关键词: 直接资助, 税收优惠, 所有制, 脉冲响应

Abstract: Technological innovation is the key to realizing economic transformation and development. Enterprise research and development (R&D) activities are the central link to achieve technological innovation and an important driving force for economic transformation and development, but due to the externalities of corporate R&D activities. It is often necessary for the government to encourage innovation activities of enterprises through research and development subsidies and tax reductions.
At the same time, with the establishment and improvement of the socialist market economic system, the ownership structure of Chinese enterprises has developed in a diversified direction, forming a mixed structure of state-owned and state-controlled enterprises, private enterprises, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan investment enterprises, and foreign-funded enterprises. . Because of the nature of property rights and the operating environment, companies of different ownership types often exhibit different behavior patterns and organizational characteristics. So how efficient is the innovation of these companies when they use government-provided technology funding? For companies with different ownership systems, will the same innovation resources input achieve the same effect? The study of these issues can make the influence of ownership form on innovation efficiency more clear, provide reference for the government to formulate relevant science and technology policies, and improve the efficiency of innovation resource allocation.
From the perspective of enterprise innovation performance and government-funded resource input, this paper empirically analyzes the effectiveness of innovative resources of state-owned and state-owned holding companies, private enterprises, joint ventures, limited liability companies, and foreign-funded enterprises, and uses pulses. The response function and variance decomposition methods are used to study the impact of R&D investment such as government subsidies and tax incentives on innovation performance and the differences among different ownership enterprises.
Since the quality and quantity of enterprise innovation output cannot be directly measured, and the patent reflects the level of technological innovation of the enterprise at a certain level, the previous research usually adopts the number of patent applications or the number of patent grants as the innovation output indicators of the enterprise. In addition, relevant scholars believe that because patent authorization is interfered by more human factors, there is certain uncertainty, and the number of patent applications using patent applications instead of patent grants can better reflect the true level of innovation , therefore, this paper selects the patent application amount as the patent output index, which can better reflect the technological innovation achievements of the enterprise.
In order to test the impact of different government funding methods on corporate innovation, we use the government’s direct subsidies and tax incentives as independent variables, and use the funds from the government’s science and technology activities from the government funds and the government to enjoy the technology. The tax reduction developed is used as a proxy variable. Other influencing factors are used as control variables.
Considering that human resource ownership is an important factor affecting enterprise innovation, enterprises with more human capital are usually more willing to carry out R&D and innovation activities. Therefore, using R&D personnel’s full-time equivalent manpower as the agent control variable of human capital, the previous research is used.
The introduction, digestion and absorption of technology is an important way for enterprises to improve technology and improve innovation productivity. This paper adds the technology acquisition and transformation expenditure as a control variable to examine the effect of technological factors on innovation performance.
According to scholars’ research, the scale of enterprises also has an important impact on the innovation behavior of enterprises. Generally speaking, the size of state-owned enterprises is larger than that of ordinary private enterprises, and the resources for innovation are more abundant. Therefore, it is necessary to consider the factors of enterprise scale in building models.
The regression results show that the direct government funding has not shown a strong role in promoting the innovation output of enterprises. The utilization rate of direct government funding by Chinese enterprises needs to be improved. However, the tax preferential policies have a positive impact on the innovation output of limited liability companies, joint stock companies, private enterprises and foreign-funded enterprises, but have not shown significant effects on state-owned and state-controlled enterprises, indicating that they are of limited liability companies. For enterprises, tax incentives can promote innovation output more effectively.
In the impulse response diagram, we can see that the impact of the government’s direct funding of this form of subsidy on the innovative output of state-owned enterprises, joint-stock companies and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese investment enterprises is not very obvious, basically near zero. However, the innovation output of joint ventures, joint stock companies and private enterprises has a long-term negative impact, indicating that the direct subsidy of the government has a limited effect on the innovation output of China’s inland enterprises. To a large extent stimulate the innovation output of enterprises. Although the form of subsidy for tax incentives has not had a major impact on the innovative output of state-owned enterprises and joint-stock cooperative enterprises, the patent output of joint ventures, joint stock companies, private enterprises and Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese investment enterprises has emerged. The positive impact indicates that a more favorable tax policy for such enterprises can promote the innovation and development of enterprises than direct subsidies.
Based on the innovation data of 2000-2015 state-owned enterprises, collective enterprises, joint-stock cooperative enterprises, joint ventures, joint stock limited companies, limited liability companies, private enterprises, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwanese investment enterprises and foreign-funded enterprises, this paper analyzes direct subsidies and tax incentives. The impact of these two kinds of government funding methods on the innovation performance of different ownership enterprises shows that the direct government funding has not significantly promoted the innovation output of China’s inland enterprises; the innovation output of state-owned enterprises and government direct subsidies and tax incentives. The relationship is not significant; innovative outputs such as private companies have shown greater responsiveness to tax incentives. Therefore, when the government subsidizes enterprises, it is impossible to implement a simple and rude manner, and pay attention to the scientific validity of the method.

Key words: direct government subsidies, tax incentives, ownership, impulse response