IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i3p2128-d1044618.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax and Corporate Environmental Social Responsibility: A Test Based on Corporate Life Cycle Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Xin Jiang

    (School of Economics, Anhui University, Hefei 230610, China)

  • Guanglong Li

    (School of Economics, Anhui University, Hefei 230610, China)

  • Xianxian Fan

    (School of Economics and Trade, Hunan University, Changsha 410079, China)

Abstract

Corporate environmental social responsibility enhancement is an important way to promote green and low-carbon economic transformation and achieve high-quality development. As an important reform of China’s environmental taxation system, environmental protection fees and taxes play a unique role in environmental governance. However, faced with the increase in the intensity of environmental regulations after the implementation of the environmental protection fee-to-tax, will firms take the initiative to assume environmental social responsibility (ESR)? This paper uses the implementation of China’s Environmental Protection Tax Law in 2018 as a quasi-natural experiment to study the impact of environmental protection fee-to-tax policy on corporate ESR from a life-cycle perspective. We find that, overall, the environmental protection fee-to-tax reform policy significantly increases the likelihood of corporate ESR by 66%. By the life cycle stage, the effect of environmental protection fee-to-tax policy is mainly reflected in maturity and decline stage firms, and the impact on growth stage firms is not obvious. The design of the current environmental protection tax system and the differences in financial status, business strategies, and environmental management levels of firms in different life cycle stages are important factors in this phenomenon. Further sub-sample regressions show that the environmental protection fee-to-tax policy significantly increases the ESR among state-owned, key regulated and higher financing-constrained firms, especially those in the maturity and decline periods. The findings of this paper enrich corporate life cycle theory and provide a reference for decision making to further improve environmental tax policies to stimulate a firm’s green and low-carbon transformation.

