Depreciation Systems in Nepal: A Comparison Based on ETR
The administrator after the introduction of Income Tax Act, 2002 has claimed that the depreciation rule under the new law is more generous than the depreciation rule of 1992 in case of all the assets including machinery and building. The analysis made on the basis of ETR, however, shows no decrease in ETRs in 2002 in comparison to 1992. That means, the depreciation rule of 2002 in case of building and machinery is not generous as claimed by the tax policy maker. In opposite of this, the analysis proves that the depreciation provisions of 1992 and 2002 are more liberal than the depreciation provisions of earlier periods.
Volume (Year): 15 (2003)
Issue (Month): (April)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.nrb.org.np/ecorev/|
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Kenneth McKenzie & Jack Mintz, 1992. "Tax Effects on the Cost of Capital," NBER Chapters, in: Canada-U.S. Tax Comparisons, pages 189-216 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nrb:journl:v:15:y:2003:p:227-242. 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: (Dr. Bishnu Prasad Gautam)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.