Abstract
PurposeThis paper aims to examine how the volatility of foreign direct investment (FDI) inflows affects the volatility of corporate income tax revenue.Design/methodology/approachThe study has used an unbalanced panel data set of 129 countries over the period 1981–2016 and the two-step system generalized methods of moment approach to perform the empirical analysis.FindingsThe main findings are that FDI volatility enhances the volatility of corporate income tax revenue in less advanced economies, but reduces it in relatively advanced countries. The positive corporate income tax revenue volatility effect of FDI inflows is far higher in non-tax haven countries than in tax haven countries. Additionally, FDI volatility exerts a higher positive effect on corporate income tax revenue volatility as countries experience greater dependence on natural resources. Finally, the positive effect of FDI volatility on corporate income tax revenue volatility is further amplified by higher FDI volatility.Research limitations/implicationsOne important limitation of the present analysis is the use of aggregate FDI inflows because of the lack of data over a long period on greenfield FDI inflows and cross-border mergers and acquisitions FDI inflows. Therefore, an avenue for future research could be to explore separately the effect of the volatility greenfield FDI inflows and the volatility of cross-border mergers and acquisitions FDI inflows on the volatility of corporate income tax revenue, when long-time series data (covering many countries) would be available.Practical implicationsThese outcomes particularly shed light on the role of FDI volatility on the volatility of corporate income tax revenue, particularly in countries that are highly dependent on natural resources. Foreign capital flows, notably FDI flows, play an essential role for countries’ economic development through, inter alia, technology transfer, jobs creation and economic growth. Policymakers should aim to attract FDI, while also reducing their volatility, by designing and implementing policies and measures (such as those in favor of business environment improvement, property rights enforcement and political stability) that would assure foreign investors of the continuous high returns of their investments.Originality/valueTo the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first time this topic is being addressed empirically in the literature.
Highlights
Much work has been performed on the effect of foreign direct investment (FDI) on hostcountries’ economic growth and development
Volatility is associated with lower corporate income tax revenue volatility. These thresholds amount to US$9,918.8 [= exponential (0.842/0.0915)] for the regression-based on “FDICSTVOL” and US$31,764 [= exponential (0.538/0.0519)] for the regression-based on “FDIGDPVOL.” The key message from this analysis is that less advanced economies experience a positive effect of FDI volatility on corporate income tax revenue volatility, while in relatively advanced economies, FDI volatility is negatively associated with corporate income tax revenue volatility
We conclude that the effect of FDI volatility on corporate income tax revenue volatility consistently increases as the dependence on diffuse-natural resources rises
Summary
Much work has been performed on the effect of foreign direct investment (FDI) on hostcountries’ economic growth and development. To the best of our knowledge, the effect of FDI volatility on corporate tax revenue volatility has not been investigated in the literature, even though some studies have been conducted on the macroeconomic effect of FDI volatility (Lensink and Morrissey, 2006). The present paper aims to fill this gap in the literature by investigating the effect of the volatility of FDI inflows on corporate income tax revenue volatility. Addressing this topic is all the more relevant that FDI volatility is closely related to economic growth and development. The instability of tax revenue, including of corporate income tax revenue can be associated with public expenditure volatility (Bleaney et al, 1995; Ebeke and Ehrhart, 2012), which could in turn be detrimental to economic growth (Afonso and Furceri, 2010; Afonso and Jalles, 2012; Gong and Zou, 2002)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.