IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v24y2022i2p276-292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Market concentration and superiority among strategic export subsidy policies with taxation distortion and cost heterogeneity

Author

Listed:
  • K.L. Glen Ueng
  • Tsaur‐Chin Wu
  • Chih‐Ta Yen
  • Chih‐Ting Chou

Abstract

This paper is the first attempt to investigate the ranking of the market concentration rate (Herfindahl–Hirschman index) under specific, demand, and cost ad valorem subsidies. We show that the cost ad valorem subsidy raises the variance of the distribution of effective marginal cost, thus increasing the allocative production efficiency and yielding the highest Herfindahl–Hirschman index. In addition, we find that the distortionary cost of subsidy and the cost heterogeneity of the domestic firms play an important role in determining the superiority of social welfare under three subsidy policies. Finally, of the three subsidy regimes, the total profit of the domestic firms under the cost ad valorem subsidy is the greatest. Our finding has altered the traditional wisdom on the choice of strategic trade policies.

Suggested Citation

  • K.L. Glen Ueng & Tsaur‐Chin Wu & Chih‐Ta Yen & Chih‐Ting Chou, 2022. "Market concentration and superiority among strategic export subsidy policies with taxation distortion and cost heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 24(2), pages 276-292, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:24:y:2022:i:2:p:276-292
    DOI: 10.1111/jpet.12543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12543
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/jpet.12543?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Neary, J. Peter, 1994. "Cost asymmetries in international subsidy games: Should governments help winners or losers?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3-4), pages 197-218, November.
    2. David R. Collie, 2006. "Tariffs And Subsidies Under Asymmetric Oligopoly: Ad Valorem Versus Specific Instruments," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 74(3), pages 314-333, June.
    3. Nassar, Andre M. & Ures, Diego, 2009. "Brazil: Shadow WTO agricultural domestic support notifications," IFPRI discussion papers 865, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Snow, Arthur & Warren, Ronald Jr., 1996. "The marginal welfare cost of public funds: Theory and estimates," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 289-305, August.
    5. Carlo Capuano & Giuseppe De Feo, 2010. "Privatization in Oligopoly: the Impact of the Shadow Cost of Public Funds," Rivista italiana degli economisti, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 175-208.
    6. Horn‐In Kuo & Cheng‐Hau Peng & K. L. Glen Ueng, 2021. "On the Neutrality of Profit Taxation in a Mixed Oligopoly," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(5), pages 1012-1021, October.
    7. Keen, Michael & Lahiri, Sajal, 1998. "The comparison between destination and origin principles under imperfect competition," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 323-350, August.
    8. Ngo, Van Long & Soubeyran, Antoine, 1997. "Cost heterogeneity, industry concentration and strategic trade policies," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1-2), pages 207-220, August.
    9. Hong Hwang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Ya-Po Yang, 2015. "Specific vs Ad Valorem Strategic Export Subsidies with Taxation Distortion," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 820-828, November.
    10. Valido, Jorge & Pilar Socorro, M. & Hernández, Aday & Betancor, Ofelia, 2014. "Air transport subsidies for resident passengers when carriers have market power," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 388-399.
    11. Amir, R., 1996. "Cournot oligopoly and theory of supermodular games," LIDAM Reprints CORE 1228, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    12. Amir, Rabah, 1996. "Cournot Oligopoly and the Theory of Supermodular Games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 132-148, August.
    13. Wen-Jung Liang & Kuang Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou, 2018. "The superiority among specific, demand ad valorem and cost ad valorem subsidy regimes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Brander, James A. & Spencer, Barbara J., 1985. "Export subsidies and international market share rivalry," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(1-2), pages 83-100, February.
    15. Jonathan Eaton & Gene M. Grossman, 1986. "Optimal Trade and Industrial Policy Under Oligopoly," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(2), pages 383-406.
    16. Fevrier, Philippe & Linnemer, Laurent, 2004. "Idiosyncratic shocks in an asymmetric Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 835-848, June.
    17. Toshihiro Matsumura & Yoshihiro Tomaru, 2013. "Mixed duopoly, privatization, and subsidization with excess burden of taxation," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 46(2), pages 526-554, May.
    18. Kay, J. A., 1980. "The deadweight loss from a tax system," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 111-119, February.
