U.S. laws provide explicit whistleblower protections and direct regulators to adopt ambitious programs to reward whistleblowing. However, there is limited evidence on whether employee whistleblowing deters financial misreporting and tax aggressiveness. Using a sample of employee whistleblower cases obtained from the U.S. government, I provide evidence that firms subject to whistleblowing allegations exhibit significant decreases in financial misreporting and tax aggressiveness, compared with control firms. I find that this deterrent effect persists for at least two years beyond the year of the allegation. JEL Classifications: H25; M41; M48. Data Availability: All data are available from public sources identified in the paper.

Using the shadow insurance setting, we study the interplay between tax and nontax incentives in income shifting. Shadow insurance involves intercompany transactions designed to help firms meet regulatory capital requirements. However, prior to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), foreign-owned life insurance firms could save taxes by using shadow insurance to shift U.S. profits to tax havens. Consistent with expectations, we find that while nontax incentives appear to be the dominant factor behind firms' use of shadow insurance, tax considerations also played a role for certain firms. We also find that shadow insurance is associated with lower liquid asset holdings and increased credit risk. Overall, our results suggest that taxes were an important incentive for foreign-owned life insurance firms to use shadow insurance pre-TCJA. Moreover, in this setting, nontax considerations appeared to have motivated U.S.-owned firms' use of tax havens.

Amid growing globalization, many countries have offered tax incentives to attract corporate investment. Prior research studies the role such incentives play in firms' location and investment choices. However, we have limited evidence regarding the role that uncertainty about the intensity of future tax enforcement plays in those decisions. In 2013, the European Commission (E.C.) abruptly began investigating the tax-ruling practices of several countries in response to allegations that certain firms received preferential tax treatment (“state aid cases”). We use this setting to study the economic consequences of increased uncertainty about future tax enforcement. We find evidence consistent with significant reductions in U.S. multinational enterprises' subsidiary investments within, firm input purchases from, and aggregate investment of U.S. firms flowing to targeted state aid countries. Specifically, for U.S. multinational enterprises' subsidiary investments, we find fixed assets declined by 1.7 percent of total assets, or $7.6 million per subsidiary.

To what extent do U.S. consumers change their purchase behavior or, in the extreme, boycott companies based on negative information about corporate tax activities? Practitioner publications and academic research identify consumers as a key corporate tax stakeholder. But we have limited empirical evidence whether information about corporate tax activities influences consumer actions. We undertake a comprehensive study of this question, triangulating across several settings. First, a representative sample of consumers suggests they rarely boycott in response to corporate tax activities. Next, an analysis of granular retail scanner data fails to provide compelling evidence of consumer purchase responses to negative tax news. An analysis of individual foot traffic at retail establishments around negative tax news again fails to suggest U.S. consumers change their shopping activities in response to negative tax news. The combined evidence suggests consumers do not meaningfully alter their purchase behavior in response to negative tax news.