Información del artículo
Abstract
This paper explores which types of firms benefit more from the R&D fiscal incentives and the effect of this type of instrument on the performance of R&D activities. Spain is considered the most generous countries in the OECD in fiscal treatment of R&D, yet our data reveal that tax incentives are little known and, especially, seldom used by firms. Restricting our empirical analysis to those firms that do report knowing about such incentives, we investigate the average effect of tax incentives on innovation, using both nonparametric methods (matching estimators) and parametric methods (Heckman's two-step selection model). First, we find that large firms, especially those that implement innovations, are more likely to use the tax incentives, while small and medium enterprises encounter some obstacles to using them. Secondly, the average effect of the policy is positive, but significant only in large firms. Our main conclusion is that tax incentives increase innovative activities by large and high-tech sector firms, but may be used only randomly by small medium enterprises.
Key words:
R&D fiscal incentives, matching methods
Resumen
Este trabajo analiza qué tipo de empresas se benefician más de los incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D y el efecto que tienen sobre la inversión en I+D. España se considera el país más generosos en el tratamiento fiscal de este tipo de inversión si bien los datos muestran que los incentivos fiscales se conocen poco y, sobre todo, que se aplican escasamente. Restringiendo nuestro análisis a la submuestra de empresas que declaran conocer los incentivos fiscales, se investiga el efecto promedio de los incentivos fiscales sobre la inversión en I+D utilizando métodos econométricos paramétricos (modelo de selección en dos etapas de Heckman) y no paramétricos (estimadores matching). Obtenemos que, en primer lugar, las empresas grandes (especialmente las innovadoras) son las que tienen más probabilidad de aplicar los incentivos fiscales, mientras que las pequeñas y medianas empresas (pymes) encuentran más dificultades en su aplicación. En segundo lugar, el efecto promedio de la política es positivo, si bien solo estadísticamente significativo en las grandes empresas. La principal conclusión del estudio es que los incentivos fiscales se aplican aleatoriamente en las pymes pero no en las grandes empresas y aquellas que operan en sectores de alta-media intensidad tecnológica que valoran sus beneficios con un efecto positivo en sus actividades de innovación.
Palabras clave:
Incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D, estimadores matching
El Texto completo está disponible en PDF
References
[Abadie et al., 2004]
A. Abadie, D. Drukker, J. Leber Herr, G.W. Imbens.
Implementing matching estimators for average treatment effects in Stata.
The Stata Journal, 4 (2004), pp. 290-311
[Abadie, 2005]
Abadie, A., Imbens, G.W. (2005): On the failure of the bootstrap for matching estimators. http://ksghome.harvard.edu/∼aabadie/bootstrap.pdf
[Abadie and Imbens, 2006]
A. Abadie, G.W. Imbens.
Large sample properties of matching estimators for average treatment effects.
Econometrica, 74 (2006), pp. 235-267
[Aerts and Czarnitzki, 2005]
K. Aerts, D. Czarnitzki.
Using innovation survey data to evaluate R&D policy: the case of Flanders.
ZEW Discussion Paper n.04-55, (2005),
[Almus and Czarnitzki, 2003]
S. Almus, D. Czarnitzki.
The effects of public R&D subsidies on firm's innovation activities: the case of Eastern Germany.
Journal of Economic Statistics, 21 (2003), pp. 226-236
[Ali-Yrkkö, 2005]
Ali-Yrkkö J. Impact of public R&D financing on employment ENEPRI Working Paper n°. 39/agosto, 2005
[Ali-Yrkkö, 2005a]
Ali-Yrkkö J.Impact of public R&D financing on private R&D: Does financial constraints matter?., (Helsinki: ETLA, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy, Discussion Paper, n. 94 2004), ENEPRI Working Paper n¿. 30/febrero 2005
[Arrow, 1962]
K. Arrow.
Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Inventions.
The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity,
[Asmussen and Berriot, 1993]
R. Asmussen, C. Berriot.
Le credit d-impot recherche, cout et effet incitatif.
Ministere de l’Economie et des Finances, (1993),
[Becker and Ichino, 2002]
S. Becker, A. Ichino.
Estimation for average treatment effects based on propensity scores.
The Stata Journal, 2 (2002), pp. 358-377
[Bérubé and Mohnen, 2009]
Ch. Bérubé, P. Mohnen.
Are Firms that Receive R&D Subsidies More Innovative?.
