IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ces/ifodre/v22y2015i04p26-38.html

Steuerwettbewerb im Kleinen – Ein Blick auf den Fall Monheim

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Ilchmann
  • Felix Rösel
  • Johannes Steinbrecher

Abstract

Im Jahr 2012 erfolgte die radikalste Gewerbesteuersenkung einer Kommune in Nordrhein-Westfalen seit Jahrzehnten: Die Stadt Monheim am Rhein reduzierte den Hebesatz der Gewerbesteuer um insgesamt mehr als ein Drittel. Dies brachte der Stadt den Vorwurf ein, den Steuerwettbewerb deutlich verschärft, Unternehmen aus der Umgebung abgeworben und hierdurch „Wirtschaftskannibalismus an den Nachbarstädten“ betrieben zu haben. In diesem Beitrag wird empirisch untersucht, ob und inwiefern die Hebesatzentscheidung Monheims tatsächlich Auswirkungen auf die Steuerpolitik anderer Gemeinden hatte – gegeben der geographische Distanz zur Stadt Monheim. Die vorgelegten Ergebnisse liefern dabei Hinweise, dass die extreme Hebesatzpolitik der Stadt Monheim am Rhein einen Einfluss auf die Hebesatzpolitik der anderen Gemeinden in Nordrhein-Westfalen gehabt haben könnte. Um diese Schlussfolgerung zu verifizieren, bedarf es jedoch weiterführender Analysen, die in weiteren Arbeiten erfolgen sollen.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Ilchmann & Felix Rösel & Johannes Steinbrecher, 2015. "Steuerwettbewerb im Kleinen – Ein Blick auf den Fall Monheim," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 22(04), pages 26-38, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ifodre:v:22:y:2015:i:04:p:26-38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/ifodb-2015-04-illchmann-et-al-steuerwettbewerb-2015-08-24.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sinn, Hans-Werner, 1994. "How Much Europe? Subsidiarity, Centralization and Fiscal Competition," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 41(1), pages 85-107, February.
    2. Bucovetsky, S., 1991. "Asymmetric tax competition," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 167-181, September.
    3. Wilson, John Douglas, 1999. "Theories of Tax Competition," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 52(2), pages 269-304, June.
    4. Becker, Sascha O. & Egger, Peter H. & Merlo, Valeria, 2012. "How low business tax rates attract MNE activity: Municipality-level evidence from Germany," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(9-10), pages 698-711.
    5. Wilson, John Douglas, 1999. "Theories of Tax Competition," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 52(n. 2), pages 269-304, June.
    6. George R. Zodrow & Peter Mieszkowski, 2019. "Pigou, Tiebout, Property Taxation, and the Underprovision of Local Public Goods," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: George R Zodrow (ed.), TAXATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Selected Essays of George R. Zodrow, chapter 17, pages 525-542, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    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. Lemmer, Jens, 2016. "Wie wirkt Steuerwettbewerb auf kommunaler Ebene? Das Beispiel der Stadt Monheim am Rhein," DSi kompakt 24, DSi - Deutsches Steuerzahlerinstitut des Bundes der Steuerzahler e.V., Berlin.
    2. David Bauer, 2017. "Die Anreizwirkungen des kommunalen Finanzausgleichs," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 24(02), pages 26-30, April.

    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. Zodrow, George R, 2003. "Tax Competition and Tax Coordination in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 651-671, November.
    2. Kessler, Anke S. & Lulfesmann, Christoph & Myers, Gordon M., 2003. "Economic versus political symmetry and the welfare concern with market integration and tax competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(5-6), pages 847-865, May.
    3. Sandy Fréret & Denis Maguain, 2017. "The effects of agglomeration on tax competition: evidence from a two-regime spatial panel model on French data," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(6), pages 1100-1140, December.
    4. Wallace E. Oates & Wallace E. Oates, 2004. "Fiscal Competition and European Union: Contrasting Perspectives," Chapters, in: Environmental Policy and Fiscal Federalism, chapter 10, pages 182-194, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Ohad Raveh, 2013. "Dutch Disease, factor mobility, and the Alberta Effect: the case of federations," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(4), pages 1317-1350, November.
    6. Lee, Kangoh, 2002. "Factor Mobility and Income Redistribution in a Federation," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 77-100, January.
    7. Braid, Ralph M., 2013. "State and local tax competition in a spatial model with sales taxes and residential property taxes," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 57-67.
    8. Munongo, Simon & Akanbi, Olusegun Ayo & Robinson, Zurika, 2017. "Do tax incentives matter for investment? A literature review," Business and Economic Horizons (BEH), Prague Development Center (PRADEC), vol. 13(2).
    9. Wilson, John Douglas & Wildasin, David E., 2004. "Capital tax competition: bane or boon," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(6), pages 1065-1091, June.
    10. Tadashi Morita & Yasuhiro Sato & Kazuhiro Yamamoto, 2020. "Demographics and competition for capital in political economy," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 27(4), pages 865-889, August.
    11. Braid, Ralph M., 2005. "Tax competition, tax exporting and higher-government choice of tax instruments for local governments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(9-10), pages 1789-1821, September.
    12. Kangoh Lee, 2003. "Factor Ownership and Governmental Strategic Interaction," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 345-361, April.
    13. James R. Hines Jr., 2023. "Comment on "Fiscal Federalism and the Role of the Income Tax"," NBER Chapters, in: Policy Responses to Tax Competition, pages 266-272, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Matthias Wrede, 2014. "Agglomeration, tax competition, and fiscal equalization," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(6), pages 1012-1027, December.
    15. Lars Feld, 2014. "James Buchanan’s theory of federalism: from fiscal equity to the ideal political order," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 231-252, September.
    16. Ben Ferrett & Ian Wooton, 2010. "Competing for a duopoly: international trade and tax competition," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 776-794, August.
    17. Boadway, Robin & Tremblay, Jean-François, 2012. "Reassessment of the Tiebout model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(11), pages 1063-1078.
    18. Anton Jevcak, 2005. "The Role of Symmetry between the Revenue and the Expenditure Side of the Government Budget in the Debate about the Potential Negative Effects of Tax Competition," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 195-201, September.
    19. Yang Shen, 2024. "Corporate income taxation and multinational production," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 1039-1070, August.
    20. Leonzio Rizzo, 2006. "Le inefficienze della competizione fiscale: una rassegna dei principali modelli teorici," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 1, pages 89-120.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects
    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General

    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:ces:ifodre:v:22:y:2015:i:04:p:26-38. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifooode.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.