http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 신승묘 ( Seung Myo Shin ) (검색결과 18 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
신승묘 ( Seung Myo Shin ) 한국회계학회 2013 회계학연구 Vol.38 No.4
회계이익과 세무이익의 차이(Book-Tax Differences: BTD)가 회계이익의 속성을 반영하는지에 관하여 수행된 선행연구들은 BTD가 회계이익의 질과 세후순이익의 미래성장성을 반영한다는 실증결과를 제시하고 있다. BTD는 일시적 차이와 영구적 차이로 나뉘는 바 선행연구들은 대체로 회계이익의 질과 세후순이익의 미래성장성 측면에서 일시적 차이와 영구적 차이가 반영하는 내용을 명확히 구분하여 파악하고 있지 않다. The objectives and rules of recognizing accounting income are different from those of recognizing taxable income, and this makes accounting income different from taxable income. That is, there are book-tax differences (hereinafter BTD). BTD are classified into temporary differences and permanent differences. Temporary differences arise because managerial discretion is permitted in recognizing the periodic accounting income, whereas objectivity is important in recognizing the periodic taxable income. In other words, temporary differences reflect differences in the timing of recognition that will reverse in the future. On the contrary, permanent differences arise because the concept and scope of accounting income are different from those of taxable income, and so, they do not reverse in the future.
-
리스와 부채 사이의 대체관계와 기업의 조세부담 및 부채수용력
신승묘 ( Seung Myo Shin ) 한국회계학회 2015 회계학연구 Vol.40 No.3
기업이 어떤 자산을 리스하면 당해 자산을 이용할 수 있음과 아울러 그에 대한 대가로 리스기간 동안 매기 일정한 리스료를 지불해야 하며, 따라서 어떤 자산을 리스하는 것은 부채로 조달한 자본으로 당해 자산을 구입하는 것과 경제적 효과가 동일하다. 다시 말하여 리스와 부채는 자산구입 자본의 조달과 관련한 고정적 청구권이라는 공통점을 지니며, 이에 따라 전통적 기업재무론에서는 이들 사이에 대체관계(substitutability)가 존재할 것으로 예상하여 왔다. 그런데 이러한 예상에 관한 기존의 실증결과들은 그다지 일관성이 충분하지는 않으며, 이점과 관련하여 리스와 부채 사이에 부분적으로 보완관계도 존재할 수 있고 이러한 보완관계에 의하여 대체관계가 상쇄됨으로써 약하게 될 수 있음이 언급되어 왔다. Lewis and Schallheim(1992)은 리스를 이용하면 임차인의 입장에서 볼 때 조세절감에 사실상 기여하지 못함으로써 불필요한 비부채감세수단을 임대인에게 이전할 수 있음에 따라 조세부담 측면에서의 이유로 리스와 부채 사이에 부분적으로 보완관계가 존재할 수 있고, 이러한 보완관계에 의하여 이들 사이의 대체관계가 상쇄됨으로써 약하게 될 수 있음을 제시하였다. 한편 부채에 대한 이자비용의 손금산입으로 인하여 비부채감세수단의 필요성이 작은 정도는 한계세율이 높을수록 클 것이다. 이러한 점을 감안할 때 한계세율이 높을수록 부채와 리스 사이의 대체관계가 보다 약하게 나타날 것으로 예상된다. 이상에서 언급한 점들에 근거하여 본 연구는 우리나라의 제조업에 속한 유가증권상장기업을 대상으로 하여 리스와 부채 사이의 대체관계가 한계세율이 높을수록 약한지 그리고 부채수준이 높을수록 강한지 실증분석 하였으며, 그 결과 당초의 예상을 지지하는 실증결과 를 얻었다. 이러한 실증분석결과는 기업의 실질적인 총부채 규모를 파악하려면 리스로 인한 고정적 청구권의 규모까지 감안하여야 할 것임을 지지한다. 한편 최근에는 국내외적으로 운용리스를 포함한 모든 리스를 자본화하는 방향으로 리스회계기준의 개정을 추진 중인데, 본 연구의 실증분석결과는 이러한 개정의 추진이 회계정보의 유용성 측면에서 긍정적일 것임을 시사한다. When a firm leases an asset it makes the firm be able to use the asset as well as commits the firm to a fixed series of lease payments during lease period, and therefore, the firm is the same as bearing debt amounting to the present value of future lease payments. In other words, leasing an asset has the same economic effect as raising capital through debt financing and purchasing the asset by the capital, and so, both lease and debt are fixed claims in common related with financing asset purchase. Based on this point, corporate finance theory predicts that there would be substitutability between lease and debt. Many existing studies have presented empirical results supporting this prediction, but there have been also some empirical studies not supporting the prediction. So the empirical results of existing studies are not so consistent. In spite of the insufficient consistency of empirical results, the studies have not denied the lease-debt substitutability. Instead, they have said that there could be partial complementarity between lease and debt and this could weaken the substitutability between them. Paying attention to what have been said in existing studies, Lewis and Schallheim(1992) argue that there can be partial complementarity between lease and debt from the perspective of tax burden, and as a result, the substitutability between lease and debt can be not so strong for being weakened by the partial complementarity. The reasoning for this argument is that lease is a useful tool to transfer to the lessor the lessee``s non-debt tax shields that is redundant for not contributing to tax saving. In addition to the argument of Lewis and Schallheim(1992), it can be inferred that the redundancy of non-debt tax shields resulting from interest expense’s tax deductibility would be bigger for the higher marginal tax rate than for the lower marginal tax rate. Taking these points into account, the substitutability between lease and debt is expected to be weaker for the higher marginal tax rate than for the lower marginal tax rate. Lease is always associated with financing asset purchase, while debt is not necessarily so. In other words, debt can be used to finance not only the capital for asset purchase but also the working capital. And lease is prior to debt in liquidation priorities, and agency problem arising from manager``s under-investment incentive is less severe in the case of lease financing compared to the case of debt financing. For these