues. This focuses attention on smaller, owner‐managed companies, for which there is less empirical evidence relating to dividend policy. This analysis of smaller companies is restricted to the UK taxation system only.

The positive relationship between dividend yield and risk-adjusted return, which is called the dividend yield effect, is well documented in the US market. Yet, the drivers of the yield effect are unclear. Some argue this evidence is consistent with the prediction that the investor-level tax burden is capitalized in stock prices, also known as the tax capitalization hypothesis. Still others contend that nontax omitted factors drive the yield effect. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the debate by exploring if the yield effect occurs in Hong Kong market where no taxes exist on either dividend income or capital gain.

The authors use two main approaches to detect the dividend yield effect. The first approach groups stocks into portfolios based on dividend yields and tests for the presence of a yield effect at the portfolio level. The second approach employs the Fama-MacBeth methodology at the firm level and tests if a yield effect is existent after controlling for firm characteristics known to explain stock returns.

The paper documents a robust dividend yield effect in the Hong Kong market and suggests that nontax reasons help to explain the yield effect.

Tax capitalization is a long-standing question in financial economics and the research evidence is mixed. The findings do not completely rule out the tax capitalization hypothesis. The main contribution is to illustrate the difficulty of conducting a powerful test of this hypothesis in practice and to urge caution in interpreting the dividend yield effect as evidence in support of this hypothesis.