-
75 Commerce & Management Quarterly, Vol.18, No.1, pp.75~100(2017)
FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE, CORPORATE TAX AND
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY DISCLOSURE
*
Chi-Ping Hou Professor, Department of Accounting,
China University of Technology
Yu-Chin Tsai Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting,
China University of Technology
Bor-Hwang Ni Assistant Professor, Department of Public Finance,
China University of Technology
Tzu-Wen Lee Lecturer, Department of Accounting,
China University of Technology
* 56 (02)2931-3416 2287
E-mail: [email protected]
-
76
2009 2013
ABSTRACT
The increasing popularity of corporate social responsibility (CSR) during the past few years has made it a trend that companies start to voluntarily publish their CSR reports. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationship among financial performance, corporate tax and corporate social responsibility disclosure. Our samples include the firms listed on Taiwan Stock Market from 2009 to 2013. The results show that financial performance is significantly positively related to CSR report disclosure, and corporate income tax payment is significantly negatively related to CSR report disclosure. The results imply that companies with good performance tend to disclose their CSR reports, and they have more resource to be engaged in tax planning, hence these companies pay less income tax than other companies. Recent Taiwan authorities promote to disclose CSR information. Our findings suggest enhance firms information transparency through CSR reports with firms tax planning information.
Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Tax, Financial Performance
-
77
Corporate Social ResponsibilityCSR CSR CSR CSR
CSR 2004 CSR CSR CSR CSR
2014 9 18
2015 CSR 11 CSR CSR 11 26 CSR
90 CSR 1997 2001
WBCSD CSR 2000 CSR
-
78
McKendalll, Sanchez, & Sicilian, 1999Molloy, Erekson, & Gorman, 2002 CSR
CSR Cochran & Wood, 1984Stanwick & Stanwick, 1998 CSR
1953 Howard R. Bowen Social Responsibilities of the BusinessWorld Business Council for sustainable DevelopmentWBCSDCSR
2009 CSR 1.80 2.NGO3.4.
(2009) CSR Cornell and Shapiro1987
CSR Turban &
-
79
Greening, 1996Alexander & Buchholz, 1978Poter & Linde, 1995Fombrun, Gardberg, & Barnett, 2000
2013
CSR CSR
CSR CSR
Cormier and Gordon2001Al-Tuwaijri, Christensen, and Hughes2004Richardson and Welker2001
2013 2014 CSR Global Reporting InitiativesGRI CSR 2015 CSR
CSR
Porter & Kramer, 2007Gao, 2011 CSR 1999 13 2000
2002 CSR 2004 1 CSR 2006 9 2007 CSR CSR 20012012
-
80
CSR
CSR CSR
Szilagyi1984
Venkatraman and Ramanujam1986
CSR CSR 2000CSR Smith, 2007 CSR Cochran and Wood1984 1970 1979 40 CSR
CSR Ullmann198513 8 4l l Preston and OBannon1997
Waddock and Graves1997 CSR CSR CSR CSR
-
81
McWilliams & Siegel, 2000McKendalll, Sanchez, & Sicilian, 1999Molloy, Erekson, & Gorman, 2002 CSR Corporate social performanceCSPGriffin and Mahon1997 1972 1997 CSP 51 33 9 19 CSR CSR McWilliams and Siegel2000 1991 1996 524 CSR Cardebat and Sirven 2010 2000 2008 154
20082009CSP CSP 2011CSR CSR 2013CSR
CSR
CSR CSR CSR McGuire1988Toutsoura2004Fombrun and Shanley1990CSR
