税收竞争影响出口产品质量的效应与路径分析

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 本文从企业迁移效应和激励效应角度，利用微观企业数据、实证分析了中国地方政府间的税收竞争对出口产品质量的影响，在此基础上对税收竞争影响出口产品质量的路径进行分解。研究发现：（1）地方税收竞争可以有效提升本地区的出口产品质量。（2）异质性分析表明，税收竞争对外资企业出口产品质量的促进效应比内资企业更大；税收竞争对高效率企业出口产品质量的促进效应比低效率企业更大。（3）MP动态分解显示，地方政府税收竞争通过激励本地区企业提高生产率（而非引入高效率的新企业）来提升本地区的出口产品质量。

关键词: 税收竞争, 出口产品质量, 激励效应

Abstract: China′s local governments′ performance target has changed from "competition for growth" to "competition for quality" under the background of supply-side structural reform, so local governments try to improve enterprise efficiency and product quality through tax competition. Although some scholars have studied the impact of tariff concession on the quality of export products from the national level, there is no literature on the impact of local tax competition on the quality of export products from the city level. Based on Chinese industrial enterprises database, China customs database and the statistical yearbook of Chinese cities, this paper empirically tests the impact of local government tax competition on exports quality of Chinese enterprises, and uses MP dynamic decomposition identity to decompose the quality of export products, and empirically tests the path of local tax competition affecting the quality of export products. Specifically, based on the data of China′s industrial enterprises, this paper calculates the tax competition indicators of enterprise income tax and value-added tax in 279 cities of China, and empirically tests the impact of local tax competition on the quality of export products and its mechanism by combining with the import and export data of China customs.
The conclusions are as follows: (1) Tax competition of local government can promotes regional export product quality; Through the IV estimation, replacing the tax competition variable and changing the estimation method, the results are still robust. (2) Compared with domestic enterprises, tax incentives for foreign enterprises can promote the improvement of regional product quality; compared with enterprises with lower productivity, tax incentives for enterprises with higher productivity can promote the improvement of export product quality; (3) The analysis of research mechanism shows that tax competition among regions can improve the productivity of enterprises, and then enhance the quality of export-products. In other words, inter regional tax competition promotes the quality of export products of local enterprises by improving the production efficiency of existing enterprises in the region (incentive effect), rather than attracting high-efficiency enterprises (migration effect).
Based on the empirical analysis, our suggestions are as follows: First, allow local governments to implement appropriate tax incentives. Empirical analysis shows that the overall effect of tax competition policy is positive, which can reduce the cost of enterprises and improving the quality of regional export products. Therefore, local governments should be allowed to take preferential tax policies to reduce the tax burden of enterprises and encourage existing enterprises to make innovation investment, so as to improve the quality of regional export products. Second, continue to allow tax incentives for high-tech industries. Considering the positive role of high-tech enterprises, local governments can be allowed to give appropriate tax preference to high-tech industries, and activate the competitive effect of the region by attracting high productivity enterprises to settle in, so as to improve the allocation efficiency of resources in the region; Third, allow the existence of moderately differentiated tax policies. Empirical analysis shows that tax competition has different impacts on domestic /foreign enterprises and on enterprises with lower /higher productivity, so local governments should be allowed to adopt differentiated tax policies moderately, so as to encourage enterprises with strong innovation ability or high productivity to promote the quality of local export products.

Key words: tax competition, exported product quality, incentive effect

李长青, 彭馨. 税收竞争影响出口产品质量的效应与路径分析[J]. 科研管理, 2021, 42(9): 34-43.

Li Changqing, Peng Xin. An analysis of the impact and paths of local tax competition on the quality of exported products[J]. Science Research Management, 2021, 42(9): 34-43.

参考文献

[1]刘井建,赵革新,李惠竹.企业税收激励对R&D投资的影响机理及效应——时间趋势、效力边界与创新产出[J].科研管理, 2020, 41(10): 40-53.

LIU Jingjian, ZHAO Gexin, LI Huizhu. Influence mechanism and effect of corporate tax incentives on R&D investment——Time trend, effective boundary and innovation output[J]. Science Research Management, 2020, 41(10): 40-53.

[2]MELITZ J M, POLANEC S. Dynamic Olley-Pakes productivity decomposition with entry and exit[J]. Rand Journal of Economics, 2015, 46(2): 362-375.

[3]AMITI, M, KHANDELWAL A K. Import competition and quality upgrading[J].Review of Economics and Statistics, 2013, 95(2),476-490.

[4]刘晓宁,刘磊.贸易自由化对出口产品质量的影响效应——基于中国微观制造业企业的实证研究[J].国际贸易问题, 2015(08):14-23.

LIU Xiaoning, LIU Lei. Effects of trade liberalization on quality of export products: An empirical research based on China's micro manufacturing enterprises[J]. Journal of International Trade, 2015 (08):14-23.

[5]李仁宇,钟腾龙,祝树金.区域合作、自由贸易协定与企业出口产品质量[J].世界经济研究, 2020 (12): 48-64+133.

LI Renyu, ZHONG Tenglong, ZHU Shujin. Regional cooperation, free trade agreement and quality of firms′ export products[J]. World Economy Studies, 2020 (12): 48-64+133.

[6]彭馨. 税收竞争、地区生产率增长与异质性企业出口[J]. 经济科学, 2019(4): 19-32.

PENG Xin. Tax competition, regional productivity growth and heterogeneous firm export [J]. Economic Science, 2019 (4): 19-32.

[7]唐飞鹏,叶柳儿.税收竞争、资本用脚投票与产业转型升级[J].财贸经济, 2020(11):28-35.

