What manner of organization is the National Bureau of Economic Research? How does it select research topics? Who does the work and what kind of tasks do they perform? Where do the funds come from? How does the National Bureau safeguard the scientific quality of its findings? How are the results disseminated? Visitors to the National Bureau often ask these and similar questions; perhaps the answers will be of interest to readers of the American Statistician. The National Bureau of Economic Research is a private non-profit corporation, formed, according to its charter, "to conduct, or assist in the making of exact and impartial investigations in the field of economic, social and industrial science, and to this end to cooperate with governments, universities, learned societies, and individuals." Hence it is not a government agency, nor an adjunct of a university, nor does it sell research services. The revenue from the only products it does sell, publications, barely covers the printing costs. Its funds are contributed by philanthropic foundations, by trade and professional organizations, by business concerns, trade unions, and individuals. Contributions are usually on a yearly basis, but some grants cover several years. Some of the funds are earmarked for specific studies; the balance goes to support a general program of research. The National Bureau is governed by a Board of Directors numbering about thirty, selected to represent various institutions and diverse points of view on economic problems. Over the years since the Bureau was founded in 1920 this body of men has made a significant contribution to the development of scientific inquiry in economics, both within the National Bureau and outside. Such outstanding economists as Wesley C. Mitchell, George E. Roberts, Allyn A. Young, Edwin F. Gay, Thomas S. Adams, and John R. Commons have been among its members. At the present time professors from a dozen universities are on the Board. Also, Directors from each of the following organizations are elected: American Statistical Association, American Economic Association, American Farm Economic Association, Economic History Association, American Institute of Accountants, American Management Association, Congress of Industrial Organizations, and American Federation of Labor. Finally, there is a group of Directors at Large, men from varied walks of life with an abiding interest in economic research. The Board serves an important function not only in shaping the broad lines of the research program but also in safeguarding the quality of the results. Matters of policy requiring prompt action are handled by an Executive Committee of eleven, elected by the Board from its membership. Arthur F. Burns, the Director of Research, is the member of the Committee who is directly responsible for the research program. The members of the research staff, numbering about twenty-five, direct the individual studies, and are aided in their work by upwards of forty-five research assistants. A staff of typists, bookkeepers, mimeograph operators, etc., brings the total payroll of the National Bureau to roughly a hundred persons. William J. Carson, the Executive Director, handles the Bureau's finances, accounts, and other administrative matters. Not all the employees of the National Bureau work at the main office at 1819 Broadway, New York City. DuLr Financial Research Program is housed at "Hillside," an estate about 10 miles north of Manhattan overlooking the HuLdson River. Other National BureauL investigators are to be fotund at various universities throughout the United States, since cooperative arrangements are maintained with a number of universities that permit their facultv members to engage in National Butreau studies. Government agencies, too, cooperate in similar ways. Such cooperative relationships are a vital feature of our work, and we try to foster them in many ways. The growing acceptance on the part of universities of the view that research is part of the job of a faculty member has helped to make these efforts productive. For example, for a number of years we have appointed promising young men or women holding university positions as Research Associates for one year. The objective is to enable scholars to pursue their research interests in fields in which the National Bureau also has an interest. Since 1930 twenty-six Research Associates, coming from eighteen American colleges or universities and two foreign universities, have been appointed under the plan. The work of several committees is another example of cooperation for the purpose of advancing research. Two committees, one on financial and the other on fiscal research, help to guide our studies in these areas. They are composed of experts from universities, government agencies, and private business. In 1935 the Universities-National Bureau Committee was established for the express purpose of promoting contact

The National Bureau of Economic Research

This paper examines how prices set by multinational firms vary across arm's-length and related party customers. Comparing prices within firms, products, destination countries, modes of transport and month, we find that the prices U.S. exporters set for their arm's-length customers are substantially larger than the prices recorded for related-parties. This price wedge is smaller for commodities than for differentiated goods, is increasing in firm size and firm export share, and is greater for goods sent to countries with lower corporate tax rates and higher tariffs. We also find that changes in exchange rates have differential effects on arm's-length and related-party prices; an appreciation of the dollar reduces the difference between the prices.

