English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 20 |  Items with full text/Total items : 90029/119959 (75%)
Visitors : 24038815      Online Users : 102
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/111437

    Title: 企業不端行為與避稅天堂的關聯
    Corporate wrongdoing and tax havens
    Authors: 張瑋芩
    Chang, Wei Chin
    Contributors: 蘇威傑
    Chang, Wei Chin
    Keywords: 企業不端行為
    Corporate wrongdoing
    Labor related misbehavior
    Illegal corporate behavior
    Offshore companies in tax havens
    Date: 2017
    Issue Date: 2017-07-31 10:55:20 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 隨著2016年巴拿馬文件(Panama Paper)的曝光,社會對避稅天堂的關注度在此時達到高峰。由於使用避稅天堂是一種法律及道德上處於灰色地帶的商業手段,因此本研究欲探討是否具有不端行為的企業會較容易使用避稅天堂。過去研究指出,一間具有不端行為而導致形象轉為負面的企業,會因此失去商譽、銷售下跌或失去合作夥伴等。而為了挽救上述影響所帶來的損失,有過不端行為的企業有較高機會再次利用具有爭議性的方法來彌補虧損。由於避稅天堂通常具有低稅率或完全免稅的特徵,也具有極高的資訊隱蔽性,因此面臨經營困難的企業可以容易利用避稅天堂來降低交易成本,如匯集資金、避稅,甚至用來隱藏賄賂等不法行為。
    The public’s concern about tax havens has peaked as the leak of “Panama Papers.” Since setting up subsidiaries in tax havens is an ethically dubious and controversial business practice, this study would like to examine whether there is a relationship between corporate wrongdoing and the usage of tax havens. Prior studies have shown that corporate wrongdoing would lead to impairment in goodwill, reduction in sales or losing partnership. In order to recover from the losses occur from the effects mentioned above, companies would have a higher incentive to involve in controversial behaviors. Tax haven, with its unique characteristic such as extremely low tax rate or tax free, and a high degree of concealment regarding sharing information with other governments, enables companies to avoid some market transaction costs and gives them an opportunity to easily pool money, evade tax, and even hide illegal conducts such as bribery. This study uses a quantitative method to investigate on listed companies in Taiwan. The result shows that the amount of corporate wrongdoing, labor related misbehavior and illegal corporate behavior all have a positive relationship with the possibility that corporates use tax haven. Also, corporates, which have past records in labor related dispute, tend to set up more subsidiaries in tax havens; especially those fined by the authorities.
    Reference: 【英文部分】
    1. Baucus, D. A., & Baucus, M. S. (1997). Variations in base fees and royalties in franchising contracts. Franchising Research: An International Journal, 2(1), 15-31.
    2. Baucus, M. S. (1994). Pressure, opportunity and predisposition: A multivariate model of corporate illegality. Journal of Management, 20(4), 699-721.
    3. Chari, M., & Acikgoz, S. (2016). What drives emerging economy firm acquisitions in tax havens?. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 664-671.
    4. Chen, S., Chen, X., Cheng, Q., & Shevlin, T. (2010). Are family firms more tax aggressive than non-family firms?. Journal of Financial Economics, 95(1), 41-61.
    5. Clinard, M. B. (1983). Corporate ethics and crime: The role of middle management. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
    6. Desai, M. A., Foley, C. F., & Hines, J. R. (2006). The demand for tax haven operations. Journal of Public Economics, 90(3), 513-531.
    7. Dharmapala, D., & Hines J. R. (2009). Which countries become tax havens?. Journal of Public Economics 93(9), 1058-1068.
    8. Dyreng, S. D., Hoopes, J. L., & Wilde, J. H. (2016). Public pressure and corporate tax behavior. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(1), 147-185.
    9. Dyreng, S. D., & Lindsey, B. P. (2009). Using financial accounting data to examine the effect of foreign operations located in tax havens and other countries on US multinational firms' tax rates. Journal of Accounting Research, 47(5), 1283-1316.
    10. Finney, H. C., & Lesieur, H. R. (1982). A contingency theory of organizational crime. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 1, 255-299.
    11. Inagaki, K. (2015). Toshiba’s once lauded culture became the cause of its problems. Retrieved April 10, 2017, from 68365b68-2faf-11e5-91ac-a5e17d9b4cff
    12. Jones, C., & Temouri, Y. (2016). The determinants of tax haven FDI. Journal of World Business, 51(2), 237-250.
    13. Kriesberg, S. M. (1976). Decisionmaking models and the control of corporate crime. Yale Law Journal, 85(8), 1091-1129.
    14. Lange, D., & Washburn, N. T. (2012). Understanding attributions of corporate social irresponsibility. Academy of Management Review, 37(2), 300-326.
    15. Mishina, Y., Dykes, B. J., Block, E. S., & Pollock, T. G. (2010). Why “good” firms do bad things: The effects of high aspirations, high expectations, and prominence on the incidence of corporate illegality. Academy of Management Journal, 53(4), 701-722.
    16. Porter, M.E. (1980). Competitive strategy. NY: The Free Press.
    17. The Economist (2008). Bavarian baksheesh. Retrieved May 14, 2017, from http://www.economist.com/node/12800474
    18. The Economist (2016). The Secretive and Morally Dubious World of Shell Companies. Retrieved February 10, 2017, from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/04/using-and-abusing-offshore-accounts
    19. The Economist (2016). The lesson of the Panama papers. Retrieved February 10, 2017, from http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2016/04/using-and-abusing-offshore-accounts
    20. The Guardian (2016). Senators accuse Apple of 'highly questionable' billion-dollar tax avoidance scheme. Retrieved February 8, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/may/20/apple-accused-tax-avoidance-billions-scheme
    21. Vaughan, D. (1982). Toward understanding unlawful organizational behavior. Michigan Law Review, 80(7), 1377-1402.
    22. Wokutch, R. E., & Spencer, B. A. (1987). Corporate saints and sinners: The effects of philanthropic and illegal activity on organizational performance. California Management Review, 29(2), 62-77.

