(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)"> (This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)">
[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/itaxpf/v14y2007i6p631-655.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Profit tax competition and formula apportionment

Author

Listed:
  • Rüdiger Pethig
  • Andreas Wagener
Abstract
We analyse tax competition with corporate profit taxes in a common market where tax revenues are allocated according to an apportionment formula. As a general rule, tax competition is sharper the higher is the tax elasticity of the apportionment formula which, in turn, depends on the properties of production technologies. In particular: (i) If labour input is fixed, tax competition is sharpest if apportionment is based on property shares, followed by the sales and payroll shares. (ii) If capital and labour are endogenous and technologies are Cobb-Douglas, tax competition under the property- and the payroll-share rule is sharper than under the output-share formula. Whether payroll- or property-share apportionment generates sharper tax competition, depends on factor elasticities.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Rüdiger Pethig & Andreas Wagener, 2007. "Profit tax competition and formula apportionment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(6), pages 631-655, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:itaxpf:v:14:y:2007:i:6:p:631-655
    DOI: 10.1007/s10797-006-9017-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10797-006-9017-5
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10797-006-9017-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sijbren Cnossen, 2002. "Tax Policy in the European Union," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 58(4), pages 466-558, November.
    2. Joann Weiner, 2002. "Formula Apportionment in the European Union: A Dream Come True or the EU’s Worst Nightmare?," CESifo Working Paper Series 667, CESifo.
    3. Dietmar Wellisch, 2004. "Taxation under Formula Apportionment - Tax Competition, Tax Incidence, and the Choice of Apportionment Factors," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(1), pages 24-41, April.
    4. Søren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos–Møller & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2003. "Formula Apportionment and Transfer Pricing under Oligopolistic Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 419-437, April.
    5. Laussel, Didier & Le Breton, Michel, 1998. "Existence of Nash equilibria in fiscal competition models," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 283-296, May.
    6. Anand, Bharat N. & Sansing, Richard, 2000. "The Weighting Game: Formula Apportionment as an Instrument of Public Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 53(n. 2), pages 183-200, June.
    7. Joann Weiner, 2002. "Formulary apportionment and the future of company taxation in the European Union : company taxation and the internal market," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(01), pages 10-20, April.
    8. Walter Hellerstein & Charles E. McLure, Jr., 2004. "The European Commission's Report on Company Income Taxation: What the EU Can Learn from the Experience of the US States," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(2), pages 199-220, March.
    9. Bartelsman, Eric J. & Beetsma, Roel M. W. J., 2003. "Why pay more? Corporate tax avoidance through transfer pricing in OECD countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(9-10), pages 2225-2252, September.
    10. Goolsbee, Austan & Maydew, Edward L., 2000. "Coveting thy neighbor's manufacturing: the dilemma of state income apportionment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 125-143, January.
    11. Søren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos-Møller & Guttorm Schjelderup, "undated". "Tax Spillovers under Separate Accounting and Formula Apportionment," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-07, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    12. European Commission, 2001. "Company Taxation in the Internal Market," Taxation Studies 0005, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    13. Bayindir-Upmann, Thorsten & Ziad, Abderrahmanne, 2005. "Existence of equilibria in a basic tax-competition model," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-22, January.
    14. Nielsen, Søren Bo & Raimondos-Møller, Pascalis & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2010. "Company taxation and tax spillovers: Separate accounting versus formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 121-132, January.
    15. Wolfgang Eggert & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2003. "Symmetric Tax Competition under Formula Apportionment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 439-446, April.
    16. Wilson, John Douglas, 1999. "Theories of Tax Competition," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 52(2), pages 269-304, June.
    17. Anand, Bharat N. & Sansing, Richard, 2000. "The Weighting Game: Formula Apportionment as an Instrument of Public Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 53(2), pages 183-200, June.
    18. Jack Mintz, 2002. "European company tax reform : prospects for the future ; company taxation and the internal market," CESifo Forum, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 3(01), pages 3-9, April.
