Skip to Main Content
HBS Home
  • About
  • Academic Programs
  • Alumni
  • Faculty & Research
  • Baker Library
  • Giving
  • Harvard Business Review
  • Initiatives
  • News
  • Recruit
  • Map / Directions
Working Knowledge
Business Research for Business Leaders
  • Browse All Articles
  • Popular Articles
  • Cold Call Podcast
  • Managing the Future of Work Podcast
  • About Us
  • Book
  • Leadership
  • Marketing
  • Finance
  • Management
  • Entrepreneurship
  • All Topics...
  • Topics
    • COVID-19
    • Entrepreneurship
    • Finance
    • Gender
    • Globalization
    • Leadership
    • Management
    • Negotiation
    • Social Enterprise
    • Strategy
  • Sections
    • Book
    • Podcasts
    • HBS Case
    • In Practice
    • Lessons from the Classroom
    • Op-Ed
    • Research & Ideas
    • Research Event
    • Sharpening Your Skills
    • What Do You Think?
  • Browse All
    Securing Jobs or the New Protectionism? Taxing the Overseas Activities of Multinational Firms
    24 Mar 2009Working Paper Summaries

    Securing Jobs or the New Protectionism? Taxing the Overseas Activities of Multinational Firms

    by Mihir A. Desai
    Popular imagination often links two significant economic developments: the rapid escalation of the foreign activities of American multinational firms over the last 15 years, and rising levels of economic insecurity, particularly among workers in certain sectors. The presumed linkages between these phenomena have led many to call for a reconsideration of the tax treatment of foreign investment. Increasing the tax burden on outbound investment by American multinational firms, it is claimed, offers the promise of alleviating domestic employment losses and insecurity while also raising considerable revenue. HBS professor Mihir A. Desai looks beneath the trends, examining the economic determinants of outbound investment decisions and synthesizing what is known about the relationship between domestic and foreign activities. Key concepts include:
    • There is no clear evidence of significant negative impacts on domestic investment or employment due to the overseas activities of firms. Foreign activity by multinational firms does not necessarily displace domestic economic activity.
    • Other factors—such as falling prices of investment goods, and/or trade patterns—may have driven the employment changes that are so worrisome.
    • When policymakers decide the appropriate taxation of multinational firms, they should resist the tempting logic of protectionism.
    LinkedIn
    Email

    Author Abstract

    Tax policy toward American multinational firms would appear to be approaching a crossroads. The presumed linkages between domestic employment conditions and the growth of foreign operations by American firms have led to calls for increased taxation on foreign operations—the so-called "end to tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas." At the same time, the current tax regime employed by the U.S. is being abandoned by the two remaining large capital exporters—the UK and Japan—that had maintained similar regimes. The conundrum facing policymakers is how to reconcile mounting pressures for increased tax burdens on foreign activity with the increasing exceptionalism of American policy. This paper address these questions by analyzing the available evidence on two related claims i) that the current U.S. policy of deferring taxation of foreign profits represents a subsidy to American firms and ii) that activity abroad by multinational firms represents the displacement of activity that would have otherwise been undertaken at home. These two tempting claims are found to have limited, if any, systematic support. Instead, modern welfare norms that capture the nature of multinational firm activity recommend a move toward not taxing the foreign activities of American firms, rather than taxing them more heavily. Similarly, the weight of the empirical evidence is that foreign activity is a complement, rather than a substitute, for domestic activity. Much as the formulation of trade policy requires resisting the tempting logic of protectionism, the appropriate taxation of multinational firms requires a similar fortitude.

    Paper Information

    • Full Working Paper Text
    • Working Paper Publication Date: March 2009
    • HBS Working Paper Number: 09-107
    • Faculty Unit(s): Finance; Entrepreneurial Management
      Trending
        • 31 May 2023
        • HBS Case

        From Prison Cell to Nike’s C-Suite: The Journey of Larry Miller

        • 23 May 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Face Value: Do Certain Physical Features Help People Get Ahead?

        • 31 May 2023
        • HBS Case

        Why Business Leaders Need to Hear Larry Miller's Story

        • 30 May 2023
        • Research & Ideas

        Can AI Predict Whether Shoppers Would Pick Crest or Colgate?

        • 25 Jan 2022
        • Research & Ideas

        More Proof That Money Can Buy Happiness (or a Life with Less Stress)

    Mihir A. Desai
    Mihir A. Desai
    Mizuho Financial Group Professor of Finance
    Contact
    Send an email
    → More Articles
    Find Related Articles
    • Finance
    • Accounting
    • Economics
    • Government and Politics
    • North & Central America
    • United States

    Sign up for our weekly newsletter

    Interested in improving your business? Learn about fresh research and ideas from Harvard Business School faculty.
    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
    ǁ
    Campus Map
    Harvard Business School Working Knowledge
    Baker Library | Bloomberg Center
    Soldiers Field
    Boston, MA 02163
    Email: Editor-in-Chief
    →Map & Directions
    →More Contact Information
    • Make a Gift
    • Site Map
    • Jobs
    • Harvard University
    • Trademarks
    • Policies
    • Accessibility
    • Digital Accessibility
    Copyright © President & Fellows of Harvard College