Handbuch Soziale Diagnostik (H25): Lokale Allianzen für Menschen mit Demenz
In: Archiv für Wissenschaft und Praxis der sozialen Arbeit 01
677 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Archiv für Wissenschaft und Praxis der sozialen Arbeit 01
The paper presents development and empirical evaluation of the Homophobia scale (H25). The Homophobia scale consists of 25 items with a five-point Likert type scale. The sample of 476 subjects participated in the research. The results shown good psychometric properties of the H25 (KMO = .99, α = .97). Factor analysis revealed two highly correlated underlying dimensions of homophobia, which can be interpreted as 'homosexuality as a threat to a society' and 'homosexuality as a threat to me'. Convergent and predictive validities of the scale were also demonstrated. The H25 correlated with alternative measures of homophobia (feeling thermometer and connotative differential) as well as with discriminatory attitudes toward homosexuals. Additionally, homophobia was related to gender, political orientation, religiousness, contact with homosexuals and basic personality traits (i.e., Openness and Conscientiousness). In conclusion, the H25 proves to be a reliable and valid measure of homophobia in heterosexuals, which can be used for both research and practical purposes. ; U ovom radu predstavljena je konstrukcija i evaluacija Testa homofobije koji u sadržinskom smislu objedinjuje dosadašnja znanja i ideje o prirodi ovog fenomena. Test homofobije (H25) sastoji se od 25 stavki u formi tvrdnji kojima je pridružena petostepena skala Likertovog tipa. Na uzorku od 476 ispitanika proverene su psihometrijske karakteristike testa i njegova faktorska struktura. U celini test pokazuje dobre psihometrijske karakteristike (KMO = .99, α = .97). Faktorskom analizom ekstrahovana su dva visoko korelirana faktora, koja su interpretirana kao 'homoseksualnost kao pretnja za društvo' i 'homoseksualnost kao pretnja za mene'. Takođe, test je pokazao zadovoljavajuću konvergentnu validnost spram dve alternativne mere homofobije, kao i visoku predikciju diskriminatornih stavova prema osobama homoseksualne orijentacije. Dodatno, pokazano je da homofobija, merena konstruisanim instrumentom, ima veći broj socio-demografskih i personalnih korelata. ...
BASE
SSRN
In: SCC Online Blog, 2023
SSRN
SSRN
In: WU International Taxation Research Paper Series No. 2015-28
SSRN
SSRN
In: RSUE-D-22-00192
SSRN
In: FRL-D-23-00754
SSRN
For decades, most industrialised countries have implemented some forms of fiscal and financial incentives to stimulate fixed capital formation. Tax cuts and capital grants are of great use in regional policy. Since these instruments mobilise huge amounts of public resources the issue of their efficiency is of particular interest for policymakers. The impact of taxation on investment income was traditionally apprehended through models measuring the effective tax rate on marginal investments. However recent literature, especially Devereux and Griffith (2002), showed the interest of resorting to an alternative tax measure – the effective average tax rate (EATR) - when firms face discrete investment choices that are expected to generate positive economic rent before tax. This effective average tax rate is defined by the difference between the net present value of the rent of the investment before and after taxes scaled by the net present value of the pre-tax income stream. In this sense, the effective average tax rate developed by Devereux and Griffith (2002) seems to be particularly relevant to shed a new light on the relative effectiveness of tax cuts and capital subsidy grants. In this paper we intend to compare the costs for public authorities to lower the corporate tax rate or to grant a capital subsidy. These public costs are directly affected by the variation of the after-tax revenue earned by the shareholder. The extent to which each policy must be implemented depends on the channel chosen by the government to stimulate investment. We pay attention to two of these channels: a reduction of the capital cost and a lowering of the EATR. Finally, in order to illustrate the relevance of our approach, we developed a numerical example for the Belgian case. JEL Classification: H25, H32 and R58
BASE
Die Corona-Krise hat die Debatte über eine steuerliche Entlastung von Unternehmen neu belebt. Tatsächlich haben Reformen in Deutschland bereits seit 20 Jahren die Unternehmensbesteuerung deutlich gesenkt. Ziel ist es, im internationalen Steuerwettbewerb zu bestehen. Allerdings geht die neue ökonomische Geografie davon aus, dass es sich Volkswirtschaften mit hoher Standortattraktivität leisten können, hohe Steuern zu erheben. Für die Standortwahl der Unternehmen sind stabile wirtschaftliche Rahmenbedingungen, eine ausgebaute Infrastruktur und gut ausgebildete Arbeitskräfte wesentlich wichtiger. Die Steuerpolitik in der COVID-19-Pandemie sollte sich dementsprechend darauf konzentrieren, diese Standortfaktoren zu verbessern. ; Current reform proposals call for a reduction of the corporate tax burden in Germany and justify this due to the competitiveness of Germany as a business location. However, in view of Germany's continuously high attractiveness in this regard, these demands appear to be inappropriate, even in an international context. To ensure this attractiveness in the long term, it seems to be more important to focus on investments in digitisation, the digital infrastructure, and electromobility. Even in times of economic problems, e.g., the COVID19 pandemic, lowering the nominal tax burdens on companies is not necessarily the answer. Instead, temporary tax breaks for companies that invest during this phase of economic weakness may be more appropriate.
