English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 91913/122132 (75%)
Visitors : 25810202      Online Users : 280
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/140.119/130613


    Title: 企業策略、政治關聯與稅務風險
    Business Strategy, Corporate Political Connections, and Tax Risk
    Authors: 陳妍君
    Chen, Yan-Jyun
    Contributors: 何怡澄
    郭振雄

    陳妍君
    Chen, Yan-Jyun
    Keywords: 稅務風險
    企業策略
    政治關聯
    Tax risk
    Business strategy
    Corporate political connections
    Date: 2020
    Issue Date: 2020-07-01 13:54:59 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 本篇研究目標為企業策略、政治關聯與稅務風險的關聯性,以 1999 年至 2013 年間臺灣的上市櫃公司為研究對象,參考 Miles and Snow (1978, 2003) 的策略分類法,將企業分為穩健者、分析者及先驅者三種類型,並將政治關聯變數依政治影響力逐漸累加,藉此探討不同政治關聯分類與不同企業策略型態之交互作用對未來稅務風險的影響。

    實證結果發現:第一,穩健者型企業與稅務風險不具關聯性;先驅者型企業與稅務風險呈顯著正相關,且其稅務風險程度高於穩健者,代表企業策略形態越接近先驅者(穩健者),其稅務風險程度越高(低)。第二,政治關聯與稅務風險不具關聯性。第三,政治關聯不會降低穩健者的稅務風險,但會降低先驅者的稅務風險,顯示政治關聯可以幫助先驅者型企業在選擇更具風險的避稅策略時,降低租稅法規適用的不確定性及查核方面的稅務風險,因此相較於沒有政治關聯的先驅者型企業,有政治關聯的先驅者型企業其稅務風險較低。第四,工具變數法的實證結果亦顯示,在解決內生性問題後,即使董事政治關聯的定義擴大至涵蓋全部政府職位,企業董事會成員亦會降低先驅者的稅務風險程度,表示建立政治關聯也是一種企業策略,透過選任具政治影響力的人擔任董、監事或獨立董事,可以降低企業的稅務風險。
    This paper investigates the relationship between business strategies, corporate political connection, and tax risk, using the listed company in Taiwan from 1999 to 2013. Using Miles and Snow's (1978, 2003) theoretical business strategy framework, we separate our sample into Defender, Analyzer, and Prospectors strategy types, and gradually accumulates corporate political connection variables according to their political influence. We then examine whether the association between different strategy types and tax risk differ across different corporate political connections.

    The empirical results show that: first, the relation between Defenders and tax risks are not significant. On the other hand, Prospectors are positively related to tax risk, suggest that Prospectors not only engage in more tax avoidance but do so in more risky, uncertain ways (Higgins et al., 2015). Second, the relationship between corporate political connections and tax risks are not significant. Third, corporate political connections can reduce the tax risks of Prospectors by bringing lower detection risk and obtaining critical information regarding future changes in tax codes or the strictness of tax enforcement (Dyreng et al., 2019).

