Tax Instruments to Stimulate Innovations in Eu Countries

Solow-Swann's neoclassical theory of economic growth shows that without technological progress, capital accumulation can only lead to a short-term increase in the growth rate of output per capita. The challenges of sustainable innovative development in many countries are coming to the fore today. The creation, dissemination and use of innovations occur in companies, universities, scientific organizations (micro-level), between economic entities within the framework of regional (meso-level) and national (macro-level) innovation systems, as well as at the international level. Innovation support is carried out at the meso-level, focuses on companies and organizations, and is evaluated at the level of the country as a whole. State support for innovation is necessary for the following reasons: 1) the ease of information transfer puts manufacturing companies in a less favorable position compared to consumer companies;2) the difficulty of obtaining a loan for R&D with the risk of information leakage and lack of confidence in the final results;3) the socio-economic system of the country receives more benefits from innovation than all companies in the aggregate. The article discusses such types of support as government subsidies and grants, tax incentives, measures for the development of human capital in an innovative environment, competition and intellectual property protection policy. In the international practice of stimulating innovation, tax incentives are used, 1) allowing to reduce R&D costs, 2) based on non-reduction of R&D expenditures and 3) preferential tax regimes derived from innovation activities. It is shown that the methodological approaches used to assess the effectiveness of tax measures are the B-index (calculated and published by the OECD by country), the analysis of the validity of tax instruments and the use of the European Tax Analyzer model - computer modeling. The analysis of innovative development showed that the European Union in terms of the number of patents, residents and non-residents, the share of researchers in the total population and the share of R&D expenditures in GDP for 2000-2022 is often inferior to China, the USA, Japan and Korea, but generally has a positive development trend. The most popular tools in the European Union countries are tax deductions, "super deductions", R&D grants and other incentives. There is no direct correlation between the number of benefits and the level of innovation development. At the same time, it is noticeable that countries using a large number of support tools are becoming attractive to innovative companies and entrepreneurs. The article analyzes the measures of state support for R&D during the COVID-19 pandemic. Of these, the most relevant are grants and subsidies, and tax benefits. The analysis of tax instruments for stimulating innovation carried out in the article may be useful in the implementation of appropriate policies in other countries.

COVID-19 and deferred tax reversals

Purpose>This paper aims to examine the financial statement impact resulting from the tax depreciation on buildings that was reinstated on 25 March 2020 as part of the New Zealand Government’s coronavirus (COVID-19) tax support package. The COVID-19 pandemic and the tax relief created an accounting response to map the environment to accounting reports, reversing previously recognized deferred tax liabilities and increasing reported income as a result.Design/methodology/approach>This is an exploratory and descriptive study to understand the accounting response and impact on companies’ financial statements following a COVID-19 tax relief to support businesses in a dire financial situation as the effects of COVID-19 took hold.Findings>First, the accounting response provided the appropriate mapping from the COVID-19 environment to accounting reports. Second, the financial statement impacts are material, especially for companies with extensive holdings of buildings that are held for use. Third, while the accounting relief was immediate, the economic (cash flow) support does not occur until a year later.Research limitations/implications>The financial statement impacts are based on a subset of NZX 50 companies with the available information at the time of writing. However, they do not compromise the external validity of the findings because the tax depreciation relief applies to other listed companies, unlisted public and private companies, trust, partnerships and individuals.Practical implications>The New Zealand Government could have been more helpful to businesses by allowing an immediate depreciation deduction in the 2020 year as opposed to implementing it from 2021. Further, it could have legislated a backlog depreciation deduction from 2010 – when the depreciation on buildings was disallowed – to 2020.Originality/value>This paper documents the evolution of the accounting for deferred taxes when the New Zealand Government withdrew the tax depreciation in 2010, how NZ IAS 12 evolved as a result of that event and now the reversal effect with the reinstatement of the tax depreciation during COVID-19. The paper also blends in the accounting responses and considers whether they are opportunistic or efficient.

A Model for the Assessment of the Economic Benefits Associated with Energy Retrofit Interventions: An Application to Existing Buildings in the Italian Territory

In recent decades, the issue of existing buildings’ energy retrofit has played a central role in the context of international and national territorial development policies, mainly due to the obsolescence state that characterizes the housing stock. Since the current need for energy renovation collides with the widespread low spending capacity of the owners, in recent years numerous fiscal incentives have been envisaged, aimed at promoting building initiatives for the improvement of energy performance indices. With reference to the Italian fiscal measure so-called Superbonus, introduced by the “Relaunch” Law Decree No. 34/2020, in the present research, a model for evaluating the economic benefits, in terms of the convenience of the operators involved, generated by energy requalification interventions, has been proposed. The analysis has been developed with regards to the Italian territory and to the prevailing building typology, by considering 110 provincial capitals and the main urban areas into which each city is divided (central, semi-central, and peripheral). Specifically, for each urban area of the Italian capitals considered, the market value differential between the after energy and before energy intervention situations has been firstly determined. Furthermore, assuming an ordinary profit margin of a generic investor interested in this type of investment, the break-even incentive, i.e., the percentage threshold able to ensure the condition of minimum convenience for an investor, has been estimated for each urban area.