Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Should Countries Promote Foreign Direct Investment?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Gordon H. HANSON

Abstract

This paper examines whether policies to promote foreign direct investment (FDI) make economic sense. The discussion focuses on whether existing academic research suggests that the benefits of FDI are sufficient to justify the kind of policy interventions seen in practice. For small open economies, efficient taxation of foreign and domestic capital depends on their relative mobility. If foreign and domestic capital are equally mobile internationally, it will be optimal for countries to subject both types of capital to equal tax treatment. If foreign capital is more mobile internationally, it will be optimal to have lower taxes on capital owned by foreign residents than on capital owned by domestic residents. Absent market failure, there is no justification for favouring FDI over foreign portfolio investment. In practice, countries appear to tax income from foreign capital at rates lower than those for domestic capital and to subject different forms of foreign investment to very different tax treatment. FDI appears to be sensitive to host-country characteristics. Higher taxes deter foreign investment, while a more educated work force and larger goods markets attract FDI. There is also some evidence that multinationals tend to agglomerate in a manner consistent with location-specific externalities. There is weak evidence that FDI generates positive spillovers for host economies. While multinationals are attracted to high-productivity countries, and to high-productivity industries within these countries, there is little evidence at the firm or plant level that FDI raises the productivity of domestic enterprises. Indeed, it appears that plants in industries with a larger multinational presence tend to enjoy lower rates of productivity growth over time. Empirical research thus provides little support for the idea that promoting FDI is warranted on welfare grounds. Subsidies to FDI are more likely to be warranted where multinationals are intensive in the use of elastically supplied factors, where the arrival of multinationals to a market does not lower the market share of domestic firms, and where FDI generates strong positive productivity spillovers for domestic agents. Empirical research suggests that the first and third conditions are unlikely to hold. In the three cases we examine, it appears that the second condition holds, but not the first or third conditions. This suggests that Brazil’s subsidies to foreign automobile manufacturers may have lowered national welfare. Costa Rica appears to have been prudent in not offering subsidies in the case of Intel. There clearly is a need for much more research on the host-economy consequences of FDI. The impression from existing academic literature is that countries should be sceptical about claims that promoting FDI will raise national welfare. A sensible approach for policy makes in host countries is to presume that subsidizing FDI is unwarranted, unless clear evidence is presented to support the argument that the social returns to FDI exceed the private returns.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.unctad.org/en/Docs/pogdsmdpbg24d9.en.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by United Nations Conference on Trade and Development in its series G-24 Discussion Papers with number 9.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 2001
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:unc:g24pap:9

