IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/14033.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Assessing the impact of introducing an ACE regime: A behavioural corporate microsimulation analysis for Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Finke, Katharina
  • Heckemeyer, Jost H.
  • Spengel, Christoph

Abstract

In their famous Mirrlees review (2011) on reforming the tax system for the 21st century, the authors put forward the introduction of an allowance for corporate equity regime. In recent years, several countries introduced an ACE regime. The main feature of an ACE regime is that it removes tax distortions on marginal investment and finance distortions. Yet, by narrowing the tax base an ACE regime potentially requires an increase in tax rates which might affect location choices and profit shifting activity negatively. In this paper, we employ a microsimulation model to determine the consequences of introducing an ACE regime in Germany. The simulation results show that granting an ACE for corporate income tax purposes results in a revenue loss of about 18%. This could be financed by an increase of the combined profit tax rate by 6 percentage points. At firm level, our analysis illustrates the heterogeneous distribution of the reform effect accross the sample. For 50% of firms between the 25th and 75th percentile, introducing an ACE regime reduces tax payments between 35% and 2%. If the ACE is combined with a tax rate adjustment, the tax effect ranges between -32% and +7.1% for firms between the 25th and 75th percentile. With respect to behavioural responses on decision margins, we find that introducing the ACE reduces the mean debt-ratio by about 1.5 percentage points in the short run. For the capital-stock we arrive at a mean short-term increase of 2.4%. Finally, our computations show that the ACE regime with adjusted profit tax rate cannot be overall tax neutral. In particular, the increase in the profit tax rate required to finance the equity allowance induces intensified outward profit-shifting activities and affects location choices negatively. In the short-run the tax revenue is therefore shown to decline to about 95% of its original level.

Suggested Citation

  • Finke, Katharina & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Assessing the impact of introducing an ACE regime: A behavioural corporate microsimulation analysis for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-033, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:14033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/97295/1/786784369.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander Klemm, 2007. "Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 229-262, June.
    2. (IFS), Institute for Fiscal Studies & Mirrlees, James (ed.), 2011. "Tax By Design: The Mirrlees Review," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199553747.
    3. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The United Kingdom," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 31-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Atkinson, A B & Sandmo, A, 1980. "Welfare Implications of the Taxation of Savings," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(359), pages 529-549, September.
    5. Ruud Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.
    6. John Isaac, 1997. "A comment on the viability of the allowance for corporate equity," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 303-318, August.
    7. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "Introduction to "The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany"," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 1-6, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Filippo Oropallo & Valentino Parisi, 2007. "Will Italy’s Tax Reform Reduce the Corporate Tax Burden? A Microsimulation Analysis," Rivista di statistica ufficiale, ISTAT - Italian National Institute of Statistics - (Rome, ITALY), vol. 9(1), pages 31-58, march.
    9. Katharina Finke & Jost H. Heckemeyer & Timo Reister & Christoph Spengel, 2013. "Impact of Tax-Rate Cut cum Base-Broadening Reforms on Heterogeneous Firms: Learning from the German Tax Reform of 2008," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(1), pages 72-114, March.
    10. Paul Johnson & Gareth Myles, 2011. "The Mirrlees Review," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 319-329, September.
    11. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The United States," NBER Chapters, in: The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, pages 193-267, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Michael P. Devereux & Rachel Griffith & Alexander Klemm, 2002. "Corporate income tax reforms and international tax competition [‘Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 449-495.
    13. Boadway, Robin & Bruce, Neil, 1984. "A general proposition on the design of a neutral business tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 231-239, July.
    14. Mervyn A. King & Don Fullerton, 1984. "The Taxation of Income from Capital: A Comparative Study of the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number king84-1, May.
    15. Doina Maria Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2007. "ACE versus CBIT: Which is Better for Investment and Welfare?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 53(2), pages 294-328, June.
    16. Michael Devereux & Harold Freeman, 1991. "A general neutral profits tax," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Christian Keuschnigg & Martin Dietz, 2007. "A growth oriented dual income tax," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(2), pages 191-221, April.
    18. Ruud A. De Mooij, 2012. "Tax Biases to Debt Finance: Assessing the Problem, Finding Solutions," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 489-512, December.
    19. Alessandra Staderini, 2001. "Tax reforms to influence corporate financial policy: the case of the Italian business tax reform of 1997-98," Temi di discussione (Economic working papers) 423, Bank of Italy, Economic Research and International Relations Area.
    20. Boadway, R. W. & Bruce, N., 1979. "Depreciation and interest deductions and the effect of the corporation income tax on investment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 93-105, February.
    21. Doina Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2006. "ACE Vs. CBIT: Which Is Better for Investment and Welfare?," EcoMod2006 272100072, EcoMod.
    22. Ruud A. De Mooij, 2012. "Tax Biases to Debt Finance: Assessing the Problem, Finding Solutions," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 489-512, December.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Bergner, Sören Martin & Bräutigam, Rainer & Evers, Maria Theresia & Spengel, Christoph, 2017. "The use of SME tax incentives in the European Union," ZEW Discussion Papers 17-006, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Petutschnig, Matthias & Rünger, Silke, 2017. "The effects of a tax allowance for growth and investment: Empirical evidence from a firm-level analysis," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 221, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    3. 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.
    4. Martin Falk & Werner Hölzl & Harald Oberhofer, 2015. "Die Bedeutung von unternehmensbezogenen Individualdaten für die empirische Wirtschaftsforschung und wirtschaftspolitische Beratung," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 88(11), pages 845-857, November.
    5. Seppo Kari & Londiwe Khoza & Nangamso Manjezi & Kyle McNabb, 2019. "Combatting debt bias in South African firms: The case for an allowance for corporate equity," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2019-10, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    6. Spengel, Christoph & Fischer, Leonie & Ludwig, Christopher & Müller, Jessica & Weck, Stefan & Winter, Sarah, 2021. "Debt-equity bias should be addressed on national rather than on EU level," ZEW policy briefs 7/2021, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. Dominik von Hagen & Oliver Hahn & Fabian Nicolas Pönnighaus, 2017. "Nutzen deutsche Konzerne Belgien als Finanzierungsstandort? [Do German corporations use Belgium as a financing location?]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 69(4), pages 441-475, November.
    8. N. N., 2015. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 11/2015," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 88(11), November.