reasons, some existing studies say that there can be complementarity between lease and debt other than that from the perspective of tax burden, and this can also weaken the substitutability between them. In addition to this, the studies say that the complementarity between lease and debt would be more pronounced whe there is more room for debt capacity, and so, the substitutability between them would be more offset by the partial complementarity. And it can be inferred that the firms with higher debt level would generally have less room for debt capacity than the firms with lower debt level. Taking these points into account, it is expected that the substitutability between lease and debt would be stronger for the higher debt level than for the lower debt level. Based on what are mentioned above, this paper performs the following two empirical tests for the KSE-listed companies. First, this paper investigates whether the substitutability between lease and debt is the weaker for the higher marginal tax rate to see if the substitutability is offset by the partial complementarity from the perspective of tax burden. Second, this paper investigates whether the substitutability between lease and debt is the stronger for the higher debt level to see if the substitutability is more offset by the partial complementarity when there is more room for debt capacity. Main test results are as follows. First, there is substitutability between lease and debt, and the substitutability is weaker for higher marginal tax rate aswell as stronger for higher debt level. Second, the lease-debt substitutability and its being stronger for higher debt level are less significant for the period after the year 2001. Third, the lease-debt substitutability’s being weaker for higher marginal tax rate is more significant in case of the firms with high non-debt tax shields than in case of the firms with low non-debt tax shields. Fourth, the lease-debt substitutability’s being stronger for higher debt level is less significant in case of the firms with low debt ratio than in case of the firms with high debt ratio. Fifth, the test results are qualitatively the same when short-term debt is excluded from debt. These empirical test results support that lease is a kind of unrecorded debt, and so, the size of fixed claim due to leases needs to be taken into account when one tries to grasp a firm’s total debt size in substance. And these findings imply that the recent discussion to change to new IFRS under which all leases including operating leases are to be capitalized is positive in terms of accounting information usefulness.well as stronger for higher debt level. Second, the lease-debt substitutability and its being stronger for higher debt level are less significant for the period after the year 2001. Third, the lease-debt substitutability’s being weaker for higher marginal tax rate is more significant in case of the firms with high non-debt tax shields than in case of the firms with low non-debt tax shields.Fourth, the lease-debt substitutability’s being stronger for higher debt level is less significant in case of the firms with low debt ratio than in case of the firms with high debt ratio. Fifth, the test results are qualitatively the same when short-term debt is excluded from debt. These empirical test results support that lease is a kind of unrecorded debt, and so, the size of fixed claim due to leases needs to be taken into account when one tries to grasp a firm’s total debt size in substance. And thesefindings imply that the recent discussion to change to new IFRS under whichall leases including operating leases are to be capitalized is positive in terms of accounting information usefulness.well as stronger for higher debt level. Second, the lease-debt substitutability and its being stronger for higher debt level are less significant for the period after the year 2001. Third, the lease-debt substitutability’s being weaker for higher marginal tax rate is more significant in case of the firms with high non-debt tax shields than in case of the firms with low non-debt tax shields. Fourth, the lease-debt substitutability’s being stronger for higher debt level is less significant in case of the firms with low debt ratio than in case of the firms with high debt ratio. Fifth, the test results are qualitatively the same when short-term debt is excluded from debt. These empirical test results support that lease is a kind of unrecorded debt, and so, the size of fixed claim due to leases needs to be taken into account when one tries to grasp a firm’s total debt size in substance. And these findings imply that the recent discussion to change to new IFRS under which all leases including operating leases are to be capitalized is positive in terms of accounting information usefulness.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
