IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eti/dpaper/17050.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tax Avoidance by Capital Reduction: Evidence from corporate tax reform in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • HOSONO Kaoru
  • HOTEI Masaki
  • MIYAKAWA Daisuke

Abstract

Using the pro forma standard taxation system introduced in Japan on April 1, 2004 as a natural experiment, we empirically examine how firms reacted to this exogenous institutional change, which burdened all firms holding stated capital of larger than 100 million yen with additional tax payments. Then, we determine whether such a reaction (if any) systematically resulted in firm growth. Our results are as follows. First, firms that originally held capital above the threshold became more likely to reduce their capital to the threshold level, or below, after the announcement of the new tax system. Second, firms that exhibit losses, hold smaller assets, have lower liquidity, and/or would benefit more from a tax point of view by reducing their capital were more likely to do so. Third, firms that reduced their capital showed a higher exit rate and ex-post lower growth in size, as measured by total and tangible assets, number of employees, and sales. Quantitatively, firms that reduced their capital decreased their assets, employment, and sales by 15%, 11%, and 4%, respectively, on average, within two years of the capital reduction, as compared with those that did not. Fourth, while the debt-to-total assets ratio of firms that reduced their capital did not change in comparison with firms that did not do so, the former did show a relative increase in the share of total assets made up of liquid assets. These results imply that the policy-induced capital reduction had substantial negative impacts on firm growth, and resulted in firms changing the balance of their asset holdings in favor of liquid assets.

Suggested Citation

  • HOSONO Kaoru & HOTEI Masaki & MIYAKAWA Daisuke, 2017. "Tax Avoidance by Capital Reduction: Evidence from corporate tax reform in Japan," Discussion papers 17050, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
  • Handle: RePEc:eti:dpaper:17050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.rieti.go.jp/jp/publications/dp/17e050.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hovakimian, Armen & Opler, Tim & Titman, Sheridan, 2001. "The Debt-Equity Choice," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 1-24, March.
    2. Savina Princen, 2012. "Taxes do Affect Corporate Financing Decisions: The Case of Belgian ACE," CESifo Working Paper Series 3713, CESifo.
    3. Heider, Florian & Ljungqvist, Alexander, 2015. "As certain as debt and taxes: Estimating the tax sensitivity of leverage from state tax changes," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 684-712.
    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. Tobias Adrian & Hyun Song Shin, 2014. "Procyclical Leverage and Value-at-Risk," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(2), pages 373-403.
    6. Emmanuel Saez, 2010. "Do Taxpayers Bunch at Kink Points?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 180-212, August.
    7. Miguel Almunia & David Lopez-Rodriguez, 2018. "Under the Radar: The Effects of Monitoring Firms on Tax Compliance," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, February.
    8. DeAngelo, Harry & Masulis, Ronald W, 1980. "Leverage and Dividend Irrelevancy under Corporate and Personal Taxation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(2), pages 453-464, May.
    9. Raj Chetty & John N. Friedman & Emmanuel Saez, 2013. "Using Differences in Knowledge across Neighborhoods to Uncover the Impacts of the EITC on Earnings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2683-2721, December.
    10. Onji, Kazuki, 2009. "The response of firms to eligibility thresholds: Evidence from the Japanese value-added tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(5-6), pages 766-775, June.
    11. Francisco J. Buera & Joseph P. Kaboski & Yongseok Shin, 2011. "Finance and Development: A Tale of Two Sectors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1964-2002, August.
    12. Henrik J. Kleven & Mazhar Waseem, 2013. "Using Notches to Uncover Optimization Frictions and Structural Elasticities: Theory and Evidence from Pakistan," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(2), pages 669-723.
    13. 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.
    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. Wenyan Sun & Kedong Yin & Zhe Liu, 2021. "Tax Incentives, R&D Manipulation, and Corporate Innovation Performance: Evidence from Listed Companies in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-16, October.
    2. Drahomir Klimsa & Robert Ullmann, 2023. "Threshold-dependent tax enforcement and the size distribution of firms: evidence from Germany," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(4), pages 1002-1035, August.
    3. Miguel Almunia & David Lopez-Rodriguez, 2018. "Under the Radar: The Effects of Monitoring Firms on Tax Compliance," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 1-38, February.
    4. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Maxime Gravoueille & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Tax simplicity or simplicity of evasion? Evidence from self-employment taxes in France," POID Working Papers 050, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Hargaden, Enda Patrick, 2020. "Taxpayer responses in good times and bad," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 653-690.
    6. Li Liu & Ben Lockwood & Miguel Almunia & Eddy H. F. Tam, 2021. "VAT Notches, Voluntary Registration, and Bunching: Theory and U.K. Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(1), pages 151-164, March.
    7. Lu, Yi & Shi, Julie & Yang, Wanyu, 2019. "Expenditure response to health insurance policies: Evidence from kinks in rural China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    8. Miguel Almunia & David Lopez-Rodriguez, 2014. "Heterogeneous Responses to Effective Tax Enforcement: Evidence from Spanish Firms," Working Papers 1412, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    9. 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.
    10. Asatryan, Zareh & Peichl, Andreas, 2016. "Responses of firms to tax, administrative and accounting rules: Evidence from Armenia," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-065, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Juliana Londoño-Vélez & Javier Avila-Mahecha, 2024. "Behavioral Responses to Wealth Taxation: Evidence from Colombia," NBER Working Papers 32134, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Harju, Jarkko & Matikka, Tuomas & Rauhanen, Timo, 2019. "Compliance costs vs. tax incentives: Why do entrepreneurs respond to size-based regulations?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 139-164.
    13. Andreas R. Kostøl & Andreas S. Myhre, 2021. "Labor Supply Responses to Learning the Tax and Benefit Schedule," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3733-3766, November.
    14. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Tax Simplicity and Heterogeneous Learning," NBER Working Papers 24049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. R. Lardeux, 2018. "Who Understands The French Income Tax? Bunching Where Tax Liabilities Start," Documents de Travail de l'Insee - INSEE Working Papers g2018-04, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.
    16. Dina Pomeranz & José Vila-Belda, 2019. "Taking State-Capacity Research to the Field: Insights from Collaborations with Tax Authorities," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 11(1), pages 755-781, August.
    17. Marcelo Bergolo & Gabriel Burdin & Mauricio De Rosa & Matias Giaccobasso & Martín Leites, 2019. "Tax bunching at the Kink in the Presence of Low Capacity of Enforcement: Evidence From Uruguay," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 19-05, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    18. Goupille-Lebret, Jonathan & Garbinti, Bertrand & Munoz, Mathilde & Stantcheva, Stefanie & Zucman, Gabriel, 2023. "Tax Design, Information, and Elasticities: Evidence From the French Wealth Tax," CEPR Discussion Papers 18206, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Søgaard, Jakob Egholt, 2019. "Labor supply and optimization frictions: Evidence from the Danish student labor market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 125-138.
    20. Slotwinski, Michaela & Schmidheiny, Kurt, 2014. "Behavioral Responses to Local Tax Rates: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from a Foreigners Tax Scheme in Switzerland," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100292, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eti:dpaper:17050. 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: TANIMOTO, Toko (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/rietijp.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.