|
||||
|
||||
Watch What I Do, Not What I Say: The Unintended Consequences of the Homeland Investment ActDhammika DharmapalaUniversity of Illinois College of Law C. Fritz FoleyHarvard Business School; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Kristin J. ForbesMassachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - Sloan School of Management; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) April 27, 2010 Journal of Finance, forthcoming CELS 2009 4th Annual Conference on Empirical Legal Studies Paper MIT Sloan Research Paper No. 4741-09 Abstract: The Homeland Investment Act provided a tax holiday for the repatriation of foreign earnings. Advocates argued the Act would alleviate financial constraints by reducing the cost to U.S. multinationals of accessing internal capital. This paper shows that repatriations did not increase domestic investment, employment or R&D—even for firms that appeared to be financially constrained or lobbied for the holiday. Instead, a $1 increase in repatriations was associated with a $0.60-$0.92 increase in shareholder payouts. Regulations intended to restrict such payouts were undermined by the fungibility of money. Results indicate that U.S. multinationals were not financially constrained and were well-governed.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 56 Keywords: Repatriations, financial constraints, governance, international taxation, flypaper effect JEL Classification: G3, F23, G14, G18, H26 working papers seriesDate posted: February 4, 2009 ; Last revised: June 4, 2010Suggested CitationContact Information
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
FAQ
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.484 seconds