This study examines the stock market reaction to the unprecedented leaks of confidential advance tax rulings between Luxembourg and multinational corporations—also known as the “LuxLeaks.” Contrary to the negative market reaction to tax shelter news documented in prior research, we find that investors responded positively to these leaks. This reaction is concentrated among U.S. firms. Furthermore, we document a positive association between abnormal returns and the reduction in firms' tax uncertainty, consistent with a downward revision in investors' perception of the tax uncertainty associated with the firms' Luxembourg operations. We also investigate other firm characteristics and find that, among U.S. firms, investors' reaction is weaker for those over-invested in tax avoidance. Among non-U.S. firms, the market response is muted by concerns about the quality of governance. In summary, our results suggest that investors' reaction to tax shelter news is conditional on their reassessment of the firms' tax uncertainty.

In 2018, the European Union (EU) introduced a new mandatory reporting requirement for a wide range of cross‐border tax arrangements (EU Directive 2018/822, also known as DAC6). Unlike prior corporate transparency initiatives, which put the reporting responsibility primarily on the taxpayers, this directive puts the initial reporting responsibility on the third‐party intermediaries who are involved in the reportable arrangement at any stage during the planning and execution process. We exploit the adoption of DAC6 in the EU to examine the effectiveness of third‐party reporting in curbing cross‐border tax planning by multinationals. Using a difference‐in‐differences research design, we find that affected firms reduce income shifting and report higher effective tax rates in the post‐adoption period. The reduction in income shifting is stronger for affiliates operating in countries without legal professional privilege extensions and in countries where noncompliance penalties are higher. Our results highlight the importance of strong third‐party reporting requirements in constraining cross‐border tax planning.

ABSTRACT In this study, we examine the effect of increased tax transparency on the tax planning behavior of European banks. In 2014, the European Union introduced public country‐by‐country reporting requirements to the banking industry. Treating this new requirement as an exogenous shock, we find limited evidence consistent with a decline in income shifting by the banks' financial affiliates in the post‐adoption period (starting from 2015). We do not, however, find robust evidence of a significant change in the consolidated book effective tax rates among the affected banks. Our findings suggest that increased transparency from public country‐by‐country reporting can deter tax‐motivated income shifting but that it did not appear to materially influence the banks' overall tax avoidance. Our findings have policy implications for the ongoing debate between the European Parliament, the Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, and accounting standard‐setting bodies on whether to require multinationals to publish country‐by‐country reports.

ABSTRACT The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development introduced country‐by‐country reporting (CbCR) for multinational enterprises (MNEs) to help tax authorities combat tax‐motivated income shifting. This study uses confidential U.S. tax administrative data from 2011 to 2018 to examine the effect of U.S. CbCR adoption on the tax‐motivated income shifting and real activities of U.S. MNEs. We first document that while U.S. CbCR provides the Internal Revenue Service with incremental information about the location of U.S. MNEs’ global activities relative to existing U.S. tax return disclosures, substantial overlap exists between U.S. CbCR and existing disclosures. In contrast with prior CbCR studies in cross‐country settings, we fail to find evidence of a change in U.S. MNEs’ tax‐motivated income shifting or a reallocation of real activities based on tax incentives in response to U.S. CbCR using multiple empirical approaches. Overall, our study leverages U.S. tax administrative data to provide insights into the impact of the CbCR initiative on U.S. MNEs.