IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fistud/v30y2009i1p73-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What is the After‐Tax Price of R&D? An Interstate Comparison

Author

Listed:
  • Lolita Paff
  • Todd A. Watkins

Abstract

As of 2005, 31 US states offered corporate income tax credits on research and development (R&D) expenses in order to encourage more in‐state innovation activities. Empirical questions about the efficacy of such tax breaks at the state level persist, in part because the complexity of the tax laws means that simple credit‐rate comparisons across states do not fully capture the differential variation in effective after‐tax price incentives firms face in choosing where to locate R&D activities. We are unaware of any research analysing and comparing the effective prices of R&D faced by firms, across all US states and utilising micro‐level data. Using data extracted from detailed reading of individual firms' 10‐K and S‐1 filings and of state‐level tax credit rules, we estimate the effective after‐tax price of basic and qualified research expenditure each firm would have faced in each of the 50 states had they been located there. Our methodology simulates the effective tax price of each firm's marginal dollar of research expenditure, assuming the firm chose to move all of its R&D operations to each of the 49 other states. Through Monte Carlo techniques, we consider the sensitivity of our interstate comparative results to several modelling assumptions. We find significant variation in after‐tax R&D prices across states with quite different R&D tax laws. Prices range from $0.176 to $0.520 on a marginal dollar of R&D in Virginia and Washington State, respectively. We also find that the interstate variability is generally more important – indeed, much wider than we had anticipated before investigating state‐by‐state regulations – than the inter‐firm variability within states.

Suggested Citation

  • Lolita Paff & Todd A. Watkins, 2009. "What is the After‐Tax Price of R&D? An Interstate Comparison," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1), pages 73-101, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:fistud:v:30:y:2009:i:1:p:73-101
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-5890.2009.00090.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2009.00090.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1475-5890.2009.00090.x?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James R. Hines, Jr. & R. Glenn Hubbard & Joel Slemrod, 1993. "On the Sensitivity of R&D to Delicate Tax Changes: The Behavior of U. S. Multinationals in the 1980s," NBER Chapters, in: Studies in International Taxation, pages 149-194, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Bloom, Nick & Griffith, Rachel & Van Reenen, John, 2002. "Do R&D tax credits work? Evidence from a panel of countries 1979-1997," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 1-31, July.
    3. James R. Hines, Jr., 1994. "No Place like Home: Tax Incentives and the Location of R&D by American Multinationals," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 8, pages 65-104, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Productivity, R&D, and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970s," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 82-99, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Mansfield, Edwin, 1980. "Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 863-873, December.
    6. Watkins, Todd A., 1991. "A technological communications costs model of R&D consortia as public policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 87-107, April.
    7. Benjamin Russo, 2004. "A cost-benefit analysis of R&D tax incentives," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 37(2), pages 313-335, May.
    8. Mansfield, Edwin, 1981. "Composition of R and D Expenditures: Relationship to Size of Firm, Concentration, and Innovative Output," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 63(4), pages 610-615, November.
    9. Scherer, F M, 1982. "Inter-Industry Technology Flows and Productivity Growth," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 64(4), pages 627-634, November.
    10. Rork, Jonathan C., 2003. "Coveting Thy Neighbors' Taxation," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 56(4), pages 775-787, December.
    11. Paff Lolita A, 2005. "State-Level R&D Tax Credits: A Firm-Level Analysis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-27, September.
    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. Todd Watkins & Lolita Paff, 2009. "Absorptive capacity and R&D tax policy: Are in-house and external contract R&D substitutes or complements?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 207-227, August.

    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. Harris, Richard & Li, Qian Cher & Trainor, Mary, 2009. "Is a higher rate of R&D tax credit a panacea for low levels of R&D in disadvantaged regions?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 192-205, February.
    2. Dirk Czarnitzki & Hanna Hottenrott & Susanne Thorwarth, 2011. "Industrial research versus development investment: the implications of financial constraints," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 35(3), pages 527-544.
    3. G Cameron, 1996. "Innovation and Economic Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0277, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    4. Ugur, Mehmet & Trushin, Eshref & Solomon, Edna & Guidi, Francesco, 2016. "R&D and productivity in OECD firms and industries: A hierarchical meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 2069-2086.
    5. Christof Ernst & Katharina Richter & Nadine Riedel, 2014. "Corporate taxation and the quality of research and development," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(4), pages 694-719, August.
    6. Ufuk Akcigit & Douglas Hanley & Nicolas Serrano-Velarde, 2021. "Back to Basics: Basic Research Spillovers, Innovation Policy, and Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(1), pages 1-43.
    7. Hall, Bronwyn H. & Mairesse, Jacques & Mohnen, Pierre, 2010. "Measuring the Returns to R&D," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1033-1082, Elsevier.
    8. Giuseppe Medda & Claudio Piga, 2014. "Technological spillovers and productivity in Italian manufacturing firms," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 419-434, June.
    9. Christoph Ernst & Katharina Richter & Nadine Riedel, 2013. "Corporate taxation and the quality of research & development," Working Papers 1301, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    10. Todd Watkins & Lolita Paff, 2009. "Absorptive capacity and R&D tax policy: Are in-house and external contract R&D substitutes or complements?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 207-227, August.
    11. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    12. Ana Lara GÓMEZ, 2015. "Technological Spillovers of Research Infrastructures," Departmental Working Papers 2015-18, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    13. Link, Albert N., 1996. "On the classification of industrial R & D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 397-401, May.
    14. Volker Grossmann & Thomas M. Steger & Timo Trimborn, 2016. "Quantifying Optimal Growth Policy," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(3), pages 451-485, June.
    15. Gersbach, Hans & Sorger, Gerhard & Amon, Christian, 2018. "Hierarchical growth: Basic and applied research," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 434-459.
    16. Cassiman, Bruno & Perez-Castrillo, David & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2002. "Endogenizing know-how flows through the nature of R&D investments," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 20(6), pages 775-799, June.
    17. Huang, Minjie & Kubick, Thomas R. & Tseng, Kevin, 2021. "Technology spillovers and the duration of executive compensation," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    18. repec:lic:licosd:20308 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Kokko, Ari & Tingvall, Patrik Gustavsson & Videnord, Josefin, 2015. "The growth effects of R&D spending in the EU: A meta-analysis," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 9, pages 1-26.
    20. Mamuneas, Theofanis P., 1999. "Spillovers from publicly financed R&D capital in high-tech industries," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 215-239, February.
    21. Chiara Modanese & Hannu S. Laine & Toni P. Pasanen & Hele Savin & Joshua M. Pearce, 2018. "Economic Advantages of Dry-Etched Black Silicon in Passivated Emitter Rear Cell (PERC) Photovoltaic Manufacturing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-18, September.

    More about this item

    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:wly:fistud:v:30:y:2009:i:1:p:73-101. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1475-5890 .

    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.