경제위기 이후 대기업의 연구개발투자에 대한 조세지원제도의 효과분석

안숙찬 韓國公認會計士會 2009 회계·세무와 감사 연구 Vol.49 No.-

본 연구는 경제위기 이후인 2000년부터 2007년까지의 기간에 걸쳐 우리나라 상장기업 중에서 연구개발활동을 실제로 수행하고 있는 대기업 1,512 기업-연을 대상으로 연구개발활동을 촉진하기 위해 시행하고 있는 조세지원제도인 연구·인력개발비 세액공제제도와 연구·인력개발준비금 손금산입제도의 효과를 분석하였다. 분석결과, 2000년대에 이루어진 연구개발투자에 대한 조세지원의 확대(축소)는 연구개발투자를 유의하게 증가(감소)시키지 못한 것으로 나타났다. 특히 2003년 연구·인력개발 세액공제율이 10%포인트 축소되었음에도 불구하고 대기업의 연구개발투자는 유의하게 증가한 것으로 나타났다. 조세지원제도의 변경이 연구개발투자에 미치는 영향은 조세부담 정도에 따라 차이가 있어, 조세부담이 낮은 집단에서는 조세지원의 확대(축소)에 따라 연구개발투자가 증가(감소)하지 않았다. 그러나 조세부담이 높은 집단에서는 조세지원의 확대에 따라 연구개발투자가 유의하게 증가하였다. 본 연구는 경제위기 이후 연구개발 관련 조세지원의 축소에도 불구하고 대기업은 연구개발투자를 지속적으로 증대시켜 왔다는 것을 보임으로써 조세당국이 대기업의 경우 정부의 인센티브제공이나 지원 없이도 연구개발활동을 수행할 만한 동기와 여력이 충분하다고 보고 대기업에 대한 조세지원을 줄인 정책이 어느 정도 타당성을 갖는다는 것을 보였다. Tax incentives aim at achieving specific national economic objectives, one of which is to encourage firms to invest in R&D. This study examines the impact of changes in tax incentives, R&D tax credit and reserves for R&D, on the major firms' R&D investments after the Asian economic crisis. The tax incentives for major firms' R&D have diminished since the economic crisis because Korean tax authority thought that large companies had motivation and ability enough to make R&D investment without government's tax incentives. However, the tax policy for R&D was changed to give more incentives to large companies from 2008. In spite of a lot of money for tax incentives and the big change of tax policy, there is not a study that analyzes the effectiveness of tax incentives for R&D after the Asian economic crisis. There are four changes in tax incentives from 2000 to 2007. In 2000, major firms can choose the larger amount as tax credit between 5% of R&D expenses and 50% of R&D expenses which exceed the average expenses occurred during the immediately preceding four business years. However, only 50% of the excess of expenses incurred for R&D is applied as tax credit rate in 2001, so tax incentives for R&D is curtailed from 2000 to 2001. From 2003, R&D tax credit rate is decreased from 50% to 40%. In 2006, tax incentive is boosted contrary to the previous years. Tax credit rate on the R&D expenditures incurred to commission small and medium-sized enterprises or universities to conduct R&D increases from 40% to 50%. In 2007, reserves for R&D is abolished. In short, tax incentives are cut down in (2001∼2002), (2003∼2005), and (2007), but are expanded in (2006). This study hypothesizes that R&D expenditures of major firms would increase(decrease) as tax incentives for R&D expand(cut down). This study uses 1,512 firm-year observations collected from Korean stock market over 2000-2007 period with multiple regression analysis. Sample firms are only large companies which have experiences to invest in R&D activities. The sample of prior studies included medium-sized companies and large companies that invested no money into R&D, which might induce misleading results. To analyze the effect of changes in tax incentives for R&D on the firms' R&D expenditure, control variables such as R&D expenditure of the previous year, internal financing(measured by cash flow from operating), external financing(measured by net cash flow from financing), debt ratio, Tobin's q ratio, profitability(measured by return on asset), size, principal stakeholders' equity ratio, and industry dummy variables are incorporated into the research model. In this study, I find that the four changes in tax incentives from 2000 to 2007 don't have a significant predicted effect on the large firms' R&D investment. The coefficients of and are negative as predicted, but not significant. The coefficient of is also positive as predicted, but not significant. The coefficient of is statistically significant, but its sign is different from the predicted. R&D investment during 2003-2005 period significantly increases relative to 2001-2002 period in spite of the 10% cut in tax credit rate for R&D of 2003. These results imply that the expansion (curtailment) in tax incentives for R&D doesn't increase(decrease) the R&D spending of major firms after the Asian economic crisis. To investigate the unexpected results further, I examine if the tax burden of an individual firm affects the relation between the changes in tax incentives and R&D investment. I classify firms into a low and a high tax burden group based on the effective tax rate. Expansion in tax incentives significantly increases the R&D investment in the high tax burden group. In the low tax burden group, however, expansion(cut) in tax incentives doesn't increase(decrease) the R&D investment. Instead, cut in tax incentives of 2003 leads to the increase of R&D expenditure in the low tax burden group. These results imply that the firms in the low tax burden group don't care about the additional tax burden due to the reduction in tax incentives and keep investing in R&D because their existing tax burden is sufficiently low. In addition, I reinvestigate the study of Lee et al.(2000) which analyzes the effect of changes in tax incentives on the firms' R&D spendings from 1987 to 1993. Their sample includes not only large companies that don't invest in R&D at all but also medium-sized firms. I reinvestigate their study using only large companies that have experiences to invest in R&D from 1992 to 1994. According to the result, the change of 1993 that cuts down the tax credit rate of R&D expenses from 10% to 5% and raises the tax credit rate of the excess R&D expenses from 10% to 25% doesn't increase significantly R&D spendings, which is not consistent with the result of Lee et al.(2000). However, the change of 1994 that raises the tax credit rate of the excess R&D expenses from 25% to 50% and does away with the use of the tax credit rate of R&D expenses significantly decrease R&D expenditures of major firms, which is consistent with the result of Lee et al.(2000) The result of this study that firms increase consistently their R&D investment even though the curtailments in tax incentives in 2000s provides tax authority with an empirical validity of its claim that majority firms have sufficient motivation and ability to invest in R&D without the government's incentives or supports. However, this study has some limitations. R&D spending of a firm may be affected by macro economic situation, so it is necessary to incorporate variables which reflect macro economic situation. Even though the research model of this study includes control variables such as profitability or q ratio, it may not be sufficient. In addition, there may be time gap between changes in tax policy and their fruits. Time gap is not taken into account in this study. However, firms can have time to adjust their R&D investment according to t

