Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
Korean Academic Society of Business Administration
[ Article ]
korean management review - Vol. 46, No. 1, pp.75-107
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 28 Feb 2017
Received 30 Mar 2016 Revised 05 Sep 2016 Accepted 24 Oct 2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2017.46.1.75

장기적인 조세최소화전략이 회계이익의 가치관련성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구

이영한* ; 최유진**
*(주저자) 서울시립대 세무학과 교수. 공인회계사 leeyh7@uos.ac.kr
**(교신저자) 서울시립대 세무전문대학원 박사과정. 세무사 eugene2@uos.ac.kr
An Empirical Study of the Effect of Long-term Tax Minimization Strategy on Value Relevance of Book Income
Young-Han Lee* ; Eugene Choi**
*Professor, The University of Seoul. Department of Science in Taxation, First Author
**Doctoral Student, The Graduate School of Science in Taxation, The University of Seoul, Corresponding Author

초록

본 연구는 기업의 조세최소화전략에 따른 유효세율의 부담 수준에 따라 회계이익의 가치관련성이 차별적으로 나타나는지를 검증하고, 조세최소화전략을 나타내는 평균유효세율의 측정기간에 따라 회계이익의 가치관련성이 차별적으로 나타나는지를 검증한다. 세전 이익수준이 동일하다고 가정할 경우 장기적, 지속적으로 세후이익을 낮게 유지할 수 있는 기업, 즉 조세부담을 낮게 유지할 수 있을 것으로 기대되는 기업의 경우 회계이익의 가치관련성이 높을 것으로 예상하여 이를 검증하였다. 검증결과 단기현금유효세율과 회계이익의 가치관련성은 유의한 관련성이 없었으나 장기현금유효세율이 낮은 기업의 경우 회계이익의 가치관련성이 유의하게 높게 나타났고 유효세율 측정기간이 장기로 확장되어도 여전히 낮은 유효세율을 보이는 기업들이 회계이익의 가치관련성이 더 높게 나타났다. 이는 회계이익이 기업가치에 반영되는 과정에서 조세부담수준이 가치평가에 반영된다는 것을 시사하며, 회계이익이 기업가치에 반영되는 과정에서 단기보다는 장기적인 조세부담수준의 최소화가 가치평가에 더 잘 반영된다는 사실을 나타내는 결과라고 생각된다.

또한, 장기 조세부담 수준이 낮은 기업을 다시 재량적 발생액의 절대값으로 측정되는 이익조정 수준에 따라 구분하여 회계이익의 가치관련성을 비교하여 보았다. 부채구조, 상각자산 보유, 세액공제 등 정책적 조세혜택을 받을 수 있는 여건, 손금부인 비용의 지출수준 등 구조적 요인으로 장기적 조세부담 수준이 낮은 경우와 달리, 낮은 조세부담 수준이 회계이익조정과 연관되어 있다면 이는 세무조사가능성 또는 경영자의 기회주의적 행동과 사적편익 추구의 가능성을 높이기 때문에 낮은 유효세율이 기업가치에 반영되는 정도가 낮으며, 이익의 가치관련성이 낮을 것이라고 예상하였다. 분석결과 조세부담 수준이 낮은 기업이라 할지라도 재량적 발생액이 높으면 회계이익의 가치관련성이 낮은 것으로 나타났다. 시장참여자들은 낮은 조세부담수준이 이익조정과 연관된 경우와 그렇지 않은 경우를 구분하여 회계이익에 대한 가치평가 반영을 차별적으로 수행함을 시사하는 결과로 해석된다.

Abstract

How does company's tax minimization strategy affect on firm value? If the company reduces actively tax expenditures through tax minimization strategies, it will improve cash flow and surplus cash flow will have a positive effect on corporate valuation. The surplus cash flow due to tax minimization strategies, on the other hand, may not be connected to the corporate value due to the opacity of accounting information. Because of these contradictory effects, the level of tax burden may affect differently when Valuation. The purpose of this study is to investigate the value relevance between accounting earnings and information for the tax burden in these conflicting possibilities.

For this study, we used Ohlson(1995)’s model to test these hypothesis, which is the most commonly used in the valuation. Although previous studies have described the value of the company using Tobin's Q, we are focused to test the direct link between price and accounting earnings. Ohlson’s model is the most intuitive model to validate the accounting profit. Tax burden levels were measured using a long-term effective rate by Desai et al(2008). This is because long-term effective tax rate can be inferred that the public continues to persist even after the future. In addition, the tax burden level is divided according to the level of earnings management, as measured by the absolute value of discretionary accruals. We used Kothari et al(2005)’s method.

