IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_1850.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

ACE vs. CBIT: Which is Better for Investment and Welfare?

Author

Listed:
  • Doina Radulescu
  • Michael Stimmelmayr

Abstract

This paper analyses the switch to an ACE or to a CBIT type of tax system starting from the present German tax system. We show that in case an ACE type of reform is financed by an increase in the VAT and not in the profit tax, it might be preferred to a CBIT even in the context of an open economy. Moreover, the required exogenous increase in the profit tax rate cannot ensure revenue neutrality on its own due to the negative general equilibrium effects it triggers on the whole economy. For a CBIT, the exogenous reduction in the tax rates on corporate and non-corporate profits leads to better results than when we allow for an endogenous change in the VAT. The best results arise when the CBIT is accompanied by a provision for immediate write-off and a lower profit tax or when the ACE with no additional capital gains taxation on the household side is financed by an increase in the VAT.

Suggested Citation

  • Doina Radulescu & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2006. "ACE vs. CBIT: Which is Better for Investment and Welfare?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1850, CESifo Group Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_1850
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp1850.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Devereux & Harold Freeman, 1991. "A general neutral profits tax," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 12(3), pages 1-15, August.
    2. Christian Keuschnigg & Martin Dietz, 2007. "A growth oriented dual income tax," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(2), pages 191-221, April.
    3. Hans-Werner Sinn, 1991. "Taxation and the Cost of Capital: The "Old" View, the "New" View, and Another View," NBER Chapters,in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 5, pages 25-54 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Christian Keuschnigg, 1991. "The Transition to a Cash Flow Income Tax," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 127(II), pages 113-140, June.
    5. Boadway, Robin & Bruce, Neil, 1984. "A general proposition on the design of a neutral business tax," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 231-239, July.
    6. Sinn, Hans-Werner, 1991. "The vanishing harberger triangle," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 271-300, August.
    7. Bradford, David F., 1981. "The incidence and allocation effects of a tax on corporate distributions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-22, February.
    8. Sinn, H.W., 1990. "Taxation And The Cost Of Capital: The "Old" View, And Another View," Papers 59, Princeton, Woodrow Wilson School - Discussion Paper.
    9. Sorensen, Peter Birch, 1995. "Changing Views of the Corporate Income Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 48(2), pages 279-94, June.
    10. John Isaac, 1997. "A comment on the viability of the allowance for corporate equity," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 303-318, August.
    11. Auerbach, Alan J. & Hassett, Kevin A., 2003. "On the marginal source of investment funds," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 205-232, January.
    12. Bond, Stephen R. & Devereux, Michael P., 2003. "Generalised R-based and S-based taxes under uncertainty," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(5-6), pages 1291-1311, May.
    13. Fehr, Hans, 1999. "Welfare Effects of Dynamic Tax Reforms," Beiträge zur Finanzwissenschaft, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, edition 1, volume 5, number urn:isbn:9783161470165.
    14. Zodrow, George R., 1991. "On the 'Traditional' and 'New' Views of Dividend Taxation," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 44(4), pages 497-509, December.
    15. Michael Keen & John King, 2002. "The Croatian profit tax: an ACE in practice," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 23(3), pages 401-418, September.
    16. Alan J. Auerbach, 1979. "Wealth Maximization and the Cost of Capital," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 93(3), pages 433-446.
    17. Lammersen, Lothar, 2002. "Investment Decisions and Tax Revenues Under an Allowance for Corporate Equity," ZEW Discussion Papers 02-47, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marko Köthenbürger & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2009. "Corporate Taxation and Corporate Governance," CESifo Working Paper Series 2881, CESifo Group Munich.
    2. Brekke, Kurt R. & Garcia Pires, Armando J. & Schindler, Dirk & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2017. "Capital taxation and imperfect competition: ACE vs. CBIT," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1-15.
    3. Finke, Katharina & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Assessing the impact of introducing an ACE regime: A behavioural corporate microsimulation analysis for Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-033, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
    4. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2015. "Thin capitalisation rules: A second-best solution to the cross-border debt bias?," MPRA Paper 72031, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Lourdes Jerez Barroso & Fidel Picos Sánchez, 2012. "La neutralidad financiera en el Impuesto sobre Sociedades: Microsimulación de las opciones de reforma para España," Hacienda Pública Española, IEF, vol. 203(4), pages 23-56, December.
    6. Ruud de Mooij & Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Alternative Systems of Business Tax in Europe: An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT Reforms," Taxation Studies 0023, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    7. Kayis-Kumar, Ann, 2015. "Taxing cross-border intercompany transactions: are financing activities fungible?," MPRA Paper 71615, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Ruud Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    income taxation; computable general equilibrium modeling; welfare analysis;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ces:ceswps:_1850. 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: (Klaus Wohlrabe). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.