특별섹션 논문 : 중소제조업의 연구개발투자에 대한 조세지원제도의 효과 분석

안숙찬 ( Sook Chan An ) 한국중소기업학회 2011 中小企業硏究 Vol.33 No.1

우리나라는 1970년대부터 연구개발 활동을 촉진할 수 있는 다양한 조세지원정책을 적극적으로 도입하여 시행하여 왔으나 2000년대 들어서는 연구개발관련 조세지원을 15년간 변화 없이 그대로 유지하거나 심지어 축소하는 방향으로 변경하였다. 그러나 신성장동력 확충을 위해서는 연구개발 활동에 대한 지원이 필요하다는 공감대가 형성됨에 따라 2008년부터는 대기업에 대한 지원을, 2009년부터는 중소기업에 대한 조세지원을 강화하는 쪽으로 정책기조를 선회하였다. 본 연구는 2005년부터 2009년까지의 기간에 걸쳐 우리나라 상장 제조업 중에서 연구개발 활동을 실제로 활발하게 수행하고 있는 중소기업 1,525기업-연을 대상으로 연구개발 활동을 촉진하기 위해 시행하고 있는 조세지원제도인 연구·인력개발비 세액공제제도와 연구·인력개발준비금 손금산입제도의 효과를 분석하였다. 분석결과, 최근에 이루어진 연구개발투자에 대한 조세지원의 확대(축소)는 정책 의도와는 달리 중소기업의 연구개발투자를 유의하게 증가(감소)시키지 못한 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 조세지원제도의 변경이 연구개발투자에 미치는 영향은 조세부담 정도에 따라 차이가 있었다. 조세부담이 높은 집단에서는 2009년의 조세지원 확대에 따라 연구개발투자가 유의하게 증가하였으나 조세부담이 낮은 집단에서는 유의한 변화가 없었다. This study investigates the impact of tax incentives such as R&D tax credit and reserve on R&D spending among small and medium-sized companies. Tax incentives often intend to achieve specific economic objectives, one of which is to encourage firms to invest more in R&D. Since 1994 the tax incentives for R&D in small and medium-sized firms had been kept without any changes for fifteen years. The tax incentives for R&D in large firms had diminished in the early to mid 2000s. However, the tax policy for R&D was changed to give more tax incentives to major companies in 2008 and to small and medium-sized firms in 2009 to help expand their growth potential. In spite of increased government`s monetary support through tax incentives and the major changes of tax policies, there has not been a study that analyzes the effectiveness of tax incentives for R&D among small and medium-sized enterprises. There were two changes in tax incentives for small and medium-sized firms between 2005 and 2009. Until 2006, small and medium-sized firms could deduct the greater amount of either 15% of the year`s R&D expenditure or 50% of R&D expenditure which exceeded the average spending occurred during the immediately preceding four business years. In addition, they could reserve 3% of sales revenue. However, reserve for R&D was abolished in 2007 and therefore the tax incentive for R&D was curtailed between 2006 and 2007. In 2009, tax incentives were boosted unlike the previous years. Tax credit rate on the year`s R&D expenditure increased from 15% to 25% and reserve for R&D came into effect again. In short, tax incentives were cut down in (2007∼2008), but were expanded in (2009). I hypothesize that R&D spending of small and medium-sized firms would increase (or decrease) as tax incentives for R&D expand (or are cut down). I use 1,525 firms-years collected from Korean stock market between 2005 and 2009. For the purpose of this study, small and medium-sized manufacturing companies which invest more than 50 million Korean won per year in R&D are chosen, unlike some of the previous studies that included medium-sized and large companies that invested no money into R&D, which might have produced misleading results. Most tax incentives for R&D are targeted to encourage manufacturing companies to increase R&D investment, so the sample of the study includes companies that fall into manufacturing industry. In addition, I use R&D data collected from annual reports instead of Balance Sheets and Income Statements in order to measure R&D expenditures more accurately. To analyze the impact of changes in tax incentives on the firms` R&D expenditure, control variables such as R&D expenditure of the previous year, operating cash flow (scaled by beginning of year total assets), leverage ratio, Tobin`s q ratio, profitability (measured by return on asset), size (measured by natural log of total assets), export rate, and industry dummy variables are incorporated into the multiple regression analysis model. The annual R&D spending of the sample firms is 1.82 billion Korean won on average, and the median is 1.12 billion Korean won. There is wide variation in R&D spending. While maximum R&D spending is 23.6 billion Korean won, minimum spending is just 60 million Korean won. The mean of R&D intensity (R&D scaled by sale) is 4.21%, and the median is 2.45%. The distribution of total R&D expenditure and R&D is intensity skewed to the right. R&D intensity of small and medium-sized firms is higher than that of large firms. However, total R&D spending is lower among SMEs than large firms. Some of the findings include that the two changes in tax incentives between 2005 and 2009 do not have statistically significant effects on R&D investment among the small and medium-sized firms. According to <Table 6>, the coefficients of and are positive, but they are not statistically significant. These results imply that the curtailment in tax incentives for R&D in 2007 does not decrease the R&D spending among small and medium-sized firms, and expansion in tax incentives in 2009 is not sufficient to increase R&D expenditure of SMEs to the point where it is statistically significant. These results may be due to the global financial crisis in 2008. The Korean economy experienced a serious recession in the following year when the nominal GDP growth rate was 3.6% and the real GDP growth rate was 0.2%. The global financial crisis and subsequent economic depression cause small and medium-sized firms to hesitate to invest more in R&D even though the government tries to provide a boost to R&D spending through tax incentives. It is also speculated that the unexpected results of the present study is due to a variation in tax burden of the sample firms at the point of R&D investment. The reaction of an individual company toward tax incentives varies according to its tax status. To further investigate why this study does not achieve the predicted results, I examine if the tax status of an individual firm affects R&D spending when tax incentives are given by the government. I classify firms into low and high tax burden groups based on the effective tax rate. <Table 7> shows that the coefficient of is significantly positive in the high tax burden group, but it is not significant in the low tax burden group. Expansion in tax incentives significantly increases the R&D investment in the high tax burden group. However, expansion in tax incentives does not increase R&D investment significantly among the low tax burden group. These results imply that the firms in the high tax burden group increase their R&D expenditure because they would like to take advantage of additional tax incentives. On the other hand, the firms in the low tax burden group are not interested in the reduction of tax because their existing tax burden is sufficiently low. In spite of the global economic recession, the expansion in tax incentives for R&D may stimulate R&D spending of the firms with a high tax burden. This study has several limitations. The R&D spending of a firm may be affected by the macroeconomic situation, so it is necessary to incorporate variables which reflect the macroeconomic situation. Even though the research model of this study includes control variables such as profitability and Tobin`s q ratio, they may not be sufficient. In addition, there may be a time gap between changes in tax policy and their fruits. Issues regarding this time gap are not taken into account in this study. However, firms can have time to adjust their R&D investment according to the predicted changes of tax policy because the discussions about changes in tax policy usually start in the middle of the previous year. Thus, the effect of a time gap on the results may be small.

