We revisit the classical result that in a closed economy the incidence of corporate taxes on labor is approximately zero. We consider a rich general equilibrium framework, where agents differ in the level of their wealth as well as in their managerial and working ability. Potential entrepreneurs go through all the key decisions affected by corporate tax changes: the choice of (i) occupation, (ii) organizational form, (iii) investment, and (iv) financing structure. We allow both for the presence of financial frictions and the traditional tax advantage of debt over corporate equity, which jointly generate misallocation of capital and talent. In this environment we characterize the effects of increasing corporate taxes both analytically and for a calibrated version of the model. We show that this tax increase reallocates production from C corporations to pass-through businesses. Since, due to distorted prices, the latter have higher capital-labor ratios, this reallocation generates a reduction in labor productivity and wages. Furthermore, the corporate tax increase induces some C corporations to reorganize as pass-throughs, which implies more restricted access to external funds and thus a socially inefficient downsizing of production in these firms. Finally, the tax increase causes further misallocation of talent by inducing agents with low wealth relative to their managerial talent to switch from entrepreneurship to being workers, while the reverse happens for agents with higher wealth and lower managerial skills. Overall, we find that both labor and capital bear a large share of the corporate tax incidence, while entrepreneurs are net beneficiaries of the tax change.

Business competition nowadays involves entire supply chains (SCs) rather than individual firms, and companies, with appropriate ways, need to coordinate and co-manage knowledge resources, activities, and innovative efforts in collaboration with their partners for improved competitiveness. Knowledge management (KM) practices and their adoption in single firms to manage inter-firm relationships can be of great help, but the current studies on this aspect are very fragmented. There is still insufficient knowledge of what practices are adopted to manage knowledge and how intensely these are used in inter-firm relationships and especially in supply chains. This study contributes to filling this gap by measuring the level of adoption and intensity of use of KM practices in companies. Also, it provides a comparison between their use at the intra- and inter-firm level. A survey of a sample of European large- and medium-sized manufacturing firms was used. A descriptive statistical analysis and a correlation analysis were performed. The study confirms that KM practices are used in companies, but with a varied level of adoption and intensity of use among firms. Especially, it resulted that KM is less used at an inter-firm level, and there is a relatively higher variation among firms in the inter-firm use rather than the internal context. On the other hand, the correlation analysis revealed that the more intensely firms used KM internally, the more likely they will intensely employ them to manage knowledge in SC relationships. The usefulness of the study lies in the fact that improving the awareness of business managers and consultants, both at firm and inter-firm, can facilitate introduction and development of KM programs.

ABSTRACT The paper analyses how SMEs manage the knowledge needed to carry out innovation, focusing on how the various knowledge management (KM) processes (acquisition, documentation, sharing, application) come into play during the different phases of the innovation process (idea generation, ideas selection, project development, launch). In fact, little is known about the KM processes and practices that SMEs employ during their innovation activities. Given the novelty of the issue, a multiple case study was carried out on 13 innovative projects implemented by as many Italian manufacturing SMEs. Empirical evidence shows that all KM processes play a role in the various phases of the innovation process, but this role changes from phase to phase. Furthermore, the study highlights that the practices used in the various processes may vary in relation to the type of innovation that is being developed. Lastly, it confirms that SMEs tend to adopt an informal and emergent KM approach.

PurposeThe purpose of this article is to develop a configurational approach based on the TOE framework (technology, organization and environment) to understand the degree of implementation of I4.0 technologies in manufacturing small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Specifically, the study considers technological infrastructure and competence, I4.0 integration capabilities, organizational agility and strategic flexibility, environmental dynamism and industry-specific forces as simultaneous pre-conditions for achieving an effective implementation of I4.0 technologies.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) methodology as it allows for asymmetric and configurational-focused testing of proposition and sound theoretical development. In total, 305 responses were collected through a survey administered to SME managers in Europe and the United Kingdom (UK).FindingsThe study examines the influence of technology, organizational and environmental aspects on I4.0 technologies implementation in SMEs. High I4.0 degree of implementation is structured around 5 configurations, while other 4 configurations are related to low levels of I4.0 implementation.Originality/valueThis study proposes a configurational approach for SMEs to become I4.0 ready and how they may successfully implement I4.0 technologies. Such findings represent an original and novel contribution to existing research, offering a broad view on the I4.0 implementation by manufacturing SMEs.

: This article provides a conceptual background to the general theme of this Special Issue ‘On Imperialism in the Middle East’. First, we posit that the concept of imperialism can be understood as a sociological process, through an approach that centres the primacy of politics vis-à-vis accounts that sever theory and praxis via empiricism. In probing this issue, the article shows how dominant academic narratives explaining wars in the region disarticulate them from history. Second, we show that wars, waste, and militarism—also termed as accumulation by waste—are the predominant activities of the US-led imperialist age, historically unleashed on the South of the world. Consequently, we end discussing how the study of US-led imperialism becomes the focus around which each article in this issue recentres its analytical contribution.