Canadian Journal of Economics, 42 (2009), pp. 206-225
[Blanes and Busom, 2004]
J.V. Blanes, I. Busom.
Who participates in R&D subsidy programs? The case of Spanish manufacturing firms.
Research Policy, 33 (2004), pp. 1459-1476
[Bloom et al., 2002]
N. Bloom, R. Griffith, J. Van Reenen.
Do R&D credits work?. Evidence from an international panel of countries 1979-1997.
Journal of Public Economics, 85 (2002), pp. 1-31
[Busom, 2000]
I. Busom.
An empirical evaluation of the effects of R&D subsidies.
Economics of Innovation and New Technologies, 9 (2000), pp. 111-148
[Collins, 1983]
E. Collins.
An early assessment of three R&D tax incentives provided by the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 Vol. PRA Report 83–7.
National Science Foundation, 1983, (1983),
[Corchuelo, 2006]
M.B. Corchuelo.
Incentivos fiscales en I+D y decisiones de innovación.
Revista de Economía Aplicada, XIV (2006), pp. 5-34
[Corchuelo and Martínez-Ros, 2008]
M.B. Corchuelo, E. Martínez-Ros.
Aplicación de los incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D en las empresas españolas.
Hacienda Pública Española/Revista de Economía Aplicada, (2008), pp. 9-39
[Czarnitzki, 2001]
D. Czarnitzki.
Die auswirkungen der forschungs-und technologiepolitik auf die innovationsaktivitäten ostdeutscher unternehmen (“The impact of R&D policies on the innovation activities of Eastern German enterprises”).
Journal of Applied Social Science Studies, 121 (2001), pp. 539-560
[Czarnitzki and Fier, 2002]
D. Czarnitzki, A. Fier.
Do innovation subsidies crowded out private investment: evidence from the German service sector.
Applied Economics Quarterly, 48 (2002), pp. 1-25
[Czarnitzki et al., 2004]
D. Czarnitzki, P. Hanel, J.M. Rosa.
Evaluating the impact of R&D tax credit on innovation: A microeconometric study on Canadian firms.
ZEW Discussion Paper, (2004),
[Czarnitzki and Ebersberger, 2006]
D. Czarnitzki, B. Ebersberger.
Distributional effects of public R&D funding.
mimeo, (2006),
[David et al., 2000]
P.A. David, B.H. Hall, A.A. Toole.
Is public R&D a complement or substitute for private R&D?. A review of the econometric evidence.
Research Policy, 29 (2000), pp. 497-529
[Dehejia and Wahba, 1999]
R. Dehejia, S. Wahba.
Casual effects in nonexperimental studies: reevaluating the evaluation of training programmes.
Journal of the American Statistical Association, (1999),
[Dehejia and Wahba, 2002]
R. Dehejia, S. Wahba.
Propensity Score-Matching methods for nonexperimental casual studies.
Review of Economics and Statistics, 84 (2002), pp. 151-161
[Department of Finance Canada and Revenue Canada, 1998]
Department of Finance Canada and Revenue Canada (1998): Evaluation report: The Federal system of income tax incentives for scientific research and experimental development. Ottawa.
[Duch et al., 2007]
Duch, N., Montolia, D., Mediavilla, M. (2007): Evaluation of public subsidies oriented to firm's performance: a quasi-experimental approach. Instituto D’Economia de Barcelona, Working Paper 2007/3.
[Duguet, 2004]
E. Duguet.
Are R&D subsidies a substitute or a complement to privately funded R&D? Evidence from France using propensity score methods for non-experimental data.
Review d’Economie Politique, 114 (2004), pp. 263-292
[European, 2003]
European Commission Raising EU R&D Intensity.
Improving the Effectiveness of Public Support Mechanism for Private Sector Research and Development: Fiscal Measures.
EUR 20714, DG for Research Knowledge Based Society and Economy Strategy and Policy,
[Falk, 2004]
Falk M.(2004) European Productivity Innovation and Public Sector R&D: Evidence from OECD country and industry-level data background report for the European Competitiveness Report 2004
[Fariñas and Jaumandreu, 1999]
J.C. Fariñas, J. Jaumandreu.
Diez años de Encuesta sobre Estrategias Empresariales (ESEE).
Economía Industrial, 329 (1999), pp. 29-42
[Fier, 2002]
A. Fier.
Technology policy and business innovation activities in the case of Germany.
