1,721,054 research outputs found
Russell_et_al._online_suppl – Supplemental material for Balancing flexibility and security in Europe? The impact of unemployment on young peoples’ subjective well-being
No full textSupplemental material, Russell_et_al._online_suppl for Balancing flexibility and security in Europe? The impact of unemployment on young peoples’ subjective well-being by Helen Russell, Janine Leschke and Mark Smith in European Journal of Industrial Relations</p
Competitiveness, sustainability and the environment: towards a “win-win-win” scenario
No full textThis paper addresses how domestic firms might enjoy profitability and international competitiveness with fewer harmful
environmental impacts than the “winner take-all approach” of neo-classical economics has thus far encouraged (i.e. the use
of “limitless” resources to maximise short-term profits). It argues that private firms that either (i) produce material goods
or (ii) use physical inputs in supplying services can improve their profitability by increasing their resource productivity. Not
only does a positive change in resource productivity mean increased profitability for the individual firm, but it also means
a dramatic improvement on the impact of business on the environment--the life support system of our planet-- particularly
with regards to climate change (and other forms of pollution) and the depletion of natural resources. Focusing on resource
productivity improvements need not be a matter solely for individual firms. There is also an important role for government
in promoting resource productivity through its regulatory toolkit, particularly tax policy. This paper explores how income
taxes, by adopting a certain kind of tax credit--the Business Sustainability Credit--might help promote increased resource
productivity and firm profitability
Rethinking the taxation of (large) corporates
No full textThis article starts the process of rethinking the taxation of large, privately-held
corporations. After outlining the impact of large, private corporations on the
commons and the idea of “communal resources”, it explores what is meant by
wealth and corporate wealth, and analyses the thinking on why corporations are
taxed. This article argues that (i) legitimate justifications for taxing large private
corporations are not limited to corporate income taxation; and (ii) justifications
specific to a corporate income tax do not hold up to close inspection, particularly in
relation to large private corporations. This article also seeds the idea that a levy on
corporate expenditure could conceivably form the basis of an alternative approach
to corporate taxation
A New-Knowledge Approach to Corporate Income Tax Efficiency
No full textThis article adopts a new-knowledge approach to tax policy analysis as a means of exploring the efficiency of the corporate income tax. The foundation stone of this approach is the idea that new knowledge and wealth creation are coextensive. The idea that new knowledge and wealth creation are coextensive is already inherent in some aspects of tax law (e.g. R&D regimes), economics (e.g. endogenous growth theory) and fundamental physics (i.e. constructor theory). From a corporate income tax perspective, the implications that flow from the new-knowledge approach include: that knowledge is by far the most important factor of production; that economic rent (or pure profit) is ultimately nothing more than a function of new knowledge; and that tax efficiency should be recast in terms of the excess burden placed on knowledge production. Accordingly, this article seeks to explain the negative impact of the corporate income tax on knowledge production and, by extension, sustainable productivity growth
“Sustainable Growth, New Knowledge and Corporate Income Taxes”
No full textThis paper argues that economic growth is sustainable, that new knowledge is the key to that growth and that corporate income taxes are an obstacle to sustainable growth because of their effect on knowledge production. First, this paper articulates the argument by David Deutsch, the renowned physicist, that sustainable progress is both possible and necessary. This is important to tax policy because of the ascendancy of the anti-growth literature and the regulatory role of the tax system with regards economic policy. Secondly, this paper suggests that Deutsch’s information-theoretic approach to explaining the fundamental nature of reality – constructor theory – makes it possible to explain why new knowledge is the only possible route to sustainable economic growth. Whilst knowledge production is already a central justification for R&D tax regimes, Deutsch provides us with an explanation of the role of knowledge that justifies a much deeper penetration of a knowledge production objective into tax policy. Thirdly, this paper argues that corporate income taxes are an unnecessary burden on knowledge production and, therefore, constitute an obstacle to sustainable economic growth. The argument runs that a firm’s pure profit is the direct result of the quality of the knowledge employed in production and that corporate income taxes almost exclusively tax pure profit. Given the downward trend of global productivity growth in OECD countries, this paper suggests decreasing the revenue-raising role of corporate income taxes. To ensure revenue neutrality, this would require a greater emphasis on the taxation of distributions and consumption
Helena Partnerships Ltd v HMRC: a step too far?
No full textHelena Partnerships Ltd v HMRC: a step too far
Comparing R&D tax regimes: Australia, Canada, UK and US
No full textThis article does two things. It explores the definition, classification and categorisation of tax incentives, at a general level,
and it compares how four global leaders target their R&D tax incentive regimes. The latter is an exercise in comparative
tax law focusing on the R&D definition and the incentive’s operational details. It observes that the R&D definition is used
by all of the regimes as a gateway to the relief and to curtail the scope of the relief by restricting R&D to "new scientific
knowledge", where the US interprets "new" to mean new to the entity, whereas the UK, Australia and Canada, interpret
"new" to mean new to the world. Thus, the US regime arguably focuses on creating and sustaining the competitiveness of
its domestic firms by subsidising "knowledge acquisition" rather than "knowledge creation". It also observes that: whilst the
US and Canada subsidise incremental improvements in new scientific knowledge, the UK and Australia do not, insisting
instead on "substantial advances"; only the US uses an incremental credit, which arguably serves as a means of limiting
the cost of this tax expenditure to the US Treasury, particularly given the broad scope of its R&D definition; none of the
regimes respond to the consensus on the need for specialisation, adopting as they do a broad-brush approach to subsidising
technological innovation; and by focusing on experimentation or scientific method, all of the regimes leave out a large area
of potentially innovative and productive commercial activity (that is, commercial product development using an iterative or
"trial and error" methodology)
Corporate competitiveness and the environment: Towards a win-win scenario
No full textCorporate competitiveness and the environment: Towards a win-win scenari
- …
