外文翻譯--企業(yè)稅收籌劃的有效性基于對(duì)報(bào)酬的激勵(lì)作用（節(jié)選）

1、<p>　　2900單詞，1.7萬(wàn)英文字符,5200單詞</p><p>　　出處：Phillips J D. Corporate Tax-Planning Effectiveness: The Role of Compensation-Based Incentives[J]. Accounting Review, 2003, 78(3):847-874.</p><p>　　本

2、科畢業(yè)論文外文資料翻譯</p><p>　　系 別： 經(jīng)濟(jì)系 </p><p>　　專 業(yè)： 會(huì)計(jì)學(xué) </p><p>　　姓 名： </p><p>　　學(xué) 號(hào)： </p><p>

3、<b>　　外文原文</b></p><p>　　Corporate Tax-Planning Effectiveness: The Role of Compensation-Based Incentives</p><p>　　John D. Phillips University of Connecticut</p><p><b&g

4、t;　　ABSTRACT</b></p><p>　　This study investigates whether compensating chief executive officers and business-unit managers using after-tax accounting-based performance measures leads to lower effective

5、 tax rates, the empirical surrogate used for tax-planning effectiveness. Utilizing proprietary compensation data obtained in a survey of corporate executives, the relation between effective tax rates and after-tax perfor

6、mance measures is modeled and estimated using a two-step approach that corrects for the endogeneity bias </p><p>　　KEYWORDS tax planning; performance measures; endogenous treatment effects.</p><p&

7、gt;　　INTRODUCTION</p><p>　　Effective tax planning, defined by Scholes et al. (2002) as tax planning that maximizes the firm's expected discounted after-tax cash flows, requires managers to consider their

8、 decisions' after-tax consequences. In this paper, I investigate whether after-tax accounting-based performance measures lead to lower effective tax rates (ETR), my empirical surrogate for tax planning effectiveness.

9、 1 The ETR, an income-statement-based outcome measure calculated as the ratio of total income tax expense to</p><p>　　Accounting research has addressed the relation between accounting-based compensation and

10、managers' actions (e.g., Larcker 1983; Healy 1985; Wallace 1997). This paper is the first to address whether after-tax accounting-based performance measures motivate managers to take actions that help lower their fir

11、ms' ETR and does so at both the chief executive officer (CEO) and business-unit (SBU) manager levels. Prior after-tax performance measure research has focused only on the determinants of compensa</p><p>

12、　　A common issue in cross-sectional studies that attempt to link a particular management accounting choice to an outcome measure is that all sample firms may be optimizing with respect to the choice being investigated (I

13、ttner and Larcker 2001). Without addressing the endogeneity of a firrrTs choice, it is difficult to provide evidence consistent with this choice leading to an improved outcome. To address this issue, the relation between

14、 ETR and CEO and SBU-manager after-tax performance measures is</p><p>　　Even if a manager's efforts are expected to lead to a lower ETR, a firm will use an after-tax performance measure only if the expec

15、ted benefits exceed the expected costs of doing so. An after-tax performance measure is expected to lead to a lower ETR because it motivates the manager's increased cooperation with tax professionals to help identify

16、, develop, and execute tax-planning strategies. McLemore (1997，I) cites Hewlett Packard's tax director to support the need for SBU-manager involvement in</p><p>　　Tax planning is only as good as being in

17、volved in the early stages of such things as business planning, strategic planning, and merger and acquisition work....Your tax department has to be represented at the table when those decisions are made. The evolving mo

18、del for the future is the tight integration of tax people with business unit planning.</p><p>　　Costs associated with using after-tax performance measures include the additional wage that must be paid to com

19、pensate the manager for the increased risk due to potential tax law changes and the increased effort that results from including income tax expense in the compensation contract. Other potential costs associated with afte

20、r-tax compensation include the administrative cost of allocating tax expense to a firm's SBU, increased tax examination costs, and increased tax authority scrutiny. Cont</p><p>　　Proprietary data obtaine

21、d in a survey of corporate executives are used to construct certain test variables, including those indicating whether CEOs and SBU managers are compensated using after-tax accounting-based performance measures. Publicly

22、 available data are used to construct ETR and other test variables. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that compensating SBU managers, but not CEOs, on an after-tax basis leads to lower ETR, resulting in an e

23、stimated median tax savings of $13.3</p><p>　　The results contribute to the accounting-based compensation literature by linking after- tax accounting-based performance measures to SBU-manager involvement tha

24、t is incrementally effective in lowering firms' ETR. Consistent with Guidry et al. (1999) who document bonus-induced earnings management at the SBU level, this finding provides additional insight into the effect that

25、 SBU-manager accounting-based incentives have 011 managers' actions. Also, the estimated explicit tax savings resulting fro</p><p>　　The paper proceeds as follows. The next section sets forth the hypothe

26、ses tested in this study. Section III outlines the empirical models and estimation procedures used in testing these hypotheses. Section TV provides a discussion of the data and sample, including a brief overview of the s

27、urvey used to obtain proprietary compensation data. Results are presented in Section V. The final section provides the conclusion and a discussion of the study's limitations.</p><p>　　HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPM

28、ENT</p><p>　　Newman (1989)，Cares and Guffey (2000), and Atwood et al. (1998) investigate firms, choices of after-tax earnings as the contracting variable in CEO bonus plans. These studies hypothesize that fi

29、rms with greater tax-planning opportunities, consistent with the Antle and Demski (1988) controllability principle, are more likely to use after-tax performance measures. Using proxies for tax-planning opportunities, the

30、se studies collectively find that multinational status, number of operating segments, </p><p>　　Dhaliwal et al. (2000) also focuses on the relation between a firm's tax-planning opportunities and the dec

31、ision whether to use after-tax earnings in CEO bonus plans, but measures planning opportunities using only realized tax credits and absolute values of firms' permanent book-tax differences. They exclude temporary boo

32、k-tax differences such as those resulting from accelerated tax depreciation because these differences do not impact a firm's after-tax accounting earnings, the performance measu</p><p>　　Consistent with

33、prior literature, Dhaliwal et al. (2000) find that firms with greater tax credits and absolute values of permanent book-tax differences are more likely to compensate their CEOs on an after-tax basis. Because permanent di

34、fferences can either increase or decrease taxable income relative to book income, they provide no direct evidence of an association between after-tax CEO compensation and lower ETR. The current study investigates this re

35、lation between after-tax CEO compensation an</p><p>　　HI: Using after-tax performance measures in CEO accounting-based bonus plans leads to lower ETR.</p><p>　　This paper also extends the pre- v

36、ersus after-tax compensation analysis to SBU-manager incentive compensation plans. The need for SBU-manager involvement in tax-planning efforts is consistent with the coordination task that arises when specialists requir

37、e input and cooperation from non specialists (Milgrom and Roberts 1992). The fmn's tax professionals not only need help from the firm's SBU managers in the identification of tax-planning opportunities, but also t

38、heir cooperation in developing and</p><p>　　In the context of lowering the ETR and increasing after-tax accounting income, how do SBU managers participate in efforts that increase tax credits and lead to per

39、manent differences that lower taxable income? Col gate- Pal mol i ve's CFO states that"Colgate man- agers routinely watch for ways to time remittances from overseas [which leads to higher foreign tax credits], m

40、aximize research and development tax credits...." (Mintz 1999, 2.) SBU managers can also help tax professionals formulate tran</p><p>　　The above discussion suggests that SBU-manager involvement is help

41、ful in lowering the ETR. It is possible that the pre- versus after-tax nature of the CEO's accounting-based bonus plan signals tax planning's importance and thus provides implicit incentives sufficient to motivat

42、e SBU managers to assist in efforts that lower the firm's ETR. If this were so, then explicit incentive pay would not be necessary to motivate such efforts. Wilson (1995, 12), however, cites an interview with a corpo

43、rate e</p><p>　　We instituted after-tax divisional measures that we have continued to refine. This puts the business units in the position that they think about taxes as they make decisions.</p><p

44、>　　Similarly, Mintz (1999, 2) cites the Colgate-Palmolive CFO's argument for after-tax performance measures:</p><p>　　Were pre-tax income to govern incentives, then employees with bonuses on their min

45、ds would pay far less attention to favorable tax implications....But because incentive compensation reflects after-tax earnings...managers are rewarded when taxes are lowered.</p><p>　　The above arguments ar

46、e consistent with evidence that mid-level managers respond to explicit bonus-based incentives (e.g., Kahn and Sherer 1990; Guidry et al.</p><p>　　. Compensating a firms SBU managers on an after-tax basis is

47、thus expected to promote efforts that lead to a lower ETR. The second hypothesis, stated in alternative form, is as follows:</p><p>　　H2: Using after-tax SBU-manager accounting-based performance measures<

48、/p><p>　　leads to lower ETR.</p><p>　　EMPIRICAL MODELS To test the hypotheses stated in the previous section, the following equations are estimated cross sectionally:</p><p>　　Variable

49、 Definitions Endogenous Variables</p><p>　　The effective tax rate (ETR) is defined as the ratio of total tax expense (TTE) to pre- tax income. An average annual ETR for the three-year period 1995-1997 is use

