避稅的目的在於使利潤最大化，減少企業的現金流出。近年來，企業避稅 造成的影響也逐漸受到各界的重視，國內外紛紛訂定相對應的稅務規範，這也 導致企業稅務風險的提升。在過去的研究中，大多探討避稅與收入或盈餘面的 關係，較少探討避稅與成本面的關係，且結果亦是混合的。故本研究以 2005 年 至 2021 年台灣上市櫃非金融業為樣本，結合本國稅法對關係人交易的定義以關 係人進銷貨銷貨程度與關係人借款程度衡量避稅，探討關係人交易避稅與成本 僵固性之間的關係。研究結果顯示，當關係人借款程度越高，成本僵固性的程 度也越高。由於不同經營策略對風險的承擔能力與資源調整成本的需求也有所 差異，本研究進一步探討商業策略對關係人交易避稅與成本僵固性的影響。基 於開創者追求風險與對特殊資源需求，與防禦者風險趨避及重視資源使用效率 的特性，本篇預期採用不同商業策略的企業，其關係人交易避稅與成本僵固性 之間的程度會有所差異，實證結果亦支持此一預期。

The purpose of tax avoidance is to maximize the profit and retain more cash flow within the corporation. In recent years, the influence of tax avoidance has aroused the attention of various sectors, leading to the establishment of corresponding tax regulations both domestically and internationally. This has also resulted in an increase in corporate tax risks. Previous studies have mostly focused on the relationship between tax avoidance and profitability, with less emphasis on tax avoidance and cost structure. Therefore, this study explores the relationship between related party tax avoidance and cost stickiness.
Using the sample of non-financial companies listed on Taiwan Stock Exchange from 2005 to 2021, we measure tax avoidance as the extend of related party purchases and sales, as well as the level of related party borrowing with the definition of tax law in Taiwan. The result indicates that the greater the level of related party borrowing, the higher the degree of cost stickiness. In addition, different business strategies might result in different risk-taking ability and resource adjustment cost. More specifically, prospector embrace risk and has higher degree of resource adjustment requirements while defender has opposite characteristic. We further investigate and find that the relationship between tax avoidance and cost stickiness varies across different business strategy.

朱炫漣、葉淑玲與楊婷雯，2021，公司策略與成本僵固性：高階經理人過度自信之角色調節，會計評論，第72期，頁83-117。

黃美祝與楊政霖，2022，關係人交易避稅對所得稅估計費用品質的影響，當代會計，第23卷，第1期，頁71-96。

Anderson, M. C. , R. D. Banker, and S. N. Janakiraman, 2003. Are selling, general, andadministrative cost “sticky”? Journal of Accounting Research 41 (March): 47-63.

Armstrong, C. S. , J. L. Blouin, and D. F. Larcker, 2012. The incentives for tax planning. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 53, 391-411.

Austin, C. R. and R. J. Wilson, 2017. An examination of reputational costs and tax avoidance: Evidence from firms with valuable consumer brands. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 39 (1), 67-93.

Banker, R. D. , D. Byzalov, and L. Chen, 2013. Employment protection legislation,
adjustment costs and cross-country differences in cost behavior. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 55 (1), 111-127.

Baner, R. D. , M. Ciftci, and R. Mashruwala, 2010. Managerial optimism, prior period sales changes, and sticky cost behavior. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1599284

Chen, C. X. , H. Lu, and T. Sougiannis, 2012. The agency problem, corporate governance, and the asymmetrical behavior of selling, general, and administrative costs. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29 (1), 252-282.

Darabi, R. and M. Zamani, 2017. Tax avoidance and asymmetric costs behavior. Iranian Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 01 (01), 39-51.

Dyreng, S. D. , M. Hanlon, and E. L. Maydew, 2019. When does tax avoidance result in tax uncertainty? The Accounting Review, 94 (2), 179-203.

Gaertner, F. B. , 2014. CEO After-tax compensation incentives and corporate tax avoidance. Contemporary Accounting Research, 31 (4), 1077-1102.

Han, S. , Z. Rezaee, and L. Tuo, 2018. Is cost stickiness associated with management earnings forecasts? Asian Review of Accounting, 28 (2), 173-211.
Higgins, D. , T. C. Omer, and J. D. Phillips, 2015. The influence of a firm’s business strategy on its tax aggressiveness. Contemporary Accounting Research, 32 (2), 674-702.

Higgins, D. M. , T. C. Omer, and J. D. Phillips, 2011. Does a firm’s business strategy influence its level of tax avoidance? 2011 American Taxation Association Midyear Meeting: JATA Conference (February 14).

Jacob, J. , 1995. Taxes and transfer pricing: Income shifting and the volume of intra- firm transfers. Northwestern University ProQuest dissertations.

Jin, X. and H. Wu, 2021. Economic policy uncertainty and cost stickiness. Management Accounting Research, 52, 100750.

Kama, I. and D. Weiss, 2013. Do earnings targets and managerial incentives affect sticky costs? Journal of Accounting Research, 51 (1), 201-224.

Khedmati, M. , K. Y. Lim, V. Naiker, and F. Navissi, 2019. Business strategy and the cost of equity capital: An evaluation of pure versus hybrid business strategies. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 31 (2): 111–141.

Klassen, K. J. , P. Lisowsky, and D. Mescall, 2017. Transfer pricing: Strategies, practices, and tax minimization. Contemporary Accounting Research, 34 (1), 455-493.

Klassen, K. J. and S. K. Laplante, 2012. The effect of foreign reinvestment and financial reporting incentives on cross-jurisdictional income shifting. Contemporary Accounting Research, 29 (3), 928-955.

Kubick, T. R. , D. P. Lynch, M. A. Mayberry, and T. C. Omer, 2015. Product market power and tax avoidance: Market leaders, mimicking strategies, and stock returns. The Accounting Review, 90 (2), 675-702.

Li, W. L. and K. Zheng, 2016. Product market competition and cost stickiness. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 49, 283-313.

Lisowsk, P. , 2010. Seeking shelter: Empirically modeling tax shelters using financial statement information. The Accounting Review, 85 (5), 1693-1720.

Liu, L. , T. S. Eisenlohr, and D. Guo, 2017. International transfer pricing and tax avoidance: Evidence from linked trade-tax statistics in the UK. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 102 (4), 766-778.

Markle, K. , 2016. A comparison of the tax-motivated income shifting of multinationals in territorial and worldwide countries. Contemporary Accounting Research, 33 (1), 7-43.

Newberry, K. J. and D. S. Dhaliwal, 2001. Cross-jurisdictional income shifting by U.S. multinationals: Evidence from international bond offerings. Journal of Accounting Research, 39 (3), 643-622.

Phillips, J. D. , 2003. Corporate tax-planning effectiveness: The role of compensation-based incentives. The Accounting Review, 78 (3), 847-874.
Robinson, J. R. , S. A. Sikes, and C. D. Weaver, 2010. Performance measurement of corporate tax departments. The Accounting Review, 85 (3), 1035-1064.

Sari, D. K. , S. Utama, and H. Rossieta, 2017. Tax avoidance, related party transactions, corporate governance, and the corporate cash dividend policy. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 32 (3), 190-208.

Simone, L. D. , 2015. Does a common set of accounting standards affect tax-motivated income shifting for multinational firms? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 61 (1), 145-165.

Subramaniam, C. and M. W. Watson, 2016. Additional evidence on the sticky behavior of costs. Advances in Management Accounting, 26: 275-305.

Wang, S. R. and Seong, D. G. , 2018. Related party transactions and tax avoidance of business groups. Sustainability, 10 (10), 3571.

Weiss, D. , 2010. Cost behavior and analysts’ earnings forecasts. The Accounting Review, 85 (4), 1441-1471.

Wilson, R. J. , 2009. An examination of corporate tax shelter participants. The Accounting Review, 84(3), 969-999.

Xu, S. and K. Zheng, 2020. Tax avoidance and asymmetric cost behavior. Journal of Accounting, Auditing & Finance, 35 (4), 723-774.

Zhang, X. , M. Husnain, H. Yang, S. Ullah, J. Abbas and R. Zhang, 2022. Corporate business strategy and tax avoidance culture: Moderating role of gender diversity in an emerging economy. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 827553.

Zhong, T. , F. Sun, H. Zhou, and J. Y. Lee, 2020. Business strategy, state-owned equity, and cost stickiness: Evidence from chinese firms. Sustainability, 12 (5), 1850.