Slack Resources Theory CSR CSR McWilliams & Siegel, 2000McKendalll et al., 1999Molloy et al., 2002
-
82
CSR CSR 2010
CSR
2015
Google 2006 200 Erle, 2006
OECD FTSE 100 CSR
2015
2004 1
2009 CSR CSR
CSR Watson2012 CSR CSR
-
83
Lanis and Richardson2012 Watson
CSR Huseynov and Klamm2012 CSR CSR
CSR 20132014 CSR
2014 CSR CSR
CSR CSR CSR CSR
2001 14 2001 CSR 2005 1 2001 2013 CSR 2008 CSR 2%2009 40
2009 25%2010 17% 2009 2013 2TEJ
7,160 2
-
84
1 2001 2013 CSR
2 2009 2013
20% 3 55.196%
(%) CSR CSR (%)
2001 1,215 6.853 14 1.152
2002 1,253 7.066 14 1.117
2003 1,283 7.240 14 1.091
2004 1,308 7.378 14 1.070
2005 1,339 7.553 17 1.270
2006 1,370 7.727 19 1.387
2007 1,392 7.852 25 1.796
2008 1,409 7.947 35 2.484
2009 1,421 8.015 40 2.815
2010 1,433 8.083 59 4.117
2011 1,435 8.094 81 5.645
2012 1,435 8.094 111 7.735
2013 1,436 8.100 161 11.212
17,729 6.853 604 3.407
(%) CSR CSR (%)
2009 1,421 19.85 40 2.815
2010 1,433 20.01 59 4.117
2011 1,435 20.04 81 5.645
2012 1,435 20.04 111 7.735
2013 1,436 20.06 161 11.212
7,160 100.00 452 6.312
-
85
3 (%)
34 0.475 124 1.732 135 1.885 280 3.911 372 5.196 80 1.117
592 8.268 25 0.349 35 0.489 210 2.933 55 0.768 25 0.349
3,952 55.196 349 4.874
125 1.746 115 1.606
124 1.732 99 1.383 60 0.838
369 5.154
7,160 100.000
CSR CSR CSR 1 0
EARNING
-
86 CSR 2014Minnick & Noga, 2010
TAXCH
1.RD
Hanlon and Terry2005
Gupta & Newberry, 1997
2.CAPINT
Graham and Tucker2006Chen, Chen, and Shevlin2010
3.BIG
CSR BIG 1 0
4.ELEC
CSR ELEC CSR ELEC 1 0
5.LOSS
1 0
-
87
6.LEV
DeAngelo,DeAngelo, and Skinner1994
7.SIZE
Ullmann1985
Waddock and Graves1997
SIZE
Probit
CSRi,t = 01EARNINGi,t2TAXCH i,t3RD i,t4CAPINT i,t5 BIG i,t6 ELEC i7 LOSS i,t8 LEV i,t9SIZE i,ti,t
1 99 1-percentile99-percentile 7,160 4 CSR 0.063EARNINGTAXCH 0.044 0.006RD 0.026CAPINT 0.508BIG 0.861ELEC 0.552LOSSLEVSIZE 0.2220.35415.019
-
88
4 CSR
CSREARNING
TAXCHRDCAPINT
BIGELECLOSS
LEVSIZE
Pearson 5TAXCHLOSSEARNING 0.3780.718 0.3 VIF 3
6 CSR Proibt EARNING 10%=0.806,Z1.827 CSR
CSR McWilliams & Siegel, 2000McKendalll et al., 1999Molloy et al., 2002
CSR 0.000 1.000 0.063 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.243
EARNING -0.418 0.266 0.044 0.051 0.006 0.104 0.105
TAXCH 0.000 0.051 0.006 0.001 0.000 0.009 0.010
RD 0.000 0.210 0.026 0.010 0.001 0.031 0.040
CAPINT 0.000 3.092 0.508 0.278 0.095 0.690 0.613
BIG 0.000 1.000 0.861 1.000 1.000 1.000 0.346
ELEC 0.000 1.000 0.552 1.000 0.000 1.000 0.497
LOSS 0.000 1.000 0.222 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.415
LEV 0.040 0.798 0.354 0.341 0.220 0.469 0.173
SIZE 6.875 21.418 15.019 14.842 14.079 15.814 1.409
-
89
CSREARNING
TAXCHRDCAPINTBIG
ELECLOSSLEVSIZE
6 CSR Probit Model : CSRi,t = 01EARNINGi,t2TAXCH i,t3RD i,t4CAPINT i,t5 BIG i,t6 ELEC i
7 LOSS i,t8 LEV i,t9SIZE i,ti,t Coef Z-value C -8.119 -26.426***
EARNING 0.806 1.827* TAXCH -10.015 -2.876***
RD 1.833 2.535** CAPINT -0.024 -0.569
BIG 0.372 3.310*** ELEC 0.389 6.584*** LOSS 0.188 1.992** LEV -0.451 -2.683***
5 CSR Pearson EARNING TAXCH RD CAPINT BIG ELEC LOSS LEV SIZE
CSR .029** -.033*** .002 .036*** .076*** .029** .079 .010 .294***
EARNING 1 .378*** -.092*** -.175*** .132*** -.062*** -.718*** -.199*** .183***
TAXCH 1 .035*** -.088*** .092*** -.008 -.234*** -.140*** -.027**
