Do multinational corporations pay their "Fair Share"?

IF 5.5 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE Green Finance Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.3934/gf.2022005
M. Conrad
{"title":"Do multinational corporations pay their \"Fair Share\"?","authors":"M. Conrad","doi":"10.3934/gf.2022005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Various Multinational Corporations minimize their effective global tax rate, and hence their contribution to public services, through Corporate Tax Avoidance. Taxpaying citizens, however, cannot reap these benefits of country-specific legislation under the international tax system, and frequently carry the majority of the tax burden. Hence, corporations are subject to accusations of not paying a \"fair share\". Based on equity theory, our paper analyses citizens' perception of fairness in regard to corporate taxation. By executing a mediation analysis, we determine which corporate tax rate is perceived as fair, mediating the relationship between equity theory determinants (individuals' tax system satisfaction, a social comparison with other entities, and cultural value-based cognition) and possible system-supportive or detrimental consequences. We confirm that a perception of inequity is prevalent among the 218 participants in our survey, and \"fair burden-sharing\" is perceived to be non-existent. We contribute to theory by classifying the social comparison determinant as most relevant for the fairness perceptions among individuals towards questionable business practices. Moreover, we emphasize that CTA needs to be considered a possible legitimacy threat for societal and institutional functioning since it may increase citizens' tax avoidant behavior, and jeopardizes social cohesion. However, the cultural values of power distance and masculinity were found to mitigate these generally detrimental consequences of CTA. Our practical and institutional implications put great emphasis on further promoting fairness within the international tax system since the recently suggested global corporate tax rate of 15% is still not considered as fair by our survey participants.","PeriodicalId":41466,"journal":{"name":"Green Finance","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Green Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3934/gf.2022005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Various Multinational Corporations minimize their effective global tax rate, and hence their contribution to public services, through Corporate Tax Avoidance. Taxpaying citizens, however, cannot reap these benefits of country-specific legislation under the international tax system, and frequently carry the majority of the tax burden. Hence, corporations are subject to accusations of not paying a "fair share". Based on equity theory, our paper analyses citizens' perception of fairness in regard to corporate taxation. By executing a mediation analysis, we determine which corporate tax rate is perceived as fair, mediating the relationship between equity theory determinants (individuals' tax system satisfaction, a social comparison with other entities, and cultural value-based cognition) and possible system-supportive or detrimental consequences. We confirm that a perception of inequity is prevalent among the 218 participants in our survey, and "fair burden-sharing" is perceived to be non-existent. We contribute to theory by classifying the social comparison determinant as most relevant for the fairness perceptions among individuals towards questionable business practices. Moreover, we emphasize that CTA needs to be considered a possible legitimacy threat for societal and institutional functioning since it may increase citizens' tax avoidant behavior, and jeopardizes social cohesion. However, the cultural values of power distance and masculinity were found to mitigate these generally detrimental consequences of CTA. Our practical and institutional implications put great emphasis on further promoting fairness within the international tax system since the recently suggested global corporate tax rate of 15% is still not considered as fair by our survey participants.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨国公司是否支付了“公平份额”?
各种跨国公司通过公司避税,尽量减少其全球有效税率,从而减少其对公共服务的贡献。但是,纳税公民不能从国际税收制度下的国别立法中获得这些好处,而且经常承担大部分的税收负担。因此,企业被指责没有支付“公平份额”。本文基于公平理论,分析了公民对企业税收公平的感知。通过执行中介分析,我们确定哪些企业税率被认为是公平的,中介公平理论决定因素(个人对税收制度的满意度,与其他实体的社会比较,以及基于文化价值的认知)与可能的系统支持或有害后果之间的关系。我们确认,在我们调查的218名参与者中,不平等的观念普遍存在,“公平分担负担”被认为是不存在的。我们通过将社会比较决定因素分类为与个人对可疑商业行为的公平感知最相关的决定因素,从而为理论做出贡献。此外,我们强调,CTA需要被视为对社会和制度功能的潜在合法性威胁,因为它可能增加公民的避税行为,并危害社会凝聚力。然而,权力距离和男子气概的文化价值观被发现可以减轻CTA的这些普遍有害的后果。我们的实际和制度意义非常强调进一步促进国际税收体系的公平性,因为最近建议的15%的全球企业税率仍然被我们的调查参与者认为不公平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Green Finance
Green Finance Multiple-
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.50%
发文量
14
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊介绍: Green Finance is an international, interdisciplinary Open Access journal dedicated to green finance, environmental, and sustainability research and practice. It offers a platform for publishing original contributions and technical reviews on green finance and related topics, following a rigorous peer-review process. Accepted article types include original research, reviews, editorials, letters, and conference reports.
期刊最新文献
Prospects of green financing in democratic societies Insuring a greener future: How green insurance drives investment in sustainable projects in developing countries? Cultural context, organizational performance and Sustainable Development Goals: A pending task Does corporate reputation play a mediating role in the association between manufacturing companies' corporate social responsibility (CSR) and financial performance? Financing low-carbon hydrogen: The role of public policies and strategies in the EU, UK and USA
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1