Skip to main content

The downside of formula apportionment: evidence on factor demand distortions

Abstract

This paper investigates the impact of corporate taxes on the input factor choice of multi-jurisdictional entities (MJEs) under a formula apportionment (FA) regime. Our testing ground is the German local business tax that applies FA regulations with income apportionment according to the relative payroll share. Using unique data on the population of German firms, we find that MJEs distort their employment and payroll costs in favor of low-tax locations. On average, a 1-percentage-point-increase in the tax rate differential between an affiliate and foreign group members is found to lower the affiliate’s payroll to capital ratio by 1.9%.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Becker, J., & Riedel, N. (2008). Cross-border tax effects on affiliate investment: evidence from European multinationals (Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation Working Paper 08/16).

  • Büttner, T. (2003). Tax base effects and fiscal externalities of local capital taxation: evidence from a panel of German jurisdictions. Journal of Urban Economics, 54, 110–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clausing, K. A. (2003). Tax-motivated transfer pricing and US intrafirm trade prices. Journal of Public Economics, 87, 2207–2223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devereux, M. P., & Loretz, S. (2008). The effects of EU formula apportionment on corporate tax revenues. Fiscal Studies, 29(1), 1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devereux, M. P., & Maffini, G. (2007). The impact of taxation on the location of capital, firms and profit: a survey of empirical evidence (Centre for Business Taxation Working Paper 07/02).

  • Eggert, W., & Haufler, A. (2006). Company tax coordination cum tax rate competition in the European Union. Finanzarchiv, 62(4), 579–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2001). Towards an internal market without tax obstacles: a strategy for providing companies with a consolidated corporate tax base for their EU-wide activities. COM(2001), 582 final (October 23).

  • Fuest, C., Hemmelgarn, T., & Ramb, F. (2007). How would the introduction of an EU-wide formula apportionment affect the distribution and size of the corporate tax base? An analysis based on German multinationals. International Tax and Public Finance, 14(5), 605–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goolsbee, A., & Maydew, E. L. (2000). Coveting thy neighbor’s manufacturing: the dilemma of state income apportionment. Journal of Public Economics, 75, 125–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, R., & Wilson, J. D. (1986). An examination of multijurisdictional corporate income taxation under formula apportionment. Econometrica, 54, 1357–1373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellerstein, W., & McLure, C. (2004). The European Commission’s report on company income taxation: what the EU can learn from the experience of the US states? International Tax and Public Finance, 11, 199–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huizinga, H. P., & Laeven, L. (2008). International profit-shifting multinationals: a multi-country perspective. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5–6), 1164–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kind, J. K., Midelfart, K. H., & Schjelderup, G. (2005). Corporate tax systems, multinational enterprises, and economic integration. Journal of International Economics, 65, 507–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klassen, K. J., & Shackelford, D. A. (1998). State and provincial corporate tax planning: income shifting and sales apportionment factor management. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 25, 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintz, J., & Smart, M. (2004). Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1149–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navaretti, G. B., Checci, D., & Turrini, A. (2003). Adjusting labour demand: multinational versus national firms: a cross-European analysis. Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(2–3), 708–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, S. B., Raimondos-Møller, P., & Schjelderup, G. (2002). Tax spillovers under separate accounting and formula apportionment (Mimeo).

  • Riedel, N., & Runkel, M. (2007). Company tax reform with a water’s edge. Journal of Public Economics, 91, 1533–1554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Statistisches Bundesamt (2005). Qualitätsbericht Gewerbesteuerstatistik. Wiesbaden.

  • Weiner, J. M. (1994). Company taxation for the European community. How subnational tax variation affects business investment in the United States and Canada. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard University.

  • Zwick, M. (2007). Alternative Modelle zur Ausgestaltung von Gemeindesteuern—Mikroanalytische Quantifizierung der Einnahme-, der Einkommens- und Verteilungseffekte. Statistik und Wissenschaft, 8, Statistisches Bundesamt.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nadine Riedel.

Additional information

I am indebted to Tobias Böhm, Stephen Bond, Rainald Borck, Thiess Büttner, Michael Devereux, Peter Egger, Clemens Fuest, Andreas Haufler, Bernd Huber, Christian Keuschnigg, Simon Loretz, Ruud de Mooij, Johannes Rincke, Johannes Voget and participants of seminars at the University of Munich, the University of Oxford and of the Congress of the International Institute of Public Finance (IIPF) for helpful comments and suggestions. All errors remain mine.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Riedel, N. The downside of formula apportionment: evidence on factor demand distortions. Int Tax Public Finance 17, 236–258 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-009-9116-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-009-9116-1

Keywords

  • Corporate taxation
  • Formula apportionment
  • Micro data

JEL Classification

  • H32
  • H73