Search

Existing studies have relied on the notion of developmentalism to explain key aspects of the tax policies in Japan and Korea. However, limited efforts have been made to explore these cases from a comparative perspective based on relevant evidence. Far fewer studies have been conducted for examining the contemporary evolution of the tax policies following major reforms since the 1990s. This article seeks to fill these gaps in the research. Employing an analytic framework of tax structure, it provides key definitions of the old and new tax models in Japan and Korea in a way that is comparable with other OECD cases. "Residualism" and "constrained activism," two heuristic models drawn from low-tax OECD countries, provide useful references for this comparative task. To validate key assessments, the author utilizes and replicates extensive tax data that operationalize important aspects of the tax structure from the 1980s to 2018. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the trajectories of capital tax policies in Japan and South Korea over recent decades. Historically, the two countries present an ideal case for studying fiscal developmentalism in East Asia. Total taxation was low, although capital owners assumed higher tax burdens than workers and consumers. From the 1990s to 2010s, both countries underwent a series of market-oriented tax reforms. A large body of political economy literature contends that the tax structures of these countries became increasingly neo-liberal during this period. Cuts in capital taxes were the primary focus of such changes. This article seeks to review this interpretation of the capital tax policies of Japan and South Korea. Through an examination of statutory and effective tax rate data, it confirms that no "race-to-the-bottom" cutbacks happened to capital taxation in these countries. Despite sharing this common ground, however, Japan's approach constitutes a more regressive case of capital tax adjustment than South Korea's. The author elucidates the reasons behind this difference by employing a revised partisan theory of capital taxation. The empirical analysis demonstrates the validity of this claim by examining eight cases of partisan governments in Japan and South Korea from the 1990s to the 2010s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although tax policies in Japan and South Korea have notably changed over recent decades, few studies have thoroughly examined the nature of these changes. Building on the average effective tax rates developed by Mendoza et al. (1994) and OECD researchers (Carey and Tchilinguirian 2000 ; Carey and Rabesona 2003) and extending and revising their original data, this study analyzes the structure of tax burdens in these two countries over 1995–2015. In particular, it examines the scholarly claim that taxation in these countries has become increasingly neoliberal over recent decades. The author finds insufficient evidence to support fiscal neoliberalism as race-to-the-bottom cuts in public taxation. Future studies may conduct in-depth comparative and case analyses to better understand the nature of the new tax structure emerging in these countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]