IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hit/ccesdp/56.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Lobbying and Tax Competition in an Agglomeration Economy: A Reverse Home Market Effect

Author

Listed:
  • Kato, Hayato

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Kato, Hayato, 2015. "Lobbying and Tax Competition in an Agglomeration Economy: A Reverse Home Market Effect," CCES Discussion Paper Series 56, Center for Research on Contemporary Economic Systems, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University.
    • Handle: RePEc:hit:ccesdp:56
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hermes-ir.lib.hit-u.ac.jp/hermes/ir/re/27173/070ccesDP_56.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kristian Behrens & Pierre M. Picard, 2007. "Welfare, home market effects, and horizontal foreign direct investment," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(4), pages 1118-1148, November.
    2. Koh, Hyun-Ju & Riedel, Nadine & Böhm, Tobias, 2013. "Do governments tax agglomeration rents?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 92-106.
    3. Elena Paltseva, 2014. "Protection for Sale: The case of oligopolistic competition and interdependent sectors," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 47(4), pages 1195-1216, November.
    4. Ottaviano, Gianmarco I.P. & van Ypersele, Tanguy, 2005. "Market size and tax competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 25-46, September.
    5. Chang, Pao-Li, 2005. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 66(2), pages 509-526, July.
    6. Devashish Mitra & Dimitrios D. Thomakos & Mehmet Ulubaşoğlu, 2016. "Can we obtain realistic parameter estimates for the ‘protection for sale’ model?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Political Economy of Trade Policy Theory, Evidence and Applications, chapter 10, pages 175-198, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Sato, Yasuhiro & Thisse, Jacques-Francois, 2007. "Competing for capital when labor is heterogeneous," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(8), pages 2054-2079, November.
    8. B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1986. "Menu Auctions, Resource Allocation, and Economic Influence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(1), pages 1-31.
    9. Borck, Rainald & Pfluger, Michael, 2006. "Agglomeration and tax competition," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 647-668, April.
    10. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1994. "Protection for Sale," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 833-850, September.
    11. Marius Brülhart & Mario Jametti & Kurt Schmidheiny, 2012. "Do agglomeration economies reduce the sensitivity of firm location to tax differentials?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(563), pages 1069-1093, September.
    12. Phillip McCalman, 2004. "Protection for Sale and Trade Liberalization: an Empirical Investigation," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 81-94, February.
    13. Grossman, Gene M & Helpman, Elhanan, 1995. "Trade Wars and Trade Talks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 675-708, August.
    14. Baldwin, Richard E. & Krugman, Paul, 2004. "Agglomeration, integration and tax harmonisation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-23, February.
    15. Giovanni Maggi & Pinelopi Koujianou Goldberg, 1999. "Protection for Sale: An Empirical Investigation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1135-1155, December.
    16. Haufler, Andreas & Wooton, Ian, 2010. "Competition for firms in an oligopolistic industry: The impact of economic integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 239-248, March.
    17. By Kishore Gawande & Pravin Krishna & Marcelo Olarreaga, 2012. "Lobbying Competition Over Trade Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 53(1), pages 115-132, February.
    18. Eva Luthi & Kurt Schmidheiny, 2014. "The effect of agglomeration size on local taxes," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 265-287.
    19. Fredrik Andersson & Rikard Forslid, 2003. "Tax Competition and Economic Geography," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 279-303, April.
    20. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2013. "What Do We Know About Corporate Tax Competition?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 66(3), pages 745-774, September.
    21. Barry, Frank & Bradley, John, 1997. "FDI and Trade: The Irish Host-Country Experience," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(445), pages 1798-1811, November.
    22. Kind, Hans Jarle & Knarvik, Karen Helene Midelfart & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2000. "Competing for capital in a 'lumpy' world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 253-274, November.
    23. Jie Ma & Pascalis Raimondos, 2015. "Competition for FDI and Profit Shifting," CESifo Working Paper Series 5153, CESifo.
    24. Sylvie Charlot & Sonia Paty, 2007. "Market access effect and local tax setting: evidence from French panel data," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 247-263, May.
    25. Kishore Gawande & Usree Bandyopadhyay, 2000. "Is Protection for Sale? Evidence on the Grossman-Helpman Theory of Endogenous Protection," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 82(1), pages 139-152, February.
    26. Bombardini, Matilde, 2008. "Firm heterogeneity and lobby participation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(2), pages 329-348, July.
    27. Bucovetsky, S., 1991. "Asymmetric tax competition," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 167-181, September.
    28. Keith Head & John Ries, 2001. "Increasing Returns versus National Product Differentiation as an Explanation for the Pattern of U.S.-Canada Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(4), pages 858-876, September.
    29. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Sato, Yasuhiro, 2014. "Free entry and regulatory competition in a global economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-14.
    30. Zhihao Yu, 2005. "Trade, market size, and industrial structure: revisiting the home‐market effect," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(1), pages 255-272, February.
    31. Harry Grubert, 2000. "Tax Planning by Companies and Tax Competition by Governments: Is There Evidence of Changes in Behavior?," NBER Chapters, in: International Taxation and Multinational Activity, pages 113-142, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    32. Kato, Hayato, 2015. "The importance of government commitment in attracting firms: A dynamic analysis of tax competition in an agglomeration economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 57-78.
    33. Christina Elschner & Werner Vanborren, 2009. "Corporate Effective Tax Rates in an Enlarged European Union," Taxation Papers 14, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Apr 2009.
    34. Yu-Bong Lai, 2014. "Asymmetric tax competition in the presence of lobbying," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(1), pages 66-86, February.
    35. James R. Hines, Jr., 2000. "International Taxation and Multinational Activity," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number hine00-1.
    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. Jie Ma & Pascalis Raimondos, 2015. "Competition for FDI and Profit Shifting," CESifo Working Paper Series 5153, CESifo.

