Tax incentive policy and firm performance: evidence from Vietnam
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.17(2).2020.22
-
Article InfoVolume 17 2020, Issue #2, pp. 277-296
- Cited by
- 980 Views
-
481 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
This paper aims to assess the impact of the tax incentive policy on firm performance after privatization in Vietnam. Using research data of 260 privatized enterprises in Vietnam, this study sheds light on whether tax incentive policies can help improve firm performance after privatization. The paper utilizes a pre-post comparison approach proposed by Megginson, Nash, and Van Randenborgh (1994). The research results reveal that privatized enterprises with tax incentives have improved profitability (ROA, ROE, ROS) and operating efficiency (NIEFF) and reduced leverage after privatization. A statistical reduction in the number of employed and an improvement in output (real income) after privatization are not observed. Besides, there is no statistical evidence proving that privatized enterprises have experienced significant changes in standard deviations of firm performance measures after privatization in Vietnam. Given significant improvements in the profitability of post-privatized enterprises with tax incentives, the authors propose some managerial implications for the Vietnamese government, investors and non-privatized state-owned enterprises (SOEs).
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)P31, G32, H25
-
References40
-
Tables14
-
Figures0
-
- Table 1. Summary of testable mean predictions for privatized SOEs with tax incentives
- Table 2. Summary of testable standard deviation predictions
- Table 3. Variable measurement
- Table 4. Frequency statistics
- Table 5. Descriptive statistics
- Table 6. Testing results of predictions for privatized SOEs with corporate income tax incentives
- Table 7. Testing results of predictions for privatized SOEs without corporate income tax incentives
- Table A1. Performance changes of privatized SOEs in agriculture, fishing and aquaculture and mining sectors (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A2. Performance changes of privatized SOEs in the manufacturing and construction sectors (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A3. Performance changes of privatized SOEs in the services sector (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A4. Performance changes of unlisted SOEs after privatization (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A5. Performance changes of listed SOEs after privatization (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A6. Performance changes of small and medium-sized SOEs after privatization (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
- Table A7. Performance changes of large SOEs after privatization (privatized SOEs with tax incentives)
-
- Alipour, M. (2013). Has privatization of state-owned enterprises in Iran led to improved performance?. International Journal of Commerce and Management, 23(4), 281-305.
- Amess, K., & Roberts, B. M. (2007). The productivity effects of privatization: The case of Polish cooperatives. International Review of Financial Analysis, 16(4), 354-366.
- Aslund, A. (2013). How capitalism was built: the transformation of Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia: Cambridge University Press.
- Aussenegg, W., & Jelic, R. (2007). The operating performance of newly privatised firms in Central European transition economies. European Financial Management, 13(5), 853-879.
- Bachiller, P. (2012). The impact of privatization on economic performance in European companies. Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, 18(1).
- Bachiller, P. (2017). A meta-analysis of the impact of privatization on firm performance. Management Decision, 55(1), 178-202.
- Boubakri, N., Cosset, J. C., & Guedhami, O. (2008). Privatisation in developing countries: Performance and ownership effects. Development Policy Review, 26(3), 275-308.
- Brown, D. J., Earle, J. S., & Telegdy, A. (2016). Where does privatization work? Understanding the heterogeneity in estimated firm performance effects. Journal of Corporate Finance, 41(C), 329-362.
- Carlin, T. M., & Pham, C. D. (2009). From Public To Private: Evidence From a Transitional Economy Setting. Australian Accounting Review, 19(3), 207-216.
- Chen, G., Firth, M., & Rui, O. (2006). Have China’s enterprise reforms led to improved efficiency and profitability? Emerging Markets Review, 7(1), 82-109.
- Cuervo, A., & Villalonga, B. (2000). Explaining the variance in the performance effects of privatization. Academy of Management Review, 25(3), 581-590.
- Dewenter, K. L., & Malatesta, P. H. (2001). State-owned and privately owned firms: An empirical analysis of profitability, leverage, and labor intensity. American Economic Review, 91(1), 320-334.
- Estrin, S., & Pelletier, A. (2018). Privatization in developing countries: what are the lessons of recent experience? The World Bank Research Observer, 33(1), 65-102.
