IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpb/discus/128.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reform in the EU

Author

Listed:
  • Ruud de Mooij
  • M.P. Devereux

Abstract

We assess the quantitative impact of two reforms of the corporation tax that would eliminate the differential treatment of debt and equity. We assess the quantitative impact of two reforms of the corporation tax that would eliminate the differential treatment of debt and equity. The two reforms are: the allowance for corporate equity (ACE), and the comprehensive business income tax (CBIT). We investigate the impact of these reforms on various decision margins, using an applied general equilibrium model for the EU calibrated with recent empirical elasticities. The results suggest that, if governments adjust statutory corporate tax rates to balance their budgets, profit shifting and discrete location render CBIT more attractive for most individual European countries. European coordination makes a joint ACE more, and a joint CBIT less, efficient. A combination of ACE and CBIT is always welfare improving.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruud de Mooij & M.P. Devereux, 2009. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reform in the EU," CPB Discussion Paper 128, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpb:discus:128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/applied-analysis-ace-and-cbit-reform-eu.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Devereux & Harold Freeman, 1991. "A general neutral profits tax," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Alexander Klemm, 2007. "Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 229-262, June.
    3. Ruud de Mooij & Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Alternative Systems of Business Tax in Europe: An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT Reforms," Taxation Studies 0023, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    4. Christian Keuschnigg & Martin Dietz, 2007. "A growth oriented dual income tax," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(2), pages 191-221, April.
    5. Devereux, Michael P & Griffith, Rachel, 2003. "Evaluating Tax Policy for Location Decisions," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 107-126, March.
    6. Hassett, Kevin A. & Hubbard, R. Glenn, 2002. "Tax policy and business investment," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 20, pages 1293-1343, Elsevier.
    7. Albert van der Horst & Leon Bettendorf & Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, 2007. "Will Corporate Tax Consolidation improve Efficiency in the EU ?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 07-076/2, Tinbergen Institute.
    8. Leon Bettendorf & Joeri Gorter & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Who benefits from tax competition in the European Union?," CPB Document 125.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. Keuschnigg, Christian & Ribi, Evelyn, 2009. "Profit Taxation and Finance Constraints," CEPR Discussion Papers 7433, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Boadway, Robin & Bruce, Neil, 1984. "A general proposition on the design of a neutral business tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 231-239, July.
    11. Devereux, Michael P. & Griffith, Rachel, 1998. "Taxes and the location of production: evidence from a panel of US multinationals," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 335-367, June.
    12. Thiess Buettner & Michael Overesch & Ulrich Schreiber & Georg Wamser, 2006. "The Impact of Thin-Capitalization Rules on Multinationals' Financing and Investment Decisions," Working Papers 2006-06, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    13. Leon Bettendorf & Joeri Gorter & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Who benefits from tax competition in the European Union?," CPB Document 125, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    14. R. Glenn Hubbard, 1998. "Capital-Market Imperfections and Investment," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 193-225, March.
    15. Bonds, Stephen R. & Devereux, Michael P., 1995. "On the design of a neutral business tax under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 57-71, September.
    16. Marko Köthenbürger & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2009. "Corporate Taxation and Corporate Governance," CESifo Working Paper Series 2881, CESifo.
    17. Doina Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2006. "ACE Vs. CBIT: Which Is Better for Investment and Welfare?," EcoMod2006 272100072, EcoMod.
    18. Ruud A. de Mooij & Sjef Ederveen, 2008. "Corporate tax elasticities: a reader's guide to empirical findings," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 680-697, winter.
    19. Devereux, Michael, 2003. "Taxing Risky Investment," CEPR Discussion Papers 4053, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Public Economics," Handbook of Public Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 4, number 4.
    21. Leon Bettendorf & Albert van der Horst & Ruud A. De Mooij, 2009. "Corporate Tax Policy and Unemployment in Europe: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(9), pages 1319-1347, September.
    22. Alan Auerbach & Michael P. Devereux & Helen Simpson, 2007. "Taxing Corporate Income," CESifo Working Paper Series 2139, CESifo.
    23. Leon Bettendorf & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Documentation of CORTAX," CPB Memorandum 161, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    24. A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), 2002. "Handbook of Public Economics," Handbook of Public Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 3, number 3.
