H25 - Business Taxes and Subsidies including sales and value-added (VAT)Return

Results 1 to 7 of 7:

Why do Some Special Economic Zones Attract More Firms than Others? Panel Data Analysis of Polish Special Economic Zones

Piotr Ci¿kowicz, Magda Ci¿kowicz-Pêka³a, Piotr Pêka³a, Andrzej Rzoñca

Prague Economic Papers 2021, 30(1):61-89 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.763

Using a unique firm-level data for Polish Special Economic Zones (SEZ) to estimate a set of panel data models we find that both employment and investment growth in SEZ are driven mainly by labour market characteristics of zone-hosting regions, while other factors (including market access, zone business climate and firms' concentration) play a less important role. Firms choose their locations based on labour availability rather than on labour costs. Moreover, they pay particular attention to availability of low-skilled rather than high-skilled labour. As far as tax incentives are concerned, their predictability matters more for SEZ development than their generosity.

Do SMEs Face a Higher Tax Burden? Evidence from Belgian Tax Return Data

Pieter Buyl, Annelies Roggeman

Prague Economic Papers 2019, 28(6):729-747 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.719

The public debate on taxation of domestic small and medium enterprises (SMEs) versus large and multinational enterprises (MNEs) is highly relevant nowadays. Using confidential tax return data instead of financial statement data, the results indicate that domestic SMEs face on average a 1.6 and 4.8 percentage-point higher effective tax burden compared to large domestic and large MNEs respectively. This suggests that tax incentives for SMEs are inadequate to compensate for the tax advantages of large and internationally operating companies. Furthermore, we show that the use of information built exclusively upon accounting data could bias the results.

Risks and Transfer Pricing Regulation at the Multinational Enterprises’ Routine Units: A Literature Review

Tomá¹ Buus

Prague Economic Papers 2018, 27(6):621-636 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.678

Multinational enterprises (MNE) allocate valuable intangible assets and strategic functions to the strategy units (usually parent companies) for that allows them to impropriate the majority of the profits there and protect those assets from subsidiaries' risks. The subsidiaries are frequently routine units. Subsequently, the routine units receive low reward, as they perform only routine functions. The OECD transfer pricing guidelines support that practice to the detriment of go-vernment budgets and public by considering the routine units as the low-risk ones. This paper reviews the relevant literature and shows that the traditional view of risk and profit allocation between strategy and routine units is inconsistent with their relative risks, resp. with relative risks of MNE's subsidiary and independent company. The long-term perspective of MNEs' members' downside risks provides correct information for transfer pricing regulation and fiscal authorities. Results of this paper enable proposal of the transfer pricing risk analysis targets and tools.

The CCCTB Allocation Formula Game: The Performance of Economics Sectors

Kateøina Krchnivá, Danu¹e Nerudová

Prague Economic Papers 2018, 27(4):427-448 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.660

The implementation of the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (hereinafter CCCTB) in the European Union will probably have an impact on tax revenues of the concerned states since the distribution of the group tax base shall reflect the capacity to earn income by individual group members. This is secured by the employing of the allocation formula containing three factors that shall reflect the profit generating process of individual companies. The paper analyses the explanatory power of the proposed CCCTB formula on the data sample of group companies with a link to the Czech Republic - either parent or subsidiary company in the group covered in dataset is tax resident of the Czech Republic. The obtained results are evaluated on the level of individual economic sector with the aim to verify if the proposed CCCTB formula is the most suitable for them, where the sufficiency of the explanatory power of the allocation formula was indicated based on the assigned change of distributed profit to the respective economic sector.

The Effectiveness of Investment Incentives in the Turkish Manufacturing Industry

Halit Yanikkaya, Hasan Karaboga

Prague Economic Papers 2017, 26(6):744-760 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.641

This study investigates the impact of investment incentives on sectoral labour productivity, capital intensity, employment and total factor productivity using data on sixteen manufacturing industry sectors in Turkey during the post-liberalization period. To deal with potential endogeneity of the investment incentives, we apply the system GMM estimation technique to the panel dataset for six five-year periods between 1981 and 2009. Our overall GMM estimations indicate that we fail to find any evidence that investment incentives positively affect anyone of our macroeconomic variables. While investment incentives do not increase the employment growth and total factor productivity growth significantly, they significantly reduce the growth rate of value added per work hour and capital stock per work hour. Given that since the early years of the Turkish Republic, investment incentive systems have always been an important part of the industrialization policies; our results have essential implications for the design and effectiveness of investment incentives.

The Impact of the CCCTB Introduction on the Distribution of the Group Tax Bases Across the EU: The Study for the Czech Republic

Danu¹e Nerudová, Veronika Solilová

Prague Economic Papers 2015, 24(6):621-637 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.514

The introduction of the CCCTB system in the European Union will have the impact on the redistribution of the group tax bases between the Member States and therefore also on the national budgets. The aim of the paper is to quantify the differences in the division of the MNEs group tax bases between the individual Member States in current situation - i.e. when applying separate entity approach and situation when CCCTB will be introduced - i.e. applying the allocation formula for sharing the tax base. The results show that the Czech Republic could gain in situation when CCCTB would be introduced in all EU Members States - the share in the group tax base would increase by 1.22%. A very slight increase was also indicated in the case of the Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain. On the contrary, the share in the group tax base was decreased in the case of Germany (by 1.36%), Estonia, Hungary and Poland. The results also indicate that there might be connection between the size of the country and the impact on the share of the tax base.

The supply of foreign direct investment incentives: subsidy competition in an oligopolistic framework

Tomá¹ Havránek

Prague Economic Papers 2009, 18(2):131-155 | DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.346

This paper examines the microeconomic motivation of governments to provide tax incentives for foreign direct investment. Author applies the classical models of oligopoly to subsidy competition, endogenousing investment incentives, but leaving tax rates exogenous. According to the conventional wisdom, subsidy competition leads to overprovision of incentives. This paper suggests that, in the oligopolistic framework, supranational coordination can either decrease or increase the supply of subsidies. Further, in the setting of subsidy regulation, the host country's corporate income tax rate has an ambiguous effect on the provision of incentives.