2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
No. 208, December 2011
No. 207, November 2011
No. 206, October 2011
No. 205, September 2011
No. 204, August 2011
No. 203, July 2011
No. 202, June 2011
No. 201, May 2011
No. 200, April 2011
No. 199, March 2011
No. 198, February 2011
No. 197, January 2011
2010
No. 196, December 2010
No. 195, November 2010
No. 194, October 2010
No. 193, September 2010
No. 192, August 2010
No. 191, July 2010
No. 190, June 2010
No. 189, May 2010
No. 188, April 2010
No. 187, March 2010
No. 186, February 2010
No. 185, January 2010
2009
No. 184, December 2009
No. 183, November 2009
No. 182, October 2009
No. 181, September 2009
No. 180, August 2009
No. 179, July 2009
No. 178, June 2009
No. 177, May 2009
No. 176, April 2009
No. 175, March 2009
No. 174, February 2009
No. 173, January 2009
2008
No. 172, December 2008
No. 171, November 2008
No. 170, October 2008
No. 169, September 2008
No. 168, August 2008
No. 167, July 2008
No. 166, June 2008
No. 165, May 2008
No. 164, April 2008
No. 163, March 2008
No. 162, February 2008
No. 161, January 2008
2007
No. 160, December 2007
No. 159, November 2007
No. 158, October 2007
No. 157, September 2007
No. 156, August 2007
No. 155, July 2007
No. 154, June 2007
No. 153, May 2007
No. 152, April 2007
No. 151, March 2007
No. 150, February 2007
No. 149, January 2007
2006
No. 148, December 2006
No. 147, November 2006
No. 146, October 2006
No. 145, September 2006
No. 144, August 2006
No. 143, July 2006
No. 142, June 2006
No. 141, May 2006
No. 140, April 2006
No. 139, March 2006
No. 138, February 2006
No. 137, January 2006
2005
No. 136, December 2005
No. 135, November 2005
No. 134, October 2005
No. 133, September 2005
No. 132, August 2005
No. 131, July 2005
No. 130, June 2005
No. 129, May 2005
No. 128, April 2005
No. 127, March 2005
No. 126, February 2005
No. 125, January 2005
2004
No. 124, December 2004
No. 123, November 2004
No. 122, October 2004
No. 121, September 2004
No. 120, August 2004
No. 119, July 2004
No. 118, June 2004
No. 117, May 2004
No. 116, April 2004
No. 115, March 2004
No. 114, February 2004
No. 113, January 2004
2003
No. 112, December 2003
No. 111, November 2003
No. 110, October 2003
No. 109, September 2003
No. 108, August 2003
No. 107, July 2003
No. 106, June 2003
No. 105, May 2003
No. 104, April 2003
No. 103, March 2003
No. 102, February 2003
No. 101, January 2003
2002
No. 100, December 2002
No. 99, November 2002
No. 98, October 2002
No. 97, September 2002
No. 96, August 2002
No. 95, July 2002
No. 94, June 2002
No. 93, May 2002
No. 92, April 2002
No. 91, March 2002
No. 90, February 2002
No. 89, January 2002
2001
No. 88, December 2001
No. 87, November 2001
No. 86, October 2001
No. 85, September 2001
No. 84, August 2001
No. 83, July 2001
No. 82, June 2001
No. 81, May 2001
No. 80, April 2001
No. 79, March 2001
No. 78, February 2001
No. 77, January 2001
2000
No. 76, December 2000
No. 75, November 2000
No. 74, October 2000
No. 73, September 2000
No. 72, August 2000
No. 71, July 2000
No. 70, June 2000
No. 69, May 2000
No. 68, April 2000
No. 67, March 2000
No. 66, February 2000
No. 65, January 2000
1999
No. 64, December 1999
No. 63, November 1999
No. 62, October 1999
No. 61, September 1999
No. 60, August 1999
No. 59, July 1999
No. 58, June 1999
No. 57, May 1999
No. 56, April 1999
No. 55, March 1999
No. 54, February 1999
No. 53, January 1999
1998
No. 52, December 1998
No. 51, November 1998
No. 50, October 1998
No. 49, September 1998
No. 48, August 1998
No. 47, July 1998
No. 46, June 1998
No. 45, May 1998
No. 44, April 1998
No. 43, March 1998
No. 42, February 1998
No. 41, January 1998
1997
No. 40, December 1997
No. 39, November 1997
No. 38, October 1997
No. 37, September 1997
No. 36, August 1997
No. 35, July 1997
No. 34, June 1997
No. 33, May 1997
No. 32, April 1997
No. 31, March 1997
No. 30, February 1997
No. 29, January 1997
1996
No. 28, December 1996
No. 27, November 1996
No. 26, October 1996
No. 25, September 1996
No. 24, August 1996
No. 23, July 1996
No. 22, June 1996
No. 21, May 1996
No. 20, April 1996
No. 19, March 1996
No. 18, February 1996
No. 17, January 1996
1995
No. 16, December 1995
No. 15, November 1995
No. 14, October 1995
No. 13, September 1995
No. 12, August 1995
No. 11, July 1995
No. 10, June 1995
No. 09, May 1995
No. 08, April 1995
No. 07, March 1995
No. 06, February 1995
No. 05, January 1995
1994
More
|
Vol. 26(S01) , May 2019 |
|
|
|
A provincial analysis of formal economic institutions and private investment in Vietnam
(pages 29-44)
Diệp Gia Luật & Bùi Thành Trung
Version of Record online: 28 Dec 2019 | DOI: 10.24311/jabes/2019.26.S01.2
Abstract
Formal economic institutions are incentive-motivated mechanisms under the control of the government and are widely accepted as an important factor shaping investment behavior. However, the relative significance of aspects of formal economic institutions has remained ambiguous, especially in a developing economy like Vietnam. This paper aims to fill this gap through the investigation of the influence of formal economic institutions such as market entry, property right protection, anti-corruption mechanisms, and informal charges on private investment across provinces in Vietnam. The empirical results suggest that the deregulation of market entry is essential for private investment. By contrast, both property right protection and anti-corruption mechanisms have unexpected outcomes as their improvements are detrimental to private investment. The effect of informal charges is consistent with the prediction of the rent-seeking hypothesis.
An analysis of taxpayer compliance using a cost-benefit approach
(pages 45-73)
Saw Sor Tin
Version of Record online: 22 Aug 2019 | DOI: 10.24311/jabes/2019.26.S01.3
Abstract
This study seeks to analyze and enhance understanding of taxpayer compliance with tax obligations in a systematic way by using the cost-benefit approach. Data from a sample of 250 audited service tax payers are used to examine the compliance factors. The hypotheses are tested using Spearman’s rho for ordinal variables and biserial correlation for dichotomous data. A decision matrix is used to make a logical conclusion on the business firm reporting behavior based on the derived expected utility value and compliance level. The results show a positive significant correlation between taxable sales, return submission and taxpayer compliance, but taxpayer compliance has a negative relationship with deficiency amount, penalty, and three other variables. The study suggests that minor penalties are unlikely to deter non-compliant behavior and economic factors seem to exert more influence on compliance. The methodology and matrix diagram can be customized to the requirements of tax audit management for assisting in audit case selection and strategy program to detect under-declaration and minimize shortfall in tax revenue. The taxpayer compliance-Correlation-Expected utility matrix analyzes the taxpayer’s expected utility function and compliance behavior, and provides an insight to what the most likely decision of a taxpayer is under certain assumptions.
Influence of exchange rate on cross-border shopping of Bruneians in Malaysia
(pages 74-92)
Saiful Islam & Nurul Faizah Salleh & Siti Nooraini Sabli
Version of Record online: 27 Jul 2019 | DOI: 10.24311/jabes/2019.26.S01.4
Abstract
One of the effects of exchange rate fluctuations is cross-border shopping by consumers. This paper provides an empirical analysis of the effects of Malaysian ringgit depreciation on cross-border shopping of Bruneians. This has been done by using daily data from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2016 (total 1,096 observations) on traffic flows to Miri, a border town of Eastern Malaysia. We find that a 1 percent increase in the depreciation of Malaysian ringgit per Brunei dollar increases the number of Bruneian shoppers to Miri by 2.10 percent. We also estimated that the average spending per person per trip to Miri is B$155 and the total spending of Bruneian shoppers in Miri is $175 million a year. This total spending is 1.11 percent of gross domestic product of Brunei in 2016. The result from this study would be helpful in designing policies for cross-border shopping of Bruneians. This is because the number of visits and the total expenditure amount of Bruneians in Miri are related to high outflow of money which results in a loss to the local economy – which may deteriorate local business.
Determinants of firms’ total factor productivity in manufacturing industry in Vietnam: An approach of a cross-classified model
(pages 04-28)
Nguyễn Thị Hoàng Oanh
Version of Record online: 27 Jul 2019 | DOI: 10.24311/jabes/2019.26.S01.1
Abstract
This study investigates the determinants of total factor productivity in manufacturing firms in Vietnam using the cross-classified multilevel model. This model enables the study to provide a more proper estimation and to make clear distinctions between firms, region-specific effects, and sector-specific effects. This study combined a data set of Vietnamese manufacturing firms and sectoral variables gathered from the annual data of the Vietnam Enterprises Survey, Technology Competitiveness Survey, and some regional variables from the General Statistics Office’s Province Competitive Index during the period from 2011 to 2014. The study found that the main source of firm total factor productivity heterogeneity mostly originates at the firm level. In addition, the interaction between regional (provincial) and sectoral factors also contribute considerably to total factor productivity heterogeneity among firms. At the firm level, both firm size and expenses on technology have a significant positive effect on firm total factor productivity. In addition, firms with exporting activities seem to have a higher total factor productivity. At the regional level, the provinces with a high ratio of well-trained employees may have a positive impact on firm total factor productivity in that province. At the sectoral level, the concentration of sectors in a province may benefit firms belonging to that sector in that province. More interestingly, the study also indicates that the concentration of sectors in a province may benefit firms located in the provinces with a ratio of better trained employees. These findings could lead to policies not only at the firm level but also at the regional level and sectoral level to enhance total factor productivity.
|
|