- Farinos, J. E., Garcia, C. J., & Ibanez, A. M. (2007). Operating and stock market performance of state-owned enterprise privatizations: the Spanish experience. International Review of Financial Analysis, 16(4), 367-389.
- Gan, J. (2009). Privatization in China: Experiences and lessons. China’s Emerging Financial Markets (pp. 581-592). Springer.
- Harper, J. T. (2002). The performance of privatized firms in the Czech Republic. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(4), 621-649.
- Huang, G., & Song, F. M. (2005). The financial and operating performance of China’s newly listed H-firms. Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, 13(1), 53-80.
- Hung, D. N., Thien, N. D., & Liem, N. T. (2017). The Impact of Equitization on Firm Performance: The Case of Vietnam. International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 12(164 ), 68-74.
- Iwasaki, I., & Mizobata, S. (2018). Post-Privatization Ownership and Firm Performance: A Large Meta-Analysis of the Transition Literature. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 89(2), 263-322.
- Jiang, G., Yue, H., & Zhao, L. (2009). A re-examination of China’s share issue privatization. Journal of Banking & Finance, 33(12), 2322-2332.
- Liao, L., Liu, B., & Wang, H. (2014). China’s secondary privatization: Perspectives from the split-share structure reform. Journal of Financial Economics, 113(3), 500-518.
- Loc, T. D., & Tran, N. M. (2016). Impact of equitization on performance of enterprises in Vietnam. Journal of Economic Development, 23(3), 36-56.
- Loc, T. D., Lanjouw, G., & Lensink, R. (2006). The impact of privatization on firm performance in a transition economy: The case of Vietnam. Economics of Transition, 14(2), 349-389.
- Mager, F., & Jesswein, T. (2010). The fundamental performance of newly privatized firms: evidence from continental Europe. Applied Economics Letters, 17(2), 181-186.
- Mckenzie, M., & Keneley, M. (2011). Privatization and performance: the case of four Australian financial institutions. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 82(3), 313-334.
- Megginson, W. L. (2017). Privatization, state capitalism, and state ownership of business in the 21st century. Foundations and Trends® in Finance, 11(1-2), 1-153.
- Megginson, W. L., Nash, R. C., & Van Randenborgh, M. (1994). The financial and operating performance of newly privatized firms: An international empirical analysis. The Journal of Finance, 49(2), 403-452.
- Ochieng, M. D., & Ahmed, A. H. (2014). The effects of privatization on the financial performance of Kenya Airways. International Journal of Business and Commerce, 3(5), 10-26.
- Oqdeh, L. N., & Abu Nassar, M. (2011). Effects of Privatization on Firms Financial and Operating Performance: Evidence from Jordan. Dirasat: Administrative Sciences, 161(717), 1-32.
- Pham, C. D. (2017). The effects of privatization on the financial position and performance of firms in emerging markets: evidence from Vietnam. International Journal of Business, Economics and Law, 13(1), 38-46.
- Pham, D. C., & Nguyen, T. X. H. (2019). The influence of privatization on financial performance of Vietnamese privatized state-owned enterprises. Investment Management & Financial Innovations, 16(3), 341.
- Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Competitive Intelligence Review, 1(1), 14-14.
- Radygin, A. (2014). Privatisation in Russia: hard choice, first results, new targets. First Results, New Targets (February 4, 2014).
- Rakhman, F. (2018). Can partially privatized SOEs outperform fully private firms? Evidence from Indonesia. Research in International Business and Finance, 45, 285-292.
- Sakr, A. (2014). The impact of privatisation on the performance of Firms in Egypt. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 5(15), 73-81.
- Sheshinski, E., & López-Calva, L. F. (2003). Privatization and its benefits: theory and evidence. CESifo Economic Studies, 49(3), 429-459.
- Sprenger, C. (2014). Privatization and survival: Evidence from a Russian firm survey. Economic Annals, 59(200), 43-60.
- Tran, N. M., Nonneman, W., & Jorissen, A. (2015). Privatization of Vietnamese firms and its effects on firm performance. Asian economic and financial review, 5(2), 202.
- Tu, G., Lin, B., & Liu, F. (2013). Political connections and privatization: Evidence from China. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 32(2), 114-135.
- Wei, Z., Varela, O., D’Souza, J., & Hassan, M. K. (2003). The financial and operating performance of China’s newly privatized firms. Financial Management, 32(2), 107-126.