50、d to control for unexplained year-to-year fluctuations in the annual ETR. TTE is used in the numerator because only efforts that lower TTE decrease the ETR and increase after-tax earnings. Accordingly, the ETR as current

51、ly measured represents the appropriate theoretical construct for evaluating the effectiveness of using after-tax acc</p><p>　　There are at least two potential issues, however, regarding measurement of the ET

52、R using TTE in the numerator. First, TTE excludes the effects of temporary book-tax differences, so tax-planning actions that result in a tax deferral are not reflected in the ETR. For example，a more favorable purchase p

53、rice allocation in an asset acquisition, which leads to greater book-tax depreciation differences, is not reflected in the ETR. Similarly, investments in special purpose entities could lead to tempor</p><p>

54、　　The second measurement issue regarding the ETR is that TTE excludes the tax benefit of deductions resulting from the exercise of nonqualified employee stock options (ESO). Firms that have little or no tax liability bec

55、ause of their ESO deductions could have high ETR, which can be problematic in studies that attempt to use the ETR to measure a firm's tax burden or to evaluate a firm's incentive to engage in tax-planning actions

56、 (e.g., Hanlon and Shevlin 2002). Arguably, these firms have little in</p><p>　　CEO TAX is an indicator variable equal to I if the CEO receives an annual bonus based, at least in pari, on an accounting measu

57、re determined on an after-tax basis, and 0 otherwise. BUATAX equals 1 if the firm uses a unit-based accounting measure in the compensation plans of a majority of its BU managers and this measure reflects the allocation o

58、f at least one unit-specific income tax item.8 If a firm does not use a business-unit-based accounting measure, then BUATAX equals 1 if the firm uses an </p><p>　　The ETR model also includes two selectivity

59、correction variables, A CEO and SBU, which represent the double-selection analogs to the Heckman (1976) single-equation inverse Mills' ratio. These variables, which are calculated based on the results of the bivariat

60、e probit estimation of the CEOATAX and BUATAX models, are included in the ETR model to achieve consistent coefficient estimates using OLS (Tunali 1986). These variables are described in more detail below in the "Est

61、imation" subsection.</p><p>　　Exogenous Variables Common to the ETR and Compensation Equations</p><p>　　All three equations contain variables that proxy for a firm's tax-pi aiming oppor

62、tunities. The rationale for including these variables in the ETR equation is that a firm's ETR differs from the statutory rate only to the extent it has opportunities to take actions that either increase or decrease

63、taxable income or tax credits (Mills et al. 1998). Consistent with prior research (e.g., Newman 1989; Atwood et al. 1998; Dhaliwal et al. and the Antle and Demski (1988) controllability principle, the ta</p><p

64、>　　From: Corporate Tax-Planning Effectiveness: The Role of Compensation-Based</p><p>　　Incentives： The Accounting Review, Vol. 78，No. 3 (Jul., 2003)</p><p><b>　　外文翻譯譯文</b></p&g

65、t;<p>　　企業(yè)稅收籌劃的有效性：基于對(duì)報(bào)酬的激勵(lì)作用</p><p>　　約翰D ·菲利普斯 康涅狄格大學(xué)</p><p><b>　　摘 要</b></p><p>　　本研究探討首席執(zhí)行官是否修正主管和業(yè)務(wù)部門經(jīng)理利用稅后會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效措施，導(dǎo)致較低的實(shí)際稅率，以報(bào)酬激勵(lì)用于稅收籌劃的有效性。企業(yè)的主管由

66、于被激勵(lì)獲得的專有報(bào)酬的數(shù)據(jù)，運(yùn)用建模和估計(jì)這兩個(gè)步驟來(lái)研究有效稅率和稅后性能指標(biāo)之間的關(guān)系來(lái)更正企業(yè)的管理人員的決定，以修正相關(guān)的內(nèi)生性偏置前與后的計(jì)稅基礎(chǔ)。結(jié)果與假設(shè)一致修正了業(yè)務(wù)部門經(jīng)理，但是沒(méi)有修正主管，關(guān)于稅后導(dǎo)致較低的實(shí)際稅率。 </p><p>　　關(guān)鍵詞 稅收計(jì)劃； 性能指標(biāo)； 內(nèi)源性的處理效果</p><p><b>　　引言 </b></

67、p><p>　　有效的稅收籌劃，根據(jù)斯科爾斯等人的定義（2002），稅收籌劃，即最大限度地提高公司的預(yù)期稅后凈現(xiàn)金流量，要求管理者要考慮他們的決定所造成的稅后結(jié)果。在本文中，研究是否以稅后會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效措施，將導(dǎo)致較低的實(shí)際出口退稅稅率。實(shí)際的經(jīng)驗(yàn)替代了出口退稅的稅務(wù)規(guī)劃效力，一個(gè)基礎(chǔ)的收入結(jié)果被合適的計(jì)量，所得稅費(fèi)用總額作為稅前收入的一定比例，通常測(cè)量減稅策略將導(dǎo)致更高的稅后收入的有效性。較低的出口退稅，然而，僅

