IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/pubfin/v34y2006i5p505-526.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interjurisdictional Taxation and Attribution Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Robert F. Conrad

    (Duke University)

Abstract

An economic model of interjurisdictional taxation is developed and used to analyze the effects of different attribution rules on the location of production, sales, and input use. To illustrate the usefulness of the model, two methods of attribution are studied: separate accounting and formulary apportionment. It is shown that if the tax systems across jurisdictions are identical and neutral, then the attribution method is arbitrary. It is also shown that separate accounting rules can be developed using standard economic definitions even in cases where this method is claimed to fail.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert F. Conrad, 2006. "Interjurisdictional Taxation and Attribution Rules," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(5), pages 505-526, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:pubfin:v:34:y:2006:i:5:p:505-526
    DOI: 10.1177/1091142106289029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1091142106289029
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1091142106289029?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edmiston, Kelly D., 2002. "Strategic Apportionment of the State Corporate Income Tax: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 55(N. 2), pages 239-262, June.
    2. Hurter, Arthur P, Jr & Martinich, Joseph S & Venta, Enrique R, 1980. "A Note on the Separability of Production and Location," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(5), pages 1042-1045, December.
    3. Robert F Conrad, 1985. "Separate Accounting Versus Formulary Apportionment: What Can Positive Economics Say?," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I).
    4. Charles E. McLure, Jr. & Walter Hellerstein, 2002. "Does Sales-only Apportionment of Corporate Income Violate the GATT?," NBER Working Papers 9060, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Søren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos-Møller & Guttorm Schjelderup, "undated". "Tax Spillovers under Separate Accounting and Formula Apportionment," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-07, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    6. Anand, Bharat N. & Sansing, Richard, 2000. "The Weighting Game: Formula Apportionment as an Instrument of Public Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 53(n. 2), pages 183-200, June.
    7. Goolsbee, Austan & Maydew, Edward L., 2000. "Coveting thy neighbor's manufacturing: the dilemma of state income apportionment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 125-143, January.
    8. Joann Martens-Weiner, 2006. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-0-387-29487-2, September.
    9. Marcel Gérard & Joann Weiner, 2003. "Cross-Border Loss Offset and Formulary Apportionment: How do they affect multijurisdictional firm investment spending and interjurisdictional tax competition ?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1004, CESifo.
    10. Anand, Bharat N. & Sansing, Richard, 2000. "The Weighting Game: Formula Apportionment as an Instrument of Public Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 53(2), pages 183-200, June.
    11. Edmiston, Kelly D., 2002. "Strategic Apportionment of the State Corporate Income Tax: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 55(2), pages 239-262, June.
    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. Hines Jr., James R., 2010. "Income misattribution under formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 108-120, January.
    2. Martini, Jan-Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2014. "Management incentives under formula apportionment: Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 168, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    3. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Buettner, Thiess & Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Strategic Consolidation Under Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 225-254, June.
    5. Doina Radulescu & Doina Maria Radulescu, 2007. "From Separate Accounting to Formula Apportionment: Analysis in a Dynamic Framework," CESifo Working Paper Series 2122, CESifo.
    6. Ortmann, Regina, 2015. "Uncertainty in weighting formulary apportionment factors and its impact on after-tax income of multinational groups," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 184, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    7. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2014. "Management Incentives under Formula Apportionment - Tax-Induced Distortions of Effort and Compensation in a Principal-Agent Setting -," CESifo Working Paper Series 4908, CESifo.
    8. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    9. Ana Agundez-Garcia, 2006. "The Delineation and Apportionment of an EU Consolidated Tax Base for Multi-jurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation: a Review of Issues and Options," Taxation Papers 9, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Oct 2006.
    10. Ruud De Mooij & Li Liu & Dinar Prihardini, 2021. "An Assessment of Global Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 431-465.
    11. Rüdiger Pethig & Andreas Wagener, 2007. "Profit tax competition and formula apportionment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(6), pages 631-655, December.
    12. William F. Fox & LeAnn Luna, 2005. "Do Limited Liability Companies Explain Declining State Corporate Tax Revenues?," Public Finance Review, , vol. 33(6), pages 690-720, November.
    13. Fatih Guvenen & Raymond J. Mataloni Jr. & Dylan G. Rassier & Kim J. Ruhl, 2022. "Offshore Profit Shifting and Aggregate Measurement: Balance of Payments, Foreign Investment, Productivity, and the Labor Share," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(6), pages 1848-1884, June.
    14. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2007. "Transfer Pricing or Formula Apportionment? Tax-Induced Distortions of Multinationals’ Investment and Production Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2020, CESifo.
    15. Raymond Mataloni & Kim Ruhl & Dylan Rassier & Fatih Guvenen, 2016. "Offshore Profit Shifting and Domestic Productivity Measurement," 2016 Meeting Papers 1382, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    16. Kind, Hans Jarle & Midelfart, Karen Helene & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2005. "Corporate tax systems, multinational enterprises, and economic integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 507-521, March.
    17. repec:prg:jnlpep:v:preprint:id:660:p:1-22 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Wolfgang Eggert & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2003. "Symmetric Tax Competition under Formula Apportionment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 439-446, April.
    19. Joann Martens Weiner, 2005. "Formulary Apportionment and Group Taxation in the European Union: Insights from the United States and Canada," Taxation Papers 8, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Mar 2005.
    20. Marcel Gérard, 2005. "Multijurisdictional Firms and Governments’ Strategies under Alternative Tax Designs," CESifo Working Paper Series 1527, CESifo.
    21. Kateřina Krchnivá & Danuše Nerudová, 2018. "The CCCTB Allocation Formula Game: The Performance of Economics Sectors," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2018(4), pages 427-448.

    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:sae:pubfin:v:34:y:2006:i:5:p:505-526. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.