외자유치에 있어서 조세제도의 역할: 동아시아지역을 중심으로

오문석 ( Moon Sok Oh ),임한자 ( Han Ja Lim ) 아시아.유럽미래학회 2010 유라시아연구 Vol.7 No.1

Companies are expanding their businesses through outward direct investments and many countries in the world are using these corporate activities and trying to attract foreign capital to develop their industry. So Korea``s company``s outward direct investments and foreign investments that are flowing into Korea is getting bigger. But the host country that are trying to receive the foreign investments is taking a serious view in tax incentive system as incentive policy. In Asia, expressly in Indonesia, they changed their tax incentive policy in many times in 1990``s and the attract results had changed a lot by this reason. Now we can see that host country``s tax incentive policy effects the decision of investments abroad. In most countries, generally gives the tax incentives above 5~10years after foreign investment. The host country can give tax incentive policy only to foreign investments that gives help to their economy, or can give tax incentive to all foreign investments. Also the host country``s tax incentive policies are devided into soliciting new investments and to attract reinvestments. To deside to reinvest the foreign incomes, it is desided by tax incentive policy about foreign dividends in host country and home country. In company``s side, there is country that tax rate of income is lower compared with home country. If a company makes large business income in the country, it is decreasing tax burden of big business groups that the company dose not send dividends to home country. Companies prefer to reinvest in low-tax areas rather that high-tax area, but the capital flow from high-tax area to low-tax area are becoming meaningless. Because many countries keep decreasing the tax rate in order to attract foreign investments. Most of all OECD countries are preferring to decrease the tax rates. The countries are decreasing the tax rate to attract foreign capital to solve their unemployment and regional economy to be active. One foreign capital``s reinvestments gives expand of investments for R&D in their country. In any situation, tax is significant point in soliciting foreign investment. So, to bring in more foreign investments, they need to have more tax cuts competition as much as they want. From one research, South Korea``s R&D center abroad is about 72 in 2007, but all countries think that company``s own work on R&D should be performed in home country. So, the tax incentive connected with company``s R&D abroad is not discussed yet. South Korea company``s R&D business investments are not figured out, but R&D business work in local area is getting bigger. A company makes the more investment on R&D, it has the more business competition. This also leads to transfer of experience, knowledge, and technology to host country``s industry. So in this part, there are lots of tax incentives to attract foreign investment. Expressly in Asia, there are tax incentives to encourage the development of new technology. As global economic systems are lasting, host countries will try to attract foreign investments with business taxation, and companies will use outward direct investment and reinvest to make the tax burden smaller.

