Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Is Corporate Tax Aggressiveness a Reputation Threat? Corporate Accountability, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Tax Behavior

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we consider the relationships among corporate accountability, reputation, and tax behavior as a corporate social responsibility issue. As part of our investigation, we provide empirical examples of corporate reputation and corporate tax behaviors using a sample of large, U.S.-based multinational companies. In addition, we utilize corporate tax controversies to illustrate possibilities for aggressive corporate tax behaviors of high-profile multinationals to become a reputation threat. Finally, we consider whether reputation serves as an accountability mechanism for corporate tax behaviors among other mechanisms for holding firms accountable for corporate tax behaviors. Our conceptual work points to a complicated relationship among shareholder, stakeholder, and civic responsibilities in the development and execution of firm’s corporate tax strategies. Building on those insights, our empirical illustration considers corporate reputation data alongside data which reflects corporate tax behavior. Based on this work, we find no clear trend or pattern indicating that reputation is associated with or affected by certain types of corporate tax behaviors. That is, our exploratory empirical illustration suggests that corporate tax behavior does not produce broad reputational consequences that would motivate a change in firm behavior. Drawing from celebrity and strategic silence research, we then suggest that reputation may not be a well-functioning mechanism for holding corporations to account for contributing their fair share of the resources used by government for the benefit of society and offer-related theoretical insights.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20560359, accessed May 6, 2018.

  2. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/08/starbucks-uk-stores-protests-tax, accessed May 6, 2018.

  3. The Reputation Institute acknowledges that its Global RepTrack ranking is likely influenced by consumer sentiment surrounding products and services which may dilute any correlation. However, in recent years, they also indicated sentiment around Governance and Citizenship dimensions, which may be more reflective of tax behavior as an ethical business practice, to be growing. We believe that growth offsets the dilution concern. Furthermore, we collected data from the Reputation Institute’s CSR-specific reputation ranking, which includes the Governance, Citizenship and Workplace dimensions, and find that using CSR-specific measures does not reveal the relationship with tax behavior to be any clearer. These results are untabulated in our paper as they do not change our findings. Our other two sources of reputation rankings also contain CSR dimensions; however, access to per-dimension data is not publicly available.

  4. There is not a universally accepted construct to measure tax avoidance used in the accounting literature (Hanlon and Heitzman 2010). Most measures approximate tax avoidance using financial statement data because this data is publicly available while tax return data is not. We recognize that using an absolute tax rate measure such as the CETR approximates the taxes a firm actually paid but does not speak to the taxes a firm should have paid. This is because measuring taxes a firm should have paid is impractical, particularly for multinational firms who pay taxes in a number of different tax jurisdictions around the world, all of which have different tax laws and tax rates.

  5. We also gathered 5 years of data on each corporation’s uncovered tax benefit (UTB). This amount, found in a corporation’s financial statements, is an estimate of potential tax dollars sheltered from payment that are more likely than less likely to have to be paid in back taxes if challenged by the Internal Revenue Service. When performing the same analyses using UTB as opposed to CETR, we found very similar patterns and draw the same conclusions. While both CETR and UTB are valid measures of tax avoidance (Lisowsky et al. 2013). CETR is the more standard measure of tax avoidance used in the accounting literature and, thus, is the main focus of our analysis.

  6. Retrieved directly from search of corporate websites, accessed as of May 15, 2018. Note U.K. law now requires the disclosure of corporate tax policy by firms with U.K. subsidiaries.

  7. Report of Offshore Shell Games: The Use of Offshore Tax Havens by Fortune 500 Companies (2017). U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund and the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

  8. Ibid.

  9. https://www.globalreporting.org/information/news-and-press-center/Pages/Tax-transparency,-regulation-and-the-need-for-greater-disclosure.aspx, accessed May 6, 2018.

  10. http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/current-issues/us-tax-policy, accessed May 6, 2018.

  11. Under the (prior) US tax regulation, as long as firms intend to indefinitely reinvest those profits outside of the US, they are not subject to US tax.

  12. https://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2015/06/18/walmart-report-on-76-billion-hidden-in-tax-havens-flawed/#3ae323d055ea, accessed May 6, 2018.

  13. https://clawback.org/2011/02/23/report-walmart-state-and-local-tax-avoidance-exceeds-400-million-annually/, accessed May 6, 2018.

  14. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-starbucks-tax/special-report-how-starbucks-avoids-uk-taxes-idUSBRE89E0EX20121015, accessed May 6, 2018.

  15. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/microsoft/how-microsoft-parks-profits-offshore-to-pare-its-tax-bill/, accessed May 6, 2018.

  16. https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2017/11/07/apple-an-example-of-why-corporate-tax-reform-isnt-enough/2/#23be5db4368d, accessed May 6, 2018.

  17. http://www.apple.com/ie/customer-letter/, accessed May 6, 2018.

  18. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/may/27/google-eric-schmidt-change-law-tax, accessed May 6, 2018.

  19. http://fortune.com/2015/05/25/amazon-tax-eu-regulators/, accessed May 6, 2018.

  20. https://itep.org/amazons-local-state-and-federal-tax-issues-explained/, accessed May 6, 2018.

  21. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/29/former-walmart-us-ceo-congress-consider-splitting-up-amazon.html, accessed May 6, 2018.

  22. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jan/24/google-ceo-were-happy-to-pay-more-tax, accessed May 6, 2018.

  23. Many taxpayers, including multinational corporations, also participate politically in the development and passage of applicable tax laws. Corporations are especially effective in having their perspectives on tax law considered through lobbying efforts and making political campaign contributions. Thus, corporations also influence the writing of the “letter of the law” to work to their advantage, which is often at odds with the “spirit of the law” (Roberts and Bobek 2004).

  24. https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/tax-cooperation-control/administrative-cooperation/enhanced-administrative-cooperation-field-direct-taxation/country-country-reporting_en, accessed May 6, 2018.

  25. Firms in Fig. 1 reporting in accordance with GRI G4 or GRI Standards that refer user to the 10-K or annual report for tax disclosure include American Express, AT&T, FedEx, General Electric, Home Depot, IBM, Pepsico, Walmart, Microsoft, Caterpillar, Coca Cola, Ford, Intel, Johnson & Johnson, JP MorganChase, Marriott, and Target. Firms that did not provide any income tax information include Kellogg, Kraft Heinz, Procter & Gamble, Visa, and Disney. Firms that aggregated both country-level and tax-type payment information include CVS, Exxon, and UPS.

References

  • Agarwal, J., Osiyevskyy, O., & Feldman, P. M. (2015). Corporate reputation measurement: Alternative factor structures, nomological validity, and organizational outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics,130(2), 485–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, J., Stackhouse, M., & Osiyevskyy, O. J. (2017). I love that company: Look how ethical, prominent, and efficacious it is—A triadic organizational reputation (TOR) Scale. Journal of Business Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3421-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alphabet. (2017). UK tax strategy. Retrieved from https://abc.xyz/investor/pdf/uk-tax-strategy.pdf

  • Apple. (2017). FY 2017 U.K. tax policy. Retrieved from https://www.apple.com/legal/more-resources/docs/uk-tax-policy.pdf

