In frictionless financial markets, no-arbitrage is a local property in time. This means that a discrete time model is arbitrage-free if and only if there does not exist a one-period-arbitrage. With capital gains taxes, this equivalence fails. For a model with a linear tax and one non-shortable risky stock, we introduce the concept of robust local no-arbitrage (RLNA) as the weakest local condition which guarantees dynamic no-arbitrage. Under a sharp dichotomy condition, we prove (RLNA). Since no-one-period-arbitrage is necessary for no-arbitrage, the latter is sandwiched between two local conditions, which allows us to estimate its non-locality. Furthermore, we construct a stock price process such that two long positions in the same stock hedge each other. This puzzling phenomenon that cannot occur in arbitrage-free frictionless markets (or markets with proportional transaction costs) is used to show that no-arbitrage alone does not imply the existence of an equivalent separating measure if the probability space is infinite. Finally, we show that the model with a linear tax on capital gains can be written as a model with proportional transaction costs by introducing several fictitious securities.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Auerbach, A., Bradford, D.: Generalized cash-flow taxation. J. Public Econ. 88, 957–980 (2004)
Ben Tahar, I., Soner, M., Touzi, N.: The dynamic programming equation for the problem of optimal investment under capital gains taxes. SIAM J. Control Optim. 46, 1779–1801 (2007)
Black, F.: The dividend puzzle. J. Portf. Manag. 2, 5–8 (1976)
Bradford, D.: Taxation, Wealth, and Saving. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)
Constantinides, G.M.: Capital market equilibrium with personal taxes. Econometrica 51, 611–636 (1983)
Dalang, R., Morton, A., Willinger, W.: Equivalent martingale measures and no-arbitrage in stochastic securities market models. Stoch. Stoch. Rep. 29, 185–201 (1990)
Dammon, R., Green, R.: Tax arbitrage and the existence of equilibrium prices for financial assets. J Finance 42, 1143–1166 (1987)
Dybvig, P., Koo, H.: Investment with taxes. Working paper, Washington University, St. Louis, MO (1996)
Dybvig, P., Ross, S.: Tax clienteless and asset pricing. J. Finance 41, 751–762 (1986)
Föllmer, H., Schied, A.: Stochastic Finance: An Introduction in Discrete Time, 3rd edn. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin (2011)
Gallmeyer, M., Srivastava, S.: Arbitrage and the tax code. Math. Financ. Econ. 4, 183–221 (2011)
Grigoriev, P.: On low dimensional case in the fundamental asset pricing theorem with transaction costs. Stat. Decis. 23, 33–48 (2005)
He, S., Wang, J., Yan, J.: Semimartingale Theory and Stochastic Calculus. CRC Press, Boca Raton (1992)
Jensen, B.: Valuation before and after tax in the discrete time, finite state no arbitrage model. Ann. Finance 5, 91–123 (2009)
Jouini, E., Koehl, P.-F., Touzi, N.: Optimal investment with taxes: an optimal control problem with endogenous delay. Nonlinear Anal. 37, 31–56 (1999)
Jouini, E., Koehl, P.-F., Touzi, N.: Optimal investment with taxes: an existence result. J. Math. Econ. 33, 373–388 (2000)
Kabanov, Y., Safarian, M.: Markets with Transaction Costs. Springer, Berlin (2009)
Kühn, C., Ulbricht, B.: Modeling capital gains taxes for trading strategies of infinite variation. Stoch. Anal. Appl. 33, 792–822 (2015)
Napp, C.: The Dalang–Morton–Willinger theorem under cone constraints. J. Math. Econ. 39, 111–126 (2003)
Pham, H., Touzi, N.: The fundamental theorem of asset pricing with cone constraints. J. Math. Econ. 31, 265–279 (1999)
Ross, S.: Arbitrage and martingales with taxation. J. Polit. Econ. 95, 371–393 (1987)
Schachermayer, W.: A Hilbert space proof of the fundamental theorem of asset pricing in finite discrete time. Insur. Math. Econ. 11, 249–257 (1992)
Schachermayer, W.: The fundamental theorem of asset pricing under proportional transaction costs in finite discrete time. Math. Finance 14, 19–48 (2004)
I would like to thank the editor, Prof. Riedel, and an anonymous associate editor for their valuable comments. I am especially grateful to the anonymous referee for finding a minor error in the previous version of Proposition 2.15 and for many valuable suggestions that lead to a substantial improvement of the presentation of the results.
About this article
Cite this article
Kühn, C. How local in time is the no-arbitrage property under capital gains taxes?. Math Finan Econ 13, 329–358 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11579-018-0230-7
- Capital gains taxes
- Deferment of taxes
- Proportional transaction costs
Mathematics Subject Classification