BASE
The introduction of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) in the European Union (EU) would substantially change the rules of the game in international taxation. According to the proposal by the European Commission (EC), the profits of a Multinational Enterprise (MNE) would no longer be assessed by using the arm's length principles and (hypothetical) market prices, but split based on a formulary apportionment. This implies that an allocation key consisting of sales volume, number of employees and capital invested would be applied to distribute the taxable profits of an MNE. From an economic perspective, the principle of taxing profits at source would be thereby abolished. However, due to the current difficulty for taxpayers and tax authorities to agree on adequate transfer prices, a radical change as proposed by the EC might be reasonable. Hence, the EC proposal for the CCCTB is a promising goal as it could lower the red tape burden for MNE as well as tax authorities. Furthermore, the adjustment of the debt bias and the encouragement of R&D as additional items of the EC proposal could stimulate economic growth. A main obstacle for the implementation of a CCCTB would be the expected shifts in tax revenue which make a political agreement at the EU level very difficult. The application of a CCCTB would substantially redistribute corporate profits among the EU member states as a simulation by the German Economic Institute (IW) shows. Especially, Ireland, Luxembourg and Malta would receive significantly less tax revenue since sales volume, number of employees and capital invested are relatively small in these countries. France and Italy, in contrast, would be on the winning side. Germany would also benefit even though to a rather low degree. A main reason for this result is that the strongly exporting German corporations today pay a large proportion of their corporate taxes in Germany. With the application of the CCCTB, parts of the taxable profits would be allocated to foreign countries. From a systematic point of view, the CCCTB is only convincing if there is a global commitment. A simulation of the tax revenue effects for the G20 countries when applying a CCCTB shows that the shift would also be drastic. The EU member states - even the big ones - would have to accept lower taxable corporate profits. Instead, the United States could increase the corporate tax base mainly because of the high consumption level. China and India would benefit due to the large number of employees. Thus, whether a country ranks among the winners or losers in terms of tax revenue depends foremost on the peer group.
BASE
This paper analyzes the impact of taxation on risk-taking under irreversibility. We integrate a simple tax system into a real option model. Under irreversibility and risk neutrality, raising the tax rate can either increase or reduce risk-taking. We numerically derive tax-volatility indifference curves, i.e. combinations of volatility and tax rate, which induce identical investment thresholds. Using this novel illustration technique it is possible to identify conditions for an unambiguous influence of taxes on risk-taking. Our simulations indicate that raising the tax rate increases risk-taking under low volatility. Implementing a ?nal withholding tax on capital income tends to reduce risky investment. Our findings extend the well-known tax effects on investment from certainty with respect to uncertainty, irreversibility, and risk-taking. ; Der vorliegende Beitrag untersucht den Einfluss der Besteuerung auf die Bereitschaft von Investoren, riskante und irreversible Investitionen durchzuführen. Als Erweiterung der vorliegenden Literatur wird ein einfaches Ertragsteuersystem in ein realoptionsbasiertes Modell irreversibler Investitionen bei Risikoneutralität integriert. Es wird gezeigt, dass Erhöhungen des Ertragsteuersatzes die Bereitschaft zur Risikoübernahme erhöhen, aber auch verringern können. Wir leiten SteuersatzVolatilitäts-Indifferenzkurven numerisch her, d.h. Kombinationen von Projektvolatilität und Nominalsteuersatz, die zu identischen Investitionsschwellen führen. Diese neuartige Darstellungsform verdeutlicht, unter welchen Bedingungen ein einheitlicher Steuereinfluss auf die Bereitschaft zur Risikoübernahme vorliegt. Unsere Simulationen zeigen, dass eine Erhöhung des Steuersatzes bei geringer Volatilität tendenziell die Bereitschaft zur Risikoübernahme erhöht. Die Einführung einer Abgeltungssteuer reduziert die Bereitschaft, riskante Investitionen zu realisieren. Die Modellergebnisse erweitern die unter Sicherheit bekannten Steuerwirkungen auf Investitionen im Hinblick auf Unsicherheit, Irreversibilität und die Bereitschaft zur Risikoübernahme.
BASE
In: American economic review, Band 109, Heft 7, S. 2679-2691
ISSN: 1944-7981
In this reply to a comment by Jentsch and Lunsford, we show that the evidence for economic and statistically significant macroeconomic effects of tax changes in Mertens and Ravn (2013) remains present for a range of asymptotically valid inference methods. (JEL E23, E62, H24, H25, H31, H32)
SSRN