  • Barnett, M. L., Jermier, J. M., & Lafferty, B. A. (2006). Corporate reputation: The definitional landscape. Corporate Reputation Review,9(1), 26–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bitektine, A. (2011). Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation, and status. Academic of Management Review,36(1), 151–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. (2015). The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review,40(1), 49–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S. J., & Pavelin, S. (2006). Corporate reputation and social performance: The importance of fit. Journal of Management Studies,43(3), 435–455.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cable, D. M., & Graham, M. E. (2000). The determinants of job seekers’ reputation perceptions. Journal of Organizational Behavior,21(8), 929–947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlos, W. C., & Lewis, B. W. (2018). Strategic silence: Withholding certification status as a hypocrisy avoidance tactic. Administrative Science Quarterly,63(1), 130–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, S., Chen, X., Cheng, Q., & Shevlin, T. (2010). Are family firms more tax aggressive than non-family firms? Journal of Financial Economics,95(1), 41–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, C. H., Laine, M., Roberts, R. W., & Rodrigue, M. (2015). Organized hypocrisy, organization facades, and sustainability reporting. Accounting, Organizations and Society,40, 78–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, J., & Murphy, R. (2004). The social irresponsibility of corporate tax avoidance: Taking CSR to the bottom line. Development,47(3), 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clemente, M., & Roulet, T. J. (2015). Public opinion as a source of deinstitutionalization: A “spiral of silence” approach. Academic of Management Review,40(1), 96–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,15, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review,2(3), 70–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy of Management Review,16, 312–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. K., Guenther, D. A., Krull, L. K., & Williams, B. M. (2016). Do socially responsible firms pay more taxes? The Accounting Review,91(1), 47–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Carter, S. M. (2005). An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation. Journal of Management Studies,42(2), 329–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devers, C. E., Dewett, T., Mishina, Y., & Belsito, C. A. (2009). A general theory of organizational stigma. Organization Science,20(1), 154–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Devinney, T. M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibliy. The Academy of Management Perspectives,23(2), 44–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The Iron Cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review,48(2), 147–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Djankov, S., Ganser, T., McLiesh, C., Ramalho, R. M., & Shleifer, A. 2008. The effect of corporate taxes on investment and entrepreneurship (January 2008). NBER Working Paper No. w13756. Retrieved from SSRN https://ssrn.com/abstract=1088670

  • Doh, J. P., Howton, S. D., Howton, S. W., & Siegel, D. S. (2010). Does the market respond to an endorsement of social responsibility? The role of institutions, information, and legitimacy. Journal of Management,36(6), 1461–1485.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling, G. R. (2014). The curious case of corporate tax avoidance: Is it socially irresponsible? Journal of Business Ethics,124(1), 173–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., & Maydew, E. L. (2008). Long-run corporate tax avoidance. The Accounting Review,83(1), 61–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyreng, S. D., Hanlon, M., Maydew, E. L., & Thornock, J. R. (2017). Changes in corporate effective tax rates over the past 25 years. The Financial Economics,124(3), 441–463.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. The Academy of Management Review,14(4), 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elbra, A., & Mikler, J. (2017). Paying a ‘Fair Share’: Multinational corporations’ perspectives on taxation. Global Policy,8(2), 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission. (2018). Corporate social responsibility (CSR). Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/corporate-social-responsibility_en.

  • FACT Coalition. (2016). A taxing problem for investors. Retrieved from https://thefactcoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/A-Taxing-Problem-for-Investors-FACT-SEC-CBCR-Report-Sept-2016-FINAL.pdf

  • FASB. (2017). Board meeting handout: Disclosure frameworkincome taxes (January 25, 2017). Retrieved from https://www.fasb.org/cs/ContentServer?c=Document_C&cid=1176168895190&d=&pagename=FASB%2FDocument_C%2FDocumentPage

  • FASB. (2018). Project update: Disclosure frameworkDisclosure review: Income taxes. Retrieved from https://www.fasb.org/jsp/FASB/FASBContent_C/ProjectUpdateExpandPage&cid=1176170683850

  • Fischer, E. L., & Reuber, R. (2007). The good, the bad, and the unfamiliar: The challenges of reputation formation facing new firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,31(1), 53–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. (2005). Building corporate reputation through CSR initiatives: Evolving standards. Corporate Reputation Review,8(1), 7–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J., & Shanley, M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal,33(2), 233–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine 13 September 1970.

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative re- search. London: Wiedenfeld & Nicholson.