조세유인과 비조세유인이 기업의 외부감사인 제공 세무서비스 구매의사결정에 미치는 영향

이영한 ( Young Han Lee ),윤성만 ( Sung Man Yoon ) 한국회계학회 2011 會計學硏究 Vol.36 No.2

최근 국제회계사연맹(IFAC)에서는 외부감사인이 피감사인에게 감사서비스와 함께 제공하는 특정 세무서비스를 제한하는 윤리규정을 신설하였다. 특히 세액산출, 세무계획 수립, 세무자문 및 세무분쟁 해결 지원 등 재무제표에 중대한 영향을 미치는 경우에는 안전장치가 없어 심각한 독립성 훼손위험을 발생시킨다는 점을 강조하고 있다. 이러한 시점에서 경영자가 외부감사인으로부터 세무서비스를 구매하는 의사결정과정에서 효율적인 세무계획을 위한 유인과 감사인의 외관상 독립성을 강화하기 위한 비조세유인을 고려하는지를 검증할 필요가 있다. 효율적인 세무계획(effective tax planning)을 위해 경영자는 외부감사인으로부터 세무서비스를 구매하는 의사결정과정에서부터 조세비용과 비조세비용 모두를 고려해야 한다. 즉, 조세부담을 줄이기 위한 비용과 이해관계자들에게 외부감사인의 외관상 독립성을 인식시키기 위한 비용을 고려하여 외부감사인의 세무서비스를 구매할 것인지를 결정해야 한다. 조세부담이 큰 기업의 경영자는 이를 효율적으로 절감하기 위해 외부감사인이 제공하는 세무서비스를 구매할 유인이 강하게 작용할 것이며, 감사인의 외관상 독립성을 이해관계자들에게 인식시키기 위해 비조세유인이 강하게 작용하여, 오히려 외부감사인의 세무서비스를 구매할 유인이 약하게 작용할 것이라는 연구가설을 설정하였다. 또한 거래상대방인 외부감사인의 감사품질수준과 chinese-wall의 정도가 이러한 경영자의 조세유인과 비조세유인에 영향을 미칠 것으로 예상하였다. 본 연구는 당기의 외부감사인으로부터 세무서비스 구매여부로 하는 이분형변수를 종속변수로 하고, 조세유인변수와 비조세유인변수를 독립변수로 하는 Logistic회귀분석을 통해 분석하였으며, 분석결과는 다음과 같다. 먼저 1)조세유인의 대용변수인 한계세율이 높은 경영자일수록 외부감사인으로부터 세무서비스를 구매할 가능성이 큰 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 현상은 조세순응(tax compliance)성격의 서비스보다는 세무계획(tax planning)성격의 서비스에서 확연하게 나타났다. 따라서 조세부담이 큰 기업일수록 감사분야와 세무분야 간의 지식이전효과(knowledge spillover between audit and tax perspective)를 발생시켜 효율적으로 조세부담을 줄이기 위해 외부감사인에게서 세무서비스를 구매한다는 것으로 해석된다. 또한 2)비조세유인 측면에서 경영자의 소유지분율이 클수록, 부채비율이 낮을수록 그리고 기업규모가 작을수록 외부감사인으로부터 세무서비스를 구매할 가능성이 크다는 것을 보여주고 있다. 이러한 결과는 외부주주, 채권자 및 외부기관 등에 대하여 감사인의 외관상 독립성 수준이 높다는 것을 인식시키기 위해 오히려 외부감사인에게서 세무서비스를 구매하지 않는다는 것으로 해석될 수 있다. 또한 3)유인들 간의 상대적 영향의 크기를 비교한 결과, 감사인으로부터 세무계획성격의 세무서비스(세무전략, 세무자문, 불복청구 등 대리 및 기타)를 구매하는 의사결정과정에서 조세유인, 부채비율, 기업규모 및 경영자소유지분율 순으로 작용하고 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. Recently, IFAC(International Federation of Accountants) has revised Auditor Ethics Code including regulation of auditor-provided specific tax services. Performing certain tax services creates self-review and advocacy threats to independence. Also this code make examples of tax services as tax return preparation, tax calculations for the purpose of preparing the accounting entries, tax planning and other tax advisory services, and assistance in the resolution of tax disputes. So the range of tax services that auditor may serve his/her client can be narrow. It is proper time to evaluate the effects of tax and nontax motivated incentives on manager`s decisionmaking of purchasing external auditor-provided tax services. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether tax and nontax incentives affect manager`s decision-making process of purchasing tax services from current auditor. Because managers should consider all costs such as tax and nontax costs for effective tax-planning(Scholes and Wolfson 1992), It is in a dilemma for them to make a decision of purchasing auditor-provided tax services in tax and nontax perspective. In this point, This study is the first step to investigate manager`s behavior in the selection process of tax agent in order to come true tax and financial reporting objectives. We hypothesize that managers have incentives to purchase auditor-provided tax services in order effectively to reduce tax burden, by improving auditor`s knowledge spillover effect between audit and tax perspectives, and in order to make the interested parties, such as external shareholders, creditors and government authorities etc., perception of higher auditor`s independence in appearance(agency costs). Additionally, we expect that auditor, service transaction parties, makes effects on these incentives of manager`s purchasing of tax service because of audit quality and chinese-wall between audit and tax department in the audit firm. To test our hypotheses, we conduct logistic regressions of dummy variables on the left-hand side, and tax incentive variable(MTR) and nontax incentives(OWN, LEV, and SIZE) as independent variables. Also we collect tax service data categorized by tax compliance services(tax return, tax adjustment) and tax planning services(tax advise, tax strategies, tax claim and tax education etc.)from DART system of FSS. The results of the logistic regression show that MTR variable significantly increases the frequency of purchasing auditor-provided tax services(especially, tax planning including tax-strategy, tax advice, tax claim and education etc). And OWN, LEV and SIZE statistically significantly effect on purchasing these services. These results support our expectation that managers have strong incentives to purchase auditorprovided tax services as their company`s tax burden and not to purchase these services in order to show higher auditor`s independence in appearance. Finally, managers employing big auditors have no incentives that they purchase auditor-provided tax services due to higher audit quality and to maintain specific level of the chinese-wall. This result reassure that Big auditors already have been perceived by market participants that big auditors have higher audit quality and strong chinese-wall. Finally managers have only tax incentive to conduct effective tax planning by purchasing auditor-provided tax planning services. This paper makes contribution to provide empirical evidences and political implications about auditor-provided tax services to KICPA and tax authorities preparing to adopt new Auditor Ethics Code.

