2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0165-4101(03)00018-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Are shareholder dividend taxes on corporate retained earnings impounded in equity prices? Additional evidence and analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

3
20
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
3
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, the magnitude of the coefficient on retained earnings in Canada is lower than that for firms in the United States. The results confirm the argument by Dhaliwal et al (2003) and Hanlon et al (2003) that the price-level valuation model based on Ohlson (1995) is probably not well-specified empirically.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…For example, the magnitude of the coefficient on retained earnings in Canada is lower than that for firms in the United States. The results confirm the argument by Dhaliwal et al (2003) and Hanlon et al (2003) that the price-level valuation model based on Ohlson (1995) is probably not well-specified empirically.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…Harris and Kemsley (1999) document different pricing on equity components, and they attribute the result to tax capitalization effect. On the other hand, Hanlon, Myers, and Shevlin (2003) and Dhaliwal, Erickson, Frank, and Banyi (2003) disagree and argue that the empirical models are mis-specified. Therefore, this paper replicates the approach taken by Harris and Kemsley (1999) and an alternative approach taken by Hanlon et al (2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, in studies of UK markets, while Ang et al (1991) and Chui et al (1992) conclude that investor level taxes are reflected in gross yields, Morgan and Thomas (1998) dispute the validity of a tax-based explanation, suggesting dividend signalling effects and a delayed related price reaction as alternatives. The lack of consensus internationally on the impact of investor level taxes is evidenced in Harris and Kemsley (1999), Harris et al (2001), Collins and Kemsley (2000), Dhaliwal et al (2003) and Hanlon et al (2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many of these studies have provided evidence supporting the existence of tax capitalization using panel studies (Harris and Kemsley, 1999, Harris, Hubbard, and Kemsley, 1999, and Collins and Kemsley, 2000, event studies (Lang andShackelford, 2000, andAyers, Cloyd, andRobinson, 2000), and time series (Williams, 2001a), while other studies have questioned the robustness of some of these findings (Dhaliwal, Erickson, Myers, andBanyi, 2001, andHanlon, Myers, andShevlin, 2001). Apart from whether tax capitalization occurs, or its magnitude, the question of whether common stocks bear implicit taxes is a fundamentally different one.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%