SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 36

The econometric analysis of the effects of foreign direct investment on corporate income tax

Doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının kurumlar vergisi gelirleri üzerindeki etkisinin ekonometrik analizi

İdris SARISOY
Selçuk KOÇ
Pages
133–153
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It is thought of such as corporate tax rates, corporate tax expenditures, efficiency in tax system are the reasons of these differences between the countries.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, it is aimed to examine of effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) on corporate tax revenue in host country.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To that end, in this study we use the data which belongs to 21 OECD countries between 1981 to 2008 years and we found that after 1 and 2 years performed FDI which positive contribution to corporate tax revenue of host countries.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It is thought of such as corporate tax rates, corporate tax expenditures, efficiency in tax system are the reasons of these differences between the countries.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2008 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to examine of effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) on corporate tax revenue in host country. To that end, in this study we use the data which belongs to 21 OECD countries between 1981 to 2008 years and we found that after 1 and 2 years performed FDI which positive contribution to corporate tax revenue of host countries. Norway within the 21 countries is the most contribution of FDI on corporate tax revenue to a country but Turkey is least. It is thought of such as corporate tax rates, corporate tax expenditures, efficiency in tax system are the reasons of these differences between the countries.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, doğrudan yabancı sermaye yatırımlarının (DYSY) ev sahibi ülkedeki kurumlar vergisi hâsılatına etkisinin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Bu amaçla 21 OECD ülkesinin 1981 2008 yılı verileri kullanarak panel regresyon ekonometrik yöntemiyle yaptığımız çalışmada DYSY gerçekleştirildikten 1 ve 2 yıl sonra ev sahibi ülkenin kurumlar vergisi hâsılatı üzerinde olumlu etkiye sahip olduğu görülmüştür. 21 ülke içinde DYSYnin kurumlar vergisi hâsılatını en çok artırdığı ülke Norveç, en az ise Türkiyedir. Bu ayrışmaya kurumlar vergisi oranları, harcamaları, etkinliği gibi konularda ülkeler arasındaki farklılıkların neden olabileceği düşünülmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SARISOY, İ., KOÇ, S. (2022). The econometric analysis of the effects of foreign direct investment on corporate income tax. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 0 - Sayı: 36, 133–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/503593

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. BISWAS, Romita; (2002), “Determinants of Foreign Direct Investment”, Review of Development Economics, 6 (3), ss. 492–504, DEMEKAS, Dimitri G., Balazs HORVATH, Elina RIBAKOVA ve Yi WU; (2005), Foreign Direct Investment in Southeastern Europe: How (and How Much) Can Policies Help?, IMF Working Paper: WP/05/110. De MOOIJ, Ruud A. ve Sjef EDERVEEN; (November 2003), “Taxation and Foreign Direct Investment: A Synthesis of Empirical Research”, International Tax and Public Finance, 10 (6), ss. 673–693, De MOOIJ, Ruud A. ve Sjef EDERVEEN; (2005), “How Does Foreign Direct Investment Respond to Taxes? A Meta Analysis”, İnternet Adresi: http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/shared/shared_levevents/conferences/200 5_Oct_ruud _de_mooij_paper.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 07.02.2010.
  2. DEVEREUX, Michael. P. ve Harold FREEMAN; (1995), “The Impact of Tax on Foreign Direct Investment: Empirical Evidence and the Implications for Tax Integration Schemes”, International Tax and Public Finance, 2, ss. 85–106. DEVEREUX, Michael P. ve Rachel GRIFFITH; (2002), “The Impact of Corporate Taxation on the Location of Capital: A Review”, Swedish Economic Policy Review, 9, ss. 79–102, FILIPPOV, Sergey ve Kálmán KALOTAY; (2009), Foreign Direct Investment in Times of Global Economic Crisis: Spotlight on New Europe, UNU-MERIT Working Papers, No: 2009–021. GOLUB, Stephen S.; (2003), Measures of Restrictions on Inward Foreign Direct Investment for OECD Countries, Economics Department Working Papers No. 357. GROPP, Reint ve Kristina KOSTIAL; (2000), The Disappearing Tax Base: Is Foreign Direct Investment Eroding Corporate Income Taxes?, European Central Bank Working Paper Series, No. 31. GRUBERT, Harry ve Jonh MUTTI; (1991), “Taxes, Tariffs and Transfer Pricing in Multinational Corporate Decision Making”, Review of Economics and Statistics 73 (2), ss. 285– 293. HARTMAN, David C.; (1982), Tax Policy And Foreign Direct Investment In The United States, NBER Working Paper Series, No. 967, HINES, James R., Jr.; (1997), “Tax Policy and the Activities of Multinational Corporations”, Fiscal Policy: Lessons from Economic Research, Alan J. AUERBACH (Ed.), MIT Press, Cambridge MA, ss. 401–445. HINES, James R., Jr.; (1999), “Lessons from Behavioural Responses to International Taxation”, National Tax Journal, 54, ss. 305–322. HINES, James R., Jr. ve Eric M. RICE; (1994), “Fiscal Paradise: Foreign tax Havens and American Business”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109, ss. 149–182. KPMG; (2006), “KPMG's Corporate Tax Rate Survey: