IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/apandp/v108y2018p590-96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unequal Rewards to Firms: Stock Market Responses to the Trump Election and the 2017 Corporate Tax Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander F. Wagner
  • Richard J. Zeckhauser
  • Alexandre Ziegler

Abstract

Massive dollars shuttled back and forth among firms on the twisted path to and passage of the 2017 tax reform. Prices of individual stocks responded to the difference between initial and revised expectations. From the bill's initiation in the House to final passage, high-tax firms gained significantly, given the dramatic cut from 35 percent to 21 percent in the corporate tax rate. Internationally-oriented firms suffered notably, since investors assessed that the surprisingly high repatriation tax outweighed the benefits from territorial taxation. Daily price movements show that the aggregate market responded positively to lower expected taxes.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander F. Wagner & Richard J. Zeckhauser & Alexandre Ziegler, 2018. "Unequal Rewards to Firms: Stock Market Responses to the Trump Election and the 2017 Corporate Tax Reform," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 590-596, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:apandp:v:108:y:2018:p:590-96
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/pandp.20181091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/pandp.20181091
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles/attachments?retrieve=BZelXg8juL4a0C5ADxVGRf281qECku4y
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles/attachments?retrieve=Zbb1Gl9ikaeITFjcpldBmq5ZKMhjwxb-
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wagner, Alexander F. & Zeckhauser, Richard & Ziegler, Alexandre, 2020. "The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act: Which Firms Won? Which Lost?," CEPR Discussion Papers 14950, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Maarten Meeuwis & Jonathan A. Parker & Antoinette Schoar & Duncan Simester, 2022. "Belief Disagreement and Portfolio Choice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(6), pages 3191-3247, December.
    3. Dhammika Dharmapala, 2024. "The consequences of the 2017 US international tax reform: a survey of the evidence," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(4), pages 1158-1178, August.
    4. Hanke, Michael & Stöckl, Sebastian & Weissensteiner, Alex, 2020. "Political event portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    5. Daniel Klein & Christopher A. Ludwig & Christoph Spengel, 2019. "Ring-fencing Digital Corporations: Investor Reaction to the European Commission’s Digital Tax Proposals," EconPol Working Paper 36, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    6. Bernd Hayo & Sascha Mierzwa, 2020. "Stock Market Reactions to Legislated Tax Changes: Evidence from the United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202047, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    7. Henning Vöpel & Harms Bandholz & Gabriel Felbermayr & Christoph Spengel & Jost Heckemeyer & Martin Mosler & Niklas Potrafke & Henrik Müller & Gabriel J. Felbermayr, 2020. "Die USA vor dem Wahlkampf: Die Spuren Donald Trumps in Wirtschaft und Politik," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 73(01), pages 03-29, January.
    8. Kalcheva, Ivalina & Plečnik, James M. & Tran, Hai & Turkiela, Jason, 2020. "(Un)intended consequences? The impact of the 2017 tax cuts and jobs act on shareholder wealth," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Rahman, Anisur & Talukdar, Bakhtear & Fan, Zaifeng Steve, 2023. "Board independence and analysts' forecast accuracy: R&D perspective," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    10. Dong, Qi Flora & Cao, Yiting & Zhao, Xin & Deshmukh, Ashutosh, 2019. "Responses of US multinational firms to a temporary repatriation tax holiday: A literature review and synthesis," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 108-123.
    11. Michelle Hanlon & Jeffrey L. Hoopes & Joel Slemrod, 2019. "Tax Reform Made Me Do It!," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(1), pages 33-80.
    12. Teresa Perry, 2023. "Did the 2016 election cause changes in substance use? An intersectional approach," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 1020-1069, November.
    13. Gasparini, Matteo, 2023. "Are financial markets pricing the net zero carbon transition? A reconsideration of the carbon premium," INET Oxford Working Papers 2023-23, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    14. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    15. De Vito, Antonio & Pancotto, Livia & Perdichizzi, Salvatore & Reghezza, Alessio, 2023. "Don’t go on holiday in August! Market reaction to an unexpected windfall tax on banks," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    16. Samson Mukanjari & Thomas Sterner, 2024. "Do markets Trump politics? Fossil and renewable market reactions to major political events," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(2), pages 805-836, April.
    17. Mindy Herzfeld, 2021. "Designing international tax reform: lessons from TCJA," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(5), pages 1163-1187, October.
    18. Blanchard, Olivier & Collins, Christopher G. & Jahan-Parvar, Mohammad R. & Pellet, Thomas & Wilson, Beth Anne, 2018. "A year of rising dangerously? The U.S. stock market performance in the aftermath of the presidential election," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 489-502.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies

    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:aea:apandp:v:108:y:2018:p:590-96. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.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.