세법상 연구개발(R&D) 지원제도의 개선방안에 관한 연구

윤충식 ( Chung Sik Yoon ) 연세대학교 법학연구원 의료·과학기술과 법센터 2012 연세 의료·과학기술과 법 Vol.3 No.1

The volume of tax incentives for Research and Development (R&D) in Korea stands at around 2.1 trillion won, accounting for about 7% of total national tax incentives of 30.1 trillion won, which shows their importance in the country`s whole tax incentive system. There is wide agreement that R&D tax incentives are essential in developing future growth engine and promoting economic growth through technical innovation. In fact, however, there have been abuses of R&D tax reliefs which provide relatively large amount of tax reduction, while comprehensive and thorough study on how to remedy such problem has rarely been made. The purpose of this study is to identify cases where such abuses are conducted going against the original aim of R&D tax incentives and other side effects found in the course of implementing such incentives and to suggest measures to improve the system in general as well as in terms of post-management thereof. Specific suggestions resulting from the study are as follows: First, there is a need for a committee to judge the eligibility of a given R&D spending for tax incentive. The idea is that only those applications for R&D tax credit submitted along with a certificate issued by the committee will be granted such benefit, thereby helping prevent tax incentive from going to unqualified spending. Second, the introduction of targeted early refund for R&D expenditure for small and medium-sized enterprises(SMEs) would lead to promoting R&D activities among them. Third, over the mid and long term, Korea should consider introducing a system in which different tax relief is granted to R&D spending made abroad than that allowed for R&D spending made domestically, taking a cue from Singapore and the US. Fourth, Korea needs to introduce additional tax incentives for research jointly conducted among industry, academy and research institutes, benchmarking the special credit regime for joint research in Japan. Fifth, there is a need to reduce the gap in the volume-based R&D tax credit amount between SMEs and large companies by increasing the credit amount for the latter by up to around 10%, given that adopting the alternative of lowering the credit amount for SMEs could deal a blow to their competitiveness. Sixth, in case of no yearly average spending, it would be effective to base tax reliefs on the volume of R&D spending with the incremental scheme to be added as complement. Seventh, tax credit associated with the special R&D district needs to be granted only when approved R&D activities have been actually conducted and the result from such activities has been submitted to the NTS for verification purpose. This study in particular has suggested a measure to address the problem that the number of special R&D districts could be easily increased, as such districts may be designated through notice issued by the Ministry of Knowledge Economy rather than through relevant laws.

