본 연구는 조세전략이 원가의 비대칭성에 미치는 영향을 검증하였다. 법인세법에 따른 법정세금과 기업이 실제 부담하는 세금의 차이인 조세혜택이 원가의 비대칭성에 미치는 영향을 분석하였다. 또한 경영상황과 법인세율 인하가 조세혜택과 원가의 비대칭성간의 관계에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지 살펴보았다. 본 연구의 분석결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 조세혜택과 원가의 비대칭성의 관계에서 조세혜택을 받기 위한 조세전략을 실행하는 기업일수록 매출감소시 총원가, 매출원가, 판매관리비 항목에서 원가의 하방경직성이 더 강화된다는 것을 확인하였다. 조세혜택을 받기 위한 연구개발에 지속적으로 투자함으로써 매출이 감소하는 상황에서 원가의 비대칭성이 강화됨을 알 수 있다. 둘째, 조세혜택은 낙관적인 상황보다는 비관적인 상황에서 원가의 하방경직성을 더 강화시킨다는 결과를 확인하였다. 경영자는 비관적인 상황에서도 조세혜택을 지속적으로 받기 위해서 기존 투자를 유지하기 때문에 조세혜택이 원가의 하방경직성에 영향을 미친다. 셋째, 법인세율 인하 직전년도에 조세혜택이 원가의 하방경직성을 더 강화시킨다는 결과를 확인하였다. 법인세율 인하 직전년도에 조세혜택이 경영자로 하여금 추가적인 투자를 유도함으로써 원가의 하방경직성을 전반적으로 강화시킨다. 원가의 비대칭성을 주제로 한 원가회계와 조세전략을 주제로 한 세무학을 접목시킨 본 연구의 결과가 제공하는 시사점은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 조세혜택은 원가의 하방경직성을 강화시키는 요인이 된다. 조세혜택은 대부분 고용 및 연구․설비투자에 대한 세제혜택이다. 따라서 기업은 조세혜택과 고용 및 연구․설비투자를 통해서 기업가치를 극대화 할 수 있는 접점을 찾아 최대한도의 조세혜택을 받을 수 있도록 최적의 조세전략을 설계하여 실행해야 할 것이다. 둘째, 조세혜택은 경영상황이 낙관적일 때보다는 비관적일 때 원가의 하방경직성을 더 강화시킨다. 따라서 전반적인 경제침체기에 봉착하더라도 기업이 고용과 설비투자를 늘릴 수 있는 적절한 세제혜택이 제공된다면 고용과 투자감소에 대한 사회․경제적 문제를 일정 부분 해결할 수 있을 것으로 판단된다. 최근 경제가 크게 위축되고 있는 상황에서 기업들은 고정비 성격의 인건비에 매우 민감하기 때문에 정부는 고용에 대한 유인책으로 조세혜택을 적극적으로 활용하는 정책이 필요하다. 마지막으로, 조세혜택은 법인세율 인하 직전연도에 원가의 하방경직성을 더 강화시킨다. 따라서 정부는 법인세율 인하를 검토하면서 동시에 불필요한 세제혜택을 과감하게 중단하는 조세개편을 실시해야 할 것이다.

This study investigates the effect of tax strategy on cost asymmetry. It also investigates the effect of business situation and corporate tax rate reductions on the relationship between tax strategy and cost asymmetry. We expect that the difference between tax amount according to corporate tax rate and tax payable after deductions affects cost asymmetry. We use the sample listed on KOSPI and KOSDAQ from 2001 to 2013 to test the effect of tax strategy on cost asymmetry. The tax subsidy advantage is calculated based on average for 3 years, so the samples used in our analysis models are 5,275 firm-year from 2004 to 2013. The results of our study are as follows. First, we find the evidence that the tax subsidy advantages for which the companies perform tax strategy are likely to strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) including TC, CGS, SG&A. Mansfield (1986), Bloom et al.(1999), Lee et al. (2006), and Seo and Lee (2011) document that the companies with the greater tax subsidy advantages are likely to increase R&D expenditures and investments, and Black et al. (2000) and Shin (2000) document that the specific tax deductions are likely to boost new investments activities. It is possible that the future sales are expected to increase when R&D expenditures and new investments increase, which makes the relationship between the tax subsidy advantages and the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) stronger. Second, we find the evidence that the tax subsidy advantages are likely to strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) in the pessimistic business condition other than in the optimistic business condition. In the optimistic business condition, it is difficult to reduce costs in the proportion of decrease of sales regardless of the tax subsidy advantages because most of the tax subsidy advantages are related to R&D and investments activities, and managers are likely to sustain R&D and investments activities to benefit from the tax subsidy advantages for the positive future. In the pessimistic business condition, however, it is likely to reduce costs in the proportion of decrease of sales when there are less or no tax subsidy advantages, and it is likely to strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) when there are more tax subsidy advantages. Third, we find the evidence that the tax subsidy advantages are likely to strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) in the previous year of a corporate tax rate reductions because managers would like to benefit from more tax subsidy advantages before a corporate tax rate reduces. However, the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) is shown regardless of the tax subsidy advantages and the effect of the tax subsidy advantages on the asymmetry of cost behavior (cost stickiness) is low in other than the previous year of a corporate tax rate reductions. The results of our study that connects cost accounting with the subject of cost asymmetry and tax accounting with the subject of tax strategy provide some implications as follows. First, the tax subsidy advantages are mostly derived from tax deduction related to R&D expenditures and new investments. So, it is necessary for managers to perform optimal tax strategy to benefit the tax subsidy advantages in order to maximize firm value. Second, the tax subsidy advantages strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior in the pessimistic business condition more than in the optimistic business condition. Therefore, it is necessary that government provides the proper tax subsidy advantages to increase employment and investment even in the period of economic slump. Recently, global economy including Korea goes worse, so if possible, the tax subsidy advantages are good policies to boost R&D expenditures and new investments. Finally, the tax subsidy advantages strengthen the asymmetry of cost behavior in the previous year of a corporate tax rate reductions. Therefore, it is necessary that government considers to stop the unnecessary tax subsidy advantages, as well as to enforce a corporate tax rate reductions because tax incomes of government will drop deeply. The limitations of our study are as follows. We were not able to concretely analyse the reason and which specific tax subsidy advantages affect cost asymmetry because we did not obtain the exact information about the tax subsidy advantages which activities of companies are related to. Recently, companies disclose various information about the tax subsidy advantages, so it is necessary to study which specific tax subsidy advantages affect cost asymmetry in the future.

tax strategy, asymmetric costs behavior, tax subsidy advantage, business situation, corporate tax rate reduction