Do Gaming Companies Benefit from the IP Box Tax Rate? Multinational, Polish and Wielkopolskie Voivodeship Perspective

• Autorzy: Agnieszka Teterycz , Anna Białek-Jaworska , Michał Woźniak , Monika Piosik

Warianty tytułu

Czy spółki sektora gier komputerowych odnoszą korzyści z IP Box? Perspektywa międzynarodowa, polska i województwa wielkopolskiego

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

Celem artykułu jest weryfikacja wpływu obniżonej stawki podatkowej IP BOX na przy-chody spółek z branży gier komputerowych oraz prawa Gibrata stwierdzającego, że wzrost firmy jest niezależny od jej wielkości. Dynamiczne modele panelowe oszacowane metodą GMM, FE dla danych panelowych i MNK, opracowano na danych 673 spółek z 11 krajów. Wykazano, że małe firmy z branży gier komputerowych rosną szybciej niż ich więksi rywale. Tym samym odrzucono prawo Gibrata. Nie potwierdzono, że IP Box wspiera wzrost przedsiębiorstw z wyjątkiem województwa wielkopolskiego. Większe szanse na korzyści z IP Box (obniżona do 5% stawka podatku dochodowego obowiązująca w Polsce od 2019 r.) mają firmy o bardziej istotnych i dynamicznych zmianach kapitałochłonności, aktywów niematerialnych i zapasów. Branża gier wideo w Wielkopolsce odnosi większe korzyści z IP Box niż w pozostałej części Polski.(abstrakt oryginalny)

EN

This article aims to verify the impact of the reduced IP Box tax rate on the revenues of gaming companies and Gibrat's Law stating that firm growth is independent of a company's size. The dynamic panel-data models estimated in this article using GMM, FE panel data and OLS methods were created based on data of 673 companies from 11 countries. We show that small gaming firms are growing faster than their larger rivals. Thus, we reject Gibrat's Law. We did not find evidence that IP Box supports the firm's growth except for the Wielkopolskie Voivodeship. More chances for IP Box's (reduced to 5% income tax rate being in force in Poland since 2019) effects are given to firms with more remarkable and dynamic changes in capital intensity, intangibility and inventory. The gaming industry in Wielkopolska benefits more from IP Box than the rest of Poland.(original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

PL

Gry komputerowe; Spółki; Przedsiębiorstwo; Podatki; Programy komputerowe

EN

Computer games; Companies; Enterprises; Taxes; Computer programs

• Czasopismo: Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna / Instytut Geografii Społeczno-Ekonomicznej i Gospodarki Przestrzennej Uniwersytetu im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
• Rocznik: 2022
• Numer: nr 62
• Strony: 303-323