배당소득 증대세제와 기업의 내재자본비용

김단비,윤성수,두서영 한국세무학회 2020 세무와 회계저널 Vol.21 No.2

본 연구는 「가계소득 증대세제」 중 하나인 배당소득 증대세제가 배당을 늘려 세제혜택 요건을 충족한 기업의 내재자본비용에 영향을 미치는지를 분석하고, 이러한 효과가 기업의 지분구조에 따라 차별적인지를 분석한다. 또한 세제혜택을 적용받고자 배당을 증가시킨 기업이 배당소득 증대세제의 종료 후에도 증가된 배당금을 유지하는지를 분석한다. 유가증권시장 및 코스닥시장에 상장된 12월 결산 비금융업 기업을 대상으로 배당소득 증대세제가 적용된 2015년에서 2017년까지의 기간을 그 전․후 기간과 각각 비교하여 실증분석한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 배당소득 증대세제 적용기간에 세제혜택을 받은 기업의 내재자본비용이 감소하였다. 이는 세제혜택에 따른 투자자의 세부담 감소 효과가 내재자본비용에 반영된 것으로 보인다. 둘째, 대주주지분율이 높을수록 내재자본비용 감소효과가 완화되는 것으로 나타났다. 이는 대주주의 이익 실현을 위한 배당 증가를 투자자들이 부정적으로 평가하거나, 적용기간 중 세법개정에 따라 대주주에 대한 세제혜택이 감소하여 배당을 증가시킬 유인이 감소하였기 때문인 것으로 보인다. 추가분석에서 배당소득 증대세제의 종료 후 고배당기업의 배당 행태를 살펴본 결과, 배당소득 증대세제의 시행기간 동안 세제혜택을 받은 횟수가 많은 기업일수록 동 제도의 종료 후에도 증가한 배당을 유지하는 것으로 나타났다. 기업의 수익성을 비교해 본 결과, 수익성이 높아 배당을 늘릴 여력이 있는 기업은 세제혜택을 위해 배당을 증가시키고 이후 기간에도 이를 유지한 것으로 나타나 배당소득 증대세제의 도입 취지와 일치하는 반면, 수익성이 낮은 기업의 경우 세제혜택을 위해 배당을 일시적으로 증가시키나 과도한 배당이 오히려 기업의 투자를 감소시켜 기업가치에 부정적인 영향을 미쳤을 가능성도 있는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구는 배당소득 증대세제의 적용기간 동안 고배당기업의 내재자본비용을 분석함으로써 배당소득 증대세제의 경제적 효과를 직접적으로 검증하였다. 한시적인 세제혜택도 기업의 내재자본비용에 영향을 미칠 수 있고 그 효과는 기업의 지분구조에 따라 차별적이며, 세제혜택을 위해 증가한 배당이 과세특례제도가 종료된 이후에도 유지되는지 여부가 기업의 수익성에 따라 다르게 나타난다는 연구 결과는 정부가 세제혜택을 통해 기업의 배당을 유도하고 자본시장을 활성화하기 위한 정책을 수립하는 데 시사점을 제공할 것으로 기대한다. This study investigates whether dividend income tax incentives affect the implied cost of equity capital of high-dividend companies and whether these effects depend on the ownership structure of the companies. We also analyze whether companies that increased dividends for tax benefits maintain high dividends without these tax benefits. For empirical tests, we use ex ante measures of the cost of equity capital as a dependent variable and identify high-dividend companies following tax law. Our main results are as follows. First, the cost of equity capital of high-dividend firms decreases during the period of tax incentives. This indicates that investors lower the required rate of returns by reflecting the reduced tax burdens, which supports the dividend tax capitalization hypothesis. Second, the higher the ownership of the largest shareholders, the less the effect of the dividend tax capitalization. This result suggests that high dividend decisions for the tax benefits of the largest shareholders are negatively evaluated in the capital market or that the dividend tax capitalization is mitigated because the tax benefits of the largest shareholders are reduced due to the 2016 revision of tax law. We also find that companies with high profitability can afford to increase their dividends for tax benefits and maintain increased dividends, which is consistent with the purpose of the tax incentives. In the case of low-profitability companies, dividends are temporarily increased in order to receive tax benefits, and there is a possibility that these excessive dividends lower the capacity to invest. This study suggests that the temporary tax benefits affect the cost of equity capital of high-dividend companies, and that this effect depends on the ownership structure and profitability of the companies. These results imply that the policy makers need to closely consider the ownership structure and profitability of companies when they intend to encourage firms to increase dividends through tax benefits.

창업중소기업 지원세제에 대한 법리적 검토 및 입법론

최성근 영남대학교 법학연구소 2019 영남법학 Vol.0 No.48

Start-up itself is the vitality of the economy and the creation of jobs. Start-up small and medium enterprises(SMEs) strengthens the foundation of the national economy and increases employment. Various institutional incentives are provided to support start-up SMEs. In the questionnaire survey of SME managers, it was found that the preference of the tax incentives for start-up SMEs is relatively higher than other institutional incentives. Even though the motive of the tax incentives for start-up of SME is to realize the policy purpose, they are essentially the tax system and the legislation. Therefore, the contents should be in accordance with the general principles of tax law and the basic principles of legislation. In addition, since the tax incentives for start-up SMEs is spread across the national and local taxes, the harmony between the tax incentives in the Restriction of Special Taxation Act and the tax incentives in the Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act should be considered. From this point of view, this article reviewed the tax incentives for start-up SMEs under the current laws, and suggested some legislative schemes to resolve the problems of the tax incentives for start-up SMEs. In order to provide practical assistance to start-up SMEs, the starting point of the tax reduction should be defined as the occurrence of ‘tax amount’, not ‘taxable income’. And if start-up SMEs do not meet the requirements of the reduction after first application of tax reduction, the tax reduction ratio should be cut in proportion to the period. The Restriction of Special Local Taxation Act allows the reduction of local income tax only for individual start-up SMEs. The reduction of corporate local income tax for start-up SMEs is not allowed. This is not only contrary to the neutrality of the tax and the freedom of business in the constitutional law, but it also may result in socioeconomically undesirable results. Therefore, it is necessary to include corporation local income tax in the subject of reduction. 창업중소기업 지원세제는 도입 이후 중소기업정책의 변화에 따라 적용대상과 감면내용을 확대하는 방향으로 여러 차례 개정되었다. 현행 관련 제도들을 보면 정책을 입법화하는 과정에서 조세법의 기본원리나 입법의 기본원리가 충분히 고려되지 아니하였다고 여겨지는 규정들이 적지 않게 눈에 띈다. 또한 조세특례제한법과 지방세특례제한법의 실질적인 입법주체가 각각 다른 행정부처 이다보니 국세인 소득세와 법인세의 세액감면과 지방세인 취득세, 재산세 및 등록면허세의 세액감면 간에 정합성이 결여된 부분들도 있고 균형이 미흡한 부분들도 있다. 조세특례제한법과 지방세특례제한법에 공통된 사항으로, 창업한 중소기업에 대하여 실질적인 도움을 주려면 세액감면의 기산점을 ‘해당 사업에서 최초로 소득이 발생한 과세연도’가 아니라 ‘해당 사업에서 최초로 세액이 발생한 과세연도’ 또는 ‘최초로 세액을 감면받는 과세연도’로 변경할 필요가 있다. 또한 사후적으로 세액감면의 요건을 충족하지 못하게 되는 경우 시점에 관계없이 그 과세연도 전체에 대하여 감면비율을 축소하거나 감면을 배제하도록 규정하고 있는데, 이는 비례의 원칙에 반하는 것이므로 과세연도 중 해당 기간에 비례하여 감면비율을 축소하거나 감면을 배제하도록 해당 규정을 개정할 필요가 있다. 조세특례제한법에서는 창업중소기업에 대한 지원세제와 관련하여, 사후적으로 일정한 사유가 발생하는 경우 법률의 근거 없이 시행령에서 직접 세액감면의 비율을 줄이거나 세액감면을 배제하는 내용을 규정하고 있는데, 이는 조세법률주의의 과세요건 법정주의에 반하는 것이므로 조세특례제한법에 시행령 위임에 대한 근거규정을 둘 필요가 있다. 지방세특례제한법에서는 창업중소기업 등에 대한 지방소득세의 세액감면을 규정하면서 개인지방소득세만을 감면대상으로 하고 있고 법인지방소득세는 그 감면대상에서 배제하고 있는데, 이는 조세의 중립성과 헌법상 영업의 자유에 반할 뿐만 아니라 법인기업 형태의 중소기업 창업을 위축시켜 사회・경제적으로 바람직하지 아니한 결과를 초래할 수 있으므로 법인지방소득세도 감면의 대상에 포함시킬 필요가 있다.

