The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. The Impact of Corporate Tax Planning on Corporate Social Responsibility
The Moderating Role of the Board of Directors’ Gender on the Relationship between Tax Aggressiveness and CSR
3. Data and Research Methodology
Models and Variables
4. Empirical Results
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.2. Pearson’s Correlation Analysis
4.3. Regression Analysis Results
5. Contributions and Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Whait, R.B.; Christ, K.L.; Ortas, E.; Burritt, R.L. What do we know about tax aggressiveness and corporate social responsibility? An integrative review. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 204, 542–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G. Outside directors, corporate social responsibility performance, and corporate tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. J. Account. Audit. Financ. 2018, 33, 228–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kubick, T.R.; Lockhart, G.B. Overconfidence, CEO awards, and corporate tax aggressiveness. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2017, 44, 728–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dowling, G.R. The curious case of corporate tax avoidance: Is it socially irresponsible? J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 124, 173–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G. The effect of board of director composition on corporate tax aggressiveness. J. Account. Public Policy 2011, 30, 50–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bird, R.; Davis-Nozemack, K. Tax avoidance as a sustainability problem. J. Bus. Ethics 2018, 151, 1009–1025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Col, B.; Patel, S. Going to haven? Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance. J. Bus. Ethics 2019, 154, 1033–1050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions; Communication Number: COM/2011/0152 Final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Chatzoglou, P.; Chatzoudes, D.; Amarantou, V.; Aggelidis, V. Examining the antecedents and the effects of CSR implementation: An explanatory study. EuroMed J. Bus. 2017, 12, 189–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shams, S.R.; Vrontis, D.; Weber, Y.; Tsoukatos, E.; Galati, A. Stakeholder Engagement and Sustainability; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2019; ISBN 978-0-3672-1123-3. [Google Scholar]
- Leonidou, E.; Christofi, M.; Vrontis, D.; Thrassou, A. An integrative framework of stakeholder engagement for innovation management and entrepreneurship development. J. Bus. Res. 2018, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mdanat, M.F.; Shotar, M.; Samawi, G.; Mulot, J.; Arabiyat, T.S.; Alzyadat, M.A. Tax structure and economic growth in Jordan, 1980–2015. Euromed J. Bus. 2018, 13, 102–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freedman, J. Tax and corporate responsibility. Tax J. 2003, 695, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Landolf, U. Tax and corporate responsibility. Int. Tax Rev. 2006, 29, 6–9. [Google Scholar]
- Graham, J.R.; Hanlon, M.; Shevlin, T.; Shroff, N. Incentives for tax planning and avoidance: Evidence from the field. Account. Rev. 2014, 89, 991–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Rao, K.; Tilt, C. Board composition and corporate social responsibility: The role of diversity, gender, strategy and decision making. J. Bus. Ethics 2016, 138, 327–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kastlunger, B.; Dressler, S.G.; Kirchler, E.; Mittone, L.; Voracek, M. Sex differences in tax compliance: Differentiating between demographic sex, gender-role orientation, and prenatal masculinization (2D: 4D). J. Econ. Psychol. 2010, 31, 542–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G.; Taylor, G. Board of director gender and corporate tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 144, 577–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bear, S.; Rahman, N.; Post, C. The impact of board diversity and gender composition on corporate social responsibility and firm reputation. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 97, 207–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amorelli, M.F.; García-Sánchez, I.M. Critical mass of female directors, human capital, and stakeholder engagement by corporate social reporting. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2020, 27, 204–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Improving the Gender Balance among Non-Executive Directors of Companies Listed on Stock Exchanges and Related Measures; Communication Number: COM/2012/0614 Final—2012/0299 (COD); European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Rao, K.; Tilt, C. Board diversity and CSR reporting: An Australian study. Meditari Account. Res. 2016, 24, 182–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Binder, B. Does a high women quota in supervisory boards influence firm success? Euromed J. Bus. 2018, 13, 291–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanlon, M.; Slemrod, J. What does tax aggressiveness signal? Evidence from stock price reactions to news about tax shelter involvement. J. Public Econ. 2009, 93, 126–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huseynov, F.; Klamm, B.K. Tax avoidance, tax management and corporate social responsibility. J. Corp. Financ. 