IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aiy/jnljtr/v7y2021i1p68-86.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the effectiveness of anti-COVID tax support for innovation activities of small and medium-sized enterprises in OECD countries

Author

Listed:
  • Alina O. Shapovalova
  • Yuriy B. Ivanov
  • Victoriia F. Tyschenko
  • Vlada V. Karpova

Abstract

The global economy has rebounded from the lows of 2020, but its recovery will depend on innovations. Therefore, it is important to identify the most effective tax support instruments for the innovation activities of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that are used in the framework of anti-crisis economic policies in the OECD countries. It is suggested that tax incentives are the most effective tax instrument of all; the effectiveness of the profit tax benefit depends on the SME’s profitability; as to the social insurance and pension contribution, there is an allowable minimum of the rate, determined by the level of wages, that will stimulate innovation. To assess the effectiveness of tax support tools, the study used the methods of linear multivariate regression and simulation in Simulink. The source of information for regression analysis was the data published by the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). It was concluded that the most effective measures of tax support are tax incentives, as well as deferred payment of social insurance and pension contributions. The 10% profit tax was shown to be optimal to stimulate innovation provided the company keeps the saved profit for development. For innovative SMEs, the minimum allowable contribution rate for social insurance and pension provision, which stimulates their innovative activities, is 12%. The results of modeling confirmed that the proposed threshold indicators for supporting SMEs’ innovation activity can be an effective tool for overcoming the consequences of the global crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Alina O. Shapovalova & Yuriy B. Ivanov & Victoriia F. Tyschenko & Vlada V. Karpova, 2021. "Assessment of the effectiveness of anti-COVID tax support for innovation activities of small and medium-sized enterprises in OECD countries," Journal of Tax Reform, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal University, vol. 7(1), pages 68-86.
  • Handle: RePEc:aiy:jnljtr:v:7:y:2021:i:1:p:68-86
    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2021.7.1.091
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://jtr.urfu.ru/fileadmin/user_upload/site_15907/2021/Shapovalova_et_al.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/jtr.2021.7.1.091?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boot, Arnoud W. A. & Carletti, Elena & Kotz, Hans-Helmut & Krahnen, Jan Pieter & Pelizzon, Loriana & Subrahmanyam, Marti G., 2020. "Corona and financial stability 3.0: Try equity - risk sharing for companies, large and small," SAFE Policy Letters 81, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    2. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2020. "Tax Policy for Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 151-188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Mohnen, Pierre & Lokshin, Boris, 2009. "What does it take for an R&D tax incentive policy to be effective?," MERIT Working Papers 2009-014, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    4. Fairlie, Robert W., 2020. "The Impact of COVID-19 on Small Business Owners: Evidence of Early-Stage Losses from the April 2020 Current Population Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 13311, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Mohnen, Pierre & Lokshin, Boris, 2009. "What does it take for an R&D tax incentive policy to be effective?," MERIT Working Papers 014, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    6. Arnoud Boot & Elena Carletti & Hans-Helmut Kotz & Jan Pieter Krahnen & Loriana Pelizzon & Marti Subrahmanyam, 2020. "Coronavirus and financial stability 3.0: Try equity – risk sharing for companies, large and small," Vox eBook Chapters, in: AgneÌ€s BeÌ nassy-QueÌ reÌ & Beatrice Weder di Mauro (ed.), Europe in the Time of Covid-19, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 41-47, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    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. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    2. Vasja Roblek & Oshane Thorpe & Mirjana Pejic Bach & Andrej Jerman & Maja Meško, 2020. "The Fourth Industrial Revolution and the Sustainability Practices: A Comparative Automated Content Analysis Approach of Theory and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-27, October.
    3. Montmartin, Benjamin & Herrera, Marcos & Massard, Nadine, 2018. "The impact of the French policy mix on business R&D: How geography matters," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2010-2027.