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Palais des Nations, CH - 1211 Geneva 10
Phone: +41 22 907 12 34
Fax: +41 22 907 00 43
Email:
Web page: http://www.unctad.org/Templates/Page.asp?intItemID=2101&lang=1
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Matouschek, Niko, 1999. "Foreign Direct Investment and Spillovers through Backward Linkages," CEPR Discussion Papers 2283, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  2. Gordon, Roger H, 1992. " Can Capital Income Taxes Survive in Open Economies?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 47(3), pages 1159-80, July.
  3. James R. Markusen & Keith E. Maskus, 2001. "Multinational Firms: Reconciling Theory and Evidence," NBER Chapters, in: Topics in Empirical International Economics: A Festschrift in Honor of Robert E. Lipsey, pages 71-98 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Rhee, Yung Whee, 1990. "The catalyst model of development: Lessons from Bangladesh's success with garment exports," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 333-346, February.
  5. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Ohno, Yuka, 1998. "Endogenous protection, foreign direct investment and protection-building trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 205-227, December.
  6. Eckhard Janeba, 1993. "Foreign Direct Investment under Oligopoly: Profit Shifting of Profit Capturing?," Discussion Paper Serie A 420, University of Bonn, Germany.
  7. Aitken, Brian & Harrison, Ann & Lipsey, Robert E., 1996. "Wages and foreign ownership A comparative study of Mexico, Venezuela, and the United States," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3-4), pages 345-371, May.
  8. Bond, Eric W & Samuelson, Larry, 1986. "Tax Holidays as Signals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 820-26, September.
  9. James R. Markusen & Keith E. Maskus, 1999. "Discriminating Among Alternative Theories of the Multinational Enterprise," NBER Working Papers 7164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Wheeler, David & Mody, Ashoka, 1992. "International investment location decisions : The case of U.S. firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 57-76, August.
  11. Blomström, Magnus & Kokko, Ari, 1996. "Multinational Corporations and Spillovers," CEPR Discussion Papers 1365, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  12. Borensztein, E. & De Gregorio, J. & Lee, J-W., 1998. "How does foreign direct investment affect economic growth?1," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 115-135, June.
  13. Ricardo Hausmann & Eduardo Fernández-Arias, 2000. "Foreign Direct Investment: Good Cholesterol?," IDB Publications 6466, Inter-American Development Bank.
  14. Black, Dan A & Hoyt, William H, 1989. "Bidding for Firms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1249-56, December.
  15. Tybout, James, 1998. "Manufacuring firms in developing countries - how well do they do, and why?," Policy Research Working Paper Series 1965, The World Bank.
  16. Steven Globerman, 1979. "Foreign Direct Investment and `Spillover' Efficiency Benefits in Canadian Manufacturing Industries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 12(1), pages 42-56, February.
  17. Eduardo Fernández-Arias & Ricardo Hausmann, 2000. "Is FDI a Safer Form of Financing?," IDB Publications 6465, Inter-American Development Bank.
  18. Roger H. Gordon & Jeffrey K. MacKie-Mason, 1995. "Why Is There Corporate Taxation in a Small Open Economy? The Role of Transfer Pricing and Income Shifting," NBER Chapters, in: The Effects of Taxation on Multinational Corporations, pages 67-94 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. James R. Markusen & Anthony J. Venables, 1995. "Multinational Firms and The New Trade Theory," NBER Working Papers 5036, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Gordon, R.H. & Bovenberg, A.L., 1994. "Why Is Capital So Immobile Internationally?: Possible Explanations and Implications for Capital Income Taxation," Working Papers 358, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
  21. Hines, James R, Jr, 1996. "Altered States: Taxes and the Location of Foreign Direct Investment in America," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(5), pages 1076-94, December.
  22. Magnus Blomstrom & Fredrik Sjoholm, 1998. "Technology Transfer and Spillovers? Does Local Participation with Multinationals Matter?," NBER Working Papers 6816, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  23. Keith Head & John Ries & Deborah Swenson, 1994. "Agglomeration Benefits and Location Choice: Evidence from Japanese Manufacturing Investment in the United States," NBER Working Papers 4767, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Aitken, B. & Hanson, G.H. & Harrison, A.E., 1994. "Spillovers, Foreign Investment and Export Behavior," Papers 95-06, Columbia - Graduate School of Business.
  25. Caves, Richard E, 1974. "Multinational Firms, Competition, and Productivity in Host-Country Markets," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 41(162), pages 176-93, May.
  26. Rodriguez-Clare, Andres, 1996. "Multinationals, Linkages, and Economic Development," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(4), pages 852-73, September.
  27. Gordon, Roger H, 1986. "Taxation of Investment and Savings in a World Economy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1086-1102, December.
  28. Dixit, Avinash K. & Grossman, Gene M., 1986. "Targeted export promotion with several oligopolistic industries," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(3-4), pages 233-249, November.
  29. Blomstrom, Magnus & Persson, Hakan, 1983. "Foreign investment and spillover efficiency in an underdeveloped economy: Evidence from the Mexican manufacturing industry," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 11(6), pages 493-501, June.
  30. Blomstrom, Magnus, 1986. "Foreign Investment and Productive Efficiency: The Case of Mexico," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 97-110, September.
  31. Janeba, Eckhard, 1998. "Tax competition in imperfectly competitive markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 135-153, February.
  32. Blonigen, Bruce A & Figlio, David N, 1998. "Voting for Protection: Does Direct Foreign Investment Influence Legislator Behavior?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 1002-14, September.
  33. Martin Feldstein & James R. Hines Jr. & R. Glenn Hubbard, 1995. "The Effects of Taxation on Multinational Corporations," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number feld95-2.
  34. Markusen, James R., 1984. "Multinationals, multi-plant economies, and the gains from trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3-4), pages 205-226, May.
  35. Lall, Sanjaya, 1980. "Vertical Inter-Firm Linkages in LDCs: An Empirical Study," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 42(3), pages 203-26, August.
  36. Razin, A & Sadka, E & Yuen, C-W, 1997. "A Pecking Order of Capital Inflows and International Tax Principles," Papers 12-97, Tel Aviv - the Sackler Institute of Economic Studies.
  37. Dani Rodrik & Andres Velasco, 1999. "Short-Term Capital Flows," NBER Working Papers 7364, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  38. Ann E. Harrison & Brian J. Aitken, 1999. "Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 605-618, June.
  39. Kokko, Ari, 1994. "Technology, market characteristics, and spillovers," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 279-293, April.
  40. Gao, Ting, 1999. "Economic geography and the department of vertical multinational production," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 301-320, August.
  41. Bhagwati, Jagdish N. & Brecher, Richard A. & Dinopoulos, Elias & Srinivasan, T. N., 1987. "Quid pro quo foreign investment and welfare : A political-economy-theoretic model," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1-2), pages 127-138, October.
  42. Glass, Amy Jocelyn & Saggi, Kamal, 1999. "FDI policies under shared factor markets," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 309-332, December.
  43. Teece, David J, 1977. "Technology Transfer by Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost of Transferring Technological Know-how," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(346), pages 242-61, June.
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 in new window

Cited by:
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:unc:g24pap:9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rachid Bouhia).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.