Proceedings of the tip workshop: Changing Strategies for Business, pp. 54-67
[Gelabert et al., 2009]
L. Gelabert, A. Fosfuri, J. Tribó.
Does the effect of public support for R&D depend on the degree of appropiability?.
Journal of Industrial Economics, 57 (2009), pp. 736-767
[González et al., 2005]
X. González, J. Jaumandreu, C. Pazó.
Barriers to innovation and subsidy effectiveness.
Rand of Journal Economics, 36 (2005), pp. 930-950
[González and Pazó, 2008]
X. González, C. Pazó.
Do public subsidies stimulate private R&D spending?.
Research Policy, 37 (2008), pp. 371-389
[Görg and Strolb, 2005]
H. Görg, E. Strolb.
The effects of R&D subsidies on private R&D, Research Paper Series (Globalisation, Productivity and Technology) n¿ 38.
The University of Nottingham. Economica, 74 (2005), pp. 215-234
[Guellec and Van Pottlesberghe, 2003]
D. Guellec, B. Van Pottlesberghe.
The impact of public R&D expenditure on business R&D.
Economics of Innovation and New Technologies, 12 (2003), pp. 225-244
[Hall, 1993]
B. Hall.
R&D tax policy during the 1980s: success or failure.
Tax Policy and the Economy, 7 (1993), pp. 1-35
[Hall, 2002]
B. Hall.
The financing of research and development.
Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 18 (2002), pp. 35-51
[Hall, 2005]
B. Hall.
The financing of innovation.
Blackwell Hand book of Technology and Innovation Management,
[Hall and Van Reenen, 2000]
B. Hall, J. Van Reenen.
How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D?. A review of the evidence.
Research Policy, 29 (2000), pp. 449-469
[Hanel, 2003]
P. Hanel.
Impact of Government support programs on innovation by Canadian manufacturing firms Note de Recherche 2003–09.
CIRST: Centre Interuniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST),
[Harhoff, 1998]
D. Harhoff.
Are the financing constraints for R&D investment in German manufacturing firms?.
Annales D’Économie et de Statistique, 49/50 (1998), pp. 421-456
[Heckman et al., 1997]
J. Heckman, H. Ichimura, P. Todd.
Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from evaluating a job training program.
Review of Economic Studies, 64 (1997), pp. 605-664
[Heckman, 1979]
J.J. Heckman.
Sample selection bias as a specification error.
Econometrica, 47 (1979), pp. 153-161
[Heckman et al., 1998]
J. Heckman, H. Ichimura, P. Todd.
Characterizing selection bias using experimental data.
Econometrica, 66 (1998), pp. 1017-1098
[Heckman et al., 1999]
Heckman, J., LaLonde, R., Smith, J. (1999): The economics and econometrics of active labour market programme. In Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (eds.), The Handbook of Labor Economics, Vol. III
[Heijs et al., 2006]
Heijs, J., M. Buesa, L. Herrera and P. Valadez (2006): Evaluación de los incentivos fiscales a la I+D+i en España basado en el propensity score matching, Documento de Investigación, n°. 3, julio, Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.
[Herrera and Heijs, 2006]
L. Herrera, J. Heijs.
Difusión y adicionalidad de las ayudas públicas a la innovación.
Revista de Economía Aplicada, 14 (2006), pp. 45-65
[Hotz et al., 2006]
V.J. Hotz, G.W. Imbens, J.A. Klerman.
Evaluating the differential effects of alternative welfare-to-work training components: a re-analysis of the Californian GAIN program.
NBER Working Paper n¿ 11939, (2006),
[Hussinger, 2006]
K. Hussinger.
R&D and subsidies at the firm level: An application of parametric and semi-parametric two-step selection models.
Catholic University Leuven and Centre for European Economic Research. (ZEW), (2006),
[Kaiser, 2004]
U. Kaiser.
Private R&D and public subsidies: microeconomic evidence from Denmark.
Center for Economic and Business Research, (2004), pp. 2004-2019
[Lach, 2002]
S. Lach.
Do R&D subsidies stimulate or displace private R&D?.
Evidence from Israel, The Journal of Industrial Economics, (2002), pp. 369-390
[Lattimore, 1997]
R. Lattimore.
Research and Development Fiscal Incentives in Australia: Impacts and Policy Lessons.
Industry Commission, (1997),
[Lechner, 2002]
M. Lechner.
Some practical issues in the evaluation of heterogeneous labour market programmes by matching methods.
Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Serie A (Statistics in Society), 165 (2002), pp. 59
[Lööf and Hesmati, 2005]
H. Lööf, A. Hesmati.
Additionality or crowding out? On the effectiveness of R&D subsidies. The Royal Institute of Technology.
Centre of Excellence for Studies in Science and Innovation, (2005),
[Mansfield, 1986]
E. Mansfield.
The R&D tax credit and other technology policy issues.
American Economic Review, 76 (1986), pp. 190-194
[Marra, 2004]
M.A. Marra.
Incentivos fiscales, inversión en actividades de I+D y estructura de costes Un análisis por tamaño para una muestra representativa de empresas manufactureras españolas 1991-1999.
Hacienda Pública Española/Revista de Economía Pública 170– 3/2004, (2004), pp. 9-35
[Mc Fetridge and Warda, 1983]
D.G. Mc Fetridge, J.P. Warda.
Canadian R&D Tax Incentives: Their Adequacy and Impact Canadian Tax Paper, 70.
Canadian Tax foundation, (1983),
[Nelson, 1959]
R. Nelson.
The simple economics of basic scientific research.
Journal of Political Economy, 76 (1959), pp. 297-306
[Parisi and Sembenelli, 2003]
M.L. Parisi, A. Sembenelli.
Is private R&D spending sensitive to its price? Empirical evidence on panel data for Italy.
Empirica, 4 (2003),
[Romero and Sanz, 2007]
D. Romero, J.F. Sanz.
Eficacia de los incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D en los años noventa.
Hacienda Pública Española. Revista de Economía Pública, 183 (2007), pp. 9-32
[Rosembaum and Rubin, 1983]
P.R. Rosembaum, D.B. Rubin.
The central rol of the propensity score in observational studies fo causal effects.
Biometrika, 70 (1983), pp. 41-55
[Rubin, 1977]
D.B. Rubin.
Assignment to treatment group on the basis of covariate.
Journal of Educational Statistics, 2 (1977), pp. 1-26
[Sianesi, 2001]
Sianesi, B. (2001): Implementing propensity score matching estimators with Stata. http://fmwww.bc.edu/RePec/usug2001/psmatch.pdf
[Smith, 2000]
J. Smith.
A critical survey of empirical methods for evaluating active labor market policies.
Zeitschrift für Voilkswirtsschaft und Statistik, 136 (2000), pp. 1-22
[Suetens, 2002]
Suetens, S. (2002): R&D subsidies and production effects of R&D personnel: evidence from the Flemish region, CEST Discussion Paper 2002/03, Antwerp.
[Toivanen and Niininem, 2000]
Toivanen, O. y Niininem, P. (2000): Investment, R&D, subsidies and credit constraints, Working Paper W-264, Helsinki School of Economics and Business Administration, Helsinki.
[Van Pottlesberghe et al., 2003]
Van Pottlesberghe, B., Megally, E., Nysten, S. (2003): Evaluation of current fiscal incentives for business R&D in Belgium. Working Paper CEB 011. Solvay Business School, Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
[Wallsten, 2000]
S. Wallsten.
The effect of government-industry R&D programs on private R&D: the case of small business innovation research policy.
Rand Journal of Economics, 1 (2000), pp. 82-100
[Warda, 2001]
J. Warda.
Measuring the value of R&D tax treatment in OECD countries.
In SIT Review, 27 (2001), pp. 185-211
[Warda, 2002]
J. Warda.
A 2001-2002 update of R&D tax treatment in OECD countries.
Paper prepared for the OECD Directorate for Science,
[Wooldridge, 2001]
J.M. Wooldridge.
Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data.
The MIT Press, (2001),
We are grateful for comments from Isabel Busom (Universidad Autónoma of Barcelona), José María Labeaga (IEF, Spain), Pierre Mohnen (UNU-MERIT University, Maastricht) and Joaquín Artés (Universidad Complutense, Madrid) and from seminar participants at the Applied Economics Meeting in Logroño (Spain), the Symposia of Economics Analysis in Granada (Spain) and the Public Economics Meeting in Salamanca (Spain). We acknowledge financial support from project n° 2007/4162/001 provided by the Spanish Fiscal Studies Institute, project n° 03963 provided by Education and Science Spanish Ministry and project n° 0059 provided by Comunidad de Madrid.
Copyright © 2010. ACEDE
