The Dividend Clientele Hypothesis: Evidence from the 2003 Tax Act

2014 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 114-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Kawano
Keyword(s):  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Consumer Finances ◽  
Household Portfolio ◽  
Using Data ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Dividend Tax

This paper provides evidence that dividend and capital gains tax rates importantly influence household portfolio choices. Using data from the Surveys of Consumer Finances around the 2003 dividend tax reductions, I estimate the relationship between taxes and household portfolio dividend yields. I find that a one percentage point decrease in the dividend tax rate relative to the long-term capital gains tax rate causes household portfolio dividend yields to increase by 0.04 percentage points. The results suggest that high income households significantly increased their portfolio dividend yields in response to the 2003 dividend tax rate reductions. (JEL D14, G11, G35, H24)

scholarly journals Long-Term Capital Gains Tax Strategies: Correlated Protective Put Strategy

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. Aulerich ◽  
James Molloy
Keyword(s):  
Stock Price ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Holding Period ◽  
Put Option ◽  
Highly Correlated ◽  
One Year

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: x-small;">A reduction in the long-term capital gains tax rate provides investors with new strategies to minimize taxes and protect investment gains.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>One such opportunity exists when an investor decides to sell a profitable stock with a holding period of less than one-year, resulting in short-term ordinary taxes.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The investor would find it more beneficial to sell the stock after one-year lapses, resulting in lower long-term capital gain taxes, although the longer holding period exposes the investor to the uncertainty of stock price movement.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>A strategy to extend the holding period without excess risk would be to use the protective put option strategy, sometimes referred to as &ldquo;investment insurance&rdquo;.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The strategy involves the purchase of a put option to protect against the possible decline in the stock price, to take advantage of the lower long-term capital gains tax rate, and to preserve the upside potential of the stock.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Pursuant to IRS Publication 550, the IRS does not allow the use of a protective put to extend the holding period on the same security considered for sale.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>Since the IRS does not allow a direct protective put hedge, this study will explore an alternative strategy involving the purchase of a put on a highly correlated investment to extend the holding period to recognize lower capital gains tax rates.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The paper presents example situations when an investor benefits from utilizing the correlated protective put option strategy.</span></p>

scholarly journals Firm Heterogeneity and the Long-run Effects of Dividend Tax Reform

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
François Gourio ◽  
Jianjun Miao
Keyword(s):  
Capital Accumulation ◽  
Firm Heterogeneity ◽  
Percent Level ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Aggregate Productivity ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Productivity Shocks ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Dividend Tax

To study the long-run effect of dividend taxation on aggregate capital accumulation, we build a dynamic general equilibrium model in which there is a continuum of firms subject to idiosyncratic productivity shocks. We find that a dividend tax cut raises aggregate productivity by reducing the frictions in the reallocation of capital across firms. Our baseline model simulations show that when both dividend and capital gains tax rates are cut from 25 and 20 percent, respectively, to the same 15 percent level permanently, the aggregate long-run capital stock increases by about 4 percent. (JEL D21, E22, E62, G32, G35, H25, H32)

The Effects of the Capital Gains Tax Rate and Expectations of Subsequent Firm Performance on CEO Stock Ownership

2009 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert F. Gary
Keyword(s):  
Stock Prices ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Abnormal Returns ◽  
Stock Option ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Stock Ownership ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
The Relationship

ABSTRACT: This study examines the relationship between the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (TRA97) capital gains tax rate reduction and the level of chief executive officer (CEO) equity ownership. In addition, the relationship between the level of CEO equity ownership and CEO expectations of future stock prices is investigated. Corporate scandals in recent years have increased institutional investors’ advocacy of CEO stock ownership, which investors believe will align CEO interests with those of stockholders. Prior research on the role of taxes in equity-based compensation has focused on stock option exercises, but has not studied how a tax rate change affects CEO ownership. The findings from time-series cross-sectional fixed-effects regression models of ownership levels indicate that the level of CEO ownership is inversely related to the capital gains tax rate, and that this effect varies with the abnormal returns of the firm during the following year.

scholarly journals The Tax Elasticity of Capital Gains and Revenue-Maximizing Rates

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 399-416
Author(s):  
Ole Agersnap ◽  
Owen Zidar
Keyword(s):  
Rate Increase ◽  
State Level ◽  
The State ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Revenue ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Federal Level ◽  
Long Run

This paper uses a direct-projections approach to estimate the effect of capital gains taxation on realizations at the state level and then develops a framework for determining revenue-maximizing rates at the federal level. We find that the elasticity of revenues with respect to the tax rate over a 10-year period is −0.5 to −0.3, indicating that capital gains tax cuts do not pay for themselves and that a 5 percentage point rate increase would yield $18 to $30 billion in annual federal tax revenue. Our long-run estimates yield revenue-maximizing capital gains tax rates of 38 to 47 percent. (JEL E62, H25, H71)

scholarly journals The Impact of Capital Gains Tax Treatments on Optimal Livestock Enterprise Selection

1980 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-145
Author(s):  
John T. Pounder ◽  
Richard A. Schoney ◽  
Gustof A. Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Income Tax ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Preferential Treatment ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Federal Income Tax ◽  
Gains And Losses ◽  
The Impact

Current income tax provisions bear little resemblance to those enacted by the original law, the Revenue Act of 1913. Because of the progressive nature of the federal income tax, a need for special provisions for capital gains was recognized. In 1921, gains from the sale or disposition of capital assets and certain other capital items were identified and taxed differently from income from other sources. The capital gains provisions resulted in the separation of ordinary and capital gains income.Gains and losses from the sale or exchange of a capital asset and other capital items are classified as either short- or long-term, depending on the period of time the property is held. Income from items held for less than the required period is taxed as ordinary income. Income from items held for longer than the required period receive preferential treatment only if the net long-term gain exceeds the net short-term capital loss. If long-term capital gains are realized, 60 percent of the excess gain is claimable as a deduction; the remaining 40 percent of the net gain is taxed at the taxpayer's ordinary tax rate. If the net short-term capital gain exceeds the net long-term loss, 100 percent of the excess is taxable at the normal rate.

scholarly journals Tax-Motivated Trading by Individual Investors

2005 ◽  
Vol 95 (5) ◽  
pp. 1605-1630 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoran Ivković ◽  
James Poterba ◽  
Scott Weisbenner
Keyword(s):  
Capital Gains ◽  
Disposition Effect ◽  
Individual Investors ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Lock In Effect ◽  
Lock In ◽  
Tax Loss ◽  
Statutory Tax Rate

We analyze stock trades made by individuals holding stock in both taxable and tax-deferred accounts. By comparing trades across these two types of accounts, we uncover a capital gains lock-in effect in taxable accounts. The lock-in effect is more pronounced for large stock transactions and for stocks held for at least 12 months. Over shorter horizons, the disposition effect outweighs the lock-in effect. Comparison of loss realizations in taxable and tax-deferred accounts yields evidence of tax-loss selling throughout the year. Effective accrual tax rates for stocks that experience substantial appreciation are substantially below the statutory tax rate on long-term gains.

scholarly journals Policy Watch: Cutting Capital Gains Taxes

1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald E Auten ◽  
Joseph J Cordes
Keyword(s):  
Economic Performance ◽  
Tax Reform ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Taxable Income ◽  
Capital Gains Taxes ◽  
Lively Debate ◽  
Policy Watch

From 1922 to 1986, long-term capital gains were taxed at lower rates than other income, generally by allowing a portion of long-term capital gains to be excluded from taxable income. While taxing capital gains at the same rates as other income has been hailed by some as a major accomplishment of tax reform, it has been criticized by others as one of its main flaws. As a result, there have been proposals each year since 1986 to restore some type of capital gains preference. These proposals have sparked a lively debate centered on three main questions: Would reducing the capital gains tax lower or raise federal revenues? Who benefits most from cutting the capital gains tax? Would lower tax rates on capital gains improve economic performance?

The Effect of the Expected Holding Period on the Market Reaction to a Decline in the Capital Gains Tax Rate

2002 ◽  
Vol 24 (s-1) ◽  
pp. 49-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jia-Wen Liang ◽  
Steven R. Matsunaga ◽  
Dale C. Morse
Keyword(s):  
Market Reaction ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Significant Variable ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Rate Reduction ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Holding Period ◽  
Tax Relief ◽  
The Impact

We use the market reaction to capital gains tax rate reduction in the 1997 Tax Relief Act to investigate the market reaction to a change in investor-level tax rates. We find that the positive market reaction was lower for dividend-paying securities and securities with longer expected holding periods. Our results also support the hypothesis that a longer expected holding period reduces the impact of the dividend-paying status. These results are consistent with the tax capitalization model and suggest that the expected holding period is a significant variable in explaining the market reaction to a change in capital gains tax rates.

scholarly journals Treasury Bill Yield Reactions to the 1997 Capital Gains Tax Rate Reduction

2005 ◽  
Vol 27 (s-1) ◽  
pp. 55-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garth F. Novack
Keyword(s):  
Equilibrium Model ◽  
Capital Gains ◽  
Tax Rates ◽  
Capital Gains Tax ◽  
Rate Reduction ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Treasury Bills ◽  
Tax Rate ◽  
Institutional Determinants ◽  
Investment Returns

I provide evidence that changes in shareholder-level taxes influence investment returns even when income from the investment is not subject by statute to the rate that is changed. Using an equilibrium model of after-tax investment returns I predict the yields of Treasury bills, which are subject only to ordinary tax rates, will have an inverse reaction to changes in the capital gains tax rate as the income on them becomes increasingly tax-disadvantaged when compared to other investments. In a sample comprised of short-term Treasury bills, yields appear to increase in response to the May 7, 1997 surprise reduction in capital gains tax rates. The increase is statistically significant and is robust to other macroeconomic and institutional determinants of Treasury bills.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document