IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ntj/journl/v65y2012i3p709-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Issues in the Design of Taxes on Corporate Profit

Author

Listed:
  • Devereux, Michael P.

Abstract

This paper considers the proposals of the Mirrlees Review to introduce an allowance for corporate equity (ACE) in the corporation tax system. It assesses how an ACE would affect various dimensions of corporate decision making. Broadly, the ACE would introduce neutrality in decisions as to the scale of investment and the source of finance. But it would leave distortions in choices regarding many mutually exclusive discrete choices, such as location and profit shifting. The paper presents some evidence on the likely impact of introducing an ACE, which depends on how the government makes up for foregone corporation tax revenue. It also considers briefly more radical options such as a destination-based corporate tax.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ntj:journl:v:65:y:2012:i:3:p:709-30
    DOI: 10.17310/ntj.2012.3.08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2012.3.08
    Download Restriction: Access is restricted to subscribers and members of the National Tax Association.
    File URL: https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2012.3.08
    Download Restriction: Access is restricted to subscribers and members of the National Tax Association.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17310/ntj.2012.3.08?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. Alexander Klemm, 2007. "Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 229-262, June.
    2. 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.
    3. (IFS), Institute for Fiscal Studies & Mirrlees, James (ed.), 2011. "Tax By Design: The Mirrlees Review," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199553747.
    4. Marko Köthenbürger & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2009. "Corporate Taxation and Corporate Governance," CESifo Working Paper Series 2881, CESifo.
    5. 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.
    6. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2012. "How Would EU Corporate Tax Reform Affect US Investment in Europe?," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 26, pages 59-91, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Lars P. Feld & Jost H. Heckemeyer, 2011. "Fdi And Taxation: A Meta‐Study," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 233-272, April.
    8. Ruud Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.
    9. Feld, Lars P. & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Overesch, Michael, 2013. "Capital structure choice and company taxation: A meta-study," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 2850-2866.
    10. (IFS), Institute for Fiscal Studies (ed.), 2010. "Dimensions of Tax Design: The Mirrlees Review," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199553754.
    11. Paul Johnson & Gareth Myles, 2011. "The Mirrlees Review," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 319-329, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Arulampalam, Wiji & Devereux, Michael P. & Liberini, Federica, 2019. "Taxes and the location of targets," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 161-178.
    14. Johannes Becker & Clemens Fuest, 2010. "Taxing Foreign Profits With International Mergers And Acquisitions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 51(1), pages 171-186, February.
    15. Alan Auerbach & Michael P Devereux & Helen Simpson, 2007. "Taxing corporate income," Working Papers 0705, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    16. Leon Bettendorf & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Documentation of CORTAX," CPB Memorandum 161, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Simon Loretz, 2008. "Corporate taxation in the OECD in a wider context," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 639-660, winter.
    21. Devereux, Michael & Bond, Stephen Roy, 2002. "Cash Flow Taxes in an Open Economy," CEPR Discussion Papers 3401, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    22. Desai, Mihir A. & Hines, James R. Jr., 2003. "Evaluating International Tax Reform," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 56(3), pages 487-502, September.
    23. Michael Keen & John King, 2002. "The Croatian profit tax: an ACE in practice," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 401-418, September.
    24. Shackelford, Douglas A. & Shaviro, Daniel N. & Slemrod, Joel, 2010. "Taxation and the Financial Sector," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 63(4), pages 781-806, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Schock, Matthias Malte, 2019. "Steuerreformvorschläge des Mirrlees Committee und der Stiftung Marktwirtschaft [Tax Reform Proposals of the Mirrlees Committee and the Stiftung Marktwirtschaft]," MPRA Paper 96689, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Yang Chen & Juan Cuestas & Paulo Regis, 2014. "Corporate Tax Convergence in Asian and Pacific Economies," TUT Economic Research Series 17, Department of Finance and Economics, Tallinn University of Technology.
    3. Kathleen Andries & Martine Cools & Steve Van Uytbergen, 2017. "To Shift or Not To Shift? Intertemporal Income Shifting as a Response to the Risk Capital Allowance Introduction in Belgium," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 531-559, July.
    4. Hebous, Shafik & Ruf, Martin, 2017. "Evaluating the effects of ACE systems on multinational debt financing and investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 131-149.
    5. F. De Sloover & Y. Saks, 2018. "Is job polarisation accompanied by wage polarisation?," Economic Review, National Bank of Belgium, issue iii, pages 79-90, september.
    6. Hebous, Shafik & Ruf, Martin, 2017. "Evaluating the effects of ACE systems on multinational debt financing and investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 131-149.
    7. Carmen Bachmann & Martin Baumann & Konrad Richter, 2018. "The effects on investment incentives of an allowance for corporate equity tax system: the Belgian case as an example," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 943-965, November.
    8. Petutschnig, Matthias & Rünger, Silke, 2017. "The effects of a tax allowance for growth and investment: Empirical evidence from a firm-level analysis," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 221, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Ernesto Zangari & Elena Pisano, 2019. "Forward-looking effective tax rates in the banking sector," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 1236, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    10. Ey, 2015. "Experiences with cash-flow taxation and prospects. Final report," Taxation Papers 55, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.

    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 Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.
    2. 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.
    3. Hebous, Shafik & Ruf, Martin, 2017. "Evaluating the effects of ACE systems on multinational debt financing and investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 131-149.
    4. Kari Seppo, 2015. "Corporate tax in an international environment – Problems and possible remedies," Nordic Tax Journal, Sciendo, vol. 2015(1), pages 1-16, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Sijbren Cnossen, 2018. "Corporation taxes in the European Union: Slowly moving toward comprehensive business income taxation?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(3), pages 808-840, June.
    7. Hebous, Shafik & Ruf, Martin, 2017. "Evaluating the effects of ACE systems on multinational debt financing and investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 131-149.
    8. Sijbren Cnossen, 2016. "Tackling Spillovers by Taxing Corporate Income in the European Union at Source," CPB Discussion Paper 324, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. 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.
    10. Sijbren Cnossen, 2016. "Tackling Spillovers by Taxing Corporate Income in the European Union at Source," CPB Discussion Paper 324.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    11. Carmen Bachmann & Martin Baumann & Konrad Richter, 2018. "The effects on investment incentives of an allowance for corporate equity tax system: the Belgian case as an example," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 943-965, November.
    12. 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.
    13. Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Taxation of outbound direct investment: economic principles and tax policy considerations," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 698-719, winter.
    14. Petutschnig, Matthias & Rünger, Silke, 2017. "The effects of a tax allowance for growth and investment: Empirical evidence from a firm-level analysis," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 221, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    15. Rumpf, Dominik, 2013. "Zinsbereinigung bei der Dualen Einkommensteuer," Beiträge zur Finanzwissenschaft, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, edition 1, volume 32, number urn:isbn:9783161528699.
    16. Bofinger, Peter & Schnabel, Isabel & Feld, Lars P. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Wieland, Volker, 2015. "Zukunftsfähigkeit in den Mittelpunkt. Jahresgutachten 2015/16 [Focus on Future Viability. Annual Report 2015/16]," Annual Economic Reports / Jahresgutachten, German Council of Economic Experts / Sachverständigenrat zur Begutachtung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, volume 127, number 201516, February.
    17. 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.
    18. repec:zbw:rwirep:0533 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. 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.
    20. 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.
    21. European Commission, 2013. "Tax reforms in EU Member States - Tax policy challenges for economic growth and fiscal sustainability – 2013 Report," Taxation Papers 38, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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:ntj:journl:v:65:y:2012:i:3:p:709-30. 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 University of Chicago Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ntanet.org/ .

    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.