68、能夠代理節(jié)稅以及通常并不意味稅后收入或者是現(xiàn)金流已經(jīng)達(dá)到最大值。盡管有這一局限性，出口退稅還是被用來(lái)衡量稅收功能性支出的有效性（米爾斯，1998）和企業(yè)各部門稅務(wù)績(jī)效（道格拉斯，1996）。另外，降低出口退稅是經(jīng)常被作為一種增加收入（齊格勒，1997）和使股價(jià)上升的手段(e.g. Mintz 1999； Swenson 1999)。 </p><p>　　會(huì)計(jì)研究處理了以會(huì)計(jì)績(jī)效為基礎(chǔ)的薪酬和經(jīng)理的行為之間的關(guān)系

69、(e.g.， Larcker 1983； Healy 1985； Wallace 1997)，本文是第一個(gè)從事這方面研究的文章：是否以稅后會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效管理措施鼓勵(lì)經(jīng)理人員采取行動(dòng)來(lái)降低他們公司的出口退稅，并且首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部經(jīng)理也要求做。在此之前的稅后業(yè)績(jī)計(jì)量研究只集中于首席執(zhí)行官們的報(bào)酬的決定因素為預(yù)先的稅后收益 (e.g.， Newman 1989； Carnes and Guffey 2000； Atwood et al.

70、1998； Dhaliwal et al. </p><p>　　2000)，沒(méi)有提供任何證據(jù)說(shuō)明降低一個(gè)公司的稅務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)與稅后報(bào)酬的關(guān)系。這項(xiàng)調(diào)查擴(kuò)展到了事業(yè)部層次，這些部門的報(bào)酬激勵(lì)動(dòng)機(jī)與減少稅收的目的目的之間存在明顯的沖突(e.g.， McLemore 1997)以及觀察的經(jīng)驗(yàn)是，大多數(shù)企業(yè)沒(méi)有這樣做(e.g.， Douglas et al. 1996)。目前的研究提供的證據(jù)關(guān)于明確激勵(lì)首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部管理

71、人員納入其經(jīng)營(yíng)和投資決策的稅務(wù)結(jié)果的增量效益。 </p><p>　　以某個(gè)側(cè)面來(lái)研究出口退稅與管理層薪酬的共同課題，衡量的結(jié)果是所有樣本公司可優(yōu)化關(guān)于被調(diào)查的選擇(Ittner and Larcker 2001)。如果不解決公司選擇的內(nèi)生性，很難提供一致的證據(jù)關(guān)于這選擇導(dǎo)致改善的結(jié)果。為了解決這個(gè)問(wèn)題，首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部經(jīng)理關(guān)于稅后績(jī)效與出口退稅的聯(lián)系依舊采用兩步方式估計(jì)，可以幫助對(duì)潛在的內(nèi)生性與相關(guān)偏見(jiàn)這兩個(gè)

72、變量做出正確的選擇。作為實(shí)施這一方法的第一步，the Antle and Demski (1988) 可控性原則是用來(lái)模擬一個(gè)公司的決定，通過(guò)對(duì)首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部經(jīng)理稅后績(jī)效指標(biāo)的衡量。要包括一個(gè)特別措施在經(jīng)理人的薪酬合同中，這一原則要求持有一個(gè)衡量預(yù)期收益和負(fù)責(zé)任的經(jīng)理更加努力工作來(lái)規(guī)避所支付的附加工資之間的額外風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。因此，稅后績(jī)效指標(biāo)應(yīng)作為一個(gè)激勵(lì)經(jīng)理人的獲取額外報(bào)酬的方法，只有當(dāng)經(jīng)理的稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作的參與導(dǎo)致了稅前和稅后核算結(jié)果之間

73、的差異，這通常反映在出口退稅上面。與以前的研究相一致，包括與首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部經(jīng)理選擇稅后模型的變量，對(duì)于一個(gè)企業(yè)的稅務(wù)籌劃的機(jī)會(huì)控制，因?yàn)檫@種機(jī)會(huì)的存在會(huì)在某種程度上反映了經(jīng)理人的行動(dòng)，可以預(yù)期，將會(huì)降低出口退稅</p><p>　　即使通過(guò)經(jīng)理人的努力，預(yù)計(jì)將導(dǎo)致較低的出口退稅，公司將使用稅后績(jī)效指標(biāo)只有當(dāng)預(yù)期收益超過(guò)預(yù)期成本才這樣做，稅后業(yè)績(jī)措施預(yù)計(jì)會(huì)導(dǎo)致較低的出口退稅，因?yàn)樗偈构芾砣藛T和稅務(wù)專業(yè)人員加強(qiáng)

