Please wait a minute...
金融研究  2023, Vol. 512 Issue (2): 134-151    
  本期目录 | 过刊浏览 | 高级检索 |
企业业绩爆雷的溢出效应——来自地区企业税负的证据
戴亦一, 纪翔阁, 宁博, 潘越
厦门大学管理学院, 福建厦门 361005;
厦门国家会计学院, 福建厦门 361005;
厦门大学经济学院, 福建厦门 361005
The Spillover Effect of Huge Declines in Corporate Performance: Evidence from Corporate Tax Burdens
DAI Yiyi, JI Xiangge, NING Bo, PAN Yue
School of Management, Xiamen University;
Xiamen National Accounting Institute;
School of Economics, Xiamen University
下载:  PDF (661KB) 
输出:  BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)      
摘要 企业业绩爆雷不仅会直接损害投资者权益,也可能对市场中其他企业形成负外部性,不利于新时代资本市场的健康稳定发展。本文从企业税负的视角,考察我国企业业绩爆雷的溢出效应。结果发现,地区内有企业突发业绩爆雷后,当地其他企业的税负压力将显著提升。具体而言,地区内税收征管部门会因非预期的企业业绩爆雷而面临一定的征税压力,因而其在短期中的征税努力程度增加,进而形成前述溢出效应。进一步的研究发现,对地方税收影响较大的支柱企业发生业绩爆雷会产生更大的负外部性;此外,在出现企业业绩爆雷后,当地的重点企业、盈利质量更好的企业也将承担更多的税负压力。最后,从经济后果来看,企业业绩爆雷产生的溢出效应还将抑制当地其他企业的投资活动、损害其他企业的市场价值。本文有助于更加全面地洞悉企业税负的影响因素,进而为我国“十四五”时期持续深化支持企业发展的“减税降负”税制改革提供有益参考。
服务
把本文推荐给朋友
加入引用管理器
E-mail Alert
RSS
作者相关文章
戴亦一
纪翔阁
宁博
潘越
关键词:  企业业绩爆雷  企业税负  溢出效应    
Summary:  Huge declines in corporate performance not only results in significant economic losses for investors but also affects the development of other corporations in the group and upstream and downstream enterprises. Thus, it is not conducive to the development of a stable and healthy capital market. Moreover, many corporations have complex economic networks with hidden economic links, creating pathways through which economic events can have ripple effects at the regional, industry, or even national level. Large declines in corporate performance, a prominent phenomenon in China's capital market in recent years, may create negative externalities through such economic networks. However, both practical and academic discussions of the economic impact focus on the affected corporation and directly related corporations. Therefore, we lack reliable empirical evidence of whether it affects corporations that are not directly related.
In a market economy, corporations can build broad economic networks through economic transactions and have indirect links with other corporations via the government. In China's market, there are long-term economic links between the government and corporations, with taxation being the most common. This link provides a useful perspective for examining the spillover effects of large declines in corporate performance. Tax collection efforts by tax authorities adapt to changes in the external environment, which affects the tax burdens of regional corporations. Specifically,when there is a sudden large decline in corporate performance, particularly by major corporations,there will be a corresponding sharp decrease in tax payments. This affects the annual tax collections by tax authorities, which in turn increases their efforts to collect tax from other local corporations and ultimately increases the tax pressure on those corporations.
To verify this hypothesis, this paper examines the influence of the huge declines in corporate performance on the tax pressure experienced by other local corporations using 2008-2018 data on A-share listed corporations. The CSMAR, Wind, and RESSET financial research databases are used to gather firm-level financial data, and the CEIC China Economic Database is used to obtain the macroeconomic data. According to the test results, the tax burden of other local corporations significantly increases following a large decline in some corporate performance within a city. The results of the mechanism test show that the tax collection authorities in a region experience tax collection pressure as a result of a large decline in corporate performance, so they increase their tax collection efforts in the short term, creating the aforementioned spillover effect. Furthermore, we find that the effect is stronger following performance declines by pillar corporations and that pillar corporations and corporations with higher quality of earnings suffer greater tax pressure than their counterparts after a huge decline in corporate performance within a city. Finally, a large decline in regional corporate performance may stymie the investment activities of other local corporations and harm their market value.
This paper makes the following contributions. First, it is the first to show that a large decline in corporate performance has a broad spillover effect. Moreover, we find that such an event has negative externalities for corporations that are not directly related. This finding not only provides market participants with a more thorough understanding of the spillover consequences of a large decline in corporate performance but also presents scholars with new ideas to investigate the economic externalities of other unexpected events.
Second, this paper broadens academic understanding of the issues that determine corporate tax burdens. Few studies consider how a corporation's tax burden affects other corporations. We find that a large decline in corporate performance disrupts local governments' tax planning and thus increases the tax burdens of other local corporations.
Third, this paper has reference value for implementing tax cuts and policies to reduce tax burdens. We find that a huge decline in corporate performance increases the tax burden of other local corporations, decreasing investment and damaging market value. Other unexpected economic events in recent years may have had comparable spillover consequences. This paper could assist government departments in determining how to deepen tax reform and improve the flexible taxation system to deal with unexpected situations.
Keywords:  Huge Declines in Corporate Performance    Corporate Tax Burden    Spillover Effect
JEL分类号:  H20   H71   H32  
基金资助: * 本文感谢国家自然科学基金项目(72172134、72102201、71790601、71972160)的资助。感谢匿名审稿人的宝贵意见,文责自负。
通讯作者:  宁 博,经济学博士,助理教授,厦门大学管理学院,E-mail:ningbo@xmu.edu.cn.   
作者简介:  戴亦一,经济学博士,教授,厦门大学管理学院,E-mail:yydai@xmu.edu.cn.
纪翔阁,管理学博士,讲师,厦门国家会计学院,E-mail:jixiangge94@foxmail.com.
潘 越,管理学博士,教授,厦门大学经济学院,E-mail:panyue@xmu.edu.cn.
引用本文:    
戴亦一, 纪翔阁, 宁博, 潘越. 企业业绩爆雷的溢出效应——来自地区企业税负的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 512(2): 134-151.
DAI Yiyi, JI Xiangge, NING Bo, PAN Yue. The Spillover Effect of Huge Declines in Corporate Performance: Evidence from Corporate Tax Burdens. Journal of Financial Research, 2023, 512(2): 134-151.
链接本文:  
http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/  或          http://www.jryj.org.cn/CN/Y2023/V512/I2/134
[1] 白云霞、唐伟正和刘刚,2019,《税收计划与企业税负》,《经济研究》第5期,第98~112页。
[2] 曹书军、刘星和张婉君,2009,《财政分权、地方政府竞争与上市公司实际税负》,《世界经济》第4期,第69~83页。
[3] 陈冬、孔墨奇和王红建,2016,《投我以桃,报之以李:经济周期与国企避税》,《管理世界》第5期,第46~63页。
[4] 陈晓光,2016,《财政压力、税收征管与地区不平等》,《中国社会科学》第4期,第53~70+206页。
[5] 陈志军、郑丽和马鹏程,2018,《绩效下滑会驱动子公司创新吗》,《南开管理评论》第5期,第213~224页。
[6] 范子英和彭飞,2017,《“营改增”的减税效应和分工效应:基于产业互联的视角》,《经济研究》第2期,第82~95页。
[7] 黄俊、陈信元和张天舒,2013,《公司经营绩效传染效应的研究》,《管理世界》第3期,第111~118页。
[8] 李兰冰和张聪聪,2022,《高速公路连通性对区域市场一体化的影响及异质性分析》,《世界经济》第6期,第185~206页。
[9] 李四海、陈旋和宋献中,2016,《穷人的慷慨:一个战略性动机的研究》,《管理世界》第5期,第116~127+140页。
[10] 李万福和陈晖丽,2012,《内部控制与公司实际税负》,《金融研究》第9期,第195~206页。
[11] 李旭超、鲁建坤和金祥荣,2018,《僵尸企业与税负扭曲》,《管理世界》第4期,第127~139页。
[12] 刘海明、王哲伟和曹廷求,2016,《担保网络传染效应的实证研究》,《管理世界》第4期,第81~96+188页。
