Thesis (doctoral)--Universiẗat Heidelberg, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 211-225).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2003. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 179-182).

In this dissertation, I use a unique data set to address three questions related to the timing of loss realizations by institutional investors. The data include clienteles and quarterly holdings of investment advisers, whom I classify as "tax-sensitive" if their clients are primarily high net-worth individuals and as "tax-insensitive" if their clients are primarily tax-exempt entities or individuals with tax-deferred accounts. Prior empirical studies attribute abnormal stock return patterns around calendar year-end (the "January effect") to individual investors' tax-loss-selling and to institutional investors' window-dressing. In chapter two, I examine whether investment advisers contribute to the January effect via tax-loss-selling rather than via windowdressing. I find that tax-sensitive advisers' year-end sales of loss stocks (but not those of tax-exempt client advisers whose detailed disclosures to clients provide more incentive to window-dress) are associated with abnormally low (high) returns at the end of December (beginning of January). These results suggest that investment advisers contribute to the January effect via tax-loss-selling rather than via window-dressing. In chapter three, I examine whether tax-sensitive advisers respond to holding period incentives at year-end. Under U.S. tax law, net short-term gains are taxed as ordinary income, while net long-term gains are taxed at a lower rate. Prior studies find little or no response to holding period incentives by individual investors. In contrast, tax-sensitive advisers are more likely to sell stocks with short-term losses the larger the difference between the current short-term loss deduction and what the long-term loss deduction would be. In chapter four, I examine whether, like individual investors, tax-sensitive advisers realize their losses at year-end because they exhibit the "disposition effect," or the tendency to realize gains at a quicker rate than losses, earlier in the year. I compare the likelihood of advisers' realizations of "losers" (stocks the cumulative return of which over the prior nine months is negative) to the likelihood of their realizations of "winners" (stocks the cumulative return of which over the prior nine months is positive) by calendar quarter. Tax-insensitive, but not tax-sensitive, advisers exhibit the disposition effect, suggesting that tax incentives combined with investor sophistication prevent the disposition effect. / text

This dissertation contains three chapters that examine various behavioral responses to statutory tax policies. In the first chapter, I develop a framework to estimate the impact of the marriage tax on the likelihood of marriage that incorporates into one analysis all four distinct household alternatives: single, cohabit, married, and separated. This is in contrast to previous works that consider only one of three separate choices. Using data from the March CPS from 1989-1999, I estimate a bivariate probit model and find that the marriage tax has a small, but significant, effect on the likelihood of marriage. Furthermore, my results indicate that studies that do not include all four possible alternatives can overstate by as much as 200% the effect of the marriage tax on the likelihood of marriage. The second chapter considers the net distributional impact of the federal tax deduction for charitable donations. If itemizers, who tend to have higher income than non-itemizers, give to charities that provide goods that they directly use or benefit from (egoism), the government is essentially subsidizing the activities of the high-income donors. Conversely, if itemizers donate to organizations that benefit the needy (altruism), the tax deduction aids in a form of income redistribution. I estimate this tax responsiveness of giving using the Center on Philanthropy Panel Study (COPPS) module of the PSID in 2001 and 2003 for 11 types of charities. Donations by high income individuals to charities that benefit the poor are more price elastic than donations to charities that benefit themselves. I find evidence that the current tax deduction induces itemizers to donate more to charities that benefit the poor than they would have without the deduction. The third chapter estimates the economic incidence of the excise tax on tobacco. Using historical price and tax data from 1954-2005, I estimate what portion of the tax is shifted to consumers. I experiment with controls for border crossing and indoor smoking bans. I find that a 10-cent tax increase causes price to increase by 8 cents immediately and by 13 cents in the long run.