2012, 18, 804–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mehrani, S.; Seyyedi, S.J. Investigating the relationship between tax avoidance and tax differences in companies listed on the Tehran stock exchange. Account. Audit. Res. 2014, 6, 50–75. [Google Scholar]
- Desai, M.A.; Dharmapala, D. Corporate tax avoidance and high-powered incentives. J. Financ. Econ. 2006, 79, 145–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Scholes, M.S.; Wolfson, M.A.; Erickson, M.; Maydew, E.; Shevlin, T. Taxes & business strategy; Prentice Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Slemrod, J. The Economics of Corporate Tax Selfishness. Nat. Tax J. 2004, 57, 877–899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Friese, A.; Link, S.; Mayer, S. Taxation and corporate governance—The state of the art. In Tax and Corporate Governance; Schön, W., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 357–425. ISBN 978-3-540-77275-0. [Google Scholar]
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G. Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. J. Account. Public Policy 2012, 31, 86–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sikka, P. Smoke and mirrors: Corporate social responsibility and tax avoidance. Account. Forum 2010, 34, 153–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoi, C.K.; Wu, Q.; Zhang, H. Is corporate social responsibility (CSR) associated with tax avoidance? Evidence from irresponsible CSR activities. Account. Rev. 2013, 88, 2025–2059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission on the Social Agenda; Communication Number: COM/2005/0033 Final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Chrisman, J.J.; Chua, J.H.; Kellermanns, F.W.; Chang, E.P. Are family managers agents or stewards? An exploratory study in privately held family firms. J. Bus. Res. 2007, 60, 1030–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnea, A.; Rubin, A. Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 97, 71–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Letza, S.; Sun, X.; Kirkbride, J. Shareholding versus stakeholding: A critical review of corporate governance. Corp. Gov. Int. Rev. 2004, 12, 242–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chauvey, J.N.; Giordano-Spring, S.; Cho, C.H.; Patten, D.M. The normativity and legitimacy of CSR disclosure: Evidence from France. J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 130, 789–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandez-Feijoo, B.; Romero, S.; Ruiz, S. Effect of stakeholders’ pressure on transparency of sustainability reports within the GRI framework. J. Bus. Ethics 2014, 122, 53–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jo, H.; Harjoto, M.A. Corporate governance and firm value: The impact of corporate social responsibility. J. Bus. Ethics 2011, 103, 351–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Branco, M.C.; Rodrigues, L.L. Corporate social responsibility and resource-based perspectives. J. Bus. Ethics 2006, 69, 111–132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, J.Q.; Zhu, H.; Ding, H.B. Board composition and corporate social responsibility: An empirical investigation in the post Sarbanes-Oxley era. J. Bus. Ethics 2013, 114, 381–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, E.C.; Courtenay, S.M. Board composition, regulatory regime and voluntary disclosure. Int. J. Account. 2006, 41, 262–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carroll, R.; Joulfaian, D. Taxes and corporate giving to charity. Public Financ. Rev. 2005, 33, 300–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Preuss, L. Tax avoidance and corporate social responsibility: You can’t do both, or can you? Corp. Gov. Int. J. Bus. Soc. 2010, 10, 365–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G. Is corporate social responsibility performance associated with tax avoidance? J. Bus. Ethics 2015, 127, 439–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muller, A.; Kolk, A. Responsible tax as corporate social responsibility: The case of multinational enterprises and effective tax in India. Bus. Soc. 2015, 54, 435–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, S.; Baker, M.; Lay, B.F. The relationship between CSR and tax avoidance: An international perspective. Aust. Tax Forum 2017, 32, 95. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2954291 (accessed on 22 January 2020).
