IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Subsidy Competition and the Mode of FDI: Acquisition vs Greenfield

Listed author(s):
  • Facundo Albornoz

We model subsidy competition for a foreign MNC’s investment in two potential PTA partners. Taking into account acquisitions as an alternative investment mode weakens the case for subsidising greenfield investment. Competition between countries results in welfare losses, even more so if spillovers from the MNC’s presence exist. Hence in many cases a ban on subsidies may increase welfare. In addition, we show how trade integration affects the prospects for social waste.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: ftp://ftp.bham.ac.uk/pub/RePEc/pdf/Ack2007.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Department of Economics, University of Birmingham in its series Discussion Papers with number 05-15R.

as
in new window

Length: 32 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2007
Handle: RePEc:bir:birmec:05-15r
Contact details of provider: Postal:
Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT

Web page: http://www.economics.bham.ac.uk

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.:

as
in new window


  1. Keith Head & John Ries, 1997. "International Mergers and Welfare under Decentralized Competition Policy," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 30(4), pages 1104-1123, November.
  2. Haufler, Andreas & Wooton, Ian, 2001. "Regional tax coordination and foreign direct investment," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 14, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  3. Neary, J. Peter, 2004. "Cross-Border Mergers as Instruments of Comparative Advantage," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 34, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
  4. Bjorvatn, Kjetil, 2004. "Economic integration and the profitability of cross-border mergers and acquisitions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1211-1226, December.
  5. Haaland, Jan I & Wooton, Ian, 1999. " International Competition for Multinational Investment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(4), pages 631-649, December.
  6. Dupont, Vincent & Martin, Philippe, 2003. "Subsidies to Poor Regions and Inequalities: Some Unpleasant Arithmetic," CEPR Discussion Papers 4107, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  7. Motta, Massimo & Norman, George, 1996. "Does Economic Integration Cause Foreign Direct Investment?," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 757-783, November.
  8. Rodney D. Ludema & Ian Wooton, 1998. "Economic Geography and the Fiscal Effects of Regional Integration," International Trade 9801001, EconWPA.
  9. Ethier, Wilfred, 1996. "Regionalism in a multilateral world," Discussion Papers, Series II 314, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
  10. Beata Smarzynska Javorcik, 2004. "Does Foreign Direct Investment Increase the Productivity of Domestic Firms? In Search of Spillovers Through Backward Linkages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(3), pages 605-627, June.
  11. Kugler, Maurice, 2006. "Spillovers from foreign direct investment: Within or between industries?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 444-477, August.
  12. Mattoo, Aaditya & Olarreaga, Marcelo & Saggi, Kamal, 2001. "Mode of Foreign Entry, Technology Transfer, and FDI Policy," CEPR Discussion Papers 2870, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  13. Norman, George & Motta, Massimo, 1993. "Eastern European Economic Integration and Foreign Direct Investment," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(4), pages 483-507, Winter.
  14. Hans Jarle Kind & Helene Midelfart & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2000. "Competing for Capital in a "Lumpy" World," CESifo Working Paper Series 252, CESifo Group Munich.
  15. Rod Falvey, 1998. "Mergers in Open Economies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(8), pages 1061-1076, November.
  16. Horst Raff, 2002. "Preferential Trade Agreements and Tax Competition for Foreign Direct Investment," CESifo Working Paper Series 763, CESifo Group Munich.
  17. Barros, Pedro P & Cabral, Luis, 2000. "Competing for Foreign Direct Investment," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 8(2), pages 360-371, May.
  18. J. Peter Neary, 2001. "Foreign Direct Investment and the Single Market," Development Working Papers 160, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano.
  19. repec:ntj:journl:v:52:y:1999:i:n._2:p:269-304 is not listed on IDEAS
  20. Stephen W. Salant & Sheldon Switzer & Robert J. Reynolds, 1983. "Losses From Horizontal Merger: The Effects of an Exogenous Change in Industry Structure on Cournot-Nash Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 98(2), pages 185-199.
  21. Wilson, John Douglas, 1999. "Theories of Tax Competition," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 52(2), pages 269-304, June.
  22. Haufler, Andreas & Wooton, Ian, 1997. "Tax competition for foreign direct investment," Discussion Papers, Series II 329, University of Konstanz, Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 178 "Internationalization of the Economy".
  23. Ann E. Harrison & Brian J. Aitken, 1999. "Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(3), pages 605-618, June.
  24. Andrew Charlton, 2003. "Incentive Bidding for Mobile Investment: Economic Consequences and Potential Responses," OECD Development Centre Working Papers 203, OECD Publishing.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bir:birmec:05-15r. 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: (Colin Rowat)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.