Test results were as follows. For the firms of lower long-term effective tax rate, value relevance of accounting earnings came out significantly higher. This show that the tax burden level affects in corporate valuation process through accounting earnings. And for the firms of higher earnings management, despite lower long-term effective tax rate, value relevance of accounting earnings appeared significantly lower. These results can be interpreted that investors discriminate firms in evaluation by clarifying whether tax buden is relevant to earnings management or not. We can infer that market participants reflect differently about opacity information. For the robustness of study, we tested the tax burden measured by the estimated effective tax rate. But we didn’t get a significant result as long-term effective tax rate.

Our study contributes to two streams of research. Fist, we offered empirical evidence between accounting earnings and firm value depending on tax burden. Second, we also gave new evidence between accounting earnings and firm value through opacity information. As finding link about accounting earnings and firm value through taxes information, we now have a chance to think about usefulness of taxes information. Despite these contributions, we didn’t describe specific causality about low tax burden. For example, whether highly likely to manage a structure designed to relieve tax burdens including leverage structure, retention of depreciable assets, tax credits, tax reductions, and cost structure of disclamation, or not. Research on these causal relationships will be covered in a follow-up study.

Keywords:

long-run effective tax rate, value relevance, tax minimization strategy

키워드:

장기현금유효세율, 가치관련성, 조세최소화전략

References

  • 강정연·고종권(2014), “기업지배구조가 조세회피와 기업가치의 관계에 미치는 영향,” 회계학연구, 39(1), 147-183.
  • 기은선(2012), “기업의 사회적 책임활동이 조세회피 및 조세회피에 대한 시장반응에 미치는 영향,” 세무학연구, 29(2), 107-136.
  • 김경호·박종일(2003), “법인세율 인하에 따른 기업의 이익조정행태,” 회계학연구, 28(3), 85-120.
  • 고윤성·김지홍·최원욱(2007), “조세회피와 기업특성 및 기업가치에 관한 연구,” 세무학연구, 24(4), 9-40.
  • 고종권(1997), “조세부담측정치에 대한 연구,” 회계학연구, 22(3), 51-84.
  • 박성욱·나형종·정희선(2015), “기업의 성장률과 지배주주 지분율 변화에 따른 조세회피 수준 분석,” 세무학연구, 32(4), 315-340.
  • 손기근·윤성만·최원석(2010), “법인세율인하와 재무보고비용이 이익조정에 미치는 영향,” 세무와회계저널, 11(3), 261-286.
  • 손언승·양동훈·이상철·김갑순(2012), “기업지배구조가 조세절감활동과 기업가치의 관련성에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구,” 세무와회계저널, 13(3), 385-419.
  • 이창우·전규안(1997), “조세부담측정치로서의 유효법인세율의 비판적 검토,” 경영학연구, 26(4), 851-874.
  • 전주성(2011), “조세회피와 기업가치: 지배구조의 역할을 중심으로,” 재정학연구, 4(4), 59-85.
  • Amir, E., T. Harris, and E. Venuti(1993), “A Comparison of Value-Relevance of U.S. versus Non-U.S. GAAP Accounting Measures Using Form 20-F Reconciliations,” Journal of Accounting Researc, 31, 230-264. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2491172]
  • Barth, M., W. Beaver, and W. Landsman(2001), “The Relevance of the Value Relevance Literature for Financial Accounting Standard Setting: Another View,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, 77-104. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(01)00019-2]
  • Chen, K. P., and C. C. Y. Chu(2005), “International Control and External Evasion : A Model of Business Tax Compliance,” Rand Journal of Economics, 36(1), 151-164.
  • Chen, S., X. Chen, Q. Cheng, and T. Shevlin(2010), “Are Family Firms More Tax Aggressive than Non-Family Firm?” Journal of Financial Economics, 95, 41-61. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2009.02.003]
  • Collins, D., E. Maydew, and I. Weiss(1997), “Changes in the Value-Relevance of Earnings and Book Values over the Past Forty Years,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 24, 39-67. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(97)00015-3]
  • Core, J., W. Guay, and A. Buskirk(2003), “Market Valuations in the New Economy : An Investigation of what has Changed,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 34, 43-67. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-4101(02)00087-3]