Twórcy

autor

Agnieszka Teterycz

• Uniwersytet Warszawski

autor

Anna Białek-Jaworska

• Uniwersytet Warszawski

autor

Michał Woźniak

• Uniwersytet Warszawski

autor

Monika Piosik

• Szkoła Główna Handlowa w Warszawie

Bibliografia

• Aleem S., Capretz L.F., Ahmed F. 2016. Empirical investigation of key business factors for digital game performance. Entertainment Computing, 13: 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2015.09.001
• Arellano M., Bond S. 1991. Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and Application to Employment Equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58(2): 277-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968
• Audretsch D.B., Elston J.A. 2010. On the relationship between firm size and growth: Have we been asking wrong questions? Working paper presented at the Ratio Colloquium for Young Social Scientists, Stockholm.
• Audretsch D.B., Santarelli E., Vivarelli M. 1999. Start-up size and industrial dynamics: Some evidence from Italian manufacturing. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 77(7): 965-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7187(98)00002-2
• Balsmeier B., Fleming L., Manso G. 2017. Independent boards and innovation. Journal of Financial Economics, 123(3): 536-557. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2016.12.005
• Blundell R., Bond S. 1998. Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1): 115-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8
• Bornemann T., Laplante S.K., Osswald B. 2020. The Effect of Intellectual Property Boxes on Innovative Activity & Effective Tax Rates. WU International Taxation Research Paper Series No. 2018-03. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3115977
• Bradley S., Dauchy E., Robinson L. 2015. Cross-country evidence on the preliminary effects of patent box regimes on patent activity and ownership. National Tax Journal, 68(4): 1047-1072. https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2015.4.07
• Calvo J.L. 2006. Testing Gibrat's law for young, small and innovative firms. Small Business Economics, 26(2): 117-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-004-2135-5
• Caramina L.V. 2022. The taxation of 'intangible' innovation: the Patent Box in Europe and the Italian case. Review of European and Comparative Law, 50(3): 109-127. https://doi.org/10.31743/recl.13919
• Chen S., De Simone L., Hanlon M., Lester R. 2019. The Effect of Innovation Box Regimes on Income Shifting and Real Activity. Working Paper, 3453 Stanford University, Graduate School of Business. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3486428
• Dissanayake D.M.R., Wastantha H.L.N., Jinadasa M.P.K. 2018. The Role of Organizational Creativity towards Innovations: A Conceptual Review on Services Sector Research Directions. Journal of Social Science - Sri Lanka, 10(2): 1-17.
• Evers L., Miller H., Spengel C. 2015. Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations. International Tax and Public Finance, 22: 502-530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-014-9328-x
• Fagiolo G., Luzzi A. 2006. Do liquidity constraints matter in explaining firm size and growth? Some evidence from the Italian manufacturing industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(1): 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtj001
• Feijoo C., Gómez-Barroso J.L., Aguado J.M., Ramos S. 2012. Mobile gaming: Industry challenges and policy implications. Telecommunications Policy, 36(3): 212-221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2011.12.004.
• Gaessler F., Hall B.H., Harhoff D. 2021. Should there be lower taxes on patent income? Research Policy, 50(1): 104129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104129
• Geroski P.A., Gugler K. 2004. Corporate growth convergence in Europe. Oxford Economic Papers, 56(4): 597-620. https://doi.org/10.1093/oep/gpf055
• Gibrat R. 1931. Les inégalités économiques. Librairie du Receuil Sirey, Paris.
• GUS 2020. Główny Urząd Statystyczny. Baza Demografia. Wyniki badań bieżących. Stan i Struktura ludności. Ludność 2020 (https://demografia.stat.gov.pl/BazaDemografia/Tables.aspx).
• Hall B.H., Thoma G., Torrisi S. 2007. The market value of patents and R&D: Evidence from European firms. Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, 8: 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2007.26530853
• Haufler A., Schindler D. 2020. Attracting Profit Shifting or Fostering Innovation? On Patent Boxes and R&D Subsidies. CESifo Working Paper, 8640 (https://ssrn.com/abstract=3720397).
• Holbrook M.B., Hirschman E.C. 1982. The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2): 132-140. https://doi.org/10.1086/208906
• Karkinsky T., Riedel N. 2012. Corporate taxation and the choice of patent location within multinational firms. Journal of International Economics, 88(1): 176-185 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2012.04.002
• KlasterIT 2022. Klastry informatyczne w Polsce - Lista polskich klastrów IT (http://www.klasterit.pl/baza-wiedzy/publikacje-na-temat-klastrow/klastry-w-polsce/).
• Knight B., Maragani G. 2013. It is time for the United States to Implement a Patent Boc Tax Regime to Encourage Domestic Manufacturing. Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance, 19(1): 39-62.
• Koethenbuerger M., Liberini F., Stimmelmayr M. 2018. Is it Just Luring Reported Profit? The Case of European Patent Boxes. CESifo Working Paper Series, 7061 https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3211147
• KPT 2020. Krakowski Park Technologiczny Kondycja Polskiej Branży Gier 2020 (https://polishgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Raport_2021_long_FINAL_WEB.pdf).
• Kwaśnicki W. 2004. Dlaczego współistnieją duże i małe firmy? Rozkłady ukośne wielkości firm - badania symulacyjne. XXI Szkoła Systemów Gospodarczych, Kudowa-Zdrój.
• Lester R. 2021. Tax accounting research on corporate investment: A discussion of the impact of IP box regimes on the M&A market by Bradley, Ruf, and Robinson (2021). Journal of Accounting and Economics, 72(2-3), 101451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacceco.2021.101451
• Merrill P. 2016. Innovation Boxes: BEPS and Beyond. National Tax Journal, 69(4): 847-862. https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2016.4.06
• Minasian J.R. 1962. The Economics of Research and Development, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Social and Economic Factors, A Conference of the Universities-National Bureau Research. Princeton Univ. Press, p. 93-143. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400879762-004
• Minasian J.R. 1969. Research and development, production functions, and rates of return. The American Economic Review, 59(2): 80-85.
• Nam K., Kim H.-J. 2020. The determinants of mobile game success in South Korea. Telecommunications Policy, 44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2019.101855
• Newzoo 2020. Top 10 Countries/Markets by Game Revenues (https://newzoo.com/insights /rankings/top-10-countries-by-game-revenues/).
• OECD 2019. Intellectual Property Regimes (https://qdd.oecd.org/subject.aspx?Subject=IP_regimes).
• OECD 2015. Countering Harmful Tax Practices More Effectively, Taking into Account Transparency and Substance. OECD Publishing, Paris. Action 5 - 2015 Final Report. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264241190-en
• Park Y., Shin J., Kim T. 2010. Firm size, age, industrial networking, and growth: A case of the Korean manufacturing industry. Small Business Economics, 35: 153-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9177-7
• PARP 2021. The game industry of Poland - Report 2021 (https://www.parp.gov.pl/storage/publications/pdf/GIofP_2021_FINAL.pdf).
• Patent Office of the Republic of Poland 2019. Annual Report (https://uprp.gov.pl/sites/default/files/inline-files/Annual Report 2019.pdf).
• Patent Office of the Republic of Poland 2020. Annual Report (https://uprp.gov.pl/sites/default /files/inline-files/Annual Report 2020.pdf).
• Pickell D. 2019. The 7 Stages of Game Development (https://www.g2.com/articles/stages-of-game-development).
• Pilon S., Tremblay D.G 2013. The Geography of Clusters: The Case of the Video Games Clusters in Montreal and in Los Angeles. Urban Studies Research. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/957630
• Polski Gamedev 2022 (https://polskigamedev.weebly.com/--wielkopolskie.html).
• Prokurat J. 2020. Zastosowanie IP Box w branży gier (https://newtech.law/pl/zastosowanie-ip-box-wbranzy-gier/).
• PwC 2020. Global Entertainment & Media Outlook 2020-2024 (https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/industries/tmt/media/outlook.html).
• Schmitt B. 1999. Experiential marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 15(1-3): 53-67. https://doi.org/10.1362/026725799784870496
• Shapiro C., Carl S., Varian H.R. 1998. Information rules: A strategic guide to the network economy. Harvard Business Press.
• Stolarick K., Florida R. 2006. Creativity, connections and innovation: a study of linkages in the Montréal Region. Environment and Planning A, 38(10): 1799-1817. https://doi.org/10.1068/a3874
• Tax Foundation 2020. Report: Patent Box Regimes in Europe (https://taxfoundation.org/patent-box-regimes-in-europe-2020/).
• West M.A. 2002. Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds: An integrative model of creativity and innovation implementation in work groups. Applied Psychology, 51(3): 355-387. https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00951

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14746/rrpr.2022.62.17