{"title":"Universal Service Subsidies to Areas Served by Cable Telephony","authors":"J. Eisenach","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1910599","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1910599","url":null,"abstract":"This study analyzes the extent to which Federal Universal Service Fund subsidies are paid to rural telephone companies to provide service in areas served by unsubsidized competitors, i.e., cable TV companies that now provide both broadband and cable telephony service. The evidence shows that approximately $1.6 billion was spent in 2008 to subsidize telephone companies in service territories where cable companies now offer voice service to at least some households. Moreover, based on an analysis of population density and topography (the two factors that most heavily affect the costs of providing wireline telecommunications services), cable companies often serve portions of study areas which are no less costly, or even more costly, to serve than the overall study area. The existence of unsubsidized cable telephony in these areas is prima facie evidence that a significant portion of the subsidies paid to rural telephone companies are no longer necessary to meet the goal of reasonably affordable service.","PeriodicalId":161200,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Firm (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122449445","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
ERN: Firm (Topic)Pub Date : 2009-11-01DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6637-7_3
Martin Mayer
{"title":"Glass-Steagall in Our Future: How Straight, How Narrow","authors":"Martin Mayer","doi":"10.1007/978-1-4419-6637-7_3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-6637-7_3","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":161200,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Firm (Topic)","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130028262","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Do Income Support Programs Impact Producer Hedging Decisions? Evidence from a Cross-Country Comparative","authors":"Andrea E. Woolverton, M. Sykuta","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1404945","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1404945","url":null,"abstract":"This article provides a unique perspective to why U.S. producers’ hedging practices are not consistent with the price-risk management literature. We conduct a formal test of income support program impacts with survey data from South Africa and the United States, which have different producer income support policies. We find that producing in a supported environment (U.S.) decreases hedging for preplanting and preharvest expected yields by 30.39% and 20.03%, respectively. This study raises issues for further inquiry regarding both comparative agricultural lending practices and the relative costs of price-risk management tools.","PeriodicalId":161200,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Firm (Topic)","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128521733","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Investment Effects of Capital Gains Taxation Under Simultaneous Investment and Abandonment Flexibility","authors":"Rainer Niemann, Caren Sureth-Sloane","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2128098","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2128098","url":null,"abstract":"The influence of capital gains taxes on investment decisions is a central issue of accounting and public finance research. However, the implications of capital gains taxes on investors' willingness to invest in irreversible projects with entry and exit flexibility have not yet been a focal issue. As a result, the effects of taxing capital gains on the interdependencies of investment and divestment decisions have to be identified, especially under timing flexibility. This paper closes this gap by simultaneously analyzing investment timing and abandonment decisions for risky irreversible investment projects with uncertain cash flows under differential tax rates for ordinary income and capital gains. We investigate whether capital gains taxes affect immediate and delayed investment asymmetrically. Furthermore, we investigate the impact of capital gains taxation on the optimal abandonment decision. Performing extensive numerical simulations we find that varying the liquidation proceeds affects the decision whether or not to postpone the investment decision. Higher cash flow volatility favors delayed investment. We find that the introduction of capital gains taxation tends to be harmful for immediate investment. Moreover, we show that taxing capital gains may induce a tax paradox for delayed investment. Depending on the pre-tax parameter setting the future value of delayed investment may even increase in absolute terms for increasing capital gains tax rates. For sufficiently high liquidation proceeds capital gains taxation tends to favor continuation of a project. We find taxing capital gains mainly induces other, but not necessarily less arbitrary distortions than exempting capital gains.","PeriodicalId":161200,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Firm (Topic)","volume":"409 2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2009-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123106222","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Income-Related Minimum Taxation Concepts and Their Impact on Corporate Investment Decisions","authors":"C. Dahle, Caren Sureth-Sloane","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2128096","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2128096","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we analyze the impact of various minimum taxation concepts on corporate investment decisions. These investments can be realized in the form of either a real or a financial investment. In a quantitative analysis we refer to the future values of the investments as an indicator of tax-favored and tax-discriminated projects. Varying the concept-specific loss-offset parameters and cash flow time structure and performing a Monte Carlo simulation reveals the impact of the particular minimum taxation concept. For the first time a comprehensive set of equations has been deduced to integrate different minimum tax concepts in a unique model. The resulting equations can be used as a basis for further analyses of group taxation, wealth taxation and asymmetric taxation and allows us to gain first insights into the direction and magnitude of tax distortions of possible competing concepts. Depending on the set of parameters, complex and ambiguous tax effects can be identified. The effect of minimum taxation depends on the existence and magnitude of a depreciation effect. Both effects run contrary to each other, and the depreciation effect is always greater. We find that all concepts distort in the same direction and that real investments with increasing cash flows are more likely to be discriminated by minimum taxation than financial investments or real investments with constant cash flows. However, in comparison to real investments with decreasing cash flows financial investments suffer more from income-related minimum taxation concepts. These results provide interesting information for corporate investors having to decide on the location of an investment, and for tax reform discussions.","PeriodicalId":161200,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Firm (Topic)","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2008-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125530709","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
