Public Economics: Tax & Transfer Policies (Master PPD & APE ...

Public Economics: Tax & Transfer Policies (Master PPD & APE ...

Public Economics: Tax & Transfer Policies (Master PPD & APE, Paris School of Economics) Thomas Piketty Academic year 2015-2016 Lecture 1: Taxes & transfers: why & how much? (November 10th 2015) (check on line for updated versions)

Basic rationales for taxes and transfers (1) Public good provision: raising tax revenue to finance public goods: defense, roads, education, health, etc. (2) Redistribution: designing taxes & transfers in order to implement a fair distribution of income, wealth and welfare (3) Externalities: Pigouvian corrective tax and subsidy schemes so to induce private agents to internalize external effects (e.g. global warming, carbon tax) (4) Stabilization: taxes & transfers can also serve as automatic stabilizers and reduce macroeconomic volatility (mostly a by-product of tax and transfer systems)

Rationales (1), (3), (4) = taxes/transfers generate Pareto improvements and correspond to failures of the first welfare theorem Rationale (2) = taxes/transfers shift the economy to another (second-best) Pareto optimum (illusory lump-sum payments of the second welfare theorem) Reminder: welfare theorems (micro 1) First welfare theorem: under standard convexity assumptions, market equilibrium = Pareto optimum (i.e. one cannot raise everybodys welfare at the same time); conversely, if these assumptions are not satisfied (non-convexities: externalities, scale

economies, .), adequate govt interventions can generate Pareto improvements (i.e. can raise everybodys welfare at the same time) Second welfare theorem: all Pareto optima (all efficient redistributions) can be obtained as market equilibria under adequate lump-sum transfers; but with informational imperfections (moral hazard, adverse selection, etc.), only distortionnary taxation can redistribute resources: second-best Pareto optima

Basic facts about taxes & transfers in rich countries Total taxes T = about 40% of national income Y I.e. T = Y with = 40% Total monetary transfers YT = about 15% of national income Y (=pay-as-ou-go public pensions, unemployment & family benefits, meanstested transfers,..) Disposable household income YD = Y-T+YT = about 75% of national income Y Other government spendings = about 25% of national income = in-kind transfers. Typically: 5% education + 8-10% health + 10% police, defense, roads, etc. Social spendings: monetary transfers + education/health

30% of national income in rich countries (25%-35%) = around Reminder: National income vs GDP National income Y = GDP capital depreciation + net foreign factor income Typically Y = about 85-90% GDP Capital depreciation = 10-15% GDP Net foreign capital income = close to 0% in most

rich countries (between +1-2% & -1-2% GDP) ( = most rich countries own as much foreign assets in rest of the world as row owns in home assets) On long-run evolution of T/Y, see this graph: in rich countries T/Y was less than 10% in the early 20c (police, defense, basic infrastructure and administration), rose enormously between 1950 & 1980, and then stabilized around 40% (with important variations between countries)

On structure of spendings, see Adema et al, OECD 2011; see also Piketty-Saez 2013 Table 1 : most of the rise in T/Y is due to the rise of social spendings (transfers, education, health); the rise of the fiscal state is the rise of the social state On structure of taxes in Europe, see Taxation Trends in the European Union, Eurostat 2013; see table of contents; see also updated tables on taxation trends website Typically: T = 1/3 indirect taxes + 1/3 direct taxes + 1/3

social contributions But: large variations between EU countries And: this decomposition is not really meaningful; what matters is the factor income decomposition (capital vs labor) and the consumption vs saving decomposition see Lecture 2 on tax incidence Large variations in tax levels: see rich vs poor EU countries Large variations in tax mix: EU 27 vs France, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Luxembourg, Norway, Bulgaria

In poor countries: T = as low as 10%-15% of national income Y (and stagnating: declining trade tax revenues were not replaced by more modern income or value added taxes) See Cage-Gadenne 2012, "The Fiscal Cost of Trade Liberalization", Figure 1 See also Latin America Revenue Statistics (large differences, e.g. Mexico-Chile vs Argentina-Brasil)

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Chapter 4 TAXABLE INCOME AND TAX PAYABLE FOR

    Chapter 4 TAXABLE INCOME AND TAX PAYABLE FOR

    Canada CaregiverAdditional Amount - ITA 118(1)(e) Additional amount for spouse or eligible dependant. If base for spousal or eligible dependant credits is less than the Canada caregiver amount base; Then, additional amount is available: Actual spousal or eligible dependant amount,...
  • 64th General Service Conference Communicating Our Legacies Vital

    64th General Service Conference Communicating Our Legacies Vital

    Two "Delegates Only" Meetings . Three Regional meetings. Seven AA meetings . 14 Presentations and Reports. General Sharing/Q&A- 5 Hours. Delegate Highlights . ... Area 9 Mid-South California . Area w/Smallest membership: Area 85 NW Ontario. 64thGeneral Service Conference. Conference...
  • 921: Childhood Mental Health Issues: An Introduction for

    921: Childhood Mental Health Issues: An Introduction for

    Competencies. The foster parent knows how to assist in treatment of children with mental health or behavioral disorders, including discussion of feelings and concerns, problem solving, empathic listening, behavior management, de-escalation, sanctioned physical restraint, and assault prevention.
  • Lokale producten in de 'sociale catering'

    Lokale producten in de 'sociale catering'

    Nog geen lokale catering, wel Fair Trade. Grote cateraar Albron. Ede: het bedrijfsrestaurant is uitbesteed aan een ondernemer. Ede betrekt vlees van het plaatselijke bedrijf 'Ecofields' Amersfoort: ' Vitam restaurant', (Vitam = landelijk, duurzaam maar niet regionaal) biedt wel handfruit...
  • Agree with One Another - Bible Studies By Steve

    Agree with One Another - Bible Studies By Steve

    The two men parted company: [12] Abram lived in the land of Canaan, while Lot lived among the cities of the plain and pitched his tents near Sodom. Seeking of Solutions What solution did Abram propose? What land did Lot...
  • Transformative Technologies for Improving Mental Health

    Transformative Technologies for Improving Mental Health

    We found the most interesting things when comparing the two profiles with high means - it turns out that those wit the highest mean and lowest variability were the most likely to have made an attempt in the month before...
  • 毫秒脉冲星的偏振观测 - Bao

    毫秒脉冲星的偏振观测 - Bao

    from oppsite magnetic poles. While only about 2% of all normal pulsars are known to exhibit interpulses or pre- or postcursors, about 36% of all Galactic MSPs known either emit a post or precursor or exhibit an interpulse. Kramer et...
  • What Next After ACEs?

    What Next After ACEs?

    Maureen McAteer "…a joint endeavour in which a practitioner (teacher) with the help of a supervisor, attends to their clients (children), themselves as part of their client practitioner relationships and the wider systemic context, and by so doing improves the...