Suggested Citation

  • Xin Jiang & Guanglong Li & Xianxian Fan, 2023. "Environmental Protection Fee-to-Tax and Corporate Environmental Social Responsibility: A Test Based on Corporate Life Cycle Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-21, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2128-:d:1044618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2128/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/3/2128/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liu, Xing & Liu, Fengzhong, 2022. "Environmental regulation and corporate financial asset allocation: A natural experiment from the new environmental protection law in China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 47(PA).
    2. Xu, Lili & Chen, Yuyan & Lee, Sang-Ho, 2022. "Emission tax and strategic environmental corporate social responsibility in a Cournot–Bertrand comparison," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    3. Chao, Angela C. & Hong, Lucheng, 2019. "Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy, Environment and Energy Policy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 311-317.
    4. Di Giuli, Alberta & Kostovetsky, Leonard, 2014. "Are red or blue companies more likely to go green? Politics and corporate social responsibility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 158-180.
    5. Tchorzewska, K.B. & Garcia-Quevedo, J. & Martinez-Ros, E., 2022. "The heterogeneous effects of environmental taxation on green technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. He, Yu & Zhu, Xiaobo & Zheng, Huan, 2022. "The influence of environmental protection tax law on total factor productivity: Evidence from listed firms in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    7. Olivier Deschênes & Michael Greenstone & Joseph S. Shapiro, 2017. "Defensive Investments and the Demand for Air Quality: Evidence from the NOx Budget Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(10), pages 2958-2989, October.
    8. Charles J. Hadlock & Joshua R. Pierce, 2010. "New Evidence on Measuring Financial Constraints: Moving Beyond the KZ Index," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(5), pages 1909-1940.
    9. Zhao, Aiwu & Wang, Jingyi & Sun, Zhenzhen & Guan, Hongjun, 2022. "Environmental taxes, technology innovation quality and firm performance in China—A test of effects based on the Porter hypothesis," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 309-325.
    10. Dang, Vinh Q.T. & Otchere, Isaac & So, Erin P.K., 2022. "Does the nature of political connection matter for corporate social responsibility engagement? Evidence from China," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    11. Lv, Wendai & Ma, Wenhao & Yang, Xiandong, 2022. "Does social security policy matter for corporate social responsibility? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    12. Zhice Cheng & Xinyuan Chen & Huwei Wen, 2022. "How Does Environmental Protection Tax Affect Corporate Environmental Investment? Evidence from Chinese Listed Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-22, March.
    13. Anthony, Joseph H. & Ramesh, K., 1992. "Association between accounting performance measures and stock prices : A test of the life cycle hypothesis," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2-3), pages 203-227, August.
    14. Paul Hribar & Nir Yehuda, 2015. "The Mispricing of Cash Flows and Accruals at Different Life†Cycle Stages," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(3), pages 1053-1072, September.
    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. Xue, Shuyu & Chang, Qi & Xu, Jingwen, 2023. "The effect of voluntary and mandatory corporate social responsibility disclosure on firm profitability: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    2. Pavol Durana & Lucia Michalkova & Andrej Privara & Josef Marousek & Milos Tumpach, 2021. "Does the life cycle affect earnings management and bankruptcy?," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 12(2), pages 425-461, June.
    3. Keum, Daniel & Meier, Stephan, 2020. "License to Fire? Unemployment Insurance and the Moral Cost of Layoffs," IZA Discussion Papers 13497, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    4. Wunhong Su & Xingxing Hu & Liuzhen Zhang, 2023. "Association Between Directors With Foreign Experience and Firms’ Environmental Disclosure," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.
    5. Anagnostopoulou, Seraina C. & Tsekrekos, Andrianos E. & Voulgaris, Georgios, 2021. "Accounting conservatism and corporate social responsibility," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    6. Biswas, Pallab Kumar & Habib, Ahsan & Ranasinghe, Dinithi, 2022. "Firm life cycle and financial statement comparability," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    7. Amin, Abu & Bowler, Blake & Hasan, Mostafa Monzur & Lobo, Gerald J. & Tresl, Jiri, 2023. "Firm life cycle and cost of debt," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Wu, Dejun & Lin, Chen & Liu, Sibo, 2016. "Does community environment matter to corporate social responsibility?," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 127-135.
    9. Kong, Dongmin & Xiong, Mengxu & Qin, Ni, 2022. "Business Tax reform and CSR engagement: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    10. He, Yu & Zhao, Xiaoling & Zheng, Huan, 2023. "How does the environmental protection tax law affect firm ESG? Evidence from the Chinese stock markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PA).
    11. Li Ji & Tian Zeng, 2022. "Environmental “Fee-to-Tax” and Heavy Pollution Enterprises to De-Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-24, April.
    12. Qinglan Wu & Guifu Chen & Jing Han & Liyan Wu, 2022. "Does Corporate ESG Performance Improve Export Intensity? Evidence from Chinese Listed Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Xie, Xinmei & Chang, Yu-Shan & Shiue, Min-Jeng, 2022. "Corporate life cycle, family firms, and earnings management: Evidence from Taiwan," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    14. Lei Zheng & Xuemeng Guo & Libin Zhao, 2021. "How Does Transportation Infrastructure Improve Corporate Social Responsibility? Evidence from High-Speed Railway Openings in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-23, June.
    15. Jin, Ling & Li, Zhisheng & Lu, Lei & Ni, Xiaoran, 2023. "Does stock market rescue affect investment efficiency in the real sector?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    16. Hu, Shuo & Wang, Ailun & Du, Kerui, 2023. "Environmental tax reform and greenwashing: Evidence from Chinese listed companies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    17. Po‐Hsuan Hsu & Kai Li & Chi‐Yang Tsou, 2023. "The Pollution Premium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 78(3), pages 1343-1392, June.
    18. Ahsan Habib & Md. Borhan Uddin Bhuiyan & Mostafa Monzur Hasan, 2018. "Firm life cycle and advisory directors," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 43(4), pages 575-592, November.
    19. Li, Chengcheng & Wang, Xiaoqiong, 2022. "Local peer effects of corporate social responsibility," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    20. Najah Attig & Wenyao Hu & Mohammad M. Rahaman & Ashraf Al Zaman, 2023. "Overselling corporate social responsibility," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 52(3), pages 573-610, September.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:3:p:2128-:d:1044618. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.