    25. Alfons J. Weichenrieder & Tina Klautke & Alfons Weichenrieder, 2008. "Taxes and the Efficiency Costs of Capital Distortions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2431, CESifo.
    26. Ruud Mooij, 2005. "Will Corporate Income Taxation Survive?," De Economist, Springer, vol. 153(3), pages 277-301, September.
    27. Doina Maria Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2007. "ACE versus CBIT: Which is Better for Investment and Welfare?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 294-328, June.
    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. Ruud de Mooij & Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Alternative Systems of Business Tax in Europe: An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT Reforms," Taxation Studies 0023, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    2. Devereux, Michael P., 2012. "Issues in the Design of Taxes on Corporate Profit," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 65(3), pages 709-730, September.
    3. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2015. "Thin capitalisation rules: A second-best solution to the cross-border debt bias?," MPRA Paper 72031, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Keuschnigg, Christian & Ribi, Evelyn, 2010. "Profit Taxation, Innovation and the Financing of Heterogeneous Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 7626, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    5. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2015. "Taxing cross-border intercompany transactions: are financing activities fungible?," MPRA Paper 71615, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Leon Bettendorf & Albert Van Der Horst & Ruud A. De Mooij & Hendrik Vrijburg, 2010. "Corporate Tax Consolidation and Enhanced Cooperation in the European Union," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 453-479, December.
    7. Marko Köthenbürger & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2009. "Corporate Taxation and Corporate Governance," CESifo Working Paper Series 2881, CESifo.
    8. Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Taxes and Corporate Financing Decisions – Evidence from the Belgian ACE Reform," Ruhr Economic Papers 0533, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    9. Elek, Péter & Lőrincz, László, 2015. "Az effektív társasági adókulcs rugalmassága Magyarországon a 2009-2011 közötti adókulcscsökkentés alapján [The elasticity of the effective corporate tax rate in Hungary: evidence from the tax cut b," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 27-47.
    10. European Commission, 2011. "Tax Reforms in EU Member States 2011: tax policy challenges for economic growth and fiscal sustainability," Taxation Papers 28, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    11. Finke, Katharina & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Assessing the impact of introducing an ACE regime: A behavioural corporate microsimulation analysis for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Norman Gemmell & Richard Kneller & Danny McGowan & Ismael Sanz & José F. Sanz‐Sanz, 2018. "Corporate Taxation and Productivity Catch‐Up: Evidence from European Firms," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 120(2), pages 372-399, April.
    13. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2006. "Can Capital Income Taxes Survive? And Should They?," EPRU Working Paper Series 06-06, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    14. Ramón E. López & Pablo Gutiérrez Cubillos & Eugenio Figueroa, 2020. "The Tax Paradox and Weak Tax Neutrality," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(3), pages 1150-1169, January.
    15. Portal, Márcio Telles & Laureano, Luis, 2017. "Does Brazilian allowance for corporate equity reduce the debt bias? Evidences of rebound effect and ownership-induced ACE clientele," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 480-495.
    16. repec:zbw:rwirep:0533 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. aus dem Moore, Nils, 2014. "Taxes and Corporate Financing Decisions – Evidence from the Belgian ACE Reform," Ruhr Economic Papers 533, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    18. Michael P. Devereux & Peter Birch Sørensen, 2006. "The Corporate Income Tax: international trends and options for fundamental reform," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 264, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    19. Sanz Labrador, Ismael & Sanz-Sanz, José Félix, 2013. "Política fiscal y crecimiento económico: consideraciones microeconómicas y relaciones macroeconómicas," Macroeconomía del Desarrollo 5367, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    20. Keuschnigg, Christian & Ribi, Evelyn, 2009. "Profit Taxation and Finance Constraints," CEPR Discussion Papers 7433, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    21. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2018. "Implementing corporate tax cuts at the expense of neutrality? A legal and optimisation analysis of fundamental reform in practice," MPRA Paper 89703, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D58 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Computable and Other Applied General Equilibrium Models
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cpb:discus:128. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpbgvnl.html .

    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.