- Lanis, R.; Richardson, G. Corporate social responsibility and tax aggressiveness: A test of legitimacy theory. Account. Audit. Account. J. 2012, 26, 75–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gulzar, M.A.; Cherian, J.; Sial, M.; Badulescu, A.; Thu, P.; Badulescu, D.; Khuong, N. Does Corporate Social Responsibility Influence Corporate Tax Avoidance of Chinese Listed Companies? Sustainability 2018, 10, 4549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marinova, J.; Plantenga, J.; Remery, C. Gender diversity and firm performance: Evidence from Dutch and Danish boardrooms. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2016, 27, 1777–1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kılıç, M.; Kuzey, C. The effect of board gender diversity on firm performance: Evidence from Turkey. Gend. Manag. 2016, 31, 434–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reguera-Alvarado, N.; de Fuentes, P.; Laffarga, J. Does board gender diversity influence financial performance? Evidence from Spain. J. Bus. Ethics 2017, 141, 337–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nadeem, M.; Zaman, R.; Saleem, I. Boardroom gender diversity and corporate sustainability practices: Evidence from Australian Securities Exchange listed firms. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 149, 874–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Michelon, G.; Parbonetti, A. The effect of corporate governance on sustainability disclosure. J. Manag. Gov. 2012, 16, 477–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmadi, A.; Nakaa, N.; Bouri, A. Chief Executive Officer attributes, board structures, gender diversity and firm performance among French CAC 40 listed firms. Res. Int. Bus. Financ. 2018, 44, 218–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabeza-García, L.; Fernández-Gago, R.; Nieto, M. Do board gender diversity and director typology impact CSR reporting? Eur. Manag. Rev. 2018, 15, 559–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lefort, F.; González, R. Hacia un mejor gobierno corporativo en Chile. Rev. Abante 2008, 11, 17–37. [Google Scholar]
- Khaoula, A.; Ali, Z.M. Demographic Diversity in the board and corporate tax planning in American firms. Bus. Manag. Strategy 2012, 3, 72–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Khan, H.U.Z. The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting: Empirical evidence from private commercial banks of Bangladesh. Int. J. Law Manag. 2010, 52, 82–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, W.A.; Vieito, J.P. CEO gender and firm performance. J. Econ. Bus. 2013, 67, 55–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lam, K.C.; McGuinness, P.B.; Vieito, J.P. CEO gender, executive compensation and firm performance in Chinese-listed enterprises. Pac. Basin Financ. J. 2013, 21, 1136–1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dezsö, C.L.; Ross, D.G. Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2012, 33, 1072–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Marquis, C.; Lee, M. Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large US firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 483–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huang, J.; Kisgen, D.J. Gender and corporate finance: Are male executives overconfident relative to female executives? J. Financ. Econ. 2013, 108, 822–839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manner, M.H. The impact of CEO characteristics on corporate social performance. J. Bus. Ethics 2010, 93, 53–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowen, G.A. Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qual. Res. J. 2009, 9, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stock, J.H.; Watson, M.W. Introduction to Econometrics: Updated; Pearson Education: Harlow, UK, 2015; ISBN 978-1-292-07131-2. [Google Scholar]