/pdf/transfer-pricing-by-u-s-based-multinational-firms-k66e0hiqfg.pdf

Transfer Pricing by U.S.-Based Multinational Firms

This paper analyzes the transfer pricing of multinational firms. We propose a simple framework in which intra-firm prices may systematically deviate from arm’s length prices for two motives: i) pricing to market, and ii) tax avoidance. Multinational firms may decide not to avoid taxes if the risk to be sanctioned is high compared to the tax gap. Using detailed French firm-level data on arm’s length and intra-firm export prices, we find that both mechanisms are at work. The sensitivity of intra-firm prices to foreign taxes is reinforced once we control for pricing-to-market determinants. Most importantly, we find almost no evidence of tax avoidance if we disregard exports to tax havens. Back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that tax avoidance through transfer pricing amounts to about 1% of the total corporate taxes collected by tax authorities in France. The lion’s share of this loss is driven by the exports of 450 firms to ten tax havens. As such, it may be possible to achieve significant revenue increases with minimal cost by targeting enforcement.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/DP10844.pdf?abstractid=2666947&mirid=1

Title Knocking on Tax Haven's Door: Multinational Firms and Transfer Pricing

This paper documents a sustained decline in exchange rate pass-through to U.S. import prices, from above 0.5 during the 1980s to somewhere in the neighborhood of 0.2 during the last decade. This decline in the pass-through coefficient is robust to the measure of foreign prices that is included in the regression (i.e., CPI versus PPI), whether the estimation is done in levels or differences, and whether U.S. prices are included as an explanatory variable. Notably, the largest estimates of pass-through are obtained when commodity prices are excluded from the regression. In this case, the pass-through coefficient captures both the direct effect of the exchange rate on import prices and an indirect effect operating through changes in commodity prices. Our work indicates that an increasing share of exchange rate pass-through has occurred through this commodity-price channel in recent years. While the source of the decline in pass-through is difficult to pin down with certainty, our work points to several factors, including the reduced share of (commodity-intensive) industrial supplies in U.S. imports and the increased presence of Chinese exporters in U.S. markets. We detect a particular step down in the pass-through coefficient around the time of the Asian financial crisis and document a shift in the export pricing behavior of emerging Asian firms around that time.

/pdf/exchange-rate-pass-through-to-u-s-import-prices-some-new-332izu9a9v.pdf

Exchange Rate Pass-through to U.S. Import Prices: Some New Evidence

This paper analyzes the transfer pricing of multinational firms. Intrafirm prices may systematically deviate from arm’s-length prices for two motives: pricing to market and tax avoidance. Using Fre...

/pdf/knocking-on-tax-haven-s-door-multinational-firms-and-1v1kyayiep.pdf

Knocking on Tax Haven's Door: Multinational Firms and Transfer Pricing

Currently over one-third of U.S. trade in goods takes place between related parties. The valuation of these goods has been subject to much controversy and criticism over the years, as companies have been accused of over or under valuing these goods in order to minimize business taxes and/or import duties. A myriad of rules and regulations developed (in the case of the United States) by both the Internal Revenue Service as well as the Customs Service deal with these valuations. For the purpose of calculating the

/pdf/transfer-prices-and-import-and-export-price-indexes-theory-1j3scdzg4v.pdf

Transfer Prices and Import and Export Price Indexes: Theory and Practice 1

The paper argues that time series methods for the seasonal adjustment of economic price or quantity series cannot in general lead to measures of short term month to month measures of price or quantity change that are free of seasonal influences. This impossibility result can be seen most clearly if each seasonal commodity in an aggregate is present for only one season of each year. However, time series methods of seasonal adjustment can lead to measures of the underlying trend in an economic series and to forecasts of the underlying trend. In this context, it is important to have a well defined definition of the trend and the paper suggests that index number techniques based on the rolling or moving year concept can provide a good target measure of the trend. The almost forgotten work of Oskar Anderson (1927) on the difficulties involved in using time series methods to identify the trend and seasonal component in a series is reviewed.

/pdf/time-series-versus-index-number-methods-of-seasonal-4v731hpg5l.pdf

William F. Alterman

Papers

Transfer Prices and Import and Export Price Indexes: Theory and Practice 1

Time Series versus Index Number Methods of Seasonal Adjustment