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1998. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 79-81). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1998. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 79-81). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (MAcc) -- Stellenbosch University, 2004. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In order for a taxpayer to be entitled to a deduction for expenditure actually incurred, the taxpayer must meet the requirements of section 11(a), read with the provisions of sections 23(f) and 23(g). The preamble of section 11 requires that the taxpayer should incur the expenditure in the carrying on of a trade, before it will be deductible. Therefore, taxpayers who do not carry on a trade will not be allowed any deductions for expenditure actually incurred in terms of section 11(a). In the case of a holding company that grants loans to its subsidiaries or associates, there is a general prevailing view that the holding company does not carry on a trade in respect of the loans granted. Therefore it is argued that the holding company is not entitled to any deductions in terms of section 11(a). This study questions the above-mentioned general view by considering case law and the opinions of various tax experts. The question is raised whether the holding company could be regarded as carrying on a trade, and if so, under what circumstances that will be the case. A secondary issue that will be considered is whether the holding company is entitled to deductions in respect of interest expenditure actually incurred. In this regard a distinction is made between moneylenders and non-moneylenders. The writer reaches the conclusion that the definition of “trade” is not all-inclusive, and that the Legislator intended that the term should be interpreted as widely as possible. Therefore, the writer is of the opinion that taxpayers who are not moneylenders could, under certain circumstances, be carrying on a trade in respect of the granting of loans and should thus be entitled to income tax deductions for expenditure incurred. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Vir ‘n belastingpligtige om op ‘n aftrekking vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan, geregtig te wees, moet aan die bepalings van artikel 11(a), saamgelees met dié van artikels 23(f) en 23(g) voldoen word. Die aanhef tot artikel 11 vereis dat ‘n belastingpligtige die uitgawes in die beoefening van ‘n bedryf moet aangaan voordat ‘n aftrekking gëeis kan word. Belastingpligtiges wat dus nie ‘n bedryf beoefen nie, sal op geen aftrekkings vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan ingevolge artikel 11(a) geregtig wees nie. Met betrekking tot ‘n houermaatskappy wat lenings aan sy filiale of geassosieerdes toestaan, heers daar ‘n algemene siening dat die houermaatskappy nie ‘n bedryf beoefen met betrekking tot die toestaan van lenings nie. Daarom word geargumenteer dat die houermaatskappy nie ingevolge artikel 11(a) op enige aftrekkings geregtig is nie. In hierdie studie word bogenoemde algemene siening krities aan die hand van regspraak en menings van belastingkenners oorweeg. Die vraag word gevra of die houermaatskappy nie wel beskou kan word om ‘n bedryf te beoefen nie, en indien wel, onder watter omstandighede dit so sal wees. ‘n Sekondêre aspek wat oorweeg word, is of die houermaatskappy op ‘n aftrekking vir rente uitgawes werklik aangegaan by die toestaan van die lenings geregtig is. In hierdie verband word ‘n onderskeid tussen geldskieters en nie-geldskieters getref. Die skrywer kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die omskrywing van “bedryf” nie allesomvattend is nie, en dat dit blyk of dit die Wetgewer se bedoeling was om die begrip so wyd as moontlik te stel. Dit is die skrywer se mening dat belastingpligtiges wat nie geldskieters is nie, wel onder bepaalde omstandighede beskou kan word om ‘n bedryf te beoefen met betrekking tot die toestaan van lenings. Daarom behoort sulke belastingpligtiges wel op inkomstebelastingaftrekkings vir uitgawes werklik aangegaan, geregtig te wees.