    The empirical results of the instrumental variable method also show that after solving the endogenous problem, even if the definition of corporate political connections is extended to cover all government positions, the members of the company ’s board of directors still can reduce the tax risk of the Prospectors, indicating that establishing political connections is also a kind of business strategies. By selecting people with political influence as the company ’s board of directors, supervisors, or independent directors, the tax risk of the enterprise can be reduced.
    Reference: 丁翎育,2017,政治關聯與租稅規避,政治大學會計學研究所未出版碩士論文。
    吳德豐與徐麗珍,2010,《公司稅務治理與規劃─管理風險,創造價值》,資誠企業管理顧問股份有限公司出版。
    紀信義、翁慈青與廖芝嫻,2017,董事及高階主管政治連結與公司績效之關聯性,台大管理論叢,27(2),1-34。
    翁慈青與紀信義,2014,董事會政治背景與企業信用風險之關係,證券市場發展季刊,26(2),43-89。
    翁慈青、陳光政與游智翔,2016,公司創新活動對董事會成員職能與政治關係之影響,會計學報,6(2),55-89。
    陳明進與蔡麗雯,2006,財稅所得差異決定因素及課稅所得推估之研究,管理學報,23(6),739-763。
    劉若蘭與李旻育,2017,董事會政治關聯、客戶重要性對財務報導舞弊之影響,中山管理評論,25(2),367-398。
    Angrist, J. D., & Krueger, A. B. 2001. Instrumental variables and the search for identification: From supply and demand to natural experiments. Journal of Economic perspectives, 15(4), 69-85.
    Artemenko, D. A., Aguzarova, L. A., Aguzarova, F. S., & Porollo, E. V. 2017. Causes of tax risks and ways to reduce them.
    Baysinger, B., & Hoskisson, R. E. 1990. The composition of boards of directors and strategic control: Effects on corporate strategy. Academy of management review, 15(1), 72-87.
    Bentley, K. A., Omer, T. C., & Sharp, N. Y. 2013. Business strategy, financial reporting irregularities, and audit effort. Contemporary Accounting Research, 30(2), 780-817.
    Blouin, J. 2014. Defining and measuring tax planning aggressiveness. National Tax Journal, 67(4), 875.
    Boubakri, N., Mansi, S. A., & Saffar, W. 2013. Political institutions, connectedness, and corporate risk-taking. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(3), 195-215.
    Brealey, R. A., Myers, S. C., & Allan, F. 1991. Principles of Corporate Finance McGraw Hill. Inc., USA.
    Brickley, J. A., & Zimmerman, J. L. 2010. Corporate governance myths: comments on Armstrong, Guay, and Weber. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 235-245.
    Brown, J. L., & Drake, K. D. 2014. Network ties among low-tax firms. The Accounting Review, 89(2), 483-510.
    Cazier, R. A., Rego, S. O., Tian, X. S., & Wilson, R. J. 2009. Early evidence on the determinants of unrecognized tax benefits. Ryan J., Early Evidence on the Determinants of Unrecognized Tax Benefits (September 14, 2009).
    Chaney, P. K., Faccio, M., & Parsley, D. 2011. The quality of accounting information in politically connected firms. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 51(1-2), 58-76.
    Chen, C. J., Ding, Y., & Kim, C. F. 2010. High-level politically connected firms, corruption, and analyst forecast accuracy around the world. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1505-1524.
    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.
    Cook, K. A., Moser, W. J., & Omer, T. C. 2017. Tax avoidance and ex ante cost of capital. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 44(7-8), 1109-1136.
    De Simone, L., Mills, L. F., & Stomberg, B. 2016. Examining IRS audit outcomes of income mobile firms: Stanford Graduate School of Business.
    Desai, M. A., & Dharmapala, D. 2006. Corporate tax avoidance and high-powered incentives. Journal of Financial Economics, 79(1), 145-179.
    Desai, M. A., & Dharmapala, D. 2009. Corporate tax avoidance and firm value. The review of Economics and Statistics, 91(3), 537-546.
    Drope, J. M., & Hansen, W. L. 2004. Purchasing protection? The effect of political spending on US trade policy. Political Research Quarterly, 57(1), 27-37.
    Duchin, R., & Sosyura, D. 2012. The politics of government investment. Journal of Financial Economics, 106(1), 24-48.
    Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. L. 2010. The effects of executives on corporate tax avoidance. The Accounting Review, 85(4), 1163-1189.
    Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. L. 2019. When does tax avoidance result in tax uncertainty? The Accounting Review, 94(2), 179-203.
    Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., Maydew, E. L., & Thornock, J. R. 2017. Changes in corporate effective tax rates over the past 25 years. Journal of Financial Economics, 124(3), 441-463.
    Faccio, M. 2010. Differences between politically connected and nonconnected firms: A cross‐country analysis. Financial management, 39(3), 905-928.
    Faccio, M., Masulis, R. W., & McConnell, J. J. 2006. Political connections and corporate bailouts. the Journal of Finance, 61(6), 2597-2635.
    Fama, E. F. 1980. Agency problems and the theory of the firm. Journal of political economy, 88(2), 288-307.
    Fama, E. F., & French, K. R. 1992. The cross‐section of expected stock returns. the Journal of Finance, 47(2), 427-465.
    Fama, E. F., & Jensen, M. C. 1983. Separation of ownership and control. The journal of law and Economics, 26(2), 301-325.
    Fisman, R. 2001. Estimating the value of political connections. American economic review, 91(4), 1095-1102.
    Goldman, E., Rocholl, J., & So, J. 2009. Do politically connected boards affect firm value? The Review of Financial Studies, 22(6), 2331-2360.
    Guenther, D. A., Matsunaga, S. R., & Williams, B. M. 2017. Is tax avoidance related to firm risk? The Accounting Review, 92(1), 115-136.