- Cascino, S.; Pugliese, A.; Mussolino, D.; Sansone, C. The influence of family ownership on the quality of accounting information. Fam. Bus. Rev. 2010, 23, 246–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barontini, R.; Bozzi, S. Board compensation and ownership structure: Empirical evidence for Italian listed companies. J. Manag. Gov. 2011, 15, 59–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gul, F.A.; Leung, S. Board leadership, outside directors’ expertise and voluntary corporate disclosures. J. Account. Public Policy 2004, 23, 351–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Artiach, T.; Lee, D.D.; Nelson, D.; Walker, J.K. The determinants of corporate sustainability performance. Account. Financ. 2010, 50, 31–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haniffa, R.M.; Cooke, T.E. The impact of culture and governance on corporate social reporting. J. Account. Public Policy 2005, 24, 391–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brammer, S.; Millington, A.; Rayton, B. The contribution of corporate social responsibility to organizational commitment. Int. J. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2007, 18, 1701–1719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Stanny, E.; Ely, K. Corporate environmental disclosures about the effects of climate change. Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Manag. 2008, 15, 338–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clarkson, P.M.; Li, Y.; Richardson, G.D.; Vasvari, F.P. Revisiting the relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: An empirical analysis. Account. Organ. Soc. 2008, 33, 303–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bouten, L.; Everaert, P.; Roberts, R.W. How a two-step approach discloses different determinants of voluntary social and environmental reporting. J. Bus. Financ. Account. 2012, 39, 567–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Darus, F.; Arshad, R.; Othman, S.; Jusoff, K. Institutional Pressure and Ownership structure in Corporate Social Responsibility disclosure. Econ. Manag. J. 2013, 3, 1–28. [Google Scholar]
- Dyreng, S.D.; Hanlon, M.; Maydew, E.L. Long-run corporate tax avoidance. Account. Rev. 2008, 83, 61–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Minnick, K.; Noga, T. Do corporate governance characteristics influence tax management? J. Corp. Financ. 2010, 16, 703–718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, G.; Taylor, G.; Lanis, R. The impact of board of director oversight characteristics on corporate tax aggressiveness: An empirical analysis. J. Account. Public Policy 2013, 32, 68–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gnyawali, D.R.; Song, Y. Pursuit of rigor in research: Illustration from coopetition literature. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2016, 57, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granado-Peiró, N.; López-Gracia, J. Corporate governance and capital structure: A Spanish study. Eur. Manag. Rev. 2017, 14, 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jové-Llopis, E.; Segarra-Blasco, A. Eco-innovation strategies: A panel data analysis of Spanish manufacturing firms. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2018, 27, 1209–1220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamilton, B.H.; Nickerson, J.A. Correcting for endogeneity in strategic management research. Strateg. Organ. 2003, 1, 51–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Buhr, N.; Gray, R.; Milne, M.J. Histories, rationales, voluntary standards and future prospects for sustainability reporting: CSR, GRI, IIRC and beyond. In Sustainability Accounting and Accountability, 2nd ed.; Bebbington, J., Unerman, J., O’Dwyer, B., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2014; pp. 69–89. ISBN 978-0-415-69558-9. [Google Scholar]
- UN PRI. What is responsible investment? 2019. Available online: https://www.unpri.org/download?ac=6998 (accessed on 25 January 2020).
Sector | N | % |
---|---|---|
Artistic, sports, entertainment, and fun activities | 1 | 0.60% |
Activities of accommodation and catering services | 1 | 0.60% |
Real estate activities | 5 | 2.98% |
Manufacturing activities | 66 | 39.29% |
Professional, scientific, and technical activities | 34 | 20.24% |
