IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/arqudp/168.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Management incentives under formula apportionment: Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting

Author

Listed:
  • Martini, Jan-Thomas
  • Niemann, Rainer
  • Simons, Dirk

Abstract

The introduction of a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) and tax allocation via formula apportionment (FA) is hotly debated in the European Union (EU) since more than a decade. While the literature has thoroughly analyzed the economic effects of FA from a macro-level perspective, the firm view has been added only recently. Within this micro-level framework discussing possible tax-induced distortions of multi-jurisdictional entities' (MJE) decisions becomes feasible. Anticipating the reactions of MJEs to the introduction of FA requires considering delegation and incentivisation, because management decisions are influenced by principal agent relationships. How FA affects the demand for managerial effort is a hitherto neglected research question. Accordingly, the objective of this paper is to highlight the tax-induced distortions of managerial incentives caused by FA. For this purpose we set up a LEN-type principal-agent model with agents in two different jurisdictions. Compared to the case with separate taxation (ST) the principal demands increased effort and pays an increased compensation to managers in low-tax jurisdictions, if payroll enters the FA formula. Managers in high-tax jurisdictions face the opposite effect. Further, the composition of the compensation packages changes. Overall, net profit increases, because FA offers potential for profit shifting.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:arqudp:168
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/98840/1/790604671.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edmiston, Kelly D., 2002. "Strategic Apportionment of the State Corporate Income Tax: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 55(N. 2), pages 239-262, June.
    2. Nadine Riedel, 2010. "The downside of formula apportionment: evidence on factor demand distortions," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 17(3), pages 236-258, June.
    3. Walter Hellerstein & Charles E. McLure, Jr., 2004. "The European Commission's Report on Company Income Taxation: What the EU Can Learn from the Experience of the US States," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(2), pages 199-220, March.
    4. Søren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos‐Møller & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2008. "Taxes and Decision Rights in Multinationals," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(2), pages 245-258, April.
    5. Douglas Shackelford & Joel Slemrod, 1998. "The Revenue Consequences of Using Formula Apportionment to Calculate U.S. and Foreign-Source Income: A Firm-Level Analysis," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 5(1), pages 41-59, February.
    6. Klassen, Kenneth J. & Shackelford, Douglas A., 1998. "State and provincial corporate tax planning: income shifting and sales apportionment factor management," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 385-406, June.
    7. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2012. "Transfer Pricing or Formula Apportionment? Tax†Induced Distortions of Multinationals’ Investment and Production Decisions," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 1060-1086, December.
    8. Nadine Riedel, 2011. "Taxing multi-nationals under union wage bargaining," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(4), pages 399-421, August.
    9. 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.
    10. Buettner, Thiess & Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Strategic Consolidation Under Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 225-254, June.
    11. Leon Bettendorf & Michael P. Devereux & Albert Van Der Horst & Simon Loretz & Ruud A. de Mooij, 2010. "Corporate tax harmonization in the EU [Taxing corporate income]," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 25(63), pages 537-590.
    12. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    13. 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 24-41, April.
    14. Mintz, Jack & Weiner, Joann Martens, 2003. "Exploring Formula Allocation for the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 695-711, November.
    15. 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.
    16. repec:fth:prinin:430 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Kelly D. Edmiston & F. Javier Arze del Granado, 2006. "Economic Effects of Apportionment Formula Changes," Public Finance Review, , vol. 34(5), pages 483-504, September.
    18. Mintz, Jack & Smart, Michael, 2004. "Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(6), pages 1149-1168, June.
    19. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2001. "Are CEOs Rewarded for Luck? The Ones Without Principals Are," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(3), pages 901-932.
    20. Sendhil Mullainathan & Marianne Bertrand, 2000. "Agents with and without Principals," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 203-208, May.
    21. 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.
    22. 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.
    23. 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.
    24. 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.
    25. Giorgio Barba Navaretti & Daniele Checchi & Alessandro Turrini, 2003. "Adjusting Labor Demand: Multinational Versus National Firms: A Cross-European Analysis," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(2-3), pages 708-719, 04/05.
    26. Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2000. "Agents with and without Principals," Working Papers 809, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Industrial Relations Section..
    27. Fox, William F. & Murray, Matthew N. & Luna, LeAnn, 2005. "How Should a Subnational Corporate Income Tax on Multistate Businesses Be Structured?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 58(1), pages 139-159, March.
    28. Charles E. McLure, Jr., 1981. "The Elusive Incidence of the Corporate Income Tax: The State Case," NBER Working Papers 0616, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. 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.
    30. 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.
    31. Klassen, K & Lang, M & Wolfson, M, 1993. "Geographic Income Shifting By Multinational-Corporations In Response To Tax Rate Changes," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31, pages 141-173.
    32. Edmiston, Kelly D., 2002. "Strategic Apportionment of the State Corporate Income Tax: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 55(2), pages 239-262, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. 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.
    2. Martini, Jan Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2016. "Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 26-39.
    3. Ruud De Mooij & Li Liu & Dinar Prihardini, 2021. "An Assessment of Global Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 431-465.
    4. Dirk Kiesewetter & Tobias Steigenberger & Matthias Stier, 2018. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1029-1060, December.
    5. Hines Jr., James R., 2010. "Income misattribution under formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 108-120, January.
    6. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Ana Agundez-Garcia, 2006. "The Delineation and Apportionment of an EU Consolidated Tax Base for Multi-jurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation: a Review of Issues and Options," Taxation Papers 9, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Oct 2006.
    8. 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.
    9. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2007. "Transfer Pricing or Formula Apportionment? Tax-Induced Distortions of Multinationals’ Investment and Production Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2020, CESifo.
    10. 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.
    11. Buettner, Thiess & Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Strategic Consolidation Under Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 225-254, June.
    12. Martini, Jan Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2007. "Transfer pricing or formula apportionment? Tax-induced distortions of multinationals' investment and production decisions," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 27, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    13. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Julia Wagner, 2020. "How accurately does the CCCTB apportionment formula allocate profits? An evaluation of the European Commission proposal," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 495-536, May.
    14. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    15. Danuse NERUDOVA & Katerina KRCHNIVA, 2016. "Tax sharing under the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base: Measurement of the profit generating factors in the agriculture sector," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 363-377.
    16. Sommer, Christoph, 2008. "Theorie der Besteuerung nach Formula Apportionment − Untersuchung auftretender ökonomischer Effekte anhand eines Allgemeinen Gleichgewichtsmodells," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 46, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. Pinto, Santiago M., 2007. "Corporate profit tax, capital mobility, and formula apportionment," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 76-102, July.
    18. Albert van der Horst & Leon Bettendorf & Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, 2007. "Will corporate tax consolidation improve efficiency in the EU?," CPB Document 141, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    19. Rainer Niemann & Ulrich Schreiber, 2020. "Herausforderungen und Entwicklungsperspektiven des Steuersystems [Challenges and Development Perspectives of the Tax System]," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 1-48, March.
    20. Mardan, Mohammed & Stimmelmayr, Michael, 2018. "Tax revenue losses through cross-border loss offset: An insurmountable hurdle for formula apportionment?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 188-210.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base; Formula Apportionment; Managerial Compensation; Multi-Jurisdictional Entities; Principal-Agent-Problem;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    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:zbw:arqudp:168. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.arqus.info/ .

    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.