ABSTRACT Incorporating the firm's corporate parent in a tax haven is a major decision that receives significant attention from many stakeholders, yet certain implications of this corporate strategy remain unclear. While tax haven incorporation offers tax savings, it also imposes risks that are potentially costly and hence important to consider. We predict and find a higher cost of equity capital in firms with parent companies that are incorporated in tax havens but that are primarily based in nonhaven countries. We also predict and find that the observed cost of equity premium is more pronounced in firms with greater tax risk, firm‐level information risk, and country‐level legal risk. We also employ corporate inversions in a difference‐in‐differences test and again find a positive relation between tax haven parent incorporation and the cost of capital. Our findings imply that an increased cost of capital is a material cost of tax haven parent incorporation. We contribute to the literatures on valuation of tax haven use, tax and nontax costs of corporate tax strategies, corporate inversions, and the relation between taxes and the cost of capital. Our study provides evidence on the tax and nontax risks of a uniquely observable tax strategy (i.e., tax haven parent incorporation) that could factor into firms' decisions about whether to incorporate in a tax haven and policymakers' efforts to deter such activity.

Abstract This study investigates the role of tax avoidance in the credit‐rating process and whether differences exist in how rating agencies account for the risk relevance of tax avoidance. Using a sample of initial credit ratings assigned to public debt issuances during 1994–2013, our evidence is consistent with Moody's Investors Service and Standard & Poor's assessing the costs and benefits associated with tax avoidance differently from one another, resulting in more frequent and pronounced rating agency disagreement. Rating agency disagreement over tax avoidance is most evident when it is accompanied by relatively high levels of uncertain tax positions, foreign activities, research and development activities, or tax footnote opacity. We also find evidence that decreases (increases) in tax avoidance or tax footnote disclosure opacity are positively (negatively) associated with the convergence of split ratings. This suggests that firms can exacerbate or mitigate rating agency disagreement subsequent to bond issuance. Our study complements prior research by examining why sophisticated information intermediaries disagree about the risk relevance of tax avoidance. It also sheds light on how firms can influence rating agencies’ understanding of tax avoidance.

ABSTRACT During the COVID‐19 pandemic, states imposed restrictions intended to slow the spread of the virus. We investigate whether states' reliance on consumption tax revenue, relative to other tax revenue sources, is associated with the duration of COVID‐19 mobility restrictions. We find that states that are more dependent on consumption taxes experienced shorter durations of stay‐at‐home orders, restaurant closures, and bar closures. We conduct a series of analyses to mitigate concerns that state‐level political preferences and biases may be influencing our findings. Our findings suggest that anticipated shortfalls in consumption tax revenue may have shaped public health responses, consistent with tax system structures relating, unintentionally, to crisis management decisions.