Wholesale and retail trade, repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles | 22 | 13.10% |
Buildings | 4 | 2.38% |
Water supply, sewerage networks, waste management activities, and recovery | 2 | 1.19% |
Electricity, gas, steam, and air conditioning supply | 8 | 4.76% |
Rental, travel agencies, business support services | 3 | 1.79% |
Information and communication services | 17 | 10.12% |
Transport and storage | 5 | 2.98% |
Total | 168 | 100% |
Code | Variable | Value |
---|---|---|
CSRD | CSR reporting | 1 = accordance to GRI |
0 = no accordance to GRI | ||
SIZET | Total asset | Log |
LEV | Leverage | % |
ROA | Return on asset | % |
SIZEB | Number of directors | Log |
TA | Measure of tax aggressiveness of a firm | % |
%WOM | Percentage of female directors | % |
CEOW | CEO gender | 1 = female |
0 = male |
Variable | Description | Mean | Median | Min | Max | St. Dev. |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
CSRD | CSR reporting in accordance with GRI | 0.139 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.362 |
SIZET | Natural logarithm of total asset | 5.254 | 5.454 | 0 | 7.953 | 1.434 |
LEV | Leverage (Book value of debts/Equity) | 0.581 | 0.330 | −23.93 | 24.30 | 1.619 |
ROA | Return on assets (Net profit/Total assets) | 0.882 | 0 | −114.11 | 297.56 | 12.24 |
SIZEB | Number of directors | 9.057 | 9 | 1 | 22 | 3.025 |
TA | Effective Tax Rate (Total tax expense/Accounting income before tax) | 11.60 | 0 | 0 | 96.44 | 17.28 |
%WOM | Percentage of female directors | 23.08 | 2 | 0 | 57.14 | 13.53 |
CEOW | CEO is a woman | 0.074 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.263 |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) CSRD | 1 | |||||||
(2) SIZET | 0.336 ** | 1 | ||||||
(3) LEV | 0.003 | 0.099 ** | 1 | |||||
(4) ROA | 0.004 | 0.076 ** | 0.039 | 1 | ||||
(5) SIZEB | 0.314 ** | 0.334 ** | −0.044 | 0.045 | 1 | |||
(6) TA | −0.053 | 0.085 ** | 0.108 ** | 0.288 ** | −0.153 ** | 1 | ||
(7) %WOM | 0.086 ** | 0.035 | −0.030 | −0.029 | 0.144 ** | −0.085** | 1 | |
(8) CEOW | 0.011 | −0.004 | −0.005 | −0.026 | −0.001 | −0.047 | 0.077 ** | 1 |
Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
CSRD | CSRD | |||
Coeff. | Sig. | Coeff. | Sig. | |
const | 0.1886 | ** | 0.1648 | ** |
SIZET | −0.0114 | ** | −0.0117 | ** |
LEV | −0.0029 | 0.0033 | ||
ROA | −0.0002 | −0.0002 | ||
SIZEB | 0.0233 | 0.0530 | ||
TA | 0.0001 | 3.9171 | ||
%WOM | 0.0014 | *** | 0.0012 | ** |
CEOW | 0.0557 | 0.0885 | ||
%WOM X TA | 1.7115 | |||
CEOW X TA | −0.0059 | *** | ||
R2 | 0.8321 | 0.8339 | ||
Type of Panel | Fixed Effects | Fixed Effects | ||
Number of observations | 1176 | 1176 |
Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
CSRD | CSRD | |||
Coeff. | Sig. | Coeff. | Sig. | |
const | 0.1773 | ** | 0.1554 | ** |
SIZET | −0.0106 | ** | −0.0111 | ** |
LEV | −0.0031 | 0.0044 | ||
ROA | −0.0001 | −0.0001 | ||
SIZEB | 0.0137 | 0.0557 | ||
TA | 0.0213 | 0.0035 | ||
%WOM | 0.0014 | *** | 0.0013 | |
CEOW | 0.0561 | −0.1593 | ** | |
%WOM X TA | 0.0001 | |||
CEOW X TA | 0.2389 | *** | ||
R2 | 0.8324 | 0.8346 | ||
Type of Panel | Fixed Effects | Fixed Effects | ||
Number of observations | 1176 | 1176 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Vacca, A.; Iazzi, A.; Vrontis, D.; Fait, M. The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052007
Vacca A, Iazzi A, Vrontis D, Fait M. The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Sustainability. 2020; 12(5):2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052007
Chicago/Turabian StyleVacca, Andrea, Antonio Iazzi, Demetris Vrontis, and Monica Fait. 2020. "The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies" Sustainability 12, no. 5: 2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052007
APA StyleVacca, A., Iazzi, A., Vrontis, D., & Fait, M. (2020). The Role of Gender Diversity on Tax Aggressiveness and Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from Italian Listed Companies. Sustainability, 12(5), 2007. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052007