GVC 재편과 연구개발 지원세제의 개편방안

이성봉 한국조세법학회 2021 조세논총 Vol.6 No.1

This study analyses the effectiveness of R&D tax incentive system in Korea in the age of global value chain restructuring after Covid-19 pandemic, and suggests some reform ideas for the R&D tax incentives. The GVC restructuring after Covid-19 pandemic challenges Korea to transform it’s economy into an more innovative power house. In order to strengthen the country’s innovative capacity, the Korean government should promote firms’ R&D activities, especially by enhancing the effectiveness of R&D tax incentives. This study finds out three problems of Korean R&D tax incentives. Firstly, R&D tax incentives in Korea focus on only input side of R&D activities. Secondly, they don’t provide enough choice sets for companies, as main incentives are only tax credits for R&D expenditures. Thirdly, there are too big differences in R&D tax credits by the firm size. Large firms can enjoy tax credit too much less than small and midium enterprises. Based on the research findings this study suggests three reform ideas on R&D tax incentives in Korea. Firstly, it is necessary to introduce the patent box system, which promotes more R&D activities by providing corporate income tax cut for the business income from intellectual properties. Secondly, the adoption of R&D expenditure allowance system is needed to increase the flexibility of firms R&D activities. Thirdly, this study suggests decreasing the gap of R&D tax credit ratio between large firms and SMEs. 코로나19 이후 글로벌 밸류체인(GVC)의 안정성이 중요시되면서 공급망을 자국내 또는 지역내에서 완결하려는 노력을 증가하면서 GVC는 지역가치사슬 및 국가가치사슬 구축으로 변모하고 있다. 이러한 GVC 재편은 우리 경제에 소재・부품・장비분야에서 국내 완결형 공급망 강화 및 혁신역량 강화라는 과제를 던져주고 있으며, 이를 해결하기 위해서는 기업의 연구개발활동에 대한 조세지원의 효과성을 강화할 필요가 있다. 코로나19 이후 GVC 재편 관점에서 현행 연구개발 조세지원제도의 효과성을 검토한 결과 현행 연구개발 지원세제는 세 가지 문제점을 확인할 수 있었다. 첫째, 연구개발의 투입측면에 집중되어 있어 성과지향적 연구개발활동을 유인하기에는 부족한 측면이 있다. 둘째, 코로나19 이후 기업의 수익성 악화 및 유동성 문제는 세액공제방식 중심의 지원제도로는 지속적 연구개발활동의 수행을 지원하는데 한계가 있다. 셋째, 연구개발 세액공제율이 기업규모에 따라 지나치게 큰 차이를 보이고 있어 투자여력이 있는 대기업의 연구개발투자 유인이 약하다. 본 연구에서는 연구개발활동 조세지원과 관련한 이러한 문제점을 개선할 수 있는 방안으로 다음 세 가지를 제안하고 있다. 첫째, 연구개발활동의 산출물인 특허권과 같은 지식재산권을 사업화하여 발생하는 소득에 대해서 조세감면을 제공하는 특허박스제도 도입이 필요하다. 둘째, 기업의 연구개발계획의 선택지를 확대한다는 차원에서 연구・인력개발준비금 제도를 한시적으로 재도입하는 방안을 제안한다. 셋째, 대기업과 중소기업의 공제율 차이를 일반연구・인력개발비 세액공제율에서 제시된 2배를 넘지 않는 범위로 설정할 것을 제안한다.