74、合作以達(dá)成一致的，發(fā)展的，執(zhí)行稅收籌劃策略，McLemore (1997， 1)引用惠普公司的稅務(wù)主任支持稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作需要事業(yè)部經(jīng)理參與的必要性： </p><p>　　稅收籌劃這種事情也只有在被作為業(yè)務(wù)規(guī)劃的早期階段，戰(zhàn)略上的規(guī)劃，兼并和收購(gòu)工作??你的稅務(wù)部門要在會(huì)議上，代表這些部門做出決定。對(duì)未來(lái)的發(fā)展模式是稅務(wù)策劃人與業(yè)務(wù)部門緊密合作完成的。 </p><p>　　與使用稅后業(yè)績(jī)的

75、措施有關(guān)的費(fèi)用包括附加工資必須支付給經(jīng)理以彌補(bǔ)由于潛在的稅法變化增加的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，使經(jīng)理加倍的努力，包括，從合同中補(bǔ)償個(gè)人所得稅方面費(fèi)用的增加的結(jié)果。與稅后報(bào)酬有關(guān)的其他潛在費(fèi)用包括向一個(gè)公司的事業(yè)部分配行政費(fèi)用開(kāi)支，稅務(wù)檢查成本增加，并增加稅務(wù)機(jī)關(guān)審查頻率。相反，通過(guò)觀察出口退稅的好處來(lái)衡量稅后報(bào)酬，有沒(méi)有稅后業(yè)績(jī)計(jì)量的成本效益明顯的有經(jīng)驗(yàn)代理人。因此，本研究著重于在管理者的基礎(chǔ)上實(shí)現(xiàn)的稅后補(bǔ)償效益，但不提供相關(guān)的成本，規(guī)模的證據(jù)。 <

76、;/p><p>　　在企業(yè)主管的調(diào)查中所獲得的專有數(shù)據(jù)用于構(gòu)造并測(cè)試某些變量，說(shuō)明是否包括那些首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部的經(jīng)理們使用稅后會(huì)計(jì)基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效指標(biāo)。公開(kāi)數(shù)據(jù)用于構(gòu)造出口退稅和其他變量來(lái)測(cè)試，結(jié)果與假設(shè)一致，即事業(yè)部經(jīng)理的報(bào)酬，但不包括公司首席執(zhí)行官的，與稅后導(dǎo)致較低的出口退稅有關(guān)，估計(jì)使每年平均節(jié)省1330萬(wàn)美元的稅款。模擬公司進(jìn)行敏感性測(cè)試的子樣本中，邊際稅率(Graham 1996)提供進(jìn)一步的證據(jù)表明，低邊際稅

77、率的公司將會(huì)有降低潛在出口退稅的行動(dòng)，可能對(duì)現(xiàn)金流量和稅后利潤(rùn)不吻合這一結(jié)果產(chǎn)生模棱兩可的影響。敏感性測(cè)試有助于進(jìn)一步排除了稅收職能外包的比例，作為另一種解釋，統(tǒng)計(jì)上和經(jīng)濟(jì)上顯示事業(yè)部經(jīng)理的稅后報(bào)酬和出口退稅呈負(fù)相關(guān)。 </p><p>　　研究結(jié)果有助于薪酬以會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的著作，通過(guò)實(shí)施事業(yè)部經(jīng)理參與的以稅后會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效措施，是逐步降低企業(yè)出口退稅的有效措施。符合Guidry et al. (1999)表明了

78、獎(jiǎng)金導(dǎo)致事業(yè)部盈余管理水平的不同，這一發(fā)現(xiàn)提供了更多的有洞察力的影響，事業(yè)部經(jīng)理以會(huì)計(jì)績(jī)效為基礎(chǔ)對(duì)管理人員的行為進(jìn)行激勵(lì)。另外，明確的表明企業(yè)的決策者設(shè)計(jì)降低所得稅費(fèi)用的公司稅后業(yè)績(jī)會(huì)使管理層人員獲得更多薪酬的措施來(lái)激勵(lì)事業(yè)部經(jīng)理。 </p><p>　　該文章的過(guò)程如下：下一節(jié)闡述了在這項(xiàng)研究中測(cè)試的假設(shè)。第三節(jié)概述了經(jīng)驗(yàn)?zāi)Ｐ秃凸烙?jì)程序在測(cè)試中使用的一些假說(shuō)。第四節(jié)提供了數(shù)據(jù)和樣本的討論，包括用于獲得所有的用于