TANG Feipeng,YE Liu'er. Tax competition, capital movement and industrial transformation and upgrading[J]. Finance & Trade Economics, 2020 (11): 28-35.

[8]张先锋,刘佳佳,彭飞.开发区竞争如何影响企业出口产品质量——来自中国工业企业的证据[J].产业经济研究, 2020(5):14-29.

ZHANG Xianfeng, LIU Jiajia, PENG Fei. How does special economic zone competition affect export product quality: Evidence from Chinese industrial enterprises[J]. Industrial Economics Research, 2020 (5):14-29.

[9]彭馨, 蒋为. 税收竞争、企业生产效率与出口行为[J].世界经济研究, 2019(7): 43-60.

PENG Xin, JIANG Wei. Tax competition, firm productivity and export behavior[J].World Economy Studies, 2019 (7): 43-60.

[10]GORDON R H, SLEMROD J. Are real responses to taxes simply income shifting between corporate and personal tax bases[M]. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2000.

[11]李长青,禄雪焕,逯建.地方政府竞争压力对地区生产效率损失的影响[J].中国软科学, 2018(12): 87-94.

LI Changqing, LU Xuehuan, LU Jian. The impact of local government competition pressure on regional production efficiency Loss[J]. China Soft Science, 2018(12): 87-94.

[12]储德银,费冒盛,黄暄.地方政府竞争、税收努力与经济高质量发展[J].财政研究, 2020(8): 55-69.

CHU Deyin, FEI Maosheng, HUANG Xuan. Local government competition, tax efforts and high-quality economic development[J].Public Finance Research, 2020 (8): 55-69.

[13]贾俊雪.税收激励、企业有效平均税率与企业进入[J]. 经济研究, 2014(7): 94-109.

JIA Junxue. Tax incentives, corporate effective average tax rate, and firm entry[J]. Economic Research Journal, 2014 (7): 94-109.

[14]王永进, 张国峰. 开发区生产率优势的来源：集聚效应还是选择效应?[J].经济研究, 2016 (7): 58-71.

WANG Yongjin, ZHANG Guofeng. Sources of productivity advantages of special economic zones: Agglomeration effect or selection effect? [J]. Economic Research Journal, 2016 (7): 58-71.

[15]BRULHART M, JAMETTI M. SCHMIDHEINY K. Do agglomeration economies reduce the sensitivity of firm location to tax differentials?[J]. Economic Journal, 2012, 122(563): 1069- 1093.

[16]孔令池,高波,李言.市场开放、地方财税竞争与产业结构调整——基于我国省级面板数据的实证研究[J].经济理论与经济管理, 2017(10):45-57.

KONG Lingchi, GAO Bo, LI Yan. Market openness, local tax competition and the industrial restructuring: Empirical study from provincial panel data in China[J]. Economic Theory and Business Management, 2017 (10):45-57.

[17]MUKHERJEE A, SINGH M, ZALDOKAS A. Do corporate taxes hinder innovation? [J]. Journal of Financial Economics, 2017, 124 (1):195-221.

[18]马晶梅, 赵雨薇, 王成东,贾红宇.融资约束、研发操纵与企业创新决策[J].科研管理, 2020, 41 (12): 171-183.

MA Jingmei, ZHAO Yuwei, WANG Chengdong, JIA Hongyu. Financing constraints, R&D maneuver and enterprise innovation decision[J]. Science Research Management, 2020, 41 (12): 171- 183.

[19]何凌云,陶东杰.税收征管、制度环境与企业创新投入[J].科研管理, 2020, 41(09):42-50.

HE Lingyun, TAO Dongjie. A study of the relationship among tax enforcement, institutional environment and enterprise innovation investment[J].Science Research Management, 2020, 41(09):42-50.

[20]席强敏.企业迁移促进了全要素生产率提高吗?——基于城市内部制造业迁移的验证[J].南开经济研究, 2018(4):176-193.

XI Qiangmin. Does firm relocation promote the improvement of TFP: Verification based on manufacturing relocation within city[J]. Nankai Economic Studies, 2018(4):176-193.

[21]杨浩昌,李廉水,张发明.高技术产业集聚与绿色技术创新绩效[J].科研管理, 2020, 41(9): 99-112.

YANG Haochang, LI Lianshui, ZHANG Faming. High-tech industrial agglomeration and green technological innovation performance[J].Science Research Management,2020, 41(9): 99-112.

[22]潘孝珍.税收优惠的科技创新激励效应存在门槛吗?——基于股权结构视角的实证分析[J].科研管理, 2019(10):48-57.

PAN Xiaozhen. Is there a threshold for the incentive effect of preferential tax on technological innovation: An empirical analysis from the perspective of ownership structure[J].Science Research Management, 2019(10):48-57.

[23]彭馨,蒋为.税收竞争与出口产品质量：企业迁移还是效率提升?[J].经济评论, 2021, 4 (3): 126-144.

PENG Xin, JIANG Wei. Tax competition and quality of export products: Enterprise migration or efficiency improvement? [J]. Economic Review, 2021 (3):126-144.

[24]GERVAIS A. Product quality and firm heterogeneity in international trade[J]. Canadian Journal of Economics,2015,48(3):1152-1174.

[25]NEVO A. Measuring market power in the ready-to-eat cereal industry[J]. Econometrica, 2001, 69(2): 307-342.

[26]王佳杰,童锦治,李星.税收竞争、财政支出压力与地方非税收入增长[J]. 财贸经济, 2014(5): 27-38.

WANG Jiajie, TONG Jinzhi, LI Xing. Tax competition, fiscal pressure and the non-tax revenue expansion of local governments[J]. Finance & Trade Economics, 2014(5): 27-38.