Indirect tax

About: Indirect tax is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 18052 publications have been published within this topic receiving 351806 citations.

On the existence of an optimal capital structure: theory and evidence

Abstract: ONE OF THE MOST contentious issues in the theory of finance during the past quarter century has been the theory of capital structure. The geneses of this controversy were the seminal contributions by Modigliani and Miller [18, 19]. The general academic view by the mid-1970s, although not a consensus, was that the optimal capital structure involves balancing the tax advantage of debt against the present value of bankruptcy costs. No sooner did this general view become prevalent in the profession than Miller [16] presented a new challenge by showing that under certain conditions the tax advantage of debt financing at the firm level is exactly offset by the tax disadvantage of debt at the personal level. Since then there has developed a burgeoning theoretical literature attempting to reconcile Miller's model with the balancing theory of optimal capital structure [e.g., DeAngelo and Masulis [5], Kim [12], and Modigliani [17]. The general result of this work is that if there are significant "leverage-related" costs, such as bankruptcy costs, agency costs of debt, and loss of non-debt tax shields, and if the income from equity is untaxed, then the marginal bondholder's tax rate will be less than the corporate rate and there will be a positive net tax advantage to corporate debt financing. The firm's optimal capital structure will involve the trade off between the tax advantage of debt and various leverage-related costs. The upshot of these extensions of Miller's model is the recognition that the existence of an optimal capital structure is essentially an empirical issue as to whether or not the various leverage-related costs are economically significant enough to influence the costs of corporate borrowing. The Miller model and its theoretical extensions have inspired several timeseries studies which provide evidence on the existence of leverage-related costs. Trczinka [28] reports that from examining differences in average yields between taxable corporate bonds and tax-exempt municipal bonds, one cannot reject the Miller hypothesis that the marginal bondholder's tax rate is not different from the corporate tax rate. However, Trczinka is careful to point out that this finding does not necessarily imply that there is no tax advantage of corporate debt if the personal tax rate on equity is positive. Indeed, Buser and Hess [1], using a longer time series of data and more sophisticated econometric techniques, estimate that the average effective personal tax rate on equity is statistically positive and is not of a trivial magnitude. More importantly, they document evidence that is consistent with the existence of significant leverage-related costs in the economy.

The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks

Abstract: This paper investigates the impact of tax changes on economic activity. We use the narrative record, such as presidential speeches and Congressional reports, to identify the size, timing, and principal motivation for all major post war tax policy actions. This analysis allows us to separate legislated changes into those taken for reasons related to prospective economic conditions and those taken for more exogenous reasons. The behavior of output following these more exogenous changes indicates that tax increases are highly contractionary. The effects are strongly significant, highly robust, and much larger than those obtained using broader measures of tax changes. (JEL E32, E62, H20, N12) Tax changes have been a major public policy issue in recent years. The tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 were passed amid firestorms of debate about their likely effects. Some policymakers claimed that the cuts would both stimulate the economy in the short run and increase normal output in the long run. Others argued that they would raise interest rates and lower confidence and thereby reduce output in both the short run and the long run. That views of the effects of tax changes vary so radically largely reflects the fact that measuring these effects is very difficult. Tax changes occur for many reasons. Some legislated tax changes are passed for philosophical reasons or to reduce an inherited budget deficit. Others are passed because the economy is weak and predicted to fall further, or because a war is in progress and government spending is rising. And many tax changes are not legislated at all, but occur automatically because the tax base varies with the overall level of income, or because of changes in stock prices, inflation, and other nonpolicy forces. Because the factors that give rise to tax changes are often correlated with other developments in the economy, disentangling the effects of the tax changes from the effects of these underlying factors is inherently difficult. There is pervasive omitted variable bias in any regression of output on an aggregate measure of tax changes. This paper suggests one way of dealing with this omitted variable bias. There exists a vast narrative record describing the history and motivation of tax policy changes. We first use this narrative history to separate legislated tax changes from those arising from nonpolicy develop ments. We then use the information on motivation to separate the legislated tax changes into those that are likely to be contaminated by other developments affecting output, and those that can legitimately be used to measure the macroeconomic effects of tax changes. Finally, we use the legitimate observations to derive estimates of the effects of tax changes on output that are likely to be less biased than previous estimates. Section I of the paper elaborates on the conceptual framework for this study. It emphasizes that what we seek to identify from the narrative record are tax changes that are not systematically

Theories of Tax Competition

Abstract: A central message of the tax competition literature is that independent governments engage in wasteful competition for scarce capital through reductions in tax rates and public expendi- ture levels. This paper discusses many of the contributions to this literature, ranging from early demonstrations of wasteful tax com- petition to more recent contributions that identify efficiency- enhancing roles for competition among governments. Such roles involve considerations not present in earlier models, including im- perfectly-competitive market structures, government commitment problems, and political economy considerations.