79、調(diào)查的報(bào)酬數(shù)據(jù)的簡(jiǎn)要概述。結(jié)果列于第五章最后一節(jié)提供了一個(gè)結(jié)論，即關(guān)于該研究的局限性的討論。 </p><p><b>　　II. 假說(shuō)發(fā)展 </b></p><p>　　Newman (1989)， Cares and Guffey (2000)， and Atwood et al. (1998) 調(diào)查作為稅后盈利企業(yè)對(duì)首席執(zhí)行官獎(jiǎng)金計(jì)劃包含變量的選擇。這些研究假

80、設(shè)，企業(yè)有更大的稅收籌劃的機(jī)會(huì)，與Antle and Demski (1988)的可控性原則一致，更有可能使用稅后業(yè)績(jī)的措施。利用稅收籌劃的機(jī)會(huì)代理，這些研究都發(fā)現(xiàn)了跨國(guó)公司的地位，經(jīng)營(yíng)分部的數(shù)量，企業(yè)規(guī)模，首席執(zhí)行官的報(bào)酬和資本密集度呈正相關(guān)，Atwood et al. (1998) 還提出證據(jù)，充分利用這一負(fù)相關(guān)的選擇。 </p><p>　　Dhaliwaletal (2000)還關(guān)注了“企業(yè)的稅收籌劃?rùn)C(jī)會(huì)

81、和決定，是否與首席執(zhí)行官稅后收益的獎(jiǎng)金計(jì)劃的之間的關(guān)系”，但有關(guān)措施只實(shí)現(xiàn)了稅收籌劃的機(jī)會(huì)使稅收抵免和企業(yè)永遠(yuǎn)不變的繳稅財(cái)產(chǎn)清單和稅率的絕對(duì)值。但不包括那些臨時(shí)繳稅財(cái)產(chǎn)清單和稅率差異造成的加速折舊，因?yàn)檫@些差異并不影響一個(gè)公司的稅后會(huì)計(jì)盈余，用于測(cè)量稅后會(huì)計(jì)績(jī)效為基礎(chǔ)的獎(jiǎng)金計(jì)劃。同樣地，在目前的研究中使用的出口退稅是利用計(jì)算器計(jì)算所得稅費(fèi)用總額，從而排除了臨時(shí)繳稅財(cái)產(chǎn)清單和稅率差異的影響。 </p><p>　　

82、與以前的文獻(xiàn)相一致，Dhaliwal et al. (2000) 發(fā)現(xiàn)有更大的稅收抵免和繳稅財(cái)產(chǎn)清單和稅率差異絕對(duì)值使公司更容易給首席執(zhí)行官高的稅后報(bào)酬。由于永久性差異可以增加或減少應(yīng)稅收入的相對(duì)預(yù)期收入，他們沒(méi)有提供首席執(zhí)行官的稅后報(bào)酬和降低出口退稅之間的直接證據(jù)。目前研究首席執(zhí)行官的稅后報(bào)酬和出口退稅的關(guān)系。第一個(gè)假設(shè)，闡明的另一種形式是： </p><p>　　H1： 利用企業(yè)稅后業(yè)績(jī)?yōu)榛A(chǔ)來(lái)衡量首席執(zhí)行官

83、的獎(jiǎng)金計(jì)劃將導(dǎo)致出口退稅的降低。 本文還擴(kuò)展了稅前稅后報(bào)酬的分析，以作為激勵(lì)事業(yè)部經(jīng)理的薪酬計(jì)劃。對(duì)于事業(yè)部經(jīng)理參與協(xié)調(diào)稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作的任務(wù)時(shí)，專家要求從非專業(yè)人員投入和合作保持一貫性(Milgrom and Roberts 1992)。該公司的稅務(wù)專業(yè)人士不僅要幫助該公司的事業(yè)部經(jīng)理在稅務(wù)規(guī)劃?rùn)C(jī)會(huì)的選擇，而且在他們制定和執(zhí)行戰(zhàn)略，以利用這些機(jī)會(huì)合作。 </p><p>　　在調(diào)低出口退稅，增加稅后會(huì)計(jì)收益方面，怎

84、么使事業(yè)部經(jīng)理更加的努力，增加稅收抵免，并導(dǎo)致應(yīng)納稅所得額永久性差異的降低？高露潔公司首席財(cái)務(wù)官說(shuō)“高露潔人提供學(xué)習(xí)的機(jī)會(huì)經(jīng)常留意海外[從而導(dǎo)致更高的外國(guó)稅收抵免]時(shí)間匯款的方式，最大限度地提高研究和發(fā)展的稅收抵免” (Mintz 1999， 2.) 事業(yè)部經(jīng)理也可以幫助稅務(wù)專業(yè)人士制定轉(zhuǎn)移價(jià)格(Ernst & Young 1999)， 這有助于降低出口退稅，通過(guò)國(guó)家報(bào)告反映的事業(yè)部經(jīng)理參與減少（增加）收入的其他例子，有助于降低

