Tax Policy and Competitive Advantage: A Case Study of US, Canadians, and Australian Wheat Producers The Effects of Perceived Product Attributes on the Perception of Beef

The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of government influence on competitive advantage and disadvantages in trade for case farms in the United States, Canada, and Australia. The study focused on government tax policy, major social programs, and farm programs and their role in determini...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAgribusiness (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 9; no. 1; p. 43
Main Authors Nixon, Clair J, Gregory M PerryDale J Menkhaus, Colin, Damien PM, Whipple, Glen D, Field, Ray A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York Wiley Periodicals Inc 01.01.1993
Subjects
Agriculture
Barley
Case studies
Cash flow statements
Competition
Competitive advantage
Effective income tax rates
Employment
Farmers
Farms
Fiscal policy
Income taxes
Influence
Production costs
Provisions
Simulation
Sole proprietorships
Subsidies
Tax exemptions
Tax reform
Taxable income
Taxation
Trade policy
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of government influence on competitive advantage and disadvantages in trade for case farms in the United States, Canada, and Australia. The study focused on government tax policy, major social programs, and farm programs and their role in determining the after-tax changes in farmer wealth. The results indicate that government tax and social programs in Australia provide that country's farmers with a competitive advantage in trade, particularly for the small and medium-sized farms. However, the lack of government farm programs in Australia generally offsets the tax and social program advantage. Canadian tax laws and social programs likewise provide its farmers with a competitive advantage over their US counterparts, but not to the same extent as Australia. The objective of this study was to identify perceived characteristics of beef which impact quality perception. Results indicate that concerns with beef related to cholesterol and calorie content, artificial ingredients, convenience characteristics, how it is displayed in the store, and expense each significantly adversely affected quality perception.
ISSN:0742-4477
1520-6297