A great deal of recent debate has revolved around the role for the RE/BV x NI interaction term in the equations used by Harris and Kemsley (1999) and follow-up studies, challenging the decision to include the term (see, e.g., Hanlon, Myers, and Shevlin, 2001, and Dhaliwal, Erickson, Myers, and Banyi, 2001). Guenther and Sansing (2002) address the issue directly, providing a set of sufficient conditions under which the interaction term is required. Their analysis, along with the extant empirical evidence, suggests it is critical to include the interaction term in empirical equations, else mis-specification results. Nevertheless, the analysis also indicates that the tax interpretation for retained earnings coefficients is not as clear as implied by Harris and Kemsley (1999). In this brief comment, I provide perspectives on the analysis in Guenther and Sansing (2002), and I flesh it out by showing the effects of adding another key assumption to their model.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Find related papers by JEL classification: H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies