SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTION INDEBTED FIRMS IN VIETNAM: CHARACTERISTICS AND MARKET VALUE
Vol. 129 No. 5A (2020), Original Article
Vol. 129 No. 5A (2020)

SOCIAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTION INDEBTED FIRMS IN VIETNAM: CHARACTERISTICS AND MARKET VALUE

Original Article
https://doi.org/10.26459/hueuni-jed.v129i5A.5739
Published 2020-04-27
Phan Hoang Long
University of Economics - The University of Danang
Tra Luc Diep
Tran Thi Hang
PDF

Keywords

Social security contribution
Worker welfare
State ownership
Foreign ownership
Firm market value

Abstract

Abstract: This research is the first to empirically analyse the characteristics of firms that defer the social security contribution for their employees to the Vietnam Social Security agency, which is a chargeable offense starting 2018 as the Vietnam government focuses on ensuring worker welfare. Using data on 873 public firms headquartered in four major cities (Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh, Da Nang, and Hai Phong), we find that non-state-owned firms and firms with lower profitability and higher debts are more likely to be in arrears on social security contribution. On the other hand, the roles of foreign ownership, size, number of employees, and number of branches/offices are insignificant. We further show that being social security contribution indebted would negatively affect shareholders’ interest as it is associated with lower firm market values.

Key words: social security contribution, worker welfare, state ownership, foreign ownership, firm market value

https://doi.org/10.26459/hueuni-jed.v129i5A.5739
PDF

References

  1. Bailey, C. & Turner, J. (2001), Strategies to reduce contribution evasion in social security financing, World Development, 29(2), 385–393.
  2. Carter, D.A., Simkins, B. J. & Simpson, W. G. (2003), Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value, Financial Review, 38(1), 33–53.
  3. Castel, P. & Pick, A. (2018), Increasing social insurance coverage in Viet Nam’s SMEs, OECD Development Policy Papers, 13, 1–57.
  4. Castel, P. & To, Trung Thanh (2012), Informal employment in the formal sector: wages and social security tax evasion in Vietnam, Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 17(4), 616–631.
  5. Chen, X., Hu, N., Wang, X. & Tang, X. (2014), Tax avoidance and firm value: evidence from China, Nankai Business Review International, 5(1), 25–42.
  6. Desai, M.A. & Dharmapala, D. (2009), Corporate tax avoidance and firm value, Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(3), 537–546.
  7. Eisenberg, T., Sundgren, S. & Wells, M. T. (1998), Larger board size and decreasing firm value in small firms, Journal of Financial Economics, 48(1), 35–54.
  8. Goveia, L. & Sosa, A. (2017), Developing a compliance‐based approach to address error, evasion and fraud in social security systems, International Social Security Review, 70(2), 87–107.
  9. Hasnan, S., Rahman, R. A. & Mahenthiran, S. (2013), Management motive, weak governance, earnings management, and fraudulent financial reporting, Malaysian evidence, Journal of International Accounting Research, 12(1), 1–27.
  10. Hou, W. & Moore, G. (2010), Player and referee roles held jointly, the effect of state ownership on China’s regulatory enforcement against fraud, Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 317–335.
  11. Irianto, B. S., Sudibyo, Y. A. & Wafirli, A. (2017), The influence of profitability, leverage, firm size and capital intensity towards tax avoidance, International Journal of Accounting, 5(2), 33–41.
  12. Jiraporn, P., Miller, G. A., Yoon, S. S. & Kim, Y. S. (2008), Is earnings management opportunistic or beneficial? An agency theory perspective, International Review of Financial Analysis, 17(3), 622–634.
  13. Kim, H. J. & Yoon, S. S. (2008), The impact of corporate governance on earnings management in Korea, Malaysian Accounting Review, 7(1), 43–59.
  14. Lee, S. & Torm, N. (2017), Social security and firm performance, The case of Vietnamese SMEs, International Labour Review, 156(2), 185–212.
  15. McGillivray, W. (2002), Contribution evasion, Implications for social security pension schemes, International Social Security Review, 54(4), 3–22.
  16. Nguyen, Tran Thai Ha & Phan, Gia Quyen (2017), The relationship between state ownership and tax avoidance level, empirical evidence from Vietnamese firms, Journal of Asian Business Strategy, 7(1), 1–12.
  17. Nyland, C., Smyth, R. & Zhu, C. J. (2006), What determines the extent to which employers will comply with their social security obligations? Evidence from Chinese firm‐level data, Social Policy Administration, 40(2), 196–214.
  18. Richarson, G., Taylor, G. & Lanis, R. (2015), The impact of financial distress on corporate tax avoidance spanning the global financial crisis, Evidence from Australia, Economic Modelling, 44, 44–53.
  19. Salihu, I. A., Annuar, H. A. & Obid, S. N. S. (2015), Foreign investors’ interests and corporate tax avoidance, Evidence from an emerging economy, Journal of Contemporary Accounting & Economics, 11(2), 138–147.
  20. Shi, W., Aguilera, R. & Wang, K. (2020), State ownership and securities fraud, a political governance perspective, Corporate Governance An International Review, 28(2), 157–176.
  21. Torm, N. (2019), Social protection among Vietnamese SMEs: Implications for firm performance 2012–2016, International Labor Organization report, https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---asia/---ro-bangkok/---ilo-hanoi/documents/publication/wcms_721947.pdf.
  22. Villalonga, B. & Amit, R. (2006), How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value?, Journal of Financial Economics, 80(2), 385–417.
  23. Wang, L. & Yung, K. (2011), Do state enterprises manage earnings more than privately owned firms? The case of China, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 38(7&8), 794–812.