    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. Carmen Bachmann & Martin Baumann & Konrad Richter, 2018. "The effects on investment incentives of an allowance for corporate equity tax system: the Belgian case as an example," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 943-965, November.
    2. Nils aus dem Moore, 2014. "Taxes and Corporate Financing Decisions – Evidence from the Belgian ACE Reform," Ruhr Economic Papers 0533, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    3. Ruud de Mooij & Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Alternative Systems of Business Tax in Europe: An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT Reforms," Taxation Studies 0023, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    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. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2015. "Thin capitalisation rules: A second-best solution to the cross-border debt bias?," MPRA Paper 72031, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. repec:zbw:rwirep:0533 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. 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.
    8. Petutschnig, Matthias & Rünger, Silke, 2017. "The effects of a tax allowance for growth and investment: Empirical evidence from a firm-level analysis," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 221, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Devereux, Michael P., 2012. "Issues in the Design of Taxes on Corporate Profit," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 65(3), pages 709-730, September.
    10. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2014. "Taxation and the Optimal Constraint on Corporate Debt Finance," CESifo Working Paper Series 5101, CESifo.
    11. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2014. "Taxation and the optimal constraint on corporate debt finance," Working Papers 1427, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    12. Bauer, Christian & Davies, Ronald B. & Haufler, Andreas, 2014. "Economic integration and the optimal corporate tax structure with heterogeneous firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 42-56.
    13. Katharina Finke & Jost H. Heckemeyer & Timo Reister & Christoph Spengel, 2013. "Impact of Tax-Rate Cut cum Base-Broadening Reforms on Heterogeneous Firms: Learning from the German Tax Reform of 2008," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(1), pages 72-114, March.
    14. Robin Boadway & Motohiro Sato & Jean-Francois Tremblay, 2015. "Cash-flow business taxation revisited: bankruptcy, risk aversion and asymmetric information," Working Papers 1531, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    15. Giampaolo Arachi & Valeria Bucci & Ernesto Longobardi & Paolo M. Panteghini & Maria Laura Parisi & Simone Pellegrino & Alberto Zanardi, 2012. "Fiscal Reforms during Fiscal Consolidation: The Case of Italy," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 68(4), pages 445-465, December.
    16. Vito Polito, 2012. "Up or Down? Capital Income Taxation in the United States and the United Kingdom," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 68(1), pages 48-82, March.
    17. Ruud Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.
    18. 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.
    19. Heyman, Fredrik & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2015. "The Turnaround of Swedish Industry: Reforms, Firm Diversity and Job and Productivity Dynamics," Working Paper Series 1079, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    20. Lourdes Jerez Barroso & Fidel Picos Sánchez, 2012. "La neutralidad financiera en el Impuesto sobre Sociedades: Microsimulación de las opciones de reforma para España," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 203(4), pages 23-56, December.
    21. Brekke, Kurt R. & Garcia Pires, Armando J. & Schindler, Dirk & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2017. "Capital taxation and imperfect competition: ACE vs. CBIT," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1-15.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax Reform; Allowance for Corporate Equity; Microsimulation; Tax Policy Evaluation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law

    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:zbw:zewdip:14033. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.