EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

RATE‐CUTTING TAX REFORMS AND CORPORATE TAX COMPETITION IN EUROPE

Friedrich Heinemann, Michael Overesch and Johannes Rincke

Economics and Politics, 2010, vol. 22, issue 3, 498-518

Abstract: While there is a large and growing number of studies on the determinants of corporate tax rates, the literature has so far ignored the fact that the behavior of governments in setting tax rates is often best described as a discrete choice decision problem. We set up an empirical model that relates a government's decision whether to cut its corporate tax rate to the country's own inherited tax and taxes in neighboring countries. Using comprehensive data on corporate tax reforms in Europe since 1980, we find evidence suggesting that the position in terms of the tax burden imposed on corporate income relative to geographical neighbors strongly affects the probability of rate‐cutting tax reforms. Countries are particularly likely to cut their statutory tax rate if the inherited tax is high and if they are exposed to low‐tax neighbors.

Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (17)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0343.2010.00375.x

Related works:
Working Paper: Rate Cutting Tax Reforms and Corporate Tax Competition in Europe (2008) Downloads
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:ecopol:v:22:y:2010:i:3:p:498-518

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0954-1985

Access Statistics for this article

Economics and Politics is currently edited by Peter Rosendorff

More articles in Economics and Politics from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().

 
Page updated 2024-05-07
Handle: RePEc:bla:ecopol:v:22:y:2010:i:3:p:498-518