    1. 天下雜誌(2015)。「海外藏錢 蘋果第一名」。2017年2月10日,取自
    2. 天下雜誌(2016)。「兩張圖看懂反避稅條款」。2017年2月10日,取自
    3. 杜易寰、陳煒林、陳一姍(2016)。「巴拿馬文件獨家調查 /2725家離岸公司背後」。天下雜誌,第540期,2017年2月10日,取自http://www.cw.com.tw/article/articleLogin.action?id=5075582
    4. 林燦澤(2015)。「宏達電更新財測案 記缺失一次」。2017年2月10日,取自http://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20150623000242-260210
    5. 林嘉焜(2016)。「反避稅修法趨勢與資金管理」。2017年2月10日,取自http://news.cnyes.com/news/id/2167903
    6. 林潔玲(2017)。「反避稅條款上路…只欠東風」。經濟日報,2017年2月10日,取自https://udn.com/news/story/7243/2254028
    7. 林昭儀、陳一姍(2014)。「國庫十年流失三千億?」。天下雜誌,第540期,2017年2月12日,取自http://www.cw.com.tw/article/article.action?id=5055451
    8. 賀桂芬(2014)。「47國聯手 撬開富豪的祕密帳戶」。天下雜誌,第547期,2017年2月10日,取自http://www.cw.com.tw/article/articleLogin.action?id=5058081
    9. 楊芙宜(2015)。「星巴克、飛雅特涉避稅 歐盟各追繳11億」。自由時報,2017年2月10日,取自http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/world/breakingnews/1483227
    10. 蕭富元(2013)。「把企業海外避稅追回來」。天下雜誌,第537期,2017年2月10日,取自http://www.cw.com.tw/article/articleLogin.action?id=5054519
    Description: 碩士
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0104351031
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    103101.pdf1061KbAdobe PDF0View/Open

    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    社群 sharing

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback