IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_2484.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Consolidation under Formula Apportionment

Author

Listed:
  • Thiess Büttner
  • Nadine Riedel
  • Marco Runkel

Abstract

This paper argues that profit-shifting activities of multi-jurisdictional enterprises (MJE) are maintained under a tax system of consolidation and formula apportionment (FA). A theoretical model discusses how an MJE can exploit its impact on the definition of the consolidated group strategically. The analysis shows that the MJE will run individual affiliates as separate un-consolidated firms for tax purposes if intra-group tax-rate differences, and thereby potential gains from profit-shifting, are large. We test this prediction using confidential firm-level tax-return data for the local business tax in Germany. The identification strategy exploits a quasi experiment derived from a major company tax reform in 2001 that reduced the costs associated with separating out individual affiliates. Our results show that, evaluated at the sample mean, an increase in the tax-rate variance among the MJE's affiliates by one standard deviation reduces the number of consolidated affiliates by 20%.

Suggested Citation

  • Thiess Büttner & Nadine Riedel & Marco Runkel, 2008. "Strategic Consolidation under Formula Apportionment," CESifo Working Paper Series 2484, CESifo Group Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_2484
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp2484.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, pages 1-33.
    2. Clemens Fuest, 2008. "The European Commission's proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(4), pages 720-739, winter.
    3. Desai, Mihir A. & Foley, C. Fritz & Hines, James Jr., 2006. "The demand for tax haven operations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(3), pages 513-531, February.
    4. Dietmar Wellisch, 2004. "Taxation under Formula Apportionment - Tax Competition, Tax Incidence, and the Choice of Apportionment Factors," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(1), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Clemens Fuest & Thomas Hemmegarn & Fred Ramb, 2007. "How would the introduction of an EU-wide formula apportionment affect the distribution and size of the corporate tax base? An analysis based on German multinationals," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(5), pages 627-629, October.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Fuest, Clemens & Huber, Bernd & Mintz, Jack, 2005. "Capital Mobility and Tax Competition," Foundations and Trends(R) in Microeconomics, now publishers, vol. 1(1), pages 1-62, December.
    9. Thomas A. Gresik, 2001. "The Taxing Task of Taxing Transnationals," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 39(3), pages 800-838, September.
    10. Pinto, Santiago M., 2007. "Corporate profit tax, capital mobility, and formula apportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 76-102, July.
    11. Bucovetsky, Sam & Haufler, Andreas, 2008. "Tax competition when firms choose their organizational form: Should tax loopholes for multinationals be closed," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, pages 188-201.
    12. Jack M. Mintz, 1999. "Globalization of the Corporate Income Tax: The Role of Allocation," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 56(3/4), pages 389-389, July.
    13. 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.
    14. Harry P. Huizinga & Johannes Voget, 2009. "International Taxation and the Direction and Volume of Cross-Border M&As," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(3), pages 1217-1249, June.
    15. 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.
    16. Michael P Devereux, 2007. "The Impact of Taxation on the Location of Capital, Firms and Profit: a Survey of Empirical Evidence," Working Papers 0702, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    17. Wetzler, James W., 1995. "Should the U.S. Adopt Formula Apportionment?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 48(3), pages 357-62, September.
    18. Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2007. "Company tax reform with a water's edge," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1533-1554, August.
    19. Mintz, Jack & Smart, Michael, 2004. "Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 1149-1168.
    20. 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.
    21. Alfons J. Weichenrieder & Jack Mintz, 2008. "What determines the use of holding companies and ownership chains?," Working Papers 0803, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    22. 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(2), pages 183-200, June.
    23. Thomas Eichner & Marco Runkel, 2008. "Why the European Union Should Adopt Formula Apportionment with a Sales Factor," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(3), pages 567-589, September.
    24. Desai, Mihir A. & Foley, C. Fritz & Hines, James Jr., 2004. "The costs of shared ownership: Evidence from international joint ventures," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 323-374, August.
    25. 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.
    26. Buettner, Thiess, 2003. "Tax base effects and fiscal externalities of local capital taxation: evidence from a panel of German jurisdictions," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 110-128, July.
    27. Gordon, Roger H & Wilson, John Douglas, 1986. "An Examination of Multijurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation under Formula Apportionment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(6), pages 1357-1373, November.
    28. Peter Sørensen, 2004. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 91-115, January.
    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. Nadine Riedel, 2011. "Taxing multi-nationals under union wage bargaining," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, pages 399-421.
    2. Keser, Claudia & Kimpel, Gerrit & Oestreicher, Andreas, 2014. "The CCCTB option: An experimental study," Center for European, Governance and Economic Development Research Discussion Papers 199, University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    3. 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.
    4. von Schwerin, Axel & Buettner, Thiess, 2016. "Constrained Tax Competition – Empirical Effects of the Minimum Tax Rate on the Tax Rate Distribution," Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145642, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    5. Eichfelder, Sebastian & Hechtner, Frank & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen, 2015. "Formula apportionment: Factor allocation and tax avoidance," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 199, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Eichfelder, Sebastian & Hechtner, Frank & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen, 2015. "Formula apportionment: Factor allocation and tax avoidance," Discussion Papers 2015/30, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    7. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung
      [Impacts of European Group Taxation]
      ," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. repec:csg:ajrcwp:03 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Claudia Keser & Gerrit Kimpel & Andreas Oestreicher, 2014. "The CCCTB option an experimental study," CIRANO Working Papers 2014s-24, CIRANO.
    10. Kiesewetter, Dirk & Steigenberger, Tobias & Stier, Matthias, 2014. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 175, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    11. Keser, Claudia & Kimpel, Gerrit & Oestreicher, Andreas, 2014. "The CCCTB option an experimental study," Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100490, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Becker, Johannes & Runkel, Marco, 2013. "Corporate tax regime and international allocation of ownership," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 8-15.
    13. Fossen, Frank M. & Steiner, Viktor, 2014. "The tax-rate elasticity of local business profits," Discussion Papers 2014/28, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    14. 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 Group Munich.
    15. Claudia Keser & Gerrit Kimpel & Andreas Oestreicher, 2016. "Would a CCCTB mitigate profit shifting?," CIRANO Working Papers 2016s-29, CIRANO.
    16. Kazuki Onji, 2013. "Who participates in corporate income tax consolidation? Evidence from Japan," AJRC Working Papers 1303, Australia-Japan Research Centre, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    corporate taxation; formula apportionment; micro data;

    JEL classification:

    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm
    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects

    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:_2484. 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.