IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/tky/fseres/2021cf1169.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does E-Commerce Ease or Intensify Tax Competition? Destination Principle vs. Origin Principle

Author

Listed:
  • Hiroshi Aiura

    (Department of Economics, Nanzan University)

  • Hikaru Ogawa

    (Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo)

Abstract

By constructing a commodity tax competition model with product differentiation, this paperstudies the relationship between the development of e-commerce and the intensity of tax competitionunder two different tax principles to be applied to e-commerce: the destination principle and the originprinciple. Our main ndings are as follows: (i) tax competition between two symmetric countriesunder the destination principle is more intense than tax competition under the origin principle, and(ii) the development of e-commerce raises the tax rate under the origin principle, but lowers it underthe destination principle. An analysis of tax competition among asymmetric countries was alsoconducted. The nding was that in some cases, the development of e-commerce has changed the taxrate set by large and small countries in opposite directions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2021. "Does E-Commerce Ease or Intensify Tax Competition? Destination Principle vs. Origin Principle," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1169, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    • Handle: RePEc:tky:fseres:2021cf1169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cirje.e.u-tokyo.ac.jp/research/dp/2021/2021cf1169.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agrawal, David R. & Mardan, Mohammed, 2019. "Will destination-based taxes be fully exploited when available? An application to the U.S. commodity tax system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 128-143.
    2. Andreas Haufler & Michael Pflüger, 2004. "International Commodity Taxation under Monopolistic Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 445-470, August.
    3. Keen, Michael & Lahiri, Sajal, 1998. "The comparison between destination and origin principles under imperfect competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 323-350, August.
    4. Fabio Antoniou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Michael S. Michael & Nikos Tsakiris, 2016. "On the Efficiency of Destination and Origin Commodity Taxation in the Presence of Consumption Generated Cross-Border Pollution," CESifo Working Paper Series 6221, CESifo.
    5. David R. Agrawal, 2021. "The Internet as a Tax Haven?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 1-35, November.
    6. Lockwood, Ben, 2001. "Tax competition and tax co-ordination under destination and origin principles: a synthesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 279-319, August.
    7. David R. Agrawal & William F. Fox, 2017. "Taxes in an e-commerce generation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(5), pages 903-926, September.
    8. Andreas HaufLer & Guttorm Schjelderup & Frank Stähler, 2005. "Barriers to Trade and Imperfect Competition: The Choice of Commodity Tax Base," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(3), pages 281-300, May.
    9. Fabio Antoniou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Nikos Tsakiris, 2019. "Destination‐based vs. Origin‐based Commodity Taxation in Large Open Economies with Unemployment," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 86(341), pages 67-86, January.
    10. Agrawal, David R. & Wildasin, David E., 2020. "Technology and tax systems," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    11. Ben Lockwood & David Meza & Gareth Myles, 1994. "When are origin and destination regimes equivalent?," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 1(1), pages 5-24, February.
    12. Ben Lockwood & David de Meza & Gareth Myles, 1995. "On the European Union VAT proposals: the superiority of origin over destination taxation," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 16(1), pages 1-17, February.
    13. Nigar Hashimzade & Hassan Khodavaisi & Gareth Myles, 2011. "Country characteristics and preferences over tax principles," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(2), pages 214-232, April.
    14. Kanbur, Ravi & Keen, Michael, 1993. "Jeux Sans Frontieres: Tax Competition and Tax Coordination When Countries Differ in Size," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 83(4), pages 877-892, September.
    15. Birg, Laura, 2018. "Cross-border or Online - Tax Competition with Mobile Consumers under Destination and Origin Principle," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181645, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Maya Bacache-Beauvallet, 2018. "Tax competition, tax coordination and e-commerce," Post-Print hal-02163792, HAL.
    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. Behrens, Kristian & Hamilton, Jonathan H. & Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P. & Thisse, Jacques-François, 2009. "Commodity tax competition and industry location under the destination and the origin principle," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 422-433, July.
    2. Scott McCracken, 2015. "The choice of commodity tax base in the presence of horizontal foreign direct investment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(5), pages 811-833, October.
    3. Behrens, Kristian & Hamilton, Jonathan H. & Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P. & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2007. "Commodity tax harmonization and the location of industry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2), pages 271-291, July.
    4. Haufler, Andreas & Pflüger, Michael, 2003. "Market structure and the taxation of international trade," Discussion Papers in Economics 106, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    5. Andreas HaufLer & Guttorm Schjelderup & Frank Stähler, 2005. "Barriers to Trade and Imperfect Competition: The Choice of Commodity Tax Base," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 12(3), pages 281-300, May.
    6. Fabio Antoniou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Nikos Tsakiris, 2015. "Destination vs. Origin-based Commodity Taxation in Large Open Economies with Unemployment," CESifo Working Paper Series 5585, CESifo.
    7. Kenji Fujiwara, 2016. "Tax Principles and Tariff-Tax Reforms under International Oligopoly," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 18(1), pages 84-98, February.
    8. Scott McCracken & Frank Stähler, 2010. "Economic integration and the choice of commodity tax base with endogenous market structures," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 17(2), pages 91-113, April.
    9. Fabio Antoniou & Panos Hatzipanayotou & Nikos Tsakiris, 2019. "Destination‐based vs. Origin‐based Commodity Taxation in Large Open Economies with Unemployment," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 86(341), pages 67-86, January.
    10. Tsaur-Chin Wu & Chih-Ta Yen & Hsiu-Wei Chang, 2023. "Network externalities, trade costs, and the choice of commodity taxation principle," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(5), pages 1203-1224, October.
    11. Moriconi, Simone & Sato, Yasuhiro, 2009. "International commodity taxation in the presence of unemployment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(7-8), pages 939-949, August.
    12. Haufler, Andreas & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2004. "Tacit collusion and international commodity taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(3-4), pages 577-600, March.
    13. Simone Moriconi & Pierre M. Picard & Skerdilajda Zanaj, 2019. "Commodity taxation and regulatory competition," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 26(4), pages 919-965, August.
    14. Bernd Genser & Andreas Haufler, 1996. "Tax competition, tax coordination and tax harmonization: The effects of EMU," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 23(1), pages 59-89, February.
    15. Lockwood, Ben, 2001. "Tax competition and tax co-ordination under destination and origin principles: a synthesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 279-319, August.
    16. Agrawal, David R. & Shybalkina, Iuliia, 2023. "Online shopping can redistribute local tax revenue from urban to rural America," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    17. Nigar Hashimzade & Hassan Khodavaisi & Gareth Myles, 2011. "Country characteristics and preferences over tax principles," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(2), pages 214-232, April.
    18. Haufler, A. & Schjelderup, G. & Stahler, F., 2000. "Commodity Taxation and International Trade in Imperfect Markets," Papers 17/00, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration-.
    19. Andreas Haufler & Michael Pflüger, 2004. "International Commodity Taxation under Monopolistic Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 6(3), pages 445-470, August.
    20. Cremer, Helmuth & Gahvari, Firouz, 2006. "Which border taxes? Origin and destination regimes with fiscal competition in output and emission taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 2121-2142, November.

    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:tky:fseres:2021cf1169. 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: CIRJE administrative office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ritokjp.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.