Thesis (MComm)--Stellenbosch University, 2004. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Like any other item of expenditure, interest expenditure's deductibility is determined by subjecting it to the tests laid down in the general deduction formula contained in section 11(a), together with section 23(f) and 23(g) of the Income Tax Act, as well as the special deductions applicable to interest. In this study there will be only concentrated on the tests laid down in the general deduction formula contained in section 11(a), together with section 23(f) and 23(g) of the Income Tax Act. The general test according to section 11(a) as laid down by the courts to ascertain if an expense incurred in trade is deductible, is firstly to ascertain the act entailing the expenditure. If it is performed for the purpose of earning income, the expenditure attendant upon is deductible. Secondly, the closeness of the connection between the expenditure incurred and the trade must be ascertained. If the expense incurred is so closely connected with the business operation that it may be regarded as part of the cost of performing it, the expenditure will be deductible. The courts have considered many factors to ascertain if interest expenditure complies with the statutory requirements as set out in section 11(a), read together with section 23(f) and 23(g) of the Income Tax Act. There seems to be one test which can be applied to most of the statutory requirements and can be seen as the conclusive factor in determining the deductibility of interest expenses and that is the test of the original purpose of the loan that leads to the interest expense. Firstly in this study, the factors considered by the courts to ascertain if the deductibility of an interest expenditure complies with the statutory requirements as set out in the introduction of section 11(a), together with section 23(f) and 23(g), will be examined with specific reference to the purpose of the loan. Then the possibility of a change in the original purpose of a loan and the effect on the deductibility of an interest expenditure will be examined. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Soos enige ander uitgawe, word rente uitgawes se aftrekbaarheid bepaal deur dit te onderwerp aan die toetse soos neergele in die algemene aftrekkingsformule, vervat in artikel 11(a), saamgelees met artikel 23(f) en 23(g) van die Inkomstebelastingwet, asook die spesiale aftrekkings wat op rente van toepassing is. In hierdie studie word slegs op die algemene aftrekkingsformule, vervat in artikel 11(a), saamgelees met artikel 23(f) en 23(g) van die Inkomstebelastingwet gekonsentreer. Die algemene toets volgens artikel 11(a) wat deur die howe neergele is om te bepaal of 'n uitgawe aangegaan in 'n bedryf aftrekbaar is, is om eerstens te bepaal of die handeling waaraan die uitgawe verbind is by die voortbrenging van inkomste aangegaan is en tweedens of die uitgawe wat aangegaan is nou genoeg verwant is aan die bedryf sod at dit as deel van die koste beskou kan word om die bedryf te beoefen. Die howe het verskeie faktore oorweeg om te bepaal of die aftrekbaarheid van rente uitgawes voldoen aan die statutere vereistes soos bepaal deur artikel 11(a), saamgelees met artikel 23(f) en 23(g) van die Inkomstebelastingwet. Daar blyk een toets te wees wat op die meeste statutêre vereistes toegepas kan word en wat ook as die bepalende factor beskou kan word om die aftrekbaarheid van rente uitgawes te beoordeel en dit is die oorspronklike doel waarmee die lening aangegaan is wat die rente uitgawe tot gevolg het. In hierdie studie word eerstens ondersoek ingestel na die faktore wat die howe oorweeg om te bepaal of 'n rente uitgawe aan die vereistes, soos uiteengesit in die inleiding van artikel 11(a), saamgelees met artikel 23(f) en 23(g), voldoen met spesifieke verwysing na die doel waarmee 'n lening aangegaan word. Die moontlikheid word dan ondersoek dat die oorspronklike doel van die lening kan verander en watter effek dit op die aftreknbaarheid van ‘n rente uitgawe kan hê.

Thesis (MComm)--Stellenbosch University, 2004. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to determine the applicability of the various South African Income Taxation Act sections on the deduction of software costs. A distinction is made between the various deduction sections in the Income Taxation Act that are applicable to software costs. By doing this an appropriate taxation deduction is recommended for the different types of software costs that the taxpayer incurs. Software assets and expenditure can be divided into various categories based on the acquisition agreement. The rights and assets that are obtained, differ for each category of software cost. In some instances a copyright is obtained and in other instances only a right of use is obtained. Furthermore the taxpayer receives intellectual property, an intangible asset, and/or a tangible asset. A literature study and an analysis of the different types of software costs and the four concerned Income Taxation Act sections serve as background for the consideration of the applicability of each specific deduction section in the Income Taxation Act on the various categories of software costs. By using the information obtained in the literature study and the analyses, a recommendation is made of the most applicable deduction article for each category of software cost. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie studie het ten doel om die toepaslikheid van die verskillende Suid-Afrikaanse Inkomstebelastingwetsartikels, op die aftrekking van sagtewarekoste te bepaal. 'n Onderskeid word getref tussen die verskillende aftrekkingsartikels wat van toepassing is op sagtewarekoste in die Inkomstebelastingwet. Sodoende word 'n geskikte belastingaftrekking vir die verskillende tipes sagtewarekoste voorgestel wat deur elke belastingpligtige aangegaan word. Sagtewarebates of -uitgawes kan in verskillende kategoriee verdeel word na aanleiding van die verkrygingsooreenkoms wat aangegaan is. Die regte en bates wat verkry word verskil ten opsigte van elke kategorie sagtewarekoste. In sommige gevalle word 'n outeursreg verkry en in ander gevalle slegs 'n gebruiksreg. Verder kan of intellekuele eiendom, 'n ontasbare bate, en/of 'n tasbare bate verkry word. 'n Literatuurstudie en analise van die verskillende tipes sagtewarekoste en die vIer betrokke Inkomstebelastingwetsartikels dien as agtergrond vir die oorweging van die toepaslikheid van elke spesifieke aftrekkingsartikel in die Inkomstebelastingwet op die onderskeie kategoriee sagtewarekoste. Daama word die inligting wat bekom is in die literatuurstudie en analise gebruik om die mees toepaslike aftrekkingsartikel vir elke kategorieë sagtewarekoste voor te stel.