IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_6368.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tax Revenue Losses through Cross-Border Loss Offset: An Insurmountable Hurdle for Formula Apportionment

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammed Mardan
  • Michael Stimmelmayr

Abstract

This paper analyzes the relevance of firm losses for tax revenues and welfare when switching from separate accounting to a system of tax base consolidation with formula apportionment. We find that a system change unambiguously decreases tax revenues in the short run, in which neither firms nor governments can adjust their behavior, due to the cross-border loss offset inherent to formula apportionment. In the medium run, in which only firms can adjust their strategies, tax revenues are still lower under formula apportionment if the probability of incurring losses or the costs of profit shifting are sufficiently small. However, in the long run, where both firms and governments are able to adjust their behavior after the system change, a switch from separate accounting to formula apportionment is beneficial under the aforementioned conditions. Furthermore, we show that a higher weight of input shares in the apportionment formula may mitigate tax competition because, contrary to output factors, input factors provide an insurance against tax revenue shortfalls due to loss-making affiliates.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammed Mardan & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2017. "Tax Revenue Losses through Cross-Border Loss Offset: An Insurmountable Hurdle for Formula Apportionment," CESifo Working Paper Series 6368, CESifo Group Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6368
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp6368.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alan J. Auerbach, 2007. "Why Have Corporate Tax Revenues Declined? Another Look," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 53(2), pages 153-171, June.
    2. Marco Runkel & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2011. "The Choice Of Apportionment Factors Under Formula Apportionment," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 52(3), pages 913-934, August.
    3. 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.
    4. S¯ren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos-M¯ller & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2003. "Formula Apportionment and Transfer Pricing under Oligopolistic Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 419-437, April.
    5. Eicher, Theo S. & Turnovsky, Stephen J., 2001. "Transitional dynamics in a two-sector non-scale growth model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(1-2), pages 85-113, January.
    6. Arnt Ove Hopland & Petro Lisowsky & Mohammed Mardan & Dirk Schindler, 2014. "Income Shifting under Losses," CESifo Working Paper Series 5130, CESifo Group Munich.
    7. Jones, Charles I & Williams, John C, 2000. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-85, March.
    8. 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.
    9. Fred Ramb & Alfons J. Weichenrieder, 2005. "Taxes and the Financial Structure of German Inward FDI," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 141(4), pages 670-692, December.
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. Haufler, Andreas & Norbäck, Pehr-Johan & Persson, Lars, 2014. "Entrepreneurial innovations and taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 13-31.
    13. Gresik, Thomas A., 2010. "Formula apportionment vs. separate accounting: A private information perspective," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 133-149, January.
    14. Eichner, Thomas & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Corporate income taxation of multinationals in a general equilibrium model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7-8), pages 723-733, August.
    15. 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 Group Munich.
    16. Pinto, Santiago M., 2007. "Corporate profit tax, capital mobility, and formula apportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 76-102, July.
    17. Eichner, Thomas & Runkel, Marco, 2009. "Corporate income taxation of multinationals and unemployment," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 610-620, September.
    18. Haufler, Andreas & Mardan, Mohammed, 2014. "Cross-border loss offset can fuel tax competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 42-61.
    19. Thomas Eichner & Marco Runkel, 2012. "Efficient tax competition under formula apportionment without the sales factor," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 2828-2838.
    20. Michael Keen, 1993. "The welfare economics of tax co-ordination in the European Community : a survey," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 15-36, February.
    21. Gresik, Thomas A., 2016. "Allowing firms to choose between separate accounting and formula apportionment taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 32-42.
    22. Kalamov, Zarko Y. & Runkel, Marco, 2016. "On the implications of introducing cross-border loss-offset in the European Union," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 78-89.
    23. Cooper, Michael & Knittel, Matthew, 2006. "Partial Loss Refundability: How Are Corporate Tax Losses Used?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 59(3), pages 651-663, September.
    24. 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.
    25. Thomas M. Steger, 2005. "Welfare Implications of Non-scale R&D-based Growth Models," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 107(4), pages 737-757, December.
    26. Cobham, Alex & Loretz, Simon, 2014. "International Distribution of the Corporate Tax Base: Implications of Different Apportionment Factors under Unitary Taxation," Working Papers 11176, Institute of Development Studies, International Centre for Tax and Development.
    27. Nielsen, Søren Bo & Raimondos-Møller, Pascalis & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2010. "Company taxation and tax spillovers: Separate accounting versus formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 121-132, January.
    28. 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.
    29. Joann Martens Weiner & Marcel Gérard, 2006. "Comment la compensation internationale des pertes et la répartition proportionnelle des revenus imposables peuvent affecter les choix des multinationales et la concurrence fiscale," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 173(2), pages 65-77.
    30. Marcel Gérard & Joann Martens Weiner, 2006. "Comment la compensation internationale des pertes et la répartition proportionnelle des revenus imposables peuvent affecter les choix des multinationales et la concurrence fiscale," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(2), pages 65-77.
    31. 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.
    32. 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.
    33. Caterina Liesegang & Marco Runkel, 2009. "Corporate Income Taxation of Multinationals and Fiscal Equalization," FEMM Working Papers 09028, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    34. 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.
    35. 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.
    36. 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.
    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 & Mohammed Mardan & Michael Stimmelmayr, 2018. "Profit Shifting and Investment Effects: The Implications of Zero-Taxable Profits," CESifo Working Paper Series 6895, CESifo Group Munich.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    separate accounting; formula apportionment; corporate losses; cross-border loss offset; CCCTB;

    JEL classification:

    • H73 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Interjurisdictional Differentials and Their Effects
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business

    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:_6368. 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.