    4. Eckert, Sandra, 2020. "EU agencies in banking and energy between institutional and policy centralisation," SAFE Working Paper Series 278, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    5. Julien Pénin, 2013. "Devrait-on obliger les entreprises à investir en R&D ? Vers une approche des politiques d’innovation par la responsabilité des entreprises," Working Papers of BETA 2013-11, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    6. Caperna, Giulio & Colagrossi, Marco & Geraci, Andrea & Mazzarella, Gianluca, 2020. "Googling Unemployment During the Pandemic: Inference and Nowcast Using Search Data," Working Papers 2020-04, Joint Research Centre, European Commission.
    7. Sérgio Kannebley Júnior & Bruno César Araújo & Alessandro Maffioli & Rodolfo Stucchi, 2013. "Productive Development Policies and Innovation Spillovers through Labor Force Mobility: The Case of the Brazilian Innovation Support System," Research Department Publications IDB-WP-459, Inter-American Development Bank, Research Department.
    8. Benjamin Montmartin & Marcos Herrera & Nadine Massard, 2017. "R&D policy regimes in France: New evidence from a spatio-temporal analysis," Working Papers hal-01559041, HAL.
    9. Stojchevska, Ivana & Baftijari, Agon, 2015. "The Impact of Governmental Policy on R&D Projects in the Pharmaceutical Industry," Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference (2015), Kotor, Montengero, in: Proceedings of the ENTRENOVA - ENTerprise REsearch InNOVAtion Conference, Kotor, Montengero, 10-11 September 2015, pages 72-79, IRENET - Society for Advancing Innovation and Research in Economy, Zagreb.
    10. Montmartin, Benjamin & Herrera, Marcos, 2015. "Internal and external effects of R&D subsidies and fiscal incentives: Empirical evidence using spatial dynamic panel models," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1065-1079.
    11. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/7rrsl07p559bjr85tr7hsft1o9 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Miguel Sanchez-Martinez & Cristiana Benedetti-Fasil & Peder Christensen & Nicolas Robledo-Bottcher, 2017. "R&D tax credits and their macroeconomic impact in the EU: an assessment using QUEST III," JRC Research Reports JRC108931, Joint Research Centre.
    13. Syoum Negassi & Jean-Francois Sattin, 2014. "Evaluation of Public R&D Policy: A Meta-Regression Analysis," Working Papers 14-09, University of Delaware, Department of Economics.
    14. A. Minniti & F. Venturini, 2014. "R&D Policy and Schumpeterian Growth: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers wp945, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    15. Julia Anderson & Simone Tagliapietra & Guntram B. Wolff, 2020. "A Framework for a European Economic Recovery After COVID-19," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 55(4), pages 209-215, July.
    16. Wojciech Grabowski & Teoman Pamukcu & Krzysztof Szczygielski & Sinan Tandogan, 2013. "Does Government Support for Private Innovation Matter? Firm-Level Evidence from Turkey and Poland," CASE Network Studies and Analyses 0458, CASE-Center for Social and Economic Research.
    17. Luiz Ricardo Cavalcante & Bruno César Araújo & Donald Pianto & Fernanda De Negri & Patrick Alves, 2011. "Impactos Dos Fundos Setoriais Nasempresas," Anais do XXXVIII Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 38th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 124, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    18. Francesco Columba & Tommaso Orlando & Francesco Palazzo & Fabio Parlapiano, 2022. "The features of equity capital increases by Italian corporates," Questioni di Economia e Finanza (Occasional Papers) 709, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    19. Castellacci, Fulvio & Lie, Christine Mee, 2015. "Do the effects of R&D tax credits vary across industries? A meta-regression analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 819-832.
    20. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4ji8v7q9nt9q0rsm9mqn5dqrrp is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Federico Revelli, 2013. "Tax incentives for cultural heritage conservation," Chapters, in: Ilde Rizzo & Anna Mignosa (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Cultural Heritage, chapter 6, pages i-i, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    22. Spyros Arvanitis, 2013. "Micro-econometric approaches to the evaluation of technology-oriented public programmes: a non-technical review of the state of the art," Chapters, in: Albert N. Link & Nicholas S. Vonortas (ed.), Handbook on the Theory and Practice of Program Evaluation, chapter 3, pages 56-88, Edward Elgar Publishing.

    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:aiy:jnljtr:v:7:y:2021:i:1:p:68-86. 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: Natalia Starodubets (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/seurfru.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.