在最优所得税存在的情况下不使用商品税的两个原因

IF 0.7 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics Pub Date : 2020-03-01 DOI:10.7866/HPE-RPE.20.1.1
X. Ruiz del Portal
{"title":"在最优所得税存在的情况下不使用商品税的两个原因","authors":"X. Ruiz del Portal","doi":"10.7866/HPE-RPE.20.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents two arguments in favor of the sole use of an income tax for redistribution purposes. The first is that most findings on nonlinear commodity taxation such as Mirrlees’s formulae for Pareto efficiency, Seade’s results on zero tax rates at the endpoints of the scale, and the Corlett-Hague tax rule only become valid under the second-order approach for the unrealistic class of utility functions that are affine with respect to ability. The second is that, for the Atkinson and Stiglitz theorem to hold, it suffices with assuming that preferences must be weakly separable in consumption and ability, a result that also remains valid with linear commodity taxation. All this relegates the use of nonlinear commodity taxes to the unlikely scenario in which, apart from non-weakly separable preferences between consumption and ability, there is a solution to the first-order approach problem.","PeriodicalId":48669,"journal":{"name":"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Two Reasons for not using Commodity Taxation in the Presence of an Optimal Income Tax\",\"authors\":\"X. Ruiz del Portal\",\"doi\":\"10.7866/HPE-RPE.20.1.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents two arguments in favor of the sole use of an income tax for redistribution purposes. The first is that most findings on nonlinear commodity taxation such as Mirrlees’s formulae for Pareto efficiency, Seade’s results on zero tax rates at the endpoints of the scale, and the Corlett-Hague tax rule only become valid under the second-order approach for the unrealistic class of utility functions that are affine with respect to ability. The second is that, for the Atkinson and Stiglitz theorem to hold, it suffices with assuming that preferences must be weakly separable in consumption and ability, a result that also remains valid with linear commodity taxation. All this relegates the use of nonlinear commodity taxes to the unlikely scenario in which, apart from non-weakly separable preferences between consumption and ability, there is a solution to the first-order approach problem.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48669,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7866/HPE-RPE.20.1.1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7866/HPE-RPE.20.1.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文提出了支持将所得税单独用于再分配目的的两个论点。首先,大多数关于非线性商品税收的发现,如米尔利斯的帕累托效率公式,Seade关于尺度端点零税率的结果,以及Corlett-Hague税收规则,只有在二阶方法下才适用于与能力有关的不切实际的效用函数类。其次,为了让阿特金森和斯蒂格利茨定理成立,假设偏好在消费和能力方面必须是弱可分的就足够了,这一结果对于线性商品税收也是有效的。所有这些都将非线性商品税的使用降级到一种不太可能出现的情况,在这种情况下,除了消费和能力之间不可弱分离的偏好之外,还有一阶方法问题的解决方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Two Reasons for not using Commodity Taxation in the Presence of an Optimal Income Tax
This paper presents two arguments in favor of the sole use of an income tax for redistribution purposes. The first is that most findings on nonlinear commodity taxation such as Mirrlees’s formulae for Pareto efficiency, Seade’s results on zero tax rates at the endpoints of the scale, and the Corlett-Hague tax rule only become valid under the second-order approach for the unrealistic class of utility functions that are affine with respect to ability. The second is that, for the Atkinson and Stiglitz theorem to hold, it suffices with assuming that preferences must be weakly separable in consumption and ability, a result that also remains valid with linear commodity taxation. All this relegates the use of nonlinear commodity taxes to the unlikely scenario in which, apart from non-weakly separable preferences between consumption and ability, there is a solution to the first-order approach problem.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics
Hacienda Publica Espanola-Review of Public Economics Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Finance
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: Hacienda Pública Española/Review of Public Economics welcomes submissions on all areas of public economics. We seek to publish original and innovative research, applied and theoretical, related to the economic analysis of Government intervention. For example, but not exclusively: Taxation, Redistribution, Health, Education, Pensions, Governance, Fiscal Policy and Fiscal Federalism. In addition to regular submissions, the journal welcomes submissions of: -Survey Reviews, containing surveys of the literature regarding issues of interest in the Public Economics field; -Policy oriented reviews, showing the current contributions of Public Economics in relation to relevant contemporary issues affecting public decision-makers in the real world (Policy Watch); -Comments of previously published articles. Contributions to this section should be limited to a maximum of 2 000 words (12 pages). If deemed adequate, the authors of the commented article will be given the opportunity to react in a Reply. Both Comment and Reply will be published together. Articles for the Survey Reviews and Policy Watch section are subject to the same double blind reviwing procedure. The adequacy of Comments submitted for publication will be evaluated by the Executive Editors.
期刊最新文献
The Relationship between Public Expenditure and Private Investment in Developed and Developing Economies: Policy Implications Based on the Difference The Case for Uniform Commodity Taxation: A Tax Reform Approach Real Estate in a Post-Pandemic World: How Can Policies Make Housing More Enviromentally Sustainable and Affordable? Centrality and Capital Costs in Urban Areas: Policy Watch for Spain Did the Euro Really Increase Corruption in the Eurozone? A Counterfactual Analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1