  • Croker, K., and J. Slemrod(2005), “Corporate Tax Evasion with Agency Costs,” Journal of Public Economics, 89(9-10), 1593-1610. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.08.003]
  • Dechow, P. M., R. Sloan, and A. Sweeny(1995), “Detecting Earnings Management,” The Accounting Review ,70(April), 193-225.
  • Desai, M., and D. Dharmapala(2006), “Corporate Tax Avoidance and High Powered Incentives,” Journal of Financial Economics, 79, 145-179. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.02.002]
  • Desai, M., and D. Dharmapala(2009), “Corporate Tax Avoidance and Firm Value,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(3), 537-546. [https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.91.3.537]
  • Dyreng, S., M. Hanlon, and E. Maydew(2008), “Long-run Corporate Tax Avoidance,” The Accounting Review, 83, 61-82. [https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2008.83.1.61]
  • Feltham, G., and J. Ohlson(1995), “Valuation and Clean Surplus Accounting for Operating and Financial Activities,” Contemporary Accounting Research 11, 689-731. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1995.tb00462.x]
  • Francis, J., and K. Shipper(1999), “Have Financial Statements Lost their Relevance?” Journal of Accounting Research, 37, 319-352. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2491412]
  • Frank, M., Lynch, L., Rego, S.(2009), “Tax Reporting Aggressiveness and Its Relation to Aggressive Financial Reporting,” The Accounting Review, 84, 467-496. [https://doi.org/10.2308/accr.2009.84.2.467]
  • Inger, Kerry Katharine(2013), “Relative Valuation of Alternative Methods of Tax Avoidance,” SSRN Working Paper. [https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2216845]
  • Jacob, M., and H. Schṻtt(2013), “Firm Valuation and the Uncertainty of Future Tax Avoidance.” Working Paper. [https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2347330]
  • Jones, J.(1991), “Earnings Management During Import Relief Investigation,” Journal of Accounting Research, 29(Autumn), 193-228. [https://doi.org/10.2307/2491047]
  • Hanlon, M., and J. Slemrod.(2009), “What does Tax Aggressiveness Signal? Evidence from Stock Price Reactions to News about Tax Shelter Involvement,” Journal of Public Economics, 93, 126-141. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2008.09.004]
  • Hanlon, M., and S. Heitzman.(2010), “A Review of Tax Research,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50, 127-178. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2010.09.002]
  • Kim, J., Y. Li, L. Zhang(2011). “Corporate Tax Avoidance and Stock Price Crash Risk : Frim-level analysis,” Journal of Financial Economics, 100, 639-662. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.07.007]
  • Kothari. S.P., A.J.Leon, and C.E.Wasley(2005), “Performance Matched Discretionary Accrual Measures,” Journal of Accounting and Economics, 39, 163-197. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2004.11.002]
  • Ohlson, J.(1995), “Earnings, Book Values and Dividends in Security Valuation,” Contemporary Accounting Research, 11, 661–687. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1911-3846.1995.tb00461.x]
  • Park, Sung Ook, and Jeong Un Choi.(2014), “Outside Director and Tax Avoidance: Focus on KOSDAQ Companies,” The Journal of Small Business Innovation, 17(1), 43-54.
  • Slemrod J.(2004), “The Economics of Corporate Tax Selfishness,” National Tax Journal, 57(4), 877-899. [https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2004.4.06]
  • Watts, R., and J. Zimmerman(1990), “Positive Accounting Theory : A Ten Year Perspective,” The Accounting Review, 65, 131-156.

• 저자 이영한은 현재 서울시립대학교 정경대학 세무학과 회계학 전공 교수로 재직 중이다. 연세대학교 경영학과를 졸업하고 연세대학교 대학원 경영학과에서 경영학 석사 및 경영학 박사를 취득하였다. 한국공인회계사이며, KPMG 산동회계법인에서 공인회계사로, 한국기업평가㈜에서 책임연구원으로 근무하였다. 주요연구분야는 세무회계, 회계감사, 금융조세 등이다.

• 저자 최유진은 현재 서울시립대학교 세무전문대학원 박사과정에 재학중이며, 고려대학교를 졸업하고, 고려대학교에서 경영학 석사를 취득하였으며 세무사이다. 주요 연구분야는 세무회계, 재무회계 및 조세법이다.