    Google Scholar 

  • GRI. (2016). GRI 201: Economic performance. Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org/standards

  • Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. J. (2006). Inhabited institutions: Social interactions and organizational forms in Gouldner’s patterns of industrial bureaucracy. Theory and Society,35(2), 213–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanlon, M., & Heitzman, S. (2010). A review of tax research. Journal of Accounting and Economics,50(2–3), 127–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. (1997). From heresy to dogma: An institutional history of corporate environmentalism. San Francisco: New Lexington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoi, C. K., Wu, Q., & Zhang, H. (2013). Is corporate social responsibility (CSR) associated with tax avoidance? Evidence from irresponsible CSR activities. The Accounting Review,88(6), 2025–2059.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, K. T. (2012). The advertising effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate reputation and brand equity: Evidence from the life insurance industry in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics,109(2), 189–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huseynov, F., & Klamm, B. K. (2012). Tax avoidance, tax management and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Finance,18(4), 804–827.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITEP. (2016). Comment letter to FASB on income tax disclosure. Retrieved from https://itep.org/comment-letter-to-fasb-on-income-tax-disclosure/

  • ITEP/U.S. PIRG. (2017). Offshore shell games 2017: The use of offshore tax havens by fortune 500 companies.

  • Jick, T. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly,24, 602–611.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J., Sutton, S., & Theis, J. (2018). Prioritizing sustainability issues: Insights from corporate managers (April 5, 2018). Retrieved from SSRN http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3157152. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3157152.

  • Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. California Management Review,22(3), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanagaretnam, K., Lee, J., Lim, C. Y., & Lobo, G. J. (2016). Cross-country evidence on the role of independent media in constraining corporate tax aggressiveness. Journal of Business Ethics,150(3), 879–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg. (2017). Tax policy & objectives. Retrieved from http://investor.kelloggs.com/~/media/Files/K/Kellogg-IR/documents/governance-documents/2017-tax-policy-and-objectives.pdf

  • Lai, C. S., Chiu, C. J., Yang, C. F., & Pai, D. C. (2010). The effects of corporate social responsibility on brand performance: The mediating effect of industrial brand equity and corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics,95(3), 457–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lange, D., Lee, P. M., & Dai, Ye. (2011). Organizational reputation: A review. Journal of Management,37(1), 153–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanis, R., & Richardson, G. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: A test of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,26(1), 75–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanis, R., & Richardson, G. (2015). Is corporate social responsibility performance associated with tax avoidance? Journal of Business Ethics,127(2), 439–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin-Hi, N., & Blumberg, I. (2018). The link between (not) practicing CSR and corporate reputation: Psychological foundations and managerial implications. Journal of Business Ethics,150, 185–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lisowsky, P., Robinson, L., & Schmidt, A. (2013). Do publicly disclosed tax reserves tell us about privately disclosed tax shelter activity? Journal of Accounting Research,51(3), 583–629.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lourrenco, I. C., Callen, J. L., & Branco, M. C. (2014). The value relevance of reputation for sustainability leadership. Journal of Business Ethics,119(1), 17–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Love, E. G., & Kraatz, M. (2009). Character, conformity, or the bottom line? How and why downsizing affected corporate reputation. The Academy of Management Journal,52(2), 314–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins, L. L. (2005). A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science,16(6), 701–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGee, R. W. (2006). Three views on the ethics of tax evasion. Journal of Business Ethics,67(1), 15–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1979). An emerging strategy of “direct” research. Administrative Science Quarterly,30, 580–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • P&G. (2017). 2017 citizenship report. Retrieved from https://us.pg.com/sustainability/at-a-glance/sustainability-reports.

