bunching evidence from Hungary

APPENDIX
Figure 13
All firms, and firms reporng tax base increasing item of “expenses due to given subsidies, debt assumpon, released
liabilies
(Notes: The figure presents the empirical frequency of firms based on their profit rate for fiscal year 2007. The counterfactual is the last fiscal year
before the introducon of the minimum tax scheme (2006). The bin width is 0.0016. The 2 percent profit threshold is marked by a vercal dashed
line; the 0 profit rate is marked by a vercal solid line. The solid line represents all firms in the profit rate range on the horizontal axis, while the
doed line represents firms with reporng tax base increasing item of “expenses due to subsidies, debt assumpon, released liabilies”.)
Number of companies
0 2000 4000
-.02 0 .02 .04 .06 .08 .1
Profit ratio
Pre-reform (2006) After reform (2007)
Figure 14
All firms, and firms reporng tax base increasing item of “loan impairment losses”
(Notes: The figure presents the empirical frequency of firms based on their profit rate for fiscal year 2007. The counterfactual is the last fiscal year
before the introducon of the minimum tax scheme (2006). The bin width is 0.0016. The 2 percent profit threshold is marked by a vercal dashed
line; the 0 profit rate is marked by a vercal solid line. The solid line represents all firms in the profit rate range on the horizontal axis, while the
doed line represents firms with reporng tax base increasing item of “loan impairment losses”. )
Number of companies
0 2000 4000
-.02 0 .02 .04 .06 .08 .1
Profit ratio
Pre-reform (2006) After reform (2007)
6.3 TABLES
MNB WORKING PAPERS 3 • 2016 31