85、出口退稅。包括：（1）在雇傭職工前看其工資是否具有抵免稅收的資格，（2）向該公司的稅務(wù)專業(yè)人士咨詢公司設(shè)立的地點(diǎn)，因?yàn)楣舅幍牟煌恢眠m用不同的稅率，（3）協(xié)助稅務(wù)專業(yè)人士收集申報(bào)納稅所需的數(shù)據(jù)文件。 </p><p>　　上述討論表明，事業(yè)部經(jīng)理的參與對(duì)降低出口退稅是有幫助的。在會(huì)議上傳達(dá)稅收籌劃效果對(duì)首席執(zhí)行官稅后獎(jiǎng)金的重要性，從而對(duì)他們產(chǎn)生足夠的激勵(lì)，以使事業(yè)部經(jīng)理通過(guò)加倍努力來(lái)降低企業(yè)的出口退稅。如果是

86、這樣的話，那么明確的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)工資就沒(méi)有必要去激勵(lì)他們付出更多的努力了。Wilson (1995， 12)，因此，舉一個(gè)有公司主管會(huì)談?dòng)涗洠灾С炙慕Y(jié)論，激勵(lì)事業(yè)部經(jīng)理稅后措施應(yīng)在稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作中有所涉及： </p><p>　　我們建立了并不斷完善部門的稅后激勵(lì)措施。這迫使經(jīng)營(yíng)單位站在對(duì)節(jié)稅有利的立場(chǎng)上考慮問(wèn)題。 </p><p>　　類似地，Mintz (1999， 2) 列舉了高露潔公司財(cái)

87、務(wù)總監(jiān)關(guān)于稅后業(yè)績(jī)計(jì)量的說(shuō)法： 是關(guān)于稅前收入的管理激勵(lì)，公司在考慮將支付給員工多少獎(jiǎng)金時(shí)得多注意稅收優(yōu)惠的影響.但是，由于激勵(lì)的報(bào)酬取決于稅后收益回報(bào)??當(dāng)公司稅收降低會(huì)使經(jīng)理得到更多的報(bào)酬。 </p><p>　　上述論點(diǎn)的證據(jù)表明，與中層管理人員額外獎(jiǎng)金的激勵(lì)機(jī)制相一致(e.g.， Kahn and Sherer 1990； Guidry et al. 1999)。一個(gè)公司的事業(yè)部經(jīng)理額外報(bào)酬基于稅后收益，

88、預(yù)計(jì)會(huì)使管理人員更加努力，導(dǎo)致較低的出口退稅。第二個(gè)假設(shè)，為另一種表現(xiàn)形式，如下： </p><p>　　H2：對(duì)事業(yè)部經(jīng)理使用會(huì)計(jì)為基礎(chǔ)的績(jī)效措施，將導(dǎo)致較低的出口退稅。 </p><p><b>　　III.經(jīng)營(yíng)模型 </b></p><p>　　為了測(cè)試在上一節(jié)所述的假設(shè)，下面的等式通過(guò)部分估計(jì)：變量定義 內(nèi)生函數(shù)實(shí)際的出口退稅率被定義為

89、稅收總收入的費(fèi)用率關(guān)于稅前收入。1995-1997年期間平均每年的出口退稅是用來(lái)控制不確定的年與年之間在每年的出口退稅上的波動(dòng)。因?yàn)橹挥信档统隹谕硕悾艜?huì)增加稅后收益。因此，出口退稅當(dāng)前被作為適當(dāng)?shù)睦碚撚脕?lái)評(píng)價(jià)稅后會(huì)計(jì)績(jī)效為基礎(chǔ)的獎(jiǎng)金計(jì)劃的效力。 </p><p>　　至少有兩個(gè)潛在的問(wèn)題，然而，出口退稅方面的測(cè)量，在計(jì)算中的使用。首先，計(jì)算時(shí)不包括臨時(shí)賬面稅率差異的影響，因此稅收籌劃的行動(dòng)，在稅收延期結(jié)果方

