In The Impact of IP Box Regimes on the M&A Market, Bradley, Robinson, and Ruf (2021) study whether and to what extent tax incentives for intellectual property affect corporate M&A investment activity. The paper finds that a 1.0 percentage point tax benefit leads to a 1.2% increase in M&A activity in a country after the implementation of an Intellectual Property (IP) Box tax regime. Results vary based on country-specific IP Box requirements, as well as firm-specific characteristics such as patent ownership and acquirer nationality. My discussion offers more cautious interpretations of the empirical results related to statutory country-specific requirements of these regimes and raises concerns about the type and timing of firm responses. More generally, I outline how this paper and other work by tax researchers in Accounting contributes to the broader literature studying the relation between corporate tax policies and investment activity.

How do U.S. companies respond to incentives intended to encourage domestic manufacturing? I study the Domestic Production Activities Deduction (DPAD), which was enacted in the American Jobs Creation Act (AJCA) of 2004 and was the third largest U.S. corporate tax expenditure as of 2017. Using confidential data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, I find greater average domestic investment spending of 95.5–143.6 million, but only within the sample of domestic‐only firms and not until 2010, when the greatest statutory DPAD benefits were available. Additional evidence suggests that U.S. multinational claimants invest abroad rather than in the United States and that the increased investment by DPAD firms is accompanied by a reduction in the domestic workforce, consistent with a substitution of capital for labor. I also show that the delayed investment response is due to firms engaging in other responses first, such as changing corporate reporting to shift income across time and borders. Quantifying the extent of these effects contributes to the literature that studies this tax deduction and informs policy makers as to the effectiveness of both manufacturing incentives and U.S. corporate income tax rate reductions in stimulating real domestic activity.

Taxation is a central economic policy tool, with governments increasingly using tax policy to stimulate local economic growth and also regulate multinational firms. We review the empirical literature that studies the effect of tax policies on firms’ investment, employment, and other real outcomes. Building on the neoclassical theory of corporate taxes and tangible investment, we propose an organizing framework for our review that captures the wide set of tax policies and firm responses examined in accounting research. This framework highlights four dimensions along which accounting scholars contribute to the literature: (i) documenting the role of financial reporting incentives as a moderating factor in firms’ real responses, (ii) studying firms’ reporting versus real responses, (iii) quantifying real effects of tax disclosure regulations, and (iv) improving measurement of firms’ tax status and proxies for investment and employment. We identify open questions for future research and suggest new international, federal, and local settings that may help uncover underlying mechanisms driving observed economic phenomena. Specifically, we encourage scholars to further distinguish firms’ reported and real responses to tax changes and improve measurement of these outcomes, especially in settings related to environmental taxation or settings in which tax avoidance and real outcomes are closely linked.

This paper investigates whether the U.S. repatriation tax for U.S. multinational corporations affects foreign investment. Our results show that the locked-out cash due to repatriation tax costs is associated with a higher likelihood of foreign (but not domestic) acquisitions. We also find a negative association between tax-induced foreign cash holdings and the market reaction to foreign deals. This result suggests that the investment activity of firms with high repatriation tax costs is viewed by the market as less value-enhancing than that of firms with low tax costs, consistent with foreign investment of firms with high repatriation tax costs possibly reflecting agency-driven behavior.

We examine the relation between corporate cash holdings and tax net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs). The literature demonstrates that firms should distribute cash to shareholders rather than retain it and generate passive investment income taxed at both corporate and investor levels. However, if the firm's tax rate on passive income is lower than shareholders'—as when the firm has NOLs—theory also shows that the firm should retain cash and invest on the shareholders' behalf. Consistent with this, we find that NOLs are associated with higher levels of savings; firms save an additional $0.12 to $0.17 per dollar of tax-effected NOL benefit. Furthermore, investors place a higher value on corporate cash in tax loss firms, consistent with NOLs increasing the after-tax returns on passive investments. The paper adds to the literature studying corporate financial policy responses to taxation and quantifies the role of NOLs in corporate savings decisions.

We study whether the corporate tax system provides incentives for risky firm investment. We analytically and empirically show two main findings: first, risk-taking is positively related to the length of tax loss periods because the loss rules shift some risk to the government; and second, the tax rate has a positive effect on risk-taking for firms that expect to use losses, and a weak negative effect for those that cannot. Thus, the sign of the tax effect on risky investment hinges on firm-specific expectations of future loss recovery.

We examine if the effectiveness of business tax subsidies varies based on state disclosure laws. The prior accounting literature on government disclosure documents substantial variation in the quality of such disclosures, raising questions about their effectiveness for monitoring. State and local business subsidies for investment and employment have tripled in size over the past 30 years, but transparency problems inhibit clear assessments of whether subsidies achieve their intended outcomes. We examine both internal disclosure laws, which mandate subsidy reporting by the granting state agency to other state oversight agencies, and external disclosure laws, which mandate reporting to the public. We find positive effects of subsidies on local employment when subsidies are subject to internal disclosure laws; by implementing such regimes, governments could forego 1.2–1.7 subsequent subsidies per county, saving 419.0–593.5 million in aggregate. In contrast, we observe little effect of external disclosure, which we show is due to governments either substituting to other types of incentives or posting stale information that impedes public monitoring. We contribute to the government disclosure literature by demonstrating the real employment effects of internal government disclosures, and we provide policy‐relevant evidence about the conditions under which external disclosure regimes facilitate public monitoring.

We examine how U.S. individuals respond to regulation intended to reduce offshore tax evasion. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) requires foreign financial institutions to report information to the U.S. government regarding U.S. account holders. We first document an average $7.8 billion to $15.3 billion decrease in equity foreign portfolio investment to the United States from tax‐haven countries after FATCA implementation, consistent with a decrease in “round‐tripping” investments attributable to U.S. investors’ offshore tax evasion. When testing total worldwide investment out of financial accounts in tax havens post‐FATCA, we find an average decline of $56.6 billion to $78.0 billion. We next provide evidence of other important consequences of this regulation, including increased expatriations of U.S. citizens and greater investment in alternative assets not subject to FATCA reporting, such as residential real estate and artwork. Our study contributes to both the academic literature and policy analysis on regulation, tax evasion, and crime.

We study whether innovation box tax incentives, which reduce tax rates on innovation-related income, are associated with increased fixed asset investment and employment. Using a stacked cohort difference-in-differences design on an entropy-balanced sample of European multinationals, we find innovation box regimes are associated with higher levels of capital expenditures, relative to noninnovation box jurisdictions. We do not find discernible effects on total employment or total compensation. However, the data suggest that companies in innovation box countries have a more highly compensated workforce following innovation box implementation, particularly among patent-owning observations in countries with more restrictive innovation box regimes and greater tax benefits. Our study contributes to the literature on, and policy evaluation of, innovation box regimes by examining the extent to which these incentives result in tangible investment and employment and by identifying how different characteristics of innovation box regimes impact these outcomes.