关键词: 税费负担, 企业创新, 减税降费

Abstract:

As China’s economy gradually enters the new normal, the traditional investment-driven growth mode is difficult to sustain, and the innovation-driven strategy has been put on the agenda. In this context, in order to effectively promote investment, innovation and entrepreneurship, China launched tax and fee reduction policies at the end of 2014 to “reduce costs” and “promote innovation”, so as to promote high-quality economic development. At the same time, in view of the enormous pressure brought by the COVID-19 pandemic, the importance of large-scale tax and fee reduction policies has become increasingly prominent. Therefore, the study of the impact of tax and fee reduction policies on enterprises’ innovation activities has important theoretical research significance and practical research value. Based on this, with the help of the fiscal impossibility triangle theory, this paper takes China’s A-share listed enterprises from 2009 to 2018 as the sample to study the impact of the tax burden on enterprises’ innovation activities. In the research process, the article focuses on the institutional environment and the incentive structure faced by local governments, and then studies the behavior choice of local governments in this environment. The results of the theoretical modeling and a series of empirical studies are as follows: First, the tax burden reduction as a result of the implementation of tax and fee reduction policies is conducive to alleviating enterprises’ financing constraints, thereby promoting the improvement of enterprises’ R & D input, output and innovation efficiency. Further study finds that the innovation incentive effect of the reduction of indirect tax burden is more significant. Second, the implementation of the “local government deleveraging” policy has hindered the innovation activities of enterprises to a certain extent. Further mechanism research reveals that the financial pressure caused by the implementation of the “local government deleveraging” policy has increased the intensity of tax collection and management to a certain extent, thus weakening the original effect of the “tax and fee reduction” policy to a certain extent. Namely, there is an institutional conflict between “Local government deleveraging” and “tax reduction and fee reduction”, resulting in a policy offset effect to a certain extent. Third, when facing the pressure of reducing tax and debt constraints, local governments prefer to strengthen the collection and management intensity of local tax regarding non-state-owned enterprises so as to alleviate the capital pressure. The research conclusions of this paper not only enrich the enterprise innovation theory, but also provide a basis for improving tax and fee reduction polivies under the framework of the modern financial system. Based on the above research findings, this paper holds that China should further promote the tax and fee reduction policies, vigorously enhance the implementation of the innovation strategy and achieve high-quality economic development. Secondly, because the reduction of indirect taxes and fees has a higher innovation incentive effect, it is necessary to focus on the reform of “indirect taxes and fees”. Thirdly, the heterogeneity analysis shows that the tax burden reduction plays a more significant role in promoting innovation in technology-intensive enterprises and high-tech enterprises, which illustrates that in the process of the policy implementation, special attention should be paid to whether the tax cuts for technology-intensive enterprises and high-tech enterprises are in place. Fourthly, the problems exposed by the policy of “tax and fee reduction” are not only problems at the level of the policy implementation, but also are deep-seated institutional problems. To improve the tax and fee reduction policy, we must first reshape the relationship between the central government and local governments by which we can solve the problem from the source of the system. Moreover, in view of the actual situation, we can provide the necessary incentive structure, such as strengthening the transfer payment to local governments which fully implement “tax and fee reduction” projects. In addition, We should also strengthen the publicity of the benefits of the “tax and fee reduction” policy. Fifthly, we should speed up the process of marketization and reduce the impact of the external intervention on the “tax and fee reduction” policy.

Key words: Tax Burden, Enterprise Innovation, Tax and Fee Reduction