조세회피의 가치관련성에 대한 기업규모의 영향

The purpose of this study is to test the impact of the tax avoidance on the firm value, and test that this impact is discriminatory based on the size of the firm. To achieve this goal, this study tests that the value relevance is negative and that the larger the size of the firm, the less relevant it is. Tax avoidance would have a positive effect on corporate value if it could reduce the amount of cash outflow. But if the costs of tax avoidance like tax evasion, agency problem exceed its benefit, there will be negative relation between tax avoidance and firm value. Moreover, from a long-term perspective, tax avoidance is not sustainable as a tax strategy. Even if the cash outflow is reduced due to tax avoidance, the increase in taxable income will result in increased cash inflow in the future. Continuous tax avoidance can also increase the likelihood of tax evasion. Meanwhile, the ability to control tax evasion is expected to ease the negative effects of tax avoidance. Since the level of tax avoidance will vary depending on the ability to execute a tax avoidance strategy and the ability to cover the related costs, this capability will mitigate the negative effects of tax avoidance. This study assumes that the larger the firm size, the smaller the negative effect of tax avoidance on the firm value is. The firm size is measured as a total asset and is measured by small businesses and large enterprises. Small and medium businesses differ in tax laws and tax benefits, and the tax benefits and tax cuts of small and medium businesses are significant. Test period is from 2010 to 2015, and 1,615 samples were selected from listed non-financial companies. A model for verifying value relevance was used by a linear model using the accounting figure of Ohlson (1995). Tax avoidance was estimated as a model of DesaI and Dharmapala (2006), and the taxable income required for estimating tax evasion was calculated using the corporate tax rate and the corporate tax burden. And the discretionary accounting accruals, which refers to earnings management, was measured using the modified Jones model (Dechow et al., 1995). The results of the analysis were as follows : First, tax avoidance showed a significant negative relationship on stock price. It shows greater costs and risks incurred by tax avoidance rather than the benefit of tax avoidance. Second, the tax avoidance of SMEs (small and medium enterprise) was smaller than that of non-SMEs. Tax incentives are relatively concentrated in small businesses, so small firms are less likely to avoid tax than large firms. And this may be due to the lack of sufficient ability for SMEs to establish and implement tax strategy for tax avoidance compared to larger firms. Third, the negative effect of tax avoidance on stock price was smaller, as the bigger the size of the corporation. And the result was the same in the empirical analysis of SMEs and non-SMEs. These results mean that the firm size takes a role to mitigate the negative effect of tax avoidance on firm value, and the firm size offer the information on the ability to control the risk and costs of tax avoidance withins the its benefit. According to the results of this study, the tax avoidance is considered to have a negative impact on the firm value. However, it suggests that a negative impact on the firm value can be reduced if the negative effects of tax avoidance can be controlled.