    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. Hayato Kato, 2018. "Lobbying and tax competition in an oligopolistic industry: a reverse home-market effect," Spatial Economic Analysis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 276-295, July.
    2. Sandy Fréret & Denis Maguain, 2017. "The effects of agglomeration on tax competition: evidence from a two-regime spatial panel model on French data," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 24(6), pages 1100-1140, December.
    3. Koh, Hyun-Ju & Riedel, Nadine & Böhm, Tobias, 2013. "Do governments tax agglomeration rents?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 92-106.
    4. Hayato Kato & Hirofumi Okoshi, 2022. "Economic Integration And Agglomeration Of Multinational Production With Transfer Pricing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1325-1355, August.
    5. Annicchiarico, Barbara & Marvasi, Enrico, 2019. "Protection for sale under monopolistic competition: Beyond the CES," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    6. Nathan Nunn & Daniel Trefler, 2006. "Putting the Lid on Lobbying: Tariff Structure and Long-Term Growth when Protection is for Sale," NBER Working Papers 12164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Brülhart, Marius & Bucovetsky, Sam & Schmidheiny, Kurt, 2015. "Taxes in Cities," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 1123-1196, Elsevier.
    8. Karen Crabbé & Karolien De Bruyne, 2013. "Taxes, Agglomeration Rents and Location Decisions of Firms," De Economist, Springer, vol. 161(4), pages 421-446, December.
    9. Eva Luthi & Kurt Schmidheiny, 2014. "The effect of agglomeration size on local taxes," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 265-287.
    10. Miyagiwa, Kaz & Sato, Yasuhiro, 2014. "Free entry and regulatory competition in a global economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 1-14.
    11. Marius Brülhart & Helen Simpson, 2018. "Agglomeration economies, taxable rents and government capture: evidence from a place-based policy," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(2), pages 319-353.
    12. Stephen Devadoss & Jeff Luckstead, 2020. "US–Brazilian cotton policies," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(8), pages 2222-2236, August.
    13. Enrico Marvasi, 2013. "Protection for Sale, Monopolistic Competition and Variable Markups," Working Papers - Economics wp2013_11.rdf, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    14. Kato, Hayato, 2015. "The importance of government commitment in attracting firms: A dynamic analysis of tax competition in an agglomeration economy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 57-78.
    15. Imai, Susumu & Katayama, Hajime & Krishna, Kala, 2009. "Protection for sale or surge protection?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 675-688, August.
    16. Barbara Annicchiarico & Enrico Marvasi, 2018. "Protection for Sale with Price Interactions and Incomplete Pass-Through," Working Papers LuissLab 18141, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    17. Imai, Susumu & Katayama, Hajime & Krishna, Kala, 2009. "Is protection really for sale? A survey and directions for future research," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 181-191, March.
    18. Nover, Justus, 2023. "Local labor markets as a taxable location factor? Evidence from a shock to foreign labor supply," ZEW Discussion Papers 23-012, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Kristy Buzard, 2017. "Trade Agreements in the Shadow of Lobbying," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(1), pages 21-43, February.
    20. Kaz Miyagiwa & Yasuhiro Sato, 2012. "Free Entry, Regulatory Competition, and Globalization," ISER Discussion Paper 0835, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax/subsidy competition; Lobbying; Market size; Reverse home-market effect; International oligopoly;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F15 - International Economics - - Trade - - - Economic Integration
    • F22 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Migration
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General

    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:hit:ccesdp:56. 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: Digital Resources Section, Hitotsubashi University Library (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cchitjp.html .

    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.