[13] 刘慧龙和吴联生,2014,《制度环境、所有权性质与企业实际税率》,《管理世界》第4期,第42~52页。
[14] 刘骏和刘峰,2014,《财政集权、政府控制与企业税负》,《会计研究》第1期,第21~27+94页。
[15] 刘行和叶康涛,2014,《金融发展、产权与企业税负》,《管理世界》第3期,第41~52页。
[16] 刘行和赵晓阳,2019,《最低工资标准的上涨是否会加剧企业避税?》,《经济研究》第10期,第121~135页。
[17] 吕冰洋和陈志刚,2021,《政府间收入分成与财政收入预算偏离》,《金融研究》第5期,第20~39页。
[18] 罗知和张川川,2015,《信贷扩张、房地产投资与制造业部门的资源配置效率》,《金融研究》第7期,第60~75页。
[19] 宁博、潘越、陈秋平和肖金利,2020,《信用风险传染与企业盈余管理:基于信用债违约的视角》,《会计研究》第3期,第66~77页。
[20] 苏冬蔚和曾海舰,2011,《宏观经济因素、企业家信心和公司融资选择》,《金融研究》第4期,第129~142页。
[21] 田彬彬、陶东杰和李文健,2020,《税收任务,策略性征管与企业实际税负》,《经济研究》第8期,第121~136页。
[22] 王永钦、刘思远和杜巨澜,2014,《信任品市场的竞争效应与传染效应:理论和基于中国食品行业的事件研究》,《经济研究》第2期,第141~154页。
[23] 张修平、高鹏和王化成,2020,《业绩冲击与商业信用——基于集团控股上市公司的经验证据》,《经济科学》第2期,第48~60页。
[24] Acemoglu, Daron, Asuman Ozdaglar, and Alireza Tahbaz-Salehi. 2015. “Systemic Risk and Stability in Financial Networks”, The American Economic Review, 105(2):564~608.
[25] Burgstahler, David, and Ilia Dichev. 1997. “Earnings Management to Avoid Earnings Decreases and Losses”, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24(1):99~126.
[26] Chen, Ting, and James K.-S. Kung. 2016. “Do Land Revenue Windfalls Create a Political Resource Curse? Evidence from China”, Journal of Development Economics, 123(11):86~106.
[27] Dai, Yunhao, Raghavendra P. Rau, Aris Stouraitis, and Weiqiang Tan. 2020. “An Ill Wind? Terrorist Attacks and CEO Compensation”, Journal of Finance Economics, 135(2):379~398.
[28] Delgado, Francisco J., Elena Fernández-Rodríguez, and Antonio Martínez-Arias. 2018. “Corporation Effective Tax Rates and Company Size: Evidence from Germany”, Economic Research, 31(1):2081~2099.
[29] Denis, David J., and Timothy A. Kruse. 2000. “Managerial Discipline and Corporate Restructuring Following Performance Declines”, Journal of Financial Economics, 55(3):391~424.
[30] Easterwood, John C., Özgür Ş. īnce, and Charu G. Raheja. 2012. “The Evolution of Boards and CEOs Following Performance Declines”, Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(4):727~744.
[31] Gredajlovic, Eric, Toru Yoshikawa, and Motomi Hashimoto. 2005. “Ownership Structure, Investment Behavior and Firm Performance in Japanese Manufacturing Industries”, Organization Studies, 26(1):7~35.
[32] Hertzel, Michael G., Zhi Li, Micah S. Officer, and Kimberly J. Rodgers. 2008. “Inter-Firm Linkages and the Wealth Effects of Financial Distress along the Supply Chain”, Journal of Financial Economics, 87(2):374~387.
[33] Kiyotaki, Nobuhiro, and John Moore. 1997. “Credit Cycles”, Journal of Political Economy, 105(2):211~248.
[34] Pandey, I. M., and Visit Ongpipattanakul. 2015. “Agency Behavior and Corporate Restructuring Choices during Performance Decline in an Emerging Economy”, International Journal of Managerial Finance, 11(2):244~267.
[35] Ref, Ohad, and Zur Shapira. 2017. “Entering New Markets: The Effect of Performance Feedback Near Aspiration and Well Below and Above it”, Strategic Management Journal, 38(7):1416~1434.