    Guenther, D. A., Wilson, R. J., & Wu, K. 2019. Tax uncertainty and incremental tax avoidance. The Accounting Review, 94(2), 229-247.
    Hall, R. L., & Wayman, F. W. 1990. Buying time: Moneyed interests and the mobilization of bias in congressional committees. American political science review, 84(3), 797-820.
    Hambrick, D. C. 1983. Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles and Snow's strategic types. Academy of Management journal, 26(1), 5-26.
    Hanlon, M., & Heitzman, S. 2010. A review of tax research. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 127-178.
    Higgins, D., Omer, T. C., & Phillips, J. D. 2015. The influence of a firm's business strategy on its tax aggressiveness. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32(2), 674-702.
    Hoopes, J. L., Mescall, D., & Pittman, J. A. 2012. Do IRS audits deter corporate tax avoidance? The Accounting Review, 87(5), 1603-1639.
    Houston, J. F., Jiang, L., Lin, C., & Ma, Y. 2014. Political connections and the cost of bank loans. Journal of Accounting Research, 52(1), 193-243.
    Hsu, P. H., Moore, J. A., & Neubaum, D. O. 2018. Tax avoidance, financial experts on the audit committee, and business strategy. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 45(9-10), 1293-1321.
    Hunter, W. J., & Nelson, M. A. 1995. Tax enforcement: A public choice perspective. Public Choice, 82(1-2), 53-67.
    Hutchens, M., & Rego, S. O. 2015. Does greater tax risk lead to increased firm risk? Available at SSRN 2186564.
    Khurana, I. K., & Moser, W. J. 2013. Institutional shareholders' investment horizons and tax avoidance. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, 35(1), 111-134.
    Kim, C., & Zhang, L. 2016. Corporate political connections and tax aggressiveness. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33(1), 78-114.
    Kim, J.-B., Li, Y., & Zhang, L. 2011. Corporate tax avoidance and stock price crash risk: Firm-level analysis. Journal of Financial Economics, 100(3), 639-662.
    Levitt, S. D. 1996. The effect of prison population size on crime rates: Evidence from prison overcrowding litigation. The quarterly journal of economics, 111(2), 319-351.
    Li, Q., Maydew, E., Willis, R., & Xu, L. 2016. Taxes, director independence, and firm value: evidence from board reforms worldwide. In: Working paper Wuhan University, The University of North Carolina at Chapel ….
    Lisowsky, P. 2010. Seeking shelter: Empirically modeling tax shelters using financial statement information. The Accounting Review, 85(5), 1693-1720.
    Lisowsky, P., Robinson, L., & Schmidt, A. 2013. Do publicly disclosed tax reserves tell us about privately disclosed tax shelter activity? Journal of Accounting Research, 51(3), 583-629.
    Markowitz, H. 1952. Portfolio analysis. Journal of Finance, 8, 77-91.
    Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman Jr, H. J. 1978. Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of management review, 3(3), 546-562.
    Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman Jr, H. J. (2003). Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. [Press release]
    Miller, E. M. 1977. Risk, uncertainty, and divergence of opinion. the Journal of Finance, 32(4), 1151-1168.
    Milyo, J., Primo, D., & Groseclose, T. 2000. Corporate PAC campaign contributions in perspective. Business and Politics, 2(1), 75-88.
    Neubig, T., & Sangha, B. 2004. Tax risk and strong corporate governance. Tax Executive, 56, 114.
    Neuman, S., Omer, T., & Shelley, M. 2012. Corporate transparency, uncertain tax activities, and sustainable tax strategies. Uncertain Tax Activities, and Sustainable Tax Strategies, 12.
    Neuman, S. S., Omer, T. C., & Schmidt, A. 2014. Examining the association between tax risk and tax outcomes. Available at SSRN 2215129.
    Pfeifer, J., & Salancik, G. R. 1978. The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. In: Harper & Row, New York, NY.
    Rego, S. O., & Wilson, R. 2012. Equity risk incentives and corporate tax aggressiveness. Journal of Accounting Research, 50(3), 775-810.
    Richter, B. K., Samphantharak, K., & Timmons, J. F. 2009. Lobbying and taxes. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 893-909.
    Shevlin, T., Urcan, O., & Vasvari, F. 2013. Corporate tax avoidance and public debt costs. Available at SSRN, 2228601.
    Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. 1994. Politicians and firms. The quarterly journal of economics, 109(4), 995-1025.
    Wahab, E. A. A., Ariff, A. M., Marzuki, M. M., & Sanusi, Z. M. 2017. Political connections, corporate governance, and tax aggressiveness in Malaysia. Asian Review of Accounting.
    Walker, G. R., & Reid, T. 2002. Upgrading corporate governance in East Asia: Part 1.
    Wilson, R. J. 2009. An examination of corporate tax shelter participants. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 969-999.
    Young, M., Reksulak, M., & Shughart, W. F. 2001. The political economy of the IRS. Economics & Politics, 13(2), 201-220.
    Zimmerman, J. L. 1983. Taxes and firm size. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 5, 119-149.
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    財政學系
    106255012
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106255012
    Data Type: thesis
    DOI: 10.6814/NCCU202000530
    Appears in Collections:[財政學系] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    501201.pdf7387KbAdobe PDF0View/Open


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


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback