IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ami/journl/v21y2022i3p431-451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mandatory Extraction Payment Disclosures and Tax Haven Use: Evidence from United Kingdom

Author

Listed:
  • Sameh Kobbi-Fakhfakh
  • Fatma Driss

    (High Business School of Sfax, Sfax University, Tunisia)

Abstract

Research Question - Does public country by country reporting (CbCr) deter multinationals' tax avoidance practices operating in extractive industries? Motivation - Public CbCr has already been implemented for two specific sectors, namely the financial and extractive sectors. Prior studies have focused on tax avoidance of EU banks around the implementation of public CbCr requirement (Joshi et al., 2020; Eberhartinger et al., 2020; Overesch & Wolff, 2021). However, studies on how resource-extracting multinationals respond to the CbCr regulation are scarce. This study seeks to fill this gap by examining the effect of public CbCr on tax avoidance with a special focus on extractive industries. Idea - To improve fiscal transparency, Canadian and European legislators have adopted regulations requiring multinational corporations (MNCs) to provide, annually, their Extraction Payment Disclosures (EPD) (Public CbCr standard for extractive industries) to governments (EC, 2013; Natural Resource Canada, 2014). This study examines the effect of mandatory EPD adoption on the extent of tax haven use. Data - For a 10-year period surrounding the mandatory EPD adoption (2010-2019), we selected a sample of UK MNCs operating in the oil, gas, and mining sectors and listed on the London Stock Exchange. The analysis is mainly based on firm-level information taken from DATASTREAM database. Based on hand-collected data from annual reports, we measured the extent of tax haven use using the percentage of multinational subsidiaries located in tax haven jurisdictions/countries as listed in Dyreng and Lindsey (2009). An alternative list identified by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2006) was also used in a robustness test. Tools - To examine our research question, we estimated a linear regression model with panel data using STATA software. Findings - The results show that the increased transparency resulting from public EPD does not appear to significantly affect the intensity of tax haven use. Contribution - This study extends and complements prior literature examining the effect of CbCr on tax avoidance and profit shifting by focusing on a specific setting i.e. extractive sector. To the best of our knowledge, apart from Johannesen and Larsen (2016) and Rauter (2020), no studies have provided empirical evidence on how resource-extracting multinationals respond to the EPD regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Sameh Kobbi-Fakhfakh & Fatma Driss, 2022. "Mandatory Extraction Payment Disclosures and Tax Haven Use: Evidence from United Kingdom," Journal of Accounting and Management Information Systems, Faculty of Accounting and Management Information Systems, The Bucharest University of Economic Studies, vol. 21(3), pages 431-451, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:ami:journl:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:431-451
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://online-cig.ase.ro/RePEc/ami/articles/21_3_6.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Country-by-country reporting; Extractive industries; Tax havens; Extraction Payment Disclosures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue

    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:ami:journl:v:21:y:2022:i:3:p:431-451. 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: Cristina Tartavulea (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.