[1] 王博, 赵森杨, 罗荣华, 彭龙. 地方政府债务、空间溢出效应与区域经济增长[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 506(8): 18-37.
[2] 张璇, 孙雪丽, 薛原, 李春涛. 卖空机制与食品安全——基于溢出效应的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 501(3): 152-170.
[3] 刘瑞琳, 李丹. 注册制改革会产生溢出效应吗?——基于企业投资行为的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 508(10): 170-188.
[4] 江轩宇, 贾婧, 刘琪. 债务结构优化与企业创新——基于企业债券融资视角的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 490(4): 131-149.
[5] 张智富, 郭云喜, 张朝洋. 宏观审慎政策协调能否抑制国际性银行危机传染?——基于跨境金融关联视角的实证研究[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 481(7): 21-37.
[6] 张礼卿, 钟茜. 全球金融周期、美国货币政策与“三元悖论”[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 476(2): 15-33.
[7] 周开国, 邢子煜, 彭诗渊. 中国股市行业风险与宏观经济之间的风险传导机制[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 486(12): 151-168.
[8] 汝毅, 薛健, 张乾. 媒体新闻报道的声誉溢出效应[J]. 金融研究, 2019, 470(8): 189-206.
[9] 罗棪心, 麻志明, 王亚平. 券商跟踪海外上市公司对国内分析师盈余预测准确性的影响[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 458(8): 190-206.
[10] 张靖佳, 孙浦阳, 古芳. 欧洲量化宽松政策对中国企业出口影响——一个汇率网状溢出效应视角[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 447(9): 18-34.
[11] 尹力博, 吴优. 离岸人民币区域影响力研究——基于信息溢出的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 446(8): 1-18.
[12] 褚剑, 方军雄, 于传荣. 卖空约束放松与银行信贷决策[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 450(12): 111-126.
[13] 王雄元, 彭旋. 稳定客户提高了分析师对企业盈余预测的准确性吗?[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 431(5): 156-172.
[14] 耿志祥, 孙祁祥. 金融危机和自然灾害对保险股票市场的影响与溢出效应检验[J]. 金融研究, 2016, 431(5): 65-81.
[1] 黄佳琳, 秦凤鸣. 中国货币政策效果的区域非对称性研究——来自混合截面全局向量自回归模型的证据[J]. 金融研究, 2017, 450(12): 1 -16 .
[2] 李文红, 贾君怡. 证券融资交易国际监管改革进展及对我国的启示与借鉴[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 452(2): 45 -60 .
[3] 邱晗, 黄益平, 纪洋. 金融科技对传统银行行为的影响——基于互联网理财的视角[J]. 金融研究, 2018, 461(11): 17 -30 .
[4] 诸竹君, 宋学印, 张胜利, 陈丽芳. 产业政策、创新行为与企业加成率——基于战略性新兴产业政策的研究[J]. 金融研究, 2021, 492(6): 59 -75 .
[5] 马勇, 付莉. “双支柱”调控、政策协调搭配与宏观稳定效应[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 482(8): 1 -17 .
[6] 文书洋, 刘浩, 王慧. 绿色金融、绿色创新与经济高质量发展[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 506(8): 1 -17 .
[7] 刘瑶, 张明. 经常账户冲击、资本账户管理与中央银行货币政策操作[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 510(12): 1 -18 .
[8] 李增福, 李铭杰, 汤旭东. 货币政策改革创新是否有利于抑制企业“脱实向虚”?[J]. 金融研究, 2022, 510(12): 19 -35 .
[9] 邹静娴, 张斌, 魏薇, 董丰. 信贷增长如何影响中国的收入和财富不平等[J]. 金融研究, 2023, 511(1): 1 -20 .
[10] 刘向明, 邓翔欧, 藏波. 市场模式、政府模式与城商行流动性风险化解—一个三期博弈的分析框架[J]. 金融研究, 2020, 478(4): 131 -146 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
版权所有 © 《金融研究》编辑部
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发 技术支持:support@magtech.com.cn
京ICP备11029882号-1