[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sgh/gosnar/y2016i3p57-72.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Provisions for Future Liabilities and Effective Corporate Income Tax Rate

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Leszczyłowska
Abstract
The paper quantifies the impact of timing differences that emerge in the case of discrepancies between accounting and tax rules on the corporate tax burden. The objective of the paper is to investigate the effect of the accelerated deductibility of company expenses via provisions for future liabilities on the multi-period effective average corporate tax rate (EATR). In the investigation, pension provisions and so-called “other provisions” are taken into account and a multi-period backward-looking measure of the tax burden based on corporate cash flows is developed. The investigated companies are divided into several subgroups according to their size and multi-period cash flow. Under the current tax law, the highest tax burden among companies with positive cash flows is observed for medium-sized firms, at 33%. For small and large enterprises, the burden takes values of 24% and 25% respectively. A different situation is observed among firms with negative cash flows: in general, the EATRs are noticeably higher in this case. Under the current tax law, the average effective tax rates are 60% for all firms and 38%, 45% and 51% for medium-sized, small and large corporations respectively.If changes are made to the ways provisions for future payments are treated under tax regulations, a slight reduction may be observed in the multi-period average effective tax burden. In general, the timing effects of the deductibility of provisions lead to an average change in the effective tax rate from –1 percentage point (in the case of small companies with positive cash flows) to –4 percentage points (in the case of small entities with negative cash flows and medium-sized entities with positive cash flows). Although the differences in the median tax burden may seem to be slight, they are statistically significant.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Leszczyłowska, 2016. "Provisions for Future Liabilities and Effective Corporate Income Tax Rate," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 57-72.
    • Handle: RePEc:sgh:gosnar:y:2016:i:3:p:57-72
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.journalssystem.com/gna/pdf-100772-33144
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Katharina Finke & Jost H. Heckemeyer & Timo Reister & Christoph Spengel, 2013. "Impact of Tax-Rate Cut cum Base-Broadening Reforms on Heterogeneous Firms: Learning from the German Tax Reform of 2008," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(1), pages 72-114, March.
    2. Andreas Oestreicher & Reinald Koch, 2011. "The Revenue Consequences of Using a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base to Determine Taxable Income in the EU Member States," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 67(1), pages 64-102, March.
    3. Spengel, Christoph & Ortmann-Babel, Martina & Zinn, Benedikt & Matenaer, Sebastian, 2012. "A common corporate tax base for Europe: An impact assessment of the draft council directive on a CC(C)TB," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    4. Clemens Fuest & Thomas Hemmegarn & Fred Ramb, 2007. "How would the introduction of an EU-wide formula apportionment affect the distribution and size of the corporate tax base? An analysis based on German multinationals," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(5), pages 627-629, October.
    5. Fuest, Clemens & Hemmelgarn, Thomas & Ramb, Fred, 2006. "How would formula apportionment in the EU affect the distribution and the size of the corporate tax base? An analysis based on German multinationals," Discussion Paper Series 1: Economic Studies 2006,20, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    6. Michael Devereux, 2004. "Debating Proposed Reforms of the Taxation of Corporate Income in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 71-89, January.
    7. Oestreicher, Andreas & Reister, Timo & Spengel, Christoph, 2009. "Common corporate tax base (CCTB) and effective tax burdens in the EU member states," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-026, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Gaëtan Nicodème, 2001. "Computing effective corporate tax rates: comparisons and results," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 153, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    9. Hans‐Georg Petersen & Antje Fischer & Juliane Flach, 2005. "Wirkungen der Einfachsteuer auf die Steuerbelastung von Haushalten und Unternehmen," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 6(1), pages 71-94, February.
    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. Anna Leszczyłowska, 2015. "Deductibility of Provisions under the CCCTB Proposal and Its Effects on Companies: The Case of Poland," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(4), pages 19-31.
    2. Dirk Kiesewetter & Tobias Steigenberger & Matthias Stier, 2018. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1029-1060, December.
    3. Melle Marco C., 2014. "Eine europäische Bemessungsgrundlage für die Körperschaftsteuer? Konzeption und ordnungsökonomische Analyse / Conceptual design and constitutional economics analysis of a European tax base for corpora," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 65(1), pages 133-156, January.
    4. Ulrich Schreiber, 2013. "International Company Taxation," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-642-36306-1, June.
    5. Spengel, Christoph & Ortmann-Babel, Martina & Zinn, Benedikt & Matenaer, Sebastian, 2012. "A common corporate tax base for Europe: An impact assessment of the draft council directive on a CC(C)TB," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    6. Robert E. Lipsey, 2010. "Measuring The Location Of Production In A World Of Intangible Productive Assets, Fdi, And Intrafirm Trade," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 56(s1), pages 99-110, June.
    7. Ortmann, Regina & Sureth, Caren, 2014. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 165, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    8. Regina Ortmann & Caren Sureth-Sloane, 2016. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(5), pages 441-475, July.
    9. Simon Loretz & Margit Schratzenstaller-Altzinger, 2019. "Der EU-Vorschlag zur Harmonisierung der Körperschaftsteuer. Auswirkungen für Österreich," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), pages 61-71, January.
    10. Christoph Spengel & Benedikt Zinn, 2012. "Steuerpolitik nach der Krise: Welche Maßnahmen sind für die Unternehmensbesteuerung in Deutschland zu ergreifen?," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 13(1-2), pages 19-51, February.
    11. Dąbroś Wojciech & Kudła Janusz, 2020. "The voting of EU members for common consolidated corporate tax base and the tax benefits," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 7(54), pages 56-71, January.
    12. Gaëtan Nicodème, 2006. "Corporate tax competition and coordination in the European Union: What do we know? Where do we stand?," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 250, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    13. Doina Radulescu & Doina Maria Radulescu, 2007. "From Separate Accounting to Formula Apportionment: Analysis in a Dynamic Framework," CESifo Working Paper Series 2122, CESifo.
    14. Ortmann, Regina & Pummerer, Erich, 2015. "Formula apportionment or separate accounting? Tax-induced distortions of multinationals' locational investment decisions," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 198, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    15. Annelies Roggeman & Isabelle Verleyen & Philippe Van Cauwenberge & Carine Coppens, 2014. "Impact of a Common Corporate Tax Base on the effective tax burden in Belgium," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 530-543, June.
    16. Evers, Maria Theresia & Finke, Katharina & Köstler, Melanie & Meier, Ina & Scheffler, Wolfram & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Gemeinsame Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage in der EU: Konkretisierung der Gewinnermittlungsprinzipien und Weiterentwicklungen," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-112, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. Becker, Johannes & Runkel, Marco, 2013. "Corporate tax regime and international allocation of ownership," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 8-15.
    18. Danuše Nerudová & Veronika Solilová, 2015. "The Impact of the CCCTB Introduction on the Distribution of the Group Tax Bases Across the EU: The Study for the Czech Republic," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(6), pages 621-637.
    19. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Julia Wagner, 2020. "How accurately does the CCCTB apportionment formula allocate profits? An evaluation of the European Commission proposal," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 495-536, May.
    20. repec:prg:jnlpep:v:preprint:id:514:p:1-17 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    corporate income tax; EATR; provisions; tax accounting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    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:sgh:gosnar:y:2016:i:3:p:57-72. 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: Grzegorz Konat (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sgwawpl.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.