請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件：
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/91346完整後設資料紀錄
| DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 陳肇鴻 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Chao-Hung Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 孔繶蓁 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author | Yi-Chen Kung | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2024-01-03T16:12:33Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2024-01-04 | - |
| dc.date.copyright | 2024-01-03 | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-12-25 | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | 一、中文文獻
1. 專書、圖書章節 John C. Coffee Jr.（著），江朝聖、林建中、洪令家、林育廷（譯），陳錦隆、王文宇（審定）（2017），《專業守門人與公司治理》，新學林。 王志誠、邵慶平、洪秀芬、陳俊仁（2021），《實用證券交易法》，6版，新學林。 洪令家（2016），〈從我國與美國法的比較視野－論財報不實的證券詐欺刑事責任〉，收於：賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集編輯委員會（編），《當前公司與證券法制新趨勢：賴英照講座教授七秩華誕祝賀論文集》，元照，頁469-492。 曾宛如（2020），《證券交易法原理》，7版，元照。 楊岳平（2011），《公司治理與公司社會責任：企業併購下股東、債權人、員工、投資人之保護》，元照。 劉連煜（2021），《現代證券交易法實例研習》，增訂18版，新學林。 賴英照（2020），《最新證券交易法解析》，4版，自刊。 2. 期刊文章 牛曰正（2012），〈資訊揭露與公平交易法－以公平交易法第24條為核心〉，《公平交易季刊》，第20卷第4期，頁105-159。 李宜樺、鄭可俐（2020），〈加速永續金融的利器－永續會計準則（SASB）〉，《會計研究月刊》，第411期，頁94-99。 柯格鐘（2014），〈論稅捐規避行為之立法與行為的類型化〉，《興大法學》，第15期，頁27-100。 柯格鐘（2019），〈稅捐稽徵協力義務、推計課稅與協力義務違反的制裁－以納稅者權利保護法第 14 條規定討論與條文修正建議為中心〉，《臺北大學法學論叢》，第110期，頁1-91。 范香琴（2016），〈永續發展下企業應做好稅務治理〉，《財稅法令半月刊》，第45卷第6期，頁35-43。 高晟晉（2019），〈GRI準則編製重點摘要〉，《證券服務》，670期，頁44-50。 高晟晉（2019），〈掌握GRI報導原則以提升ESG資訊品質〉，《證券服務》，670期，頁30-39。 郭大維（2012），〈論英國企業社會責任之推動與實踐及其對我國之啟示〉，《證券暨期貨月刊》，第30卷第3期，頁25-36。 陳仲嶙、蔡昌憲、劉冠佳（2022），〈企業社會揭露的法律管制模式──兼顧實效性與合憲性的觀點〉，《中研院法學期刊》，第31期，頁163-254。 陳衍任（2016），〈美國IT業跨國避稅模式（中）〉，《稅務旬刊》，第2317期，頁22-27。 陳麗娟（2016），〈EU公司治理下企業社會責任之研究〉，《月旦財經法雜誌》，第39期，頁45-72。 曾宛如（1997），〈論歐盟指令之直接效力及一致解釋〉，《中興法學》，第42期，頁113-136。 黃劭彥、卓嘉慶、邱安安、徐維廷（2013），〈財稅差異與財務危機之關聯性研究〉，《會計審計論叢》，第3卷第2期，頁1-26。 黃朝琮，〈環境、社會與治理（ESG）資訊揭露之規範──以重大性之判斷為核心〉，《臺北大學法學論叢》，122期，頁1-111。 會計研究月刊（2013），〈從 IFRS到審計公報與投資者權益保障〉，《會計研究月刊》，第337期，頁99-107。 楊岳平（2019），〈新公司法與企業社會責任的過去與未來－我國法下企業社會責任理論的立法架構與法院實務〉，《中正財經法學》，第18期，頁43-91。 葉豐瀅、黃世忠（2023），〈可持續發展報告的目標設定研究〉，《財務研究》，2023年第1期，頁15-25。 賴英照（2007），〈公司治理：為誰而治理？為何而治理？〉，《萬國法律》，第155期，頁2-15。 賴英照（2016），〈內線交易的紅線－重大消息何時明確？〉，《中原財經法學》，第36期，頁1-119。 戴昕、張永健（2018），〈比例原則還是成本效益分析？：法學方法的批判性重構〉，《中外法學》，30卷6期，頁1519-1545。 3. 單篇文章、研究報告 林國全、陳惟龍、蘇秀玲、陳茵琦（2013），〈各國關於財務報告及公開說明書不實之損害賠償責任研究〉，證券投資人及期貨交易人保護中心研究報告，載於：https://www.sfipc.org.tw/WebLoadFileUse.ashx?L=1&SNO=pR0Ww9cHe//ByubKSPNUgg==（最後瀏覽日期：11/24/2023）。 郭大維、戴銘昇（2022），〈證券交易法之專家管理與責任－以財務報告及公開說明書不實案件為中心〉，證券投資人及期貨交易人保護中心研究報告，載於：https://www.sfipc.org.tw/WebLoadFileUse.ashx?L=1&SNO=LA2FulxIxtDIeEhl2HZCBA==（最後瀏覽日期：11/24/2023）。 4. 學位論文 高孟如（2020），《論永續資訊不實責任——以投資人保護為中心》，國立臺灣大學科際整合法律學研究所碩士論文（未出版），臺北。 5. 網路資源 金融監督管理委員會，〈2013強化我國公司治理藍圖〉，載於：https://www.sfb.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=886&parentpath=0,8,882,884（最後瀏覽日期：11/27/2023）。 金融監督管理委員會，〈上市櫃公司永續發展行動方案（2023年）〉，載於：https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202303280001&dtable=News（最後瀏覽日期：11/27/2023）。 金融監督管理委員會，〈公司治理3.0－永續發展藍圖〉，載於：https://www.sfb.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=992&parentpath=0,8,882,884（最後瀏覽日期：11/27/2023）。 金融監督管理委員會，〈我國接軌國際財務報導準則（IFRS）永續揭露準則藍圖〉，載於：https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=202308170002&dtable=News（最後瀏覽日期：11/27/2023）。 金融監督管理委員會，〈新版公司治理藍圖（2018-2020）〉，載於： https://www.fsc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=96&parentpath=0,2&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=201804240003&toolsflag=Y&dtable=News（最後瀏覽日期：11/27/2023）。 劉謹銓，〈強化企業社會責任報告書的公信力，透過獨立公正的第三方查證（AA1000以及ISAE 3000之比較）〉，載於：https://www.bsigroup.com/LocalFiles/zh-tw/enews/No131/AA1000_with_ISAE3000.pdf（最後瀏覽日期：11/24/2023）。 二、英文文獻 1. 專書、圖書章節 Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2021). Information overload: An overview. In D. P. Redlawsk (Ed.), Oxford encyclopedia of political decision making (pp. 121–140). Oxford University Press. Bruce, D., Deskins, J., & Fox, W. (2007). On the extent, growth, and efficiency consequences of state business tax planning. In A. Auerbach, J. Hines, Jr. & J. Slemrod (Eds.), Taxing corporate income in the 21st century (pp. 226–256). Cambridge University Press. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone, Oxford. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman, Boston. Friedman, M. (2007). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. In W. C. Zimmerli, M. Holzinger & K. Richter (Eds.), Corporate ethics and corporate governance (pp. 173–178). Springer. Georgakopoulos, N. L. (2017). The logic of securities law. Cambridge University Press. Gribnau, H., & Frecknall-Hughes, J. (2022). The enlightenment and influence of social contract theory on taxation. In R. F. van Brederode (Ed.), Political philosophy and taxation (pp. 51–101). Springer. Jallai, A. (2017). Restoring stakeholders’ trust in multinationals’ tax planning practices with corporate social responsibility (CSR). In B. Peeters, J. L. M. Gribnau & J. Badisco (Eds.), Building trust in taxation (pp.173–201). Intersentia, Cambridge. Leone, V. (1996). Public procurement law. In R. H. Folsom, R. B. Lake & V. P. Nanda (Eds.), European Union law after Maastricht: A practical guide for lawyers outside the common market (pp. 73–132). Kluwer Law International. Middleton, A., & Muttonen, J. (2021). Multinational enterprises and transparent tax reporting. Routledge. Murphy, R. (2016). Country-by-country reporting. In T. Pogge & K. Mehta (Eds.), Global tax fairness (pp. 96–112). Oxford University Press. Schwartz, B., & Ward, A. (2004). Doing better but feeling worse: The paradox of choice. In P. A. Linley & S. Joseph (Eds.), Positive psychology in practice (pp. 86–104). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2. 期刊文章 Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for “lemons”: Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), 488–500. Allen, W. T. (1992). Our schizophrenic conception of the business corporation. Cardozo Law Review, 14(2), 261–282. Amel-Zadeh, A., & Serafeim, G. (2018). Why and how investors use ESG information: Evidence from a global survey. Financial Analysts Journal, 74(3), 87–103. Amir, E., Lev, B., & Sougiannis, T. (2003). Do financial analysts get intangibles?. European Accounting Review, 12(4), 635–659. Ariely, D., Kamenica, E., & Prelec, D. (2008). Man’s search for meaning: The case of Legos. Journal of Economic Behaviour & Organization, 67(3-4), 671–677. Avi-yonah, R. S. (2006). The three goals of taxation. Tax Law Review, 60(1), 1-28. Azzone, G., Brophy, M., Noci, G., Welford, R., & Young, W. (1997). A stakeholders’ view of environmental reporting. Long Range Planning, 30(5), 699–709. Balakrishnan, K., Blouin, J. L., & Guay, W. R. (2019). Tax aggressiveness and corporate transparency. The Accounting Review, 94(1), 45–69. Baumüller, J., & Sopp, K. (2022). Double materiality and the shift from non-financial to European sustainability reporting: Review, outlook and implications. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 23(1), 8–28. Beyer, A., Cohen, D. A., Lys, T. Z., & Walther, B. R. (2010). The financial reporting environment: Review of the recent literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 50(2-3), 296–343. Brown, N. C., Gale, B. T., & Grant, S. M. (2022). How do disclosure repetition and interactivity influence investors’ judgments?. Journal of Accounting Research, 60(5), 1775–1811. Calderón, J. M. (2020). Corporate tax governance 2.0: The role of tax control frameworks following the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting project. Bulletin for International Taxation, 74(3), 110–122. Choi, J., & Park, H. (2022). Tax avoidance, tax risk, and corporate governance: Evidence from Korea. Sustainability, 14(1), 469. Christensen, H. B., Hail, L., & Leuz, C. (2021). Mandatory CSR and sustainability reporting: Economic analysis and literature review. Review of Accounting Studies, 26, 1176–1248. Colombo R. J. (2009). Exposing the myth of Homo economicus. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, 32(2), 737–765. Deegan, C. (2002). The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures: A theoretical foundation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 282–311. Drury, L. L. (2009). Disclosure is speech: Imposing meaningful First Amendment constraints on SEC regulatory authority. South Carolina Law Review, 58(4), 757–788. Dyreng, S., Hoopes, J. L., & Wilde, J. H. (2016). Public pressure and corporate tax behavior. Journal of Accounting Research, 54(1), 147–186. Frederick, W. C. (1960). The growing concern over business responsibility. California Management Review, 2(4), 54–61. Frischmann, P. J., Shevlin, T., & Wilson R. (2008). Economic consequences of increasing the conformity in accounting for uncertain tax benefits. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 46(2–3), 261–278. Goshen, Z., & Parchomovsky, G. (2006). The essential role of securities regulation. Duke Law Journal, 55(4), 711–782. Göttsche, M., Habermann, F., & Siebera, S. (2023). The materiality of non-financial tax disclosure: Experimental evidence. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, forthcoming. Gribnau, H. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and tax planning: Not by rules alone. Social & Legal Studies, 24(2), 225–250. Gribnau, H., & Jallai, A. (2017). Good tax governance: A matter of moral responsibility and transparency. Nordic Tax Journal, 2017(1), 70–88. Haller, A., Link, M., & Groß, T. (2017). The term ‘non-financial information’: A semantic analysis of a key feature of current and future corporate reporting. Accounting in Europe, 14(3), 407–429. Hanlon, M. (2003). What can we infer about a firm’s taxable income from its financial statements?. National Tax Journal, 56(4), 831–863. Hanlon, M. (2005). The persistence and pricing of earnings, accruals, and cash flows when firms have large book-tax differences. The Accounting Review, 80(1), 137–166. Hardeck, I., & Kirn, T. (2016). Taboo or technical issue? An empirical assessment of taxation in sustainability reports. Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 1337–1351. Healy, P. M., & Palepu, Krishna G. (2001). Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(1–3), 405–440. Ho, V. H. (2017). “Comply or explain” and the future of nonfinancial reporting. Lewis & Clark Law Review, 21(2), 317–355. Ho, V. H. (2018). Nonfinancial risk disclosure and the costs of private ordering. American Business Law Journal, 55(3), 407–474. Hoffman, D. A. (2006). The “duty” to be a rational shareholder. Minnesota Law Review, 90, 537–611. Hoffman, W. H. (1961). The theory of tax planning. The Accounting Review, 36(2), 274–281. Hoopes, J. L., Robinson, L., & Slemrod, J. (2018). Public tax-return disclosure. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 66(1), 142–162. Hummels, H., & Timmer, D. (2004). Investors in need of social, ethical, and environmental information. Journal of Business Ethics, 52(1), 73–84. Jebe, R. (2019). The convergence of financial and ESG materiality: Taking sustainability mainstream. American Business Law Journal, 56(3), 645–702. Jørgensen, S., Mjøs, A., & Pedersen, L. (2022). Sustainability reporting and approaches to materiality: Tensions and potential resolutions. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 13(2), 341–361. Knoll, M. S. (2002). Ethical screening in modern financial markets: The conflicting claims underlying socially responsible investment. The Business Lawyer, 57(2), 681–726. Knuutinen, R., & Pietiläinen, M. (2017). Responsible investment: Taxes and paradoxes. Nordic Tax Journal, 2017(1), 135–150. Korsmo, C. R. (2017). The audience for corporate disclosure. Iowa Law Review, 102(4), 1581–1632. Lanis, R., & Richardson, G. (2012). Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 31(1), 86–108. Latapí Agudelo, M. A., Jóhannsdóttir, L., & Davídsdóttir, B. (2019). A literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 4, 1–23. Lenter, D., Slemrod, J., & Shackelford, D. (2003). Public disclosure of corporate tax return information: Accounting, economics, and legal perspectives. National Tax Journal, 56(4), 803–830. Li, H. (2019). Repetitive disclosures in the MD&A. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 46(9–10), 1063–1096. Lin, T. C. W. (2011). A behavioral framework for securities risk. Seattle University Law Review, 34, 325–378. Lin, T. C. W. (2015). Reasonable investor(s). Boston University Law Review, 95, 461–518. Lindgren, C., Huq, A. M., & Carling, K. (2021). Who are the intended users of CSR reports? Insights from a data-driven approach. Sustainability, 13(3), 1070. Lipton, A. M. (2019). Mixed company: The audience for sustainability disclosures. Georgetown Law Journal Online, 107, 81–87. Lipton, A. M. (2019). Not everything is about investors: The case for mandatory stakeholder disclosure. Yale Journal on Regulation, 37(2), 499–572. Lipton, A. M. (2019). What we talk about when we talk about shareholder primacy. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 69(4), 863–893. Longhorn, M., Rahim, M., & Sadiq, K. (2016). Country-by-country reporting: An assessment of its objective and scope. eJournal of Tax Research, 14(1), 4–33. Lynn, D. M. (2011). The Dodd-Frank Act’s specialized corporate disclosure: Using the securities laws to address public policy issues. Journal of Business & Technology Law, 6(2), 327–355. Mainardes, E. W., Alves, H., & Raposo, M. (2012). A model for stakeholder classification and stakeholder relationships. Management Decision, 50(10), 1861–1879. McCredie, B., Sadiq, K., & Krever, R. (2021). The effectiveness of voluntary corporate tax disclosures: An Australian case study. Australian Tax Forum, 36(4), 573–595. Millon, D. K. (1993). New directions in corporate law communitarians, contractarians, and the crisis in corporate law. Washington and Lee Law Review, 50(4), 1373–1393. Mills, L. (1998). Book-tax differences and internal revenue service adjustments. Journal of Accounting Research, 36(2), 343–356. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. Monsma, D., & Buckley, J. (2003). Non-financial corporate performance: The material edges of social and environmental disclosure. University of Baltimore Journal of Environmental Law, 11, 151–203. Nilsson, J. (2008). Investment with a conscience: Examining the impact of pro-social attitudes and perceived financial performance on socially responsible investment behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 307–325. Oats, L., & Tuck, P. (2019). Corporate tax avoidance: Is tax transparency the solution?. Accounting and Business Research, 49(5), 566–583. Orens, R., & Lybaert, N. (2010). Determinants of sell-side financial analysts' use of nonfinancial information. Accounting and Business Research, 40(1), 39–53. Paredes, T. A. (2003). Blinded by the light: Information overload and its consequences for securities regulation. Washington University Law Review, 81(2), 417–485. Ring, D. M. (2017). Corporate migrations and tax transparency and disclosure. Saint Louis University Law Journal, 62, 175–192. Rixen, T. (2011). Tax competition and inequality: The case for global tax governance. Global Governance, 17(4), 447–467. Rixen, T., & Unger, B. (2022). Taxation: A regulatory multilevel governance perspective. Regulation & Governance, 16(3), 621–633. Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612. Rogge, E., & Ohnesorge, L. (2022). The role of ESG rating agencies and market efficiency in Europe’s climate policy. Hastings Environmental Law Journal, 28(2), 113–147. Rowbottom, N., & Locke, J. (2016). The emergence of integrated reporting. Accounting and Business Research, 46(1), 83–115. Stolowy, H., & Paugam, L. (2018). The expansion of non-financial reporting: An exploratory study. Accounting and Business Research, 48(5), 525–548. Sundvik, D. (2019). The impact of principles-based vs rules-based accounting standards on reporting quality and earnings management. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 20(1), 78–93. Sunstein, C. R. (1999). Informational regulation and informational standing: Akins and beyond. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 147(3), 613–675. Tarquinio, L., & Posadas, S. C. (2020). Exploring the term “non-financial information”: An academics’ view. Meditari Accountancy Research, 28(5), 727–749. Tsagas, G., & Villiers, C. (2020). Why “less is more” in non-financial reporting initiatives: Concrete steps towards supporting sustainability. Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, 10(2), 20180045. Ullah, B. (2020). Signaling value of quality certification: Financing under asymmetric information. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 55, 100629. Valsecchi, A. (2022). What corporate tax policy has to do with sustainability and how companies should deal with it. World Tax Journal, 14(1), 113–137. Van der Laan Smith, J., Adhikari, A., & Rasoul, H. T. (2005). Exploring differences in social disclosures internationally: A stakeholder perspective. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24(2), 123–151. Voget, J. (2011). Relocation of headquarters and international taxation. Journal of Public Economics, 95(9-10), 1067–1081. Vukić, N. M., Vukovic, R. M., & Calace, D. (2018). Non-financial reporting as a new trend in sustainability accounting. The Journal of Accounting and Management, 13–26. Wenzel, M. (2002). The impact of outcome orientation and justice concerns on tax compliance: The role of taxpayers' identity. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 629–645. Zee, H. H. (1988). The sustainability and optimality of government debt. IMF Staff Papers, 35(4), 658–685. 3. 單篇文章、研究報告 Barker, R., & Eccles, R. G. (2018). Should FASB and IASB be responsible for setting standards for nonfinancial information? (Green paper). Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3272250 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Bilicka, K. A., Casi, E., Seregni, C., & Stage, B. (2022). Tax strategy disclosure: A greenwashing mandate. TRR 266 Accounting for Transparency Working Paper Series No. 40. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3672420 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Brannon, V. C., Killion, V. L., Novak, W. K., & Whitaker, L. P. (2023, April 26). First Amendment limitations on disclosure requirements. U.S. Congressional Research Service, IF12388. Available at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12388 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Dunker, M., & Willkomm, S. (2022). Tax transparency through mandatory qualitative disclosures: Determinants and effects of UK tax strategy reports. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4175275 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Evers, M. T., Meier, I., & Spengel, C. (2016). Country-by-country reporting: Tension between transparency and tax planning. ZEW Centre for European Economic Research Discussion Paper No. 17-008. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2913474 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Hoopes, J., Robinson, L., & Slemrod, J. B. (2023). Corporate tax disclosure. NBER Working Paper No. 31467. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w31467 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Inger, K., Hardeck, I., Moore, R., & Hohlwegler, O. (2022). Investor reactions to a voluntary tax-related sustainability reporting standard: Evidence from GRI 207: Tax. Hawai'i Accounting Research Conference [HARC] 2023. Available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/104092 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Klein, B., & Enden, E. (2021). The fiscal materiality principle: Tax as an ‘economic and social phenomenon’. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3946441 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Müller, R., Spengel, C., & Vay, H. (2020). On the determinants and effects of corporate tax transparency: Review of an emerging literature. TRR 266 Accounting for Transparency Working Paper Series No. 43. Available at: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3853895 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Murphy, R. (2012). Country-by-country reporting: Accounting for globalization locally. Tax Justice Network. Available at: https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Documents/CBC2012.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). PricewaterhouseCoopers [PwC]. (2023, April). Financial services, tax and ESG survey. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/tax/assets/financial-services-tax-and-esg-report-april.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Sartori, N. (2009). Corporate governance dynamics and tax compliance. U of Michigan Law & Economics, SJD Working Paper No. 1361895. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1361895 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Schantl, S. F., & Wagenhofer, A. (2021, April 11). Principles-based versus rules-based accounting standards: A relevance-enforceability tradeoff. Available at: https://business.columbia.edu/sites/default/files-efs/imce-uploads/CEASA/Events%20Page/principles-based_versus_rules-based_accounting_standards.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Seitzinger, M. V., & Ruane, K. A. (2015, April 2). Conflict minerals and resource extraction: Dodd-Frank, SEC regulations, and legal challenges. U.S. Congressional Research Service, R43639. Available at: https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc505519/m1/1/high_res_d/R43639_2015Apr02.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). U.S. Chamber of Commerce Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness. (2014). Corporate disclosure effectiveness: Ensuring a balanced system that informs and protects investors and facilitates capital formation. Available at: https://www.centerforcapitalmarkets.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CCMC_Disclosure_Reform_Final_7-28-20141.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC]. (2011, November 16). A comparison of U.S. GAAP and IFRS (staff paper). Available at: https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/globalaccountingstandards/ifrs-work-plan-paper-111611-gaap.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Xia, J. (2023). Qualitative disclosure as a tax enforcement mechanism: Evidence from the U.K. tax strategy disclosure requirement. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4398078 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). 4. 學位論文 Belnap, A. (2020). The effect of public scrutiny on mandatory and voluntary disclosure: Evidence from a randomized field experiment [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School. Available at: https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/concern/dissertations/7s75dj891 (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Jallai, A. G. (2020). Good tax governance: International corporate tax planning and corporate social responsibility - Does one exclude the other? (ISBN 978-94-6167-423-4) [Doctoral thesis, Tilburg University]. Studio. Available at: https://research.tilburguniversity.edu/en/publications/good-tax-governance-international-corporate-tax-planning-and-corp (Accessed: 2023, December 3). 5. 網路資源 Australian Taxation Office [ATO]. (2022, August 24). Tax risk management and governance review guide. Available at: https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/Large-business/In-detail/Key-products-and-resources/Tax-risk-management-and-governance-review-guide/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Bell, M. (2017, March 8). How to provide investors the information they need. EY. Available at: https://www.ey.com/en_tw/assurance/how-to-provide-investors-the-information-they-need (Accessed: 2023, November 13). Bernow, S., Godsall, J., Klempner, B., & Merten, C. (2019, August 7). More than values: The value-based sustainability reporting that investors want. McKinsey Sustainability. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/sustainability/our-insights/more-than-values-the-value-based-sustainability-reporting-that-investors-want (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Brown, S. L., Kimpel, S. H., & Hamiltom, A. (2022, December 1). European union adopts corporate sustainability reporting directive with impacts beyond Europe. The National Law Review. Available at: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/european-union-adopts-corporate-sustainability-reporting-directive-impacts-beyond (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Ernst & Young [EY]. (2020, July 22). How will ESG performance shape your future?. Available at: https://www.ey.com/en_us/assurance/how-will-esg-performance-shape-your-future (Accessed: 2023, November 26). European Commission. (2001, July 18). Green paper: Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility (COM/2001/366/1). Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/doc_01_9/DOC_01_9_EN.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 29). European Commission. (2011, October 25). A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for corporate social responsibility (COM/2011/681 final). Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0681 (Accessed: 2023, November 29). European Financial Reporting Advisory Group [EFRAG]. (2021). Interconnection between financial and non-financial information. Available at: https://www.efrag.org/Assets/Download?assetUrl=%2Fsites%2Fwebpublishing%2FSiteAssets%2FEFRAG%2520PTF-NFRS_A4_FINAL.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). FACT Coalition. (2022, July 28). A material concern: The investor case for public country-by-country tax reporting. Available at: https://thefactcoalition.org/report/a-material-concern-the-investor-case-for-public-country-by-country-tax-reporting/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Initiative for Fiscal Transparency [GIFT]. (2022, August 2). Transparency principles for tax policy and administration. Available at: https://fiscaltransparency.net/tax-transparency-principles/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2016). GRI 101: Foundation 2016. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2016, October 10). GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2019, December 5). GRI 207: Tax 2019. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2021, October 5). GRI 1: Foundation 2021. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2021, October 5). GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2021, October 5). GRI 2: General Disclosures 2021. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2021, October 5). GRI 3: Material Topics 2021. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Global Reporting Initiative. (2022, March 15). GRI 12: Coal Sector 2022. GRI Standards. Available at: https://www.globalreporting.org/how-to-use-the-gri-standards/gri-standards-english-language/ (Accessed: 2023, November 26). HM Revenue & Customs [HMRC]. (2015, July 22). Improving large business tax compliance (Consultation document). Available at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a808ffe40f0b62305b8be0e/Improving_Large_Business_Tax_Compliance.pdf (Accessed: 2023, September 8). Hoff, B., & Wood, D. (2008, March 1). The use of non-financial information: What do investors want? (White paper). Report on Project Findings, Boston College Carroll School of Management. Available at: https://iri.hks.harvard.edu/files/iri/files/the_use_of_non-financial_information_-_what_do_investors_want.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). IFRS Staffs. (May 2019). Management commentary: Overview of the staff’s approach to revision (Staff paper). IFRS. Available at: https://www.ifrs.org/content/dam/ifrs/meetings/2019/may/iasb/ap15-management-commentary.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 29). International Sustainability Standards Board [ISSB]. IFRS S1 general requirements for disclosure of sustainability-related financial information. IFRS. Available at: https://www.ifrs.org/issued-standards/ifrs-sustainability-standards-navigator/ifrs-s1-general-requirements/#about (Accessed: 2023, December 3). KPMG ACOR TAX. (2023, September 1). #ESG & #Sustainability Reporting Regulations: So What About #Tax?. LinkedIn. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/esg-sustainability-reporting-regulations-so-what-tax-kpmg-acor-tax (2023, December 3). Morris, W., & Visser, E. Tax Is a Crucial Part of the ESG Conversation. PwC. Available at: https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/tax/publications/tax-is-a-crucial-part-of-esg-reporting.html (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Morris, W., Wiggins, A., & Timmons, M. (2023, January 24). ESG gets tax teeth with EU’s corporate sustainability directive. Bloomberg Tax. Available at: https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/esg-gets-tax-teeth-with-eus-corporate-sustainability-directive (Accessed: 2023, September 6). Murphy, R. (2022, September 28). Tax transparency principles aim to inform public on tax systems. Bloomberg Tax. Available at: https://news.bloombergtax.com/tax-insights-and-commentary/tax-transparency-principles-aim-to-inform-public-on-tax-systems (Accessed: 2023, April 23). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2016). Co-operative tax compliance: Building better tax control frameworks. OECD Publishing. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/publications/co-operative-tax-compliance-9789264253384-en.htm (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2013). Co-operative compliance: A framework – From enhanced relationship to co-operative compliance. OECD Publishing. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264200852-en (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2021). International compliance assurance programme: Handbook for tax administrations and MNE groups. OECD Publishing. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/tax/administration/international-compliance-assurance-programme.htm (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2015). Transfer pricing documentation and country-by-country reporting, Action 13: 2015 final report, OECD/G20 base erosion and profit shifting project. OECD Publishing. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264241480-en (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD]. (2004). Compliance risk management: Managing and improving tax compliance (OECD guidance note). Available at: https://www.oecd.org/ctp/administration/33818656.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2023). OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises on responsible business conduct. OECD Publishing. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1787/81f92357-en (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Stibbe, D., & Prescott, D. (2020). The SDG partnership guidebook: A practical guide to building high impact multi-stakeholder partnerships for the Sustainable Development Goals. The Partnering Initiative & UNDESA. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2698SDG_Partnership_Guidebook_1.01_web.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). Sustainability Accounting Standards Board [SASB]. Deciding where to disclose. SASB Standards. Available at: https://sasb.org/implementation-primer/deciding-where-to-disclose/ (Accessed: 2023, November 21). Tax Administration of the Netherlands. (2022). Good practices: Tax control framework. Available at: https://download.belastingdienst.nl/belastingdienst/docs/good-practices-fisc-beheersing-dv4251z1fdeng.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 29). Tax Executives of the Conference Board, The B Team & the European Business Tax Forum. (2022). Best practices for good tax governance. Available at: https://ebtforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Best-practices-for-good-tax-governance-Paper.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). The Conseil National de la Comptabilité & European Financial Reporting Advisory Group [EFRAG]. (2009). The needs of users of financial information: A user survey. Available at: https://www.iasplus.com/en/binary/efrag/0905userneeds.pdf (Accessed: 2023, November 26). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Available at: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda (Accessed: 2023, November 26). | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/91346 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | 隨著ESG議題持續發燒、各國政府加大企業稅務監管力道，稅務治理概念的出現，昭示著公司在營運時應納入各界對其稅務實務的觀點，而公開稅務揭露具有使外界知悉公司稅務狀況以利決策的功能，自然地成為促進稅務治理的主軸。公開稅務揭露法制之目的在於使預設資訊使用者得以有效利用公司稅務資訊，然而當法制下存在預設資訊使用者各異且彼此之間具有利益衝突的多重規範時，如何以法制引導公司妥適回應不同預設資訊使用者的需求，即為本文主要研究問題。
透過對公司稅務揭露各方利害關係人的觀察，並從我國各項公開稅務揭露立法的預設資訊使用者角度出發，本文主張我國現行法制因欠缺合乎邏輯之資訊配置方式，恐難以滿足預設資訊使用者的稅務資訊需求，進而無從達成公開稅務揭露之本旨。經由對美國、歐盟與英國公開稅務揭露法制的探討，著重於其等在立法精神與揭露要求之間的對應關係，以及決定預設資訊使用者的可能因素上，同時彙整相關學說理論與實務作法，本文認為應以合乎預設資訊使用者需求之方式，重新界定我國法制下不同公開稅務揭露來源之間的關係，重視投資人與其他利害關係人在需求與保護方向上的差異，並提出符合我國永續揭露法制發展趨勢的一定界線劃定標準作為法制改進方向。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | As ESG issues continue to garner attention and governments worldwide strengthen oversight on corporate taxes, the rise of tax governance highlights the need for corporations to integrate diverse perspectives regarding tax practices from various stakeholders into their daily operations. Public tax disclosure, serving as a tool to inform external parties about a company's tax situation, plays a crucial role in promoting tax governance. The legal framework for public tax disclosure aims to enable intended users to effectively access company tax information. However, challenges arise when multiple regulations target users with divergent interests, resulting in difficulties for companies to satisfy varied information needs through public tax disclosure.