RD 1 -.093*** .276*** .100*** -.179*** -.252*** .276***
CAPINT 1 -.054*** -.133*** .164*** .084*** .100***
BIG 1 .109*** -.085*** -.059*** .118***
ELEC 1 .089*** -.094*** -.060***
LOSS 1 .121*** -.191***
LEV 1 .154***
****** 10%5%1%
-
90
6
SIZE 0.392 20.839*** Pseudo-R2 0.190
LR2 642.346 n 7,160
****** 10%5%1%
CSREARNING
TAXCHRDCAPINT
BIGELECLOSSLEV
SIZE
CSR Waddock & Graves, 1997Molloy et al., 2002
TAXCH 1% =-10.015Z=-2.876 CSR
CSR
CSR
RD 5%=1.833Z=2.535 CSR BIG 1%=0.372Z=3.310 CSR ELECLOSSSIZELEV CSR CAPINT
CSR
-
91
3
()
Logit EARNING=1.224Z=1.373CSR TAXCH 5%=-20.338Z=-2.765 CSRRD 5%=3.708Z=2.515 CSR BIG 1%=0.761Z=2.963 CSR ELECLOSSSIZELEVCAPINT
()
2001 CSR 2001 20132009 Rate 2001-2008 0 2009-2013 1 Probit EARNING CSR EARNING 5%=0.849z=2.499 CSR TAXCH CSR TAXCH CSR =-1.392Z=-0.627RDBIGEIECSIZELEVLOSSCAPINT
-
92
CSR CSR 2015 CSR
CSR CSR CSR CSR CSR 2009 2013 CSR
CSR CSR
CSR
CSR
CSR CSR CSR 4
-
93
2015 200 CSR CSR
CSR
CSR CSR CSR CSR
1. 2004
2. 2001-2008 2009-2013 TAXCH
3.
4. 2012 10 3 12
-
94
1. (2012) 2012 Retrieved 2012 3 http://taise.org.tw/uploadfile/file/2012CSRWorkshop/Class3.pdf
2. (2011)13(1)(8 )77-112
3. (2008) FTSE 36(3)339-385
4. (2001)Retrieved 2001 8 https://www.ftis.org.tw/cpe/download/she/Issue4/current4.htm
5. (2013)14(4)405-441
6. (2009)74-75
7. (2010)26
8. (2009)
9. (2013)653-72
10. (2014)
11. (2014)CSR
-
95
12. (2000)8(3)511-536
13. (2013)
14. (2015)Retrieved 2015 2 22 http://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20150222000910-260412
15. (2009)282
16. (2009)Retrieved 2009 6 8 http://m.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/309514
17. (2015)110
1. Alexander, G. J., & Buchholz, R. A. (1978). Corporate social responsibility and stock market performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21, 479-486.
2. Al-Tuwaijri, S. A., Christensen, T. E., & Hughes, K. E. II (2004). The relations among environmental disclosure, environmental performance and economic performance: a simultaneous equations approach. Accounting. Organizations and Society, 29 (July-August), 447-471.
3. Cardebat, J. M., & Sirven, N. (2010). What corporate social responsibility reporting adds to financial return? Journal of Economics and International Finance, 2(2), 20-27.
4. Cochran, P. L., & Wood, R. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 42-56.
5. Cornell, B., & Shapiro, A. C. (1987). Corporate stakeholder and corporate finance. Financial Management, 16(1), 5-14.
6. Cormier, D., & Gordon, I. M. (2001). An examination of social and environmental reporting strategies. Accounting. Auditing and Accountability Journal, 14(May), 587-616.
-
96 7. Chen, S., Chen, X., Cheng, Q., & Shevlin, T. (2010). Are family firms more tax
aggressive than non-family firms? Journal of Financial Economics, 95(1), 41-61.
8. DeAngelo, H., DeAngelo, L., & Skinner, D. J. (1994). Accounting choice in trouble companies. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 17, 113-143.
9. Erle, B. (2006). Tax Risk Management and Board Responsibility. Berlin, Germany. KPMG.
10. Fombrun, C. J., Gardberg, N. A., & Barnett, M. L. (2000). Opportunity platforms and safety nets: Corporate citizenship and reputational risk. Business and Society Review, 105(1), 85-106.
11. Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). Whats in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258.
12. Gao, Y. (2011). CSR in an emerging country: a content analysis of CSR reports of listed companies. Baltic Journal of Management 6(2), 263-291.
13. Graham, J. R., & Tucker, A. L. (2006). Tax shelters and corporate debt policy. Journal of Financial Economics, 81(3), 563-342.
14. Griffin, J. J., & Mahon, J. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate. Business and Society, 36(1), 5-31.
15. Gupta, S., & Newberry, K. (1997). Determinants of the variability in corporate effect tax rates: Evidence from longitudinal date. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 161-34.
16. Hanlon, M., & Terry S. (2005). Bank-Tax Conformity for Corporate Income: An Introduction to the Issues. NBER Working Paper Series.
17. Huseynov, F., & Klamm, B. K. (2012). Tax avoidance, tax management and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Finance, 18(4), 804-827.
18. Lanis, R., & Richardson, G. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31, 86-108.
-
97
19. McKendalll, M., Sanchez, C., & Sicilian, P. (1999). Corporate governance and corporate illegality: The effects of board structure on environmental violations. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 7, 201-223.
20. McGuire, J. B. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854-872.
21. McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: correlation or misspecification. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 603-609.
22. Minnick, K. L., & Noga, T. J. (2010). Do corporate governance characteristics influence tax management? Journal of Corporate Finance, 16(5), 703-718.
23. Molloy, L., Erekson, H., & Gorman, R., (2002). Exploring the Relationship between Environmental and Financial Performance. Working Paper, Miami University.
24. Porter, M. E., & M. R. Kramer. (2007). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review 85, 136-137.
25. Poter, M. E., & C. Van Der Linde. (1995). Toward a New Conception of the Environment-Competitiveness Relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97-118.
26. Preston, L. E., & OBannon, P. (1997). The corporate social- financial performance relationship. Business and Society, 36(4), 419-429.
27. Richardson, A. J., & Welker, M. (2001). Social disclosure, financial disclosure and the cost of equity capital. Accounting. Organizations and Society, 26(October-November), 597-616.
28. Stanwick, P. A., & Stanwick. S. D., (1998). The relationship between corporate social performance, and Organizational Size, Financial Performance, and Environmental Performance: An Empirical Examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 17, 195-204.
29. Szilagyi, A. D. (1984). Management and Performance. California Goodyear Publishing Company Inc.
30. Smith, A. D. (2007). Making the case for the competitive advantage of corporate social responsibility. Business Strategy Series, 8, 186-195.
-
98 31. Toutsoura, M. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance.
Working paper.
32. Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1996). Corporate Social Performance and Journal, 40(3), 658-670.
33. Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801-814.
34. Ullmann, A. E. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure and economic performance of US firms. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 540-557.
35. Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance-financial link. Strategy Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.
36. Watson, L. (2012). Social Influence on Aggressive Accounting: The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Tax Aggressiveness. Working Paper. Available at SSRN.
105 12 30
106 01 16
106 03 07
106 03 15
-
99
Authors Introduction
Name Chi-Ping Hou Department Professor, Department of Accounting, China University of Technology 56 Address No.56, Sec.3, Hsing-Lung Rd., Wen-Shan District, Taipei, Taiwan E-mail [email protected] Speciality Management Accounting, Auditing, Corporate Governance
Name Yu-chin Tsai Department Assistant Professor, Department of Accounting, China University of
Technology 56 Address No.56, Sec.3, Hsing-Lung Rd., Wen-Shan District, Taipei, Taiwan E-mail [email protected] Speciality Auditing, Tax Law, Tax Accounting
-
100 Name Bor-Hwang Ni Department Assistant Professor, Department of Public Finance, China University of
Technology 56 Address No.56, Sec.3, Hsing-Lung Rd., Wen-Shan District, Taipei, Taiwan E-mail [email protected] Speciality Auditing, Internal Control, Tax law
Name Tzu-Wen Lee Department Lecturer, Department of Accounting, China University of Technology 56 Address No.56, Sec.3, Hsing-Lung Rd., Wen-Shan District, Taipei, Taiwan E-mail [email protected] Speciality Performance Evaluation, Corporate Governance, Earnings Management