ESG Agenda and Aggressive Tax Planning
https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2023-16-3-144-152
Abstract
The analysis of the current state of the balance of interests of the state and organizations in the field of achieving the goals set within the framework of the ESG strategy in the jurisdictions of economically developed countries is of urgent importance for the domestic practice of interaction between organizations and tax authorities to achieve sustainable development goals. It is especially important to assess the negative trends of abuse of the ESG agenda for aggressive tax planning. The subject of the study is the mechanisms of ESG activity of organizations in relation to the tax motivation for obtaining tax benefits. The purpose of the work is to put forward proposals to improve the effectiveness of detecting illegal tax optimization. It is concluded that there is a significant relationship between the declaration of ESG goals by organizations and the methods of aggressive tax planning used by them to extract unjustified tax benefits with an emphasis on environmental ESG aspects.
The conclusions made in the study are consistent with the results of the work of foreign scientists over the past five years. At the same time, there is a real prospect of confirming economic and statistical studies within the framework of the hypothesis put forward in the study for domestic organizations in terms of the tax benefits they receive from participating in ESG activity.
About the Authors
A. S. Advocatova
Financial University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alena S. Advokatova — PhD in Economics, master of Laws, docent Department of Taxes and Tax Administration Faculty of Tax, Audit and Business Analysis, Financial University.
Moscow
A. A. Zavorykin
Financial University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksey A. Zavorykin — PhD in Economics, Junior Researcher, Center for Scientific Research and Strategic Consulting, Faculty of Taxes, Audit and Business Analysis, Financial University.
Moscow
References
1. Friedman M. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1962. 202 p.
2. Freeman R.E. Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston: Harpercollins College Div; 1984. 275 p.
3. Mansell S. F. Capitalism, corporations and the social contract: a critique of stakeholder theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013. 185 p. URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/capitalism-corporations-and-the-social-contract/capitalism-corporations-and-the-social-contract/200BB23ED6AC476844A55A3152F7FD30.
4. Guenther D., Matsunaga S., Williams B. Tax avoidance, tax aggressiveness, tax risk and firm risk. Oregon: University of Oregon; 2013. 42 p.
5. Sikka P. Smoke and mirrors: corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance. Accounting Forum; 2010;34(3–4):153–168.
6. Harnesk J., Myhrberg A. Sustainable tax planning investigating the relationship between esg and tax aggressiveness. Umea: Umea school of dusiness, economics and statistics; 2019. 75 p. URL: http://umu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1327432/fulltext01.pdf.
7. Laguir I., Staglianò R. & Elbaz J. Does corporate social responsibility affect corporate tax aggressiveness? Journal of Cleaner Production. 2015;107:662–675.
8. Abdenur A.E. Emerging powers and the creation of the UN: three ships of Theseusю Third World Quarterly; 2016;37(7):1171–1186.
9. Elster J. Rational choice. Oxford: Basil Blackwell; 1986. 266 p.
10. Davis A., Guenther D., Krull L., Williams B. Do socially responsible firms pay more taxes? The accounting review. 2016;91(1):47–68.
11. Lanis R., Richardson G. Is corporate social responsibility performance associated with tax avoidance? Journal of Business Ethics. 2014;127(2):439–457.
12. Col B., Patel S. Going to haven? Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance. SpringerLink. 2016;54(4):1033–1050.
13. Bird R., Davis-Nozemack K. Tax avoidance as a sustainability problem. Journal of Business Ethics. 2018;151(4):1009–1025.
14. Hardeck I., Kirn T. Taboo or technical issue? An empirical assessment of taxation in sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2016;133:1337–1351.
15. Osman I., Rodrigues L. Corporate social responsibility and corporate tax aggressiveness: a scientometric analysis of the existing literature to map the future. Sustainability; 2021;13(11):6225. URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071–1050/13/11/6225. DOI: 10.3390/su13116225
16. Lisovskij A.L. Transition to sustainable development: an empirical analysis of factors that motivate industrial companies to implement esg practices. Strategicheskie reshenija i risk-menedzhment = Strategic Decisions and Risk Management. 2021;12(3):262–272. (In Russ.).
17. Vishnevsky V.P., Goncharenko L.I., Dementiev V.V., Gurnak A.V. Principles of taxation for the digital economy. Terra Economicus. 2022;20(2):59–71. (In Russ.).
18. Vishnevsky V.P., Goncharenko L.I., Nikulkina I.V., Gurnak A.V. Taxes and technologies: past, present and future of the Russian tax system. Terra Economicus. 2020;18(4):6–31. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Advocatova A.S., Zavorykin A.A. ESG Agenda and Aggressive Tax Planning. Economics, taxes & law. 2023;16(3):144-152. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2023-16-3-144-152
Views:
10
Email this article 