Formula Apportionment: Is It Better Than The Current System And Are There Better Alternatives?
This analysis of formula apportionment compared to the current U.S. system recognizes that income shifting has two main sources, excess returns attributable to intangibles and debt, and that a major goal of income division systems is preserving neutrality between arm’s length and related party transactions. A model demonstrates that separate accounts (SA) and formula apportionment (FA) distort behavior along different margins. Simulations indicate that FA has no clear advantage over SA. Static estimates of U.S. tax revenues under FA suggest potentially large increases, but simulations show that revenue under FA and SA is similar once behavioral responses are taken into account.
Volume (Year): 63 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 725 15th St. NW #600. Washington, D.C. 20005-2109|
Fax: (202) 737-7308
Web page: http://www.ntanet.org/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ntj:journl:v:63:y:2010:i:4:p:1145-1184. 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: (Charmaine Wright)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.