    19. Hwang, Hong & Miyagiwa, Kaz, 1997. "Strategic Export Subsidies under a Budget Constraint: Ad Valorem versus Specific," Journal of Economic Integration, Center for Economic Integration, Sejong University, vol. 12, pages 87-98.
    20. Leahy, Dermot & Montagna, Catia, 2001. "Strategic Trade Policy with Heterogeneous Costs," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 177-182, July.
    21. Collie, David R., 2000. "State aid in the European Union: The prohibition of subsidies in an integrated market," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 867-884, August.
    22. Stuart, Charles E, 1984. "Welfare Costs per Dollar of Additional Tax Revenue in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(3), pages 352-362, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hong Hwang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Ya-Po Yang, 2015. "Specific vs Ad Valorem Strategic Export Subsidies with Taxation Distortion," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 820-828, November.
    2. Qidi Zhang & Leonard F.S. Wang & Yapo Yang, 2020. "Indirect taxation with shadow cost of public funds in mixed oligopoly," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(3), pages 415-425, April.
    3. Wen-Jung Liang & Kuang Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou, 2018. "The superiority among specific, demand ad valorem and cost ad valorem subsidy regimes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 1-21, January.
    4. Arghya Ghosh & Souresh Saha, 2008. "Trade Policy in the Presence of Technology Licensing," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 45-68, February.
    5. Dermot Leahy & Catia Montagna, 1998. "Targeted Strategic Trade Policy with Domestic Cost Heterogeneity," Dundee Discussion Papers in Economics 100, Economic Studies, University of Dundee.
    6. David Collie, 2002. "Prohibiting State Aid in an Integrated Market: Cournot and Bertrand Oligopolies with Differentiated Products," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 215-231, September.
    7. Jinji, Naoto & Toshimitsu, Tsuyoshi, 2013. "Strategic R&D policy in a quality-differentiated industry with three exporting countries," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 132-142.
    8. Dermot Leahy & J. Peter Neary, 2013. "Oligopoly and Trade," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Daniel Bernhofen & Rod Falvey & David Greenaway & Udo Kreickemeier (ed.), Palgrave Handbook of International Trade, chapter 7, pages 197-235, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Winston Chang & Hajime Sugeta, 2005. "Cost asymmetry, oligopolistic competition and optimal trade and industrial policies," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 95-114.
    10. Ela Glowicka, 2005. "Bailouts in a Common Market: A Strategic Approach," CIG Working Papers SP II 2005-20, Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin (WZB), Research Unit: Competition and Innovation (CIG).
    11. Xu, Lili & Lee, Sang-Ho & Wang, Leonard F.S., 2016. "Free trade agreements and privatization policy with an excess burden of taxation," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 37, pages 55-64.
    12. Rabah Amir & Jim Y. Jin & Michael Troege, 2022. "On the limits of free trade in a Cournot world: When are restrictions on trade beneficial?," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(4), pages 2036-2057, November.
    13. Rabah Amir & David Encaoua & Yassine Lefouili, 2011. "Per-Unit Royalty vs Fixed Fee: The Case of Weak Patents," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-00595493, HAL.
    14. Dewit, Gerda & Leahy, Dermot, 2004. "Rivalry in uncertain export markets: commitment versus flexibility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 195-209, October.
    15. Praveen Kujal & Juan Ruiz, 2003. "Cost Effectiveness of R&D and the Robustness of Strategic Trade Policy," International Trade 0302001, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 04 Feb 2003.
    16. Hong Hwang & Chao‐Cheng Mai & Hiroshi Ohta, 2010. "Export Subsidies, Cost Differential And Product Quality," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(1), pages 32-41, February.
    17. Jinji, Naoto, 2014. "Comparative statics for oligopoly: A generalized result," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 79-82.
    18. Stiegert, Kyle W. & Wang, Shinn-Shyr, 2003. "Imperfect Competition And Strategic Trade Theory: What Have We Learned," Working Papers 14589, International Agricultural Trade Research Consortium.
    19. J. Peter Neary, 1998. "Pitfalls in the Theory of International Trade Policy: Concertina Reforms of Tariffs, and Subsidies to High‐Technology Industries," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 187-206, March.
    20. Haufler, Andreas & Pflüger, Michael, 2003. "Market structure and the taxation of international trade," Discussion Papers in Economics 106, University of Munich, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:24:y:2022:i:2:p:276-292. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.