경제위기상황 이후 중소기업 조세지원제도의 개선방안

김이배,김재준 한국세무학회 2008 세무와 회계저널 Vol.9 No.1

Since the 1997's economic crisis, the government has enforced some revitalizing policies for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise(SMEs) centering around venture businesses. policy funds support and tax incentives are those typical examples. The purpose of this research is to examine the effects of tax incentives of SMEs on the basis of the survey of SMEs Korea Federation of Small and Medium Business(KBIZ) from the view point of tax incentives. Specifically, we will analyze how the Korean tax incentive policies have changed before and after the economic crisis; in addition, we will examine whether the tax load has actually decreased since the crisis. Moreover, we will investigate the reason why tax incentive programs have been poorly applied and activated. We will also find out the most frequently used tax incentive systems. Finally, some suggestions will be made in order to improve the tax incentive programs for the Korean SMEs. Making full use of the SMEs tax incentive every year turned out to be beneficial for the financial position improvement. The primary reasons for the low application of tax incentives are that some applicants are not qualified for the program and that others are not aware of the details of the system and its application processes. This research, on the ground of this analysis, has made several suggestions: the extension of application range, the simplification of tax support system and its application through relaxing restrictions of tax reduction, and the automatic program to calculate the tax saving relating to the SMEs incentive systems. This study is valuable to the effect that we have evaluated the SMEs incentive systems of the past and have made suggestions for improvements in the future, verifying that the effect of tax incentive programs has increased since the economic crisis. 정부에서는 1997년의 경제위기상황 이후 벤처기업을 중심으로 한 중소기업의 활성화정책을 펴왔으며, 정책자금지원과 조세지원제도 등이 대표적인 예이다. 본 연구에서는 조세지원제도의 측면에서 중소기업협동조합중앙회가 실시한 설문조사결과를 바탕으로 조세지원제도의 효과를 측정하고자 한다. 구체적으로 경제위기상황을 전후로 하여 우리나라 조세지원제도의 활용이 어떻게 변화하였는지, 또한 경제위기상황 이후 조세부담이 실제로 낮아졌는지 등에 대해서 분석하고자 한다. 또한 경제위기상황 이후 조세지원제도의 활용이 부진한 이유를 알아보며, 조세지원제도 중에서 가장 많이 이용되는 조세지원제도가 어떤 것인가에 대해서 알아본다. 이러한 분석결과를 바탕으로 우리나라의 중소기업 조세지원제도의 개선방안에 대하여 제시한다.중소기업 조세지원제도는 매년 적극적으로 활용됨으로써 재무상태를 개선시키고 있으며, 조세지원제도 활용 부진 이유에서는 지원대상에 해당되지 않아서 지원제도의 내용과 적용방법을 알지 못해 활용이 부진하다는 이유가 가장 많았다. 이러한 분석을 토대로 본 연구에서는 조세지원제도의 지원대상범위의 확대와 감면요건의 완화를 통해 조세지원체계를 단순화하고 조세지원제도 이용을 간편하게 하며, 중소기업 조세지원제도와 조세절감액이 자동으로 계산되는 프로그램을 만들 것을 제안하였다. 본 연구는 경제위기상황 이후 중소기업 조세지원제도의 효과가 증가하였음을 보여줌으로써 지금까지의 중소기업 조세지원제도를 평가하고 향후 개선되어야 할 사항을 제시하였다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

창업중소기업에 대한 조세감면제도의 문제점과 개선방향

이리하,유창호,유영환,백광렬 한국세무회계학회 2019 세무회계연구 Vol.0 No.59

In order to protect and develop small and medium start-up enterprises(SMSEs) by the Constitution, there are diverse tax incentives available in tax law. The purpose of tax incentives for SMSEs is to construct sound industrial structure and to provide with new employments by vitalizing the establishment of enterprises. Korea has introduced a tax support system for SMSEs and tax support for startup venture companies. Tax reliefs for SMSEs is one of the most vital among the other tax regimes on those enterprises and it is the most used tax incentives by enterprises and is also praised for high effectiveness. However, tax disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities arise from how large the scope of SMSEs should be, and it is not difficult to find a tax controversy. For operating tax reduction system for SMSEs effectively, it is required to legalize the details on business eligible for tax incentives. In addition, tax authorities need to strike a balance between the principle of no taxation without law and the principle of substantial taxation when judging whether SMSEs are eligible for tax reliefs. The contribution of this study is to summarize and analyze the problems related to the tax reliefs for small and medium start-up enterprises, suggesting improvement of the tax reduction system in the future. 조세법에는 중소기업을 보호하고 발전시키기 위한 다양한 세제 혜택들이 있다. 중소기업에 대한 세제 혜택의 목적은 기업의 설립을 활성화하여 건전한 산업구조를 구축하고 새로운 고용을 제공하는 것이다. 이를 위해 한국은 중소기업에 대한 조세지원제도와 벤처기업에 대한 조세지원제도를 도입했다. 특히, 중소기업에 대한 세금 감면은 가장 많이 사용되는 세금 장려책일 뿐만 아니라 대상 기업에 높은 효과를 창출할 수 있다는 점에서 여러 세금 감면제도들 중에서 가장 중요한 제도 중의 하나이다. 중소기업의 조세감면제도를 효과적으로 운영하려면 조세감면대상자의 범위를 명확하게 입법화해야 한다. 또한 국세청은 중소기업의 조세감면 자격 여부를 판단할 때 조세법률주의원칙과 실질과세주의원칙 사이에서 균형을 맞출 필요가 있다. 본 논문에서는 조세법상 창업의 정의에 관한 문제점과 법규정상 조세감면 적용의 문제점, 조세감면 적용배제 규정에 관한 문제점들을 여러 판례와 예규 등을 통하여 조사하고 과세당국과 납세자들의 입장 및 서로간의 견해 차이를 구체적으로 살펴보았다. 창업중소기업의 세액감면과 관련된 조세분쟁을 원활히 해결하기 위해서는 엄격해석의 원칙을 견지하더라도 사실관계의 형식보다 실질에 근거하여 동제도의 목적과 취지에 부합하는 판단을 내리도록 노력하는 것이 매우 중요하다. 이러한 과정을 통하여 모호한 조세지원의 범위가 좀 더 구체적이고 명확하게 정의된다면 창업지원이라는 본래의 입법 취지에 부합되는 실질적인 조세지원제도로 뿌리내리게 될 것이다.