By examining the interests of stakeholders in corporate tax disclosure and focusing on intended users under Taiwan's public tax disclosure regime, this thesis argues that the current legal framework falls short of meeting the needs of intended users due to illogical allocation of tax information among various disclosure channels. Consequently, the regime fails to achieve the fundamental goal of public tax disclosure, which is to provide useful information for multiple decision-makers. Through exploring public tax disclosure regulations in the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom—with a focus on the correspondence between ratio legis and disclosure requirements, as well as factors influencing the determination of intended users—this thesis suggests that regulators should redefine the relationship between several public tax disclosure channels under the current framework. This thesis contends that addressing the disparate needs of investors and other stakeholders requires implementing distinct means of protection. Therefore, this thesis proposes a standard for reallocating tax information in the current regime, which is also aligned with the movement of sustainability disclosure legislation in Taiwan. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-01-03T16:12:33Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-01-03T16:12:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 誌謝 i
摘要 iii ABSTRACT iv 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機與目的 2 第二節 研究方法與範圍 5 第三節 研究架構 7 第二章 從稅務治理到公開稅務揭露 9 第一節 稅務治理之發展 10 第二節 稅務治理概論 15 第一項 稅務治理的內涵 15 第一款 稅務政策／稅務策略（tax policy／tax strategy） 17 第二款 稅務規劃（tax planning） 18 第三款 稅務遵循（tax compliance） 19 第四款 稅務控制（tax control） 20 第五款 稅務透明（tax transparency） 21 第二項 稅務治理的推動手段 22 第一款 實務守則 23 第二款 稅務揭露 24 第三款 評級／評鑑 25 第四款 認證 26 第五款 水平監督／合作式遵循 27 第六款 立法強制要求設置稅務治理機制 28 第三節 稅務揭露在稅務治理中的角色 30 第一項 稅務揭露的分類 30 第一款 揭露對象：公開與非公開 30 第二款 選擇餘地：自願性（voluntary）與強制性（mandatory） 31 第三款 揭露內容：財務性（financial）與非財務性（non-financial） 32 第二項 與稅務治理其他面向的互動 36 第三項 作為其他推動手段的基礎 36 第四節 公開稅務揭露的特殊性 39 第一項 兼具財務及非財務性質 39 第二項 議題面向多元 40 第三項 政府作為直接利害關係人 41 第四項 投資人與其他利害關係人間存在緊張關係 42 第五節 小結：公開稅務揭露作為促進稅務治理的主軸 44 第三章 公開稅務揭露與預設資訊使用者 45 第一節 預設資訊使用者概念 46 第一項 預設資訊使用者之意義 46 第二項 預設資訊使用者之可能認定基準 50 第三項 稅務揭露常見之資訊使用者及其需求 52 第二節 公開稅務揭露相關理論 56 第一項 經濟學觀點（economic-based theories） 56 第二項 社會政治學觀點（socio-political theories） 58 第三節 公開稅務揭露之成本效益 60 第一項 效益 60 第二項 成本 61 第四節 小結：從預設資訊使用者角度出發 63 第四章 我國公開稅務揭露法制 65 第一節 傳統公開稅務揭露 67 第一項 財務報告：歷史性財務資訊 67 第二項 公司年報：財務或營運風險 72 第二節 公開稅務揭露的新趨勢 78 第一項 永續報告書：永續資訊 78 第一款 管制架構 79 第二款 依循準則 84 第三款 揭露內容 86 第四款 稅務治理在永續報告書中的角色 91 第二項 永續報告書外的獨立揭露 92 第三節 不同公開稅務揭露資訊來源之比較 96 第四節 現行制度問題 101 第一項 資訊配置方式缺乏合理邏輯 101 第二項 資訊混雜導致資訊過載問題 105 第三項 根本性問題：公開稅務揭露目的與預設資訊使用者不明 108 第五節 小結：從我國法制的根本性問題著手 111 第五章 美國、歐盟與英國之公開稅務揭露法制 113 第一節 美國：強化財務報告細節揭露 115 第一項 立法背景 115 第二項 管制架構 116 第三項 揭露內容 119 第一款 一般性揭露 119 第二款 採掘業發行人之特殊性揭露 123 第四項 強制資訊揭露爭議下的公開國別報告發展 125 第五項 小結 129 第二節 歐盟：一般性公開國別報告義務 131 第一項 立法背景 131 第一款 從特定產業之特殊性揭露到所有產業之一般性揭露 131 第二款 立法目的 132 第二項 管制架構 134 第三項 揭露內容 136 第四項 與歐盟永續報導指令之關係 138 第五項 小結 143 第三節 英國：稅法領域之公開稅務策略揭露 145 第一項 立法背景 145 第二項 管制架構 146 第三項 揭露內容 149 第一款 稅務策略 149 第二款 公開國別報告之可能 151 第四項 相關分析與討論 151 第一款 稅務策略、GRI 207與稅務治理 152 第二款 公開稅務策略揭露之實效性 153 第三款 以稅法作為公開稅務揭露規範場域之優勢與挑戰 155 第五項 小結 156 第四節 美國、歐盟、英國公開稅務揭露立法之比較 157 第六章 對我國公開稅務揭露法制的再檢視 161 第一節 我國公開稅務揭露法制問題回顧 162 第一項 公開稅務揭露制度目的與預設資訊使用者不明 162 第二項 稅務資訊配置方式無法對應至預設資訊使用者之需求 166 第三項 小結 169 第二節 美國、歐盟與英國公開稅務揭露法制之啟示 171 第一項 制度目的與預設資訊使用者分析 171 第二項 揭露內容、方式與預設資訊使用者需求的對應關係 176 第三項 公司治理目的對整體稅務揭露法制的影響 182 第三節 重新界定不同公開稅務揭露來源之間的關係 188 第一項 界線劃定之必要性 190 第一款 投資人與其他利害關係人需求不同、利益不一致 190 第二款 投資人與其他利害關係人之保護方向不同 195 第二項 界線劃定之標準 198 第四節 建議改進方向 202 第一項 釐清公開稅務揭露之目的與預設資訊使用者 202 第二項 以「稅務資訊性質上屬於財務或非財務」作為界線 202 第三項 思考稅務治理作為獨立議題的發展空間 204 第七章 結論 207 參考文獻 213 附錄 227 | - |
| dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
| dc.subject | 預設資訊使用者 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | GRI 207 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 永續揭露 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 公開稅務揭露 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | 稅務治理 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject | Sustainability Disclosure | en |
| dc.subject | Tax Governance | en |
| dc.subject | Public Tax Disclosure | en |
| dc.subject | Intended Users | en |
| dc.subject | GRI 207 | en |
| dc.title | 論稅務治理脈絡下之公開稅務揭露法制──從預設資訊使用者角度出發 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Public Tax Disclosure Regime in Advancing Tax Governance: Through the Lens of Intended Users | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | - |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 112-1 | - |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 蔡英欣;蔡昌憲 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Ying-Hsin Tsai;Chang-Hsien Tsai | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | 稅務治理,公開稅務揭露,預設資訊使用者,GRI 207,永續揭露, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Tax Governance,Public Tax Disclosure,Intended Users,GRI 207,Sustainability Disclosure, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 228 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202304567 | - |
| dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
| dc.date.accepted | 2023-12-26 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | - |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學系 | - |
| dc.date.embargo-lift | 2024-02-26 | - |
| 顯示於系所單位： | 法律學系 | |
文件中的檔案：
| 檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-112-1.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用（校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務） | 4.34 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件，除了特別指名其著作權條款之外，均受到著作權保護，並且保留所有的權利。