IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/coacre/v34y2017i1p494-524.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Three Hurdles of Tax Planning: How Business Context, Aims of Tax Planning, and Tax Manager Power Affect Tax Expense

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Feller
  • Deborah Schanz

Abstract

The question of why some companies pay fewer taxes than others is a widely investigated topic of interest. One of the well†known explanations is a phenomenon called tax avoidance. We develop a grounded theory model of influences on corporate tax planning through a series of 19 in†depth German tax expert interviews. Our research identifies three independent hurdles in the tax planning process, which can help to explain different levels of tax expense across companies. Those three hurdles sequentially address which tax planning methods are available (defined by business characteristics), desirable (given via aims of tax planning), and implementable (determined by tax manager power). A large part of previous research has estimated the influence of firm characteristics, which we incorporate in the broader term business characteristics, on tax expense, while the other influences that we identify have largely been left “out of the equation.†In the light of the current public debates on tax avoidance, we reveal two important findings: First, we find that companies vary widely in the aggressiveness of their aims of tax planning, which contrasts sharply with the picture often drawn by undifferentiated media reports. Second, tax managers can assume very different levels of power in their organization. The implementation of desirable tax planning methods varies depending on this level of tax manager power. In conclusion, our three†hurdle grounded theory provides generalizable insights into important influences on corporate tax planning which help to explain the observed variation in tax expenses across firms.Les raisons pour lesquelles certaines entreprises paient moins d'impôt que d'autres sont un sujet d'intérêt abondamment étudié. L'une des explications bien connues de cette disparité est ce que l'on appelle l’évitement fiscal. Les auteures élaborent un modèle théorique des influences auxquelles est soumise la planification fiscale de l'entreprise, reposant sur les données recueillies dans le cadre d'une série de 19 entrevues en profondeur menées auprès de fiscalistes allemands. Elles définissent trois obstacles au processus de planification fiscale n'ayant pas de lien entre eux, susceptibles de contribuer à expliquer la disparité des charges d'impôt des entreprises. Ces trois obstacles se rapportent, dans l'ordre, aux méthodes de planification fiscale envisageables (selon les caractéristiques de l'entreprise), souhaitables (selon les objectifs de la planification fiscale) et applicables (selon le pouvoir de la direction de la fiscalité). Dans de nombreuses études précédentes, les chercheurs ont jaugé l'influence des caractéristiques des sociétés — que les auteures désignent ici sous le vocable plus général de caractéristiques de l'entreprise — sur la charge d'impôt, les autres facteurs d'influence définis dans la présente étude étant essentiellement « exclus de l’équation ». À la lumière des débats publics actuels sur l’évitement fiscal, les auteures font deux constatations importantes. En premier lieu, elles observent que les entreprises diffèrent largement quant à l'audace de leurs objectifs de planification fiscale, ce qui contraste radicalement avec le portrait souvent tracé dans les reportages schématiques des médias. En second lieu, les directions de la fiscalité peuvent être investies de pouvoirs très différents au sein des organisations. La mise en œuvre de méthodes de planification fiscale souhaitables varie selon l'ampleur de ces pouvoirs. En conclusion, la théorie des trois obstacles, fondée sur les données, que proposent les auteurs livre des indications pouvant être généralisées en ce qui a trait aux influences importantes auxquelles est soumise la planification fiscale de l'entreprise, ce qui contribue à expliquer la disparité observée dans les charges d'impôt des entreprises.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Feller & Deborah Schanz, 2017. "The Three Hurdles of Tax Planning: How Business Context, Aims of Tax Planning, and Tax Manager Power Affect Tax Expense," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 494-524, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:coacre:v:34:y:2017:i:1:p:494-524
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3846.12278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3846.12278
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3846.12278?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Evers, Andrea & Matthaei, Eva Kristina, 2021. "Steuerplanung unter Unsicherheit: Eine Befragungsstudie zum Brexit," Discussion Papers 2021/10, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    2. Flavius Valentin Jakubowicz & Ionela Munteanu, 2022. "Perspectives on Tax Optimization: Opportunities and Challenges," Ovidius University Annals, Economic Sciences Series, Ovidius University of Constantza, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 0(2), pages 883-889, Decembrie.
    3. Martin Jacob & Anna Rohlfing-Bastian & Kai Sandner, 2021. "Why do not all firms engage in tax avoidance?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 459-495, February.
    4. Rainer Niemann & Mariana Sailer, 2023. "Is analytical tax research alive and kicking? Insights from 2000 until 2022," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(6), pages 1149-1212, August.
    5. Kovermann, Jost & Velte, Patrick, 2019. "The impact of corporate governance on corporate tax avoidance—A literature review," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-1.
    6. Fochmann, Martin & Heinemann-Heile, Vanessa & Huber, Hans-Peter & Maiterth, Ralf & Sureth, Caren, 2022. "Firms' tax rate misperception: Measurement, drivers, and distortionary effects," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 275, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    7. Giese, Henning & Koch, Reinald & Gamm, Markus, 2022. "Tax avoidance and vertical interlocks within multinational enterprises," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 270, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    8. Matthaei, Eva Kristina & Kiesewetter, Dirk, 2020. "A problem shared is a problem halved? Risky tax avoidance decisions and intra-group payoff conflict," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 258, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Cooper, Maggie & Nguyen, Quyen T.K., 2019. "Understanding the interaction of motivation and opportunity for tax planning inside US multinationals: A qualitative study," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1-1.
    10. Harald J. Amberger & Saskia Kohlhase, 2023. "International taxation and the organizational form of foreign direct investment," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 54(8), pages 1529-1561, October.
    11. Martin Glaum, 2020. "Financial Reporting in Non-listed Family Firms: Insights from Interviews with CFOs," Schmalenbach Business Review, Springer;Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft, vol. 72(2), pages 225-270, April.
    12. Blaufus, Kay & Möhlmann, Axel & Schwäbe, Alexander N., 2019. "Stock price reactions to news about corporate tax avoidance and evasion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 278-292.
    13. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Brenda Melissa Fonseca & Lélis Pedro Andrade & Bruno César Melo Moreira, 2023. "Bibliometric and scientometric analysis of the scientific field in taxation," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-28, January.
    14. Kay Blaufus & Jakob Reineke & Ilko Trenn, 2023. "Perceived tax audit aggressiveness, tax control frameworks and tax planning: an empirical analysis," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(3), pages 509-557, April.

    More about this item

    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:wly:coacre:v:34:y:2017:i:1:p:494-524. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3846 .

    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.