en pl
en pl

Central European Management Journal

Zobacz wydanie
Rok 07.2020 
Tom 28 
Numer 2

State Autonomy in Shaping Tax Policies: Facts and Myths Based on the Situation in OECD Countries

Jacek Tomkiewicz
Kozminski University, Poland

Marta Postuła
University of Warsaw
https://orcid.org/0000-0001- 5502-9722

07.2020 28 (2) Central European Management Journal

DOI 10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.23


Purpose: Capital flows, tax competition, multinational companies and tax havens weakens governments’ ability to lead independent tax policy. This race to the bottom, especially in the case of CIT rate, seems to work. Aim of the text is to show that the governments are not as powerless as it is often claimed. Despite common opinion, nation-states retain a relatively significant autonomy in creating their own fiscal policies, including tax instruments. Size of funds kept in tax havens have not been growing for few years and international cooperation of tax authorities is more and more efficient in dealing with the tax fraud.

Methodology: The study uses desk research method for theoretical reasoning to verify the research
hypothesis. Moreover, the study seeks answering if the application of EU tax policies determines national tax policy. To that end, the authors utilize time series and cause-effect analysis, as well as quantitative research for the systematization of statistical information and regression analysis for the examination of statistical dependencies. Tax competition or the functioning of tax havens naturally limits the realization of the fundamental functions of fiscal policies, although the taxation remains one
of the most crucial instruments of macroeconomic and income policy of national authorities.

Findings: The most important data on public revenues structure in different OECD countries indicate
that taxation remains one of the most crucial instruments of macroeconomic and income policy of
national authorities. We also show that impact of FDI on hosting economy is not as positive as it is
said to be. There is no relation between FDI and R&D spending and level of wages in hosting country
is even affected in the negative way by the FDI inflow. Irrespective of the regulatory details introduced at the EU level – the basic factor affecting jets coordination in the field of cooperation between tax services brings effects both in terms of the current collection of tax liabilities
and the creation of regulations that hinder tax avoidance and under statement assessment.

Originality/value: The study focuses on an analysis of tax policy. The view that taxation of international corporations is fraught with difficulties finds support in the undeniable reality of tax competition.Moreover, a large and growing share of profits is transferred to low-tax places. The prospects for taxing international companies with positive rates seem unoptimistic. Therefore, it is essential to check how the national economy is affected by the FDI inflow in OECD countries.