90、面，是沒(méi)有反映在出口退稅上。例如，一個(gè)更加有利的購(gòu)買資產(chǎn)的收購(gòu)，從而導(dǎo)致更大的賬面折舊攤銷的差異，是不會(huì)體現(xiàn)在出口退稅上的。同樣，有特殊目的實(shí)體的投資可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致的暫時(shí)性差異也未反映在出口退稅上(e.g.， Hanlon 2002)。設(shè)立一個(gè)外國(guó)子公司在低稅率的國(guó)家和推遲遣返外國(guó)收入的另一種方式是推遲納稅并不會(huì)影響出口退稅，除非該公司是以財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)告的立場(chǎng)，即外國(guó)收益永久或無(wú)限期地投資(Krull 2001)。對(duì)于一個(gè)企業(yè)的首席執(zhí)行官的薪酬是

91、以企業(yè)稅后績(jī)效為基礎(chǔ)的，涉及決定稅收延期的可能，這很可能是國(guó)外設(shè)立公司的情況并形成特殊目的實(shí)體，出口退稅將無(wú)法衡量首席執(zhí)行官為稅收籌劃付出的努力。 </p><p>　　第二次測(cè)量有關(guān)出口退稅問(wèn)題，計(jì)算時(shí)排除了由非限定員工股票期權(quán)產(chǎn)生的扣除稅收優(yōu)惠。企業(yè)很少或沒(méi)有應(yīng)納稅額，因?yàn)樗麄兊墓善逼跈?quán)中可以扣除更高的出口退稅，這可能是不確定的研究，嘗試使用出口退稅來(lái)衡量一個(gè)企業(yè)的稅務(wù)負(fù)擔(dān)或評(píng)價(jià)一個(gè)公司的激勵(lì)從事稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作

92、的行為(e.g.， Hanlon and Shevlin 2002)?？梢哉f(shuō)，這些企業(yè)缺乏動(dòng)力去從事代價(jià)高昂的稅務(wù)規(guī)劃行動(dòng)并不太可能使用稅后業(yè)績(jī)的措施。調(diào)整出口退稅反映了員工股票期權(quán)扣減的稅務(wù)優(yōu)惠會(huì)導(dǎo)致這些企業(yè)降低出口退稅，盡管稅前抵扣得適當(dāng)使用，并表明企業(yè)稅后業(yè)績(jī)和出口退稅之間沒(méi)有聯(lián)系的假設(shè)不成立。 </p><p>　　如果首席執(zhí)行官收到年度獎(jiǎng)金，則總裁稅的指標(biāo)變量等1，一位首席執(zhí)行官和事業(yè)部經(jīng)理，它代表的赫

93、克曼單方程逆米爾斯比雙選模擬(1976)。這些變量，是在用BUATAX模型，在計(jì)算的基礎(chǔ)上對(duì)總裁稅的估計(jì)結(jié)果，包括在出口退稅模型，實(shí)現(xiàn)統(tǒng)一使用OLS估計(jì)系數(shù)(Tunali 1986)。這些變量詳細(xì)描述在下面“估計(jì)”小節(jié)。 </p><p>　　出口退稅和補(bǔ)償方程的共同外生變量 </p><p>　　所有這三個(gè)方程包含變量，是一個(gè)企業(yè)的稅務(wù)籌劃的機(jī)會(huì) 。包括在這些變量方程的理由是，各個(gè)公司的

94、法定的出口退稅率不同，因此有機(jī)會(huì)采取行動(dòng)，增加出口退稅，從而減少應(yīng)稅收入或增加稅收抵免(Mills et al. 1998)。與以前的研究相一致(e.g.， Newman 1989； Atwood et al. 1998； Dhaliwal et al. 2000)和Antle and Demski (1988)可控性的原則，稅務(wù)規(guī)劃?rùn)C(jī)會(huì)變量也包括在CEOATAX and BUATAX方程。由于所在地稅務(wù)的影響，跨國(guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)的企業(yè)預(yù)計(jì)將有較

95、大的稅務(wù)規(guī)劃?rùn)C(jī)會(huì)，更多的遣返和轉(zhuǎn)移定價(jià)決策，為跨國(guó)經(jīng)營(yíng)的代理，作為外國(guó)資產(chǎn)的比例，截至2006年年底，以1997.9 CAPINT作為財(cái)產(chǎn)的比例計(jì)算總資產(chǎn)的賬面價(jià)值，廠房和設(shè)備的總資產(chǎn)，截至2006年年底以1997年（BVA）賬面價(jià)值，并列入有關(guān)控制固定資產(chǎn)投資的機(jī)會(huì)。規(guī)模較大的公司，通過(guò)其業(yè)務(wù)范圍和規(guī)模，預(yù)計(jì)將有更多的機(jī)會(huì)進(jìn)行稅務(wù)規(guī)劃工作。截至2006年的比例，以1997年年底的自然對(duì)數(shù)作為BVA。以更大的杠桿公司也預(yù)計(jì)將有更多的機(jī)會(huì)