    19. George R. Zodrow & Peter Mieszkowski, 2019. "Pigou, Tiebout, Property Taxation, and the Underprovision of Local Public Goods," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: George R Zodrow (ed.), TAXATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Selected Essays of George R. Zodrow, chapter 17, pages 525-542, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Gordon, Roger H & Wilson, John Douglas, 1986. "An Examination of Multijurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation under Formula Apportionment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(6), pages 1357-1373, November.
    21. Wilson, John Douglas, 1999. "Theories of Tax Competition," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 52(n. 2), pages 269-304, June.
    22. Cnossen, S., 2002. "Tax policy in the European Union : a review of issues and options," Research Memorandum 023, Maastricht University, Maastricht Research School of Economics of Technology and Organization (METEOR).
    23. Sijbren Cnossen, 2002. "Tax Policy in the European Union: A Review of Issues and Options," CESifo Working Paper Series 758, CESifo.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marcel Gérard, 2005. "Multijurisdictional Firms and Governments’ Strategies under Alternative Tax Designs," CESifo Working Paper Series 1527, CESifo.
    2. Ana Agundez-Garcia, 2006. "The Delineation and Apportionment of an EU Consolidated Tax Base for Multi-jurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation: a Review of Issues and Options," Taxation Papers 9, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Oct 2006.
    3. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Marcel Gerard, 2006. "Reforming the taxation of Multijurisdictional Enterprises in Europe, "Coopetition" in a Bottom-up Federation," Working Papers 2006-10, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    5. Kind, Hans Jarle & Midelfart, Karen Helene & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2005. "Corporate tax systems, multinational enterprises, and economic integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 507-521, March.
    6. Dirk Kiesewetter & Tobias Steigenberger & Matthias Stier, 2018. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1029-1060, December.
    7. Eichner, Thomas & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Corporate income taxation of multinationals in a general equilibrium model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 723-733.
    8. Marcel Gérard, 2006. "Reforming the Taxation of Multijurisdictional Enterprises in Europe, a Tentative Appraisal," CESifo Working Paper Series 1795, CESifo.
    9. Matthias Wrede, 2014. "Asymmetric tax competition with formula apportionment," Letters in Spatial and Resource Sciences, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 47-60, March.
    10. Buettner, Thiess & Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Strategic Consolidation Under Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 225-254, June.
    11. Gaëtan Nicodème, 2006. "Corporate tax competition and coordination in the European Union: What do we know? Where do we stand?," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 250, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    12. Mardan, Mohammed & Stimmelmayr, Michael, 2018. "Tax revenue losses through cross-border loss offset: An insurmountable hurdle for formula apportionment?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 188-210.
    13. Doina Radulescu & Doina Maria Radulescu, 2007. "From Separate Accounting to Formula Apportionment: Analysis in a Dynamic Framework," CESifo Working Paper Series 2122, CESifo.
    14. Peter Sørensen, 2004. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 91-115, January.
    15. Wolfgang Eggert & Andreas Haufler, 2006. "Company-Tax Coordination cum Tax-Rate Competition in the European Union," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 62(4), pages 579-601, December.
    16. Ruud De Mooij & Li Liu & Dinar Prihardini, 2021. "An Assessment of Global Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 431-465.
    17. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2007. "Transfer Pricing or Formula Apportionment? Tax-Induced Distortions of Multinationals’ Investment and Production Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2020, CESifo.
    18. Francis Bloch & Gabrielle Demange, 2021. "Profit-splitting rules and the taxation of multinational digital platforms," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(4), pages 855-889, August.
    19. Martini, Jan-Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2014. "Management incentives under formula apportionment: Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 168, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    20. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2003. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," EPRU Working Paper Series 03-08, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax competition; Formula apportionment;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D21 - Microeconomics - - Production and Organizations - - - Firm Behavior: Theory

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:itaxpf:v:14:y:2007:i:6:p:631-655. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.