  • Painter-Morland, M. (2007). Defining accountability in a network society. Business Ethics Quarterly,17(3), 515–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payne, D. M., & Raiborn, C. A. (2018). Aggressive tax avoidance: A conundrum for stakeholders, governments, and morality. Journal of Business Ethics,147(3), 469–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettigrew, A. M. (1990). Longitudinal field research on change: Theory and practice. Organization Science,1(3), 267–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfarrer, M. D., Pollock, T. G., & Rindova, V. P. (2010). A tale of two assets: The effects of firm reputation and celebrity on earnings surprises and investors’ reactions. Academy of Management Journal,53(5), 1131–1152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2006). The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review,84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preuss, L. (2010). Tax avoidance and corporate social responsibility: You can’t do both, or can you? Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Business in Society,10(4), 365–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, D., Surroca, J., & Tribo, J. (2008). Are socially responsible managers really ethical? Exploring the relationship between earnings management and corporate social responsibility. Corporate Governance,16(3), 160–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhee, M., & Haunschild, P. R. (2006). The liability of good reputation: A study of product recalls in the U.S. automobile industry. Organization Science,17(1), 101–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. P., Pollock, T. G., & Hayward, M. L. A. (2006). Celebrity firms: The social construction of market popularity. Academy of Management Review,31(1), 50–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Journal,48(6), 1033–1049.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, R. W., & Bobek, D. D. (2004). The politics of tax accounting in the United States: Evidence from the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997. Accounting, Organizations and Society,29(5–6), 565–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, H., & Brock, G. (2016). Abusive tax avoidance and responsibilities of tax professionals. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities,17(2), 278–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saeidi, S. P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S. P., & Saaeidi, S. A. (2015). How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Business Research,68, 341–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez, J. L. F., & Sotorrio, L. L. (2007). The creation of value through corporate reputation. Journal of Business Ethics,76(3), 335–346.

    Google Scholar 

  • SASB. (2016). Blog: Investors ask SEC for better sustainability disclosure (August 16, 2016). Retrieved from https://www.sasb.org/investors-sec-sustainability-disclosure/

  • Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research,38(2), 225–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytic framework. California Management Review,17(3), 58–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shamsie, J. (2003). The context of dominance: An industry-driven framework for exploiting reputation. Strategic Management Journal,24(3), 199–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sikka, P. (2010). Smoke and mirrors corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance. Accounting Forum,34(3/4), 153–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanaland, A. J., Lwin, M. O., & Murphy, P. E. (2011). Consumer perceptions of the antecedents and consequences of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics,102(1), 47–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Staw, B. M., & Epstein, L. D. (2000). What bandwagons bring: Effects of popular management techniques on corporate performance, reputation, and CEO pay. Administrative Science Quarterly,45(3), 523–556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1997). On the virtues of the old institutionalism. Annual Review of Sociology,23(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tschopp, D., & Nastanski, M. (2014). The harmonization and convergence of corporate social responsibility reporting standards. Journal of Business Ethics,125, 147–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees. The Academy of Management Journal,40(3), 658–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2010). UN Global Compact Management Model. Retrieved from https://www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/9.1_news_archives/2010_06_17/UN_Global_Compact_Management_Model.pdf

  • Walker, K., & Dyck, B. (2014). The primary importance of corporate social responsibility and ethicality in corporate reputation: An empirical study. Business and Society Review,119(1), 147–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, L. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, tax avoidance, and earnings performance. The Journal of the American Taxation Association,37(2), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, C. F. (2016). Leveraging reputational risk: Sustainable sourcing campaigns for improving labour standards in production networks. Journal of Business Ethics,137(1), 195–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahller, K. A., Arnold, V., & Roberts, R. W. (2015). Using CSR disclosure quality to develop social resilience to exogenous shocks: A test of investor perceptions. Behavioral Research in Accounting,27(2), 155–177.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the editors, Craig Carroll and Rowena Olegario, two anonymous reviewers, and participants at the 2016 NYU/Oxford Corporate Affairs, Accountability, and Reputation Workshop for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robin W. Roberts.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baudot, L., Johnson, J.A., Roberts, A. et al. Is Corporate Tax Aggressiveness a Reputation Threat? Corporate Accountability, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Tax Behavior. J Bus Ethics 163, 197–215 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04227-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04227-3

Keywords

Navigation