IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cesifo/v53y2007i2p229-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice

Author

Listed:
  • Alexander Klemm

Abstract

This article provides an overview of full and partial allowance for corporate equity (ACE) tax systems in practice. In the recent past, ACE systems existed in Austria, Croatia and Italy. Brazil still applies a variant of such a system and Belgium introduced one in 2006. This article summarizes the empirical literature on past ACE systems, and provides a theoretical and empirical assessment of the Brazilian ACE variant. The main finding is that the Brazilian reform introduced an ACE system for a minority of firms only, with the majority instead having a system of dividend deductibility. Despite the reduction in the tax preference for debt finance, capital structures have not changed much, but dividends have increased. Investment appears to have benefited from the reform, although the extent to which this was due to the new structure rather than the tax cut is unclear. (JEL codes: H25, H21, C33) Copyright , Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexander Klemm, 2007. "Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 229-262, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cesifo:v:53:y:2007:i:2:p:229-262
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/cesifo/ifm007
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Stephen Bond & Michael Devereux & Alexander Klemm, 2005. "Dissecting dividend decisions: some clues about the effects of dividend taxation from recent UK reforms," IFS Working Papers W05/17, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. John Isaac, 1997. "A comment on the viability of the allowance for corporate equity," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 303-318, August.
    3. Filippo Oropallo & Valentino Parisi, 2007. "Will Italy’s Tax Reform Reduce the Corporate Tax Burden? A Microsimulation Analysis," Rivista di statistica ufficiale, ISTAT - Italian National Institute of Statistics - (Rome, ITALY), vol. 9(1), pages 31-58, march.
    4. 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.
    5. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen & Devereux, Michael & Schiantarelli, Fabio, 1992. "Investment and Tobin's Q: Evidence from company panel data," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1-2), pages 233-257.
    6. 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.
    7. Michael Devereux & Harold Freeman, 1991. "A general neutral profits tax," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, August.
    8. Efraim Sadka, 1991. "An Inflation-Proof Tax System?: Some Lessons from Israel," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 38(1), pages 135-155, March.
    9. Hayashi, Fumio, 1982. "Tobin's Marginal q and Average q: A Neoclassical Interpretation," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(1), pages 213-224, January.
    10. 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.
    11. Fane, G., 1987. "Neutral taxation under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 95-105, 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. 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.
    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. 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.
    4. Deborah Knirsch & Rainer Niemann, 2008. "Deferred Shareholder Taxation -- Implementing a Neutral Business Tax in the European Union," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 101-125, December.
    5. Paolo M. Panteghini, 2005. "Asymmetric Taxation under Incremental and Sequential Investment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 7(5), pages 761-779, December.
    6. Knirsch, Deborah & Niemann, Rainer, 2007. "Allowance for shareholder equity: implementing a neutral corporate income tax in the European Union," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 34, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    7. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2003. "Neutral Taxation of Shareholder Income: A Norwegian Tax Reform Proposal," CESifo Working Paper Series 1036, CESifo.
    8. 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.
    9. Sijbren Cnossen, 2002. "Tax Policy in the European Union: A Review of Issues and Options," CESifo Working Paper Series 758, CESifo.
    10. 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).
    11. Doina Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr & Doina Maria Radulescu, 2006. "ACE vs. CBIT: Which is Better for Investment and Welfare?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1850, CESifo.
    12. Ernst Fehr & Wolfgang Wiegard, 2001. "The Incidence of an Extended Ace Corporation Tax," CESifo Working Paper Series 484, CESifo.
    13. 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.
    14. 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.
    15. Peter Sørensen, 2005. "Neutral Taxation of Shareholder Income," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(6), pages 777-801, November.
    16. 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.
    17. Paolo M. Panteghini, 2001. "Dual income taxation : the choice of the imputed rate of return," Finnish Economic Papers, Finnish Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 5-13, Spring.
    18. Grégoire Rota-Graziosi & Fayçal Sawadogo, 2020. "The tax burden on mobile network operators in Africa," Working Papers hal-03109370, HAL.
    19. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2003. "Neutral Taxation of Shareholder Income: A Norwegian Tax Reform Proposal," EPRU Working Paper Series 03-06, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    20. Jespersen, Jesper, 2005. "Debat og kommentarer: Keynes-inspireret makroøkonomisk teori," Nationaløkonomisk tidsskrift, Nationaløkonomisk Forening, vol. 2005(1), pages 104-121.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • C33 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Models with Panel Data; Spatio-temporal Models

    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:oup:cesifo:v:53:y:2007:i:2:p:229-262. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.