  1. Andrews, D. (1994). Capital Mobility and State Autonomy: Toward a Structural Theory of International Monetary Relations. International Studies Quarterly, 38, 193–218. https://doi.org/10.2307/2600975 [Google Scholar]
  2. Admati, A.R. and Skeptical, A. (2017). View of Financialized Corporate Governance. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(3), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.3.131 [Google Scholar]
  3. Alstadsæter, A., Johannesen, N. and Zucman, G. (2017). Who Owns the Wealth in Tax Havens? Macro Evidence and Implications for Global Inequality. NBER Working Paper No. 23805. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23805 [Google Scholar]
  4. Auerbach, A. and Bradford, D. (2004). Generalized cash flow taxation. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 957–980. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-2727(03)00044-6 [Google Scholar]
  5. Beebeejaun, A. (2018). The Efficiency of Transfer Pricing Rules as a Corrective Mechanism of Income Tax Avoidance. Journal of Civil and Legal Sciences, 7(237). https://doi.org/10.4172/2169-0170.1000237 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bretschger, L. and Hettich, F. (2002). Globalization, capital mobility and tax competition: theory and evidence for OECD countries. European Journal of Political Economy, 18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0176-2680(02)00115-5 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cerny, P.G. (1995). Globalisation and the Changing Logic of Collective Action. International Organization, 49(4), 595–625. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818300028459 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cheibub, J.A. (1998). Political Regimes and the Extractive Capacity of Governments: Taxation in Democracy and Dictatorships. World Politics, 50(3), 349–376. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887100012843 [Google Scholar]
  9. Garrett, G. and Mitchell D. (2001). Globalization, government spending and taxation in the OECD. European Journal of Political Research, 39(2), 145–177. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.00573 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gilpin, R. (2000). The Challenge of Global Capitalism: The World Economy in the 21st Century. Princeton: Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691186474 [Google Scholar]
  11. International Monetary Fund (2019). IMF Fiscal Monitor, April 2019. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kahle, K.M. and Stulz, R.M. (2017). Is the US Public Corporation in Trouble? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(3), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.3.67 [Google Scholar]
  13. Kleven H.J. (2014). How Can Scandinavians Tax So Much? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 77–98. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.4.77 [Google Scholar]
  14. King, S.D. (2010). Losing Control. The Emerging Threats to Western Prosperity. New Haven-London: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
  15. Kolodko, G.W. (2016). How to Destroy a Country. The Economics and the Politics of the Greek Crisis. Rivista di Politica Economica, 2(IV–VI), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3036957 [Google Scholar]
  16. Krugman, P. (2009). How Did Economist Get It So Wrong? The New York Times. 2 September 2009. [Google Scholar]
  17. Kudrle, R.T. (2008). The OECD's Harmful Tax Competition Initiative and the Tax Havens: from Bombshell to Damp squib. Global Economy Journal, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.2202/1524-5861.1329. [Google Scholar]
  18. Legrain, Ph. (2010). Aftershock: Reshaping the World Economy After the Crisis. London: Little Brown. [Google Scholar]
  19. Massey, C. and Thaler, R.H. (2012). The Loser's Curse: Decision Making & Market Efficiency in the National Football League Draft, https://ssrn.com/abstract=697121 or https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.697121 [Google Scholar]
  20. Oxfam (2019). Off the hook: how the EU is about to whitewash the world's worst tax havens, https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/hook-how-eu-about-whitewash-worlds-worst-tax-havens. [Google Scholar]
  21. Rajan R. (2010). Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy. Princeton: Princeton University. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400839803. [Google Scholar]
  22. Remeur, C. (2017). Understanding the Rationale for Compiling 'Tax Haven' Lists, European Parliament Research Service Briefing, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/614633/EPRS_BRI(2017)614633_EN.pdf [Google Scholar]
  23. Shaxson N. (2016). Will the OECD Tax Haven Blacklist be Another White Wash?, https://www.taxjustice.net/2016/07/20/oecd-another-go-hopeless-politicised-tax-haven-blacklisting [Google Scholar]
  24. Shaxson, N. and Christensen, J. (2016). Tax Competitiveness – a Dangerous Obsession. In: Th. Pogge and K. Mehta (eds.), Global Tax Fairness. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198725343.003.0013 [Google Scholar]
  25. Sheppard, L.A. (2017). The United States as Tax Haven, https://moodysgartner.com/wp-content/uploads/US-as-a-tax-haven-20170626.pdf [Google Scholar]
  26. Stiglitz, J.E. (2018). The Euro: How a Common Currency Threatens the Future of Europe. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. [Google Scholar]
  27. Tanzi, V. (2000). Globalization, Technological Developments, and the Work of Fiscal Termites, IMF Working Paper No. 00/181. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451859188.001. [Google Scholar]
  28. The Economist (2020a). Building up the pillars of state. The Economist, March 28th 2020. [Google Scholar]
  29. The Economist (2020b). Best in show. The Economist, March 28th 2020. [Google Scholar]
  30. Torslov, L., Wier, L. and Zucman, G. (2018). The Missing Profits of Nations. NBER working paper No 24701. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24701 [Google Scholar]
  31. Wright T., Zucman G. (2018). The Exorbitant Tax Privilege, NBER working paper No. 24983. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24983 [Google Scholar]
  32. Zingales L. (2017). Towards a Political Theory of the Firm. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(3), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.3.113 [Google Scholar]
  33. Zucman G. (2014). Taxing Across Boarder: Tracking Personal Wealth and Corporate Profits. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.4.121 [Google Scholar]

Kompletne metadane

Cytowanie zasobu

APA style

Jacek Tomkiewicz & Marta Postuła (2020). State Autonomy in Shaping Tax Policies: Facts and Myths Based on the Situation in OECD Countries. (2020). State Autonomy in Shaping Tax Policies: Facts and Myths Based on the Situation in OECD Countries. Central European Management Journal, 28(2), 83-97. https://doi.org/10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.23 (Original work published 07.2020n.e.)

MLA style

Jacek Tomkiewicz and Marta Postuła. „State Autonomy In Shaping Tax Policies: Facts And Myths Based On The Situation In Oecd Countries”. 07.2020n.e. Central European Management Journal, t. 28, nr 2, 2020, ss. 83-97.

Chicago style

Jacek Tomkiewicz and Marta Postuła. „State Autonomy In Shaping Tax Policies: Facts And Myths Based On The Situation In Oecd Countries”. Central European Management Journal, Central European Management Journal, 28, nr 2 (2020): 83-97. doi:10.7206/cemj.2658-0845.23.