Author:
Elexa Ľuboš,Ištok Michal,Šlampiaková Lea
Abstract
This paper aims to quantify the impact of direct equity ownership links between Slovak companies and tax havens. We distinguish between three types of tax haven: onshore, midshore and offshore. The financial impacts are measured by indicators of profitability (ROA); activity (total asset turnover); liquidity (current ratio); and bankruptcy (IN05). To measure the impacts, we link the Bisnode and Finstat databases. The first database lists those Slovak companies that had links with tax havens during 2005–2015. The second provides financial statements for all Slovak companies. It was found that: 1) There are statistically significant differences in all investigated indicators between Slovak companies with and without links to tax havens. Those with links to tax havens generally reported worse economic situations and levels of performance compared to those without such links. We conclude that having a parent company resident in a tax haven had a negative effect on financial performance. 2) There are statistically significant differences between the selected indicators of company performance, across the different categories of tax haven, and for companies with no links to tax havens. 3) Those with no such links show statistically significant correlations between all their examined performance indicators. But for those companies with links to tax havens, the only statistically significant correlation was between profitability and the remaining indicators. 4) Companies with ownership links to tax havens are clearly engaged in profit-shifting activities. The results suggest opportunities for follow-up projects, especially focusing on different industries and company size that could specify their heterogeneous approaches and variability in objectives.
Publisher
Technical University of Liberec
Subject
Strategy and Management,General Economics, Econometrics and Finance,Business and International Management
Reference55 articles.
1. Aijaz, A. (2013). Tax Haven: A Global Scenario. International Journal of Advances in Engineering Sciences, 3(3), 125-127.
2. Almazari, A. A. (2013). The Relationship between Working Capital Management and Profitability: Evidence from Saudi Cement Companies. British Journal of Economics, Management & Trade, 4(1), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJEMT/2014/5427
3. Banociová, A., & Táhlová, S. (2019). European States in a Bout of Corporate Tax Competition. Journal of Competitiveness, 11(3), 19-34. https://doi.org/10.7441/joc.2019.03.02
4. Bartelsman, E. J., & Beetsma, R. M. W. J. (2000). Profit Shifting and Productivity Mismeasurement (Discussion Paper TI 2000-097/2). Amsterdam: Tinbergen Institute. Retrieved February 28, 2020, from https://papers.tinbergen.nl/00097.pdf
5. Barinov, A. (2014). Turnover: Liquidity or Uncertainty? Management Science, 60(10), 2478-2495. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1327297
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献