This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

The possibility of a British earned income tax credit

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Robert Walker () (Institute for Fiscal Studies and University of Nottingham)
Michael Wiseman
Abstract

The possibility of an earned income tax credit, based on the US model, is currently high up the British political agenda. This paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of the current British system of in-work benefits, before reviewing the effectiveness of the US Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) scheme. The British and US systems are then directly compared in terms of the net income delivered and the effective tax rate (net benefit deduction rate). Although the evidence in favour of a US-style EITC is weak, two possible variants are considered. The paper concludes that the only future for an EITC is probably as a partial scheme, linked to the amalgamation of in-work and out-of-work benefits, which removes wage subsidisation from the sphere of social security by means of a semi-individualised tax credit. Even so, the same goals could be achieved through the benefit system.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.ifs.org.uk/fs/articles/fswalwis.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Article provided by Institute for Fiscal Studies in its journal Fiscal Studies.

Volume (Year): 18 (1997)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
Pages: 401-425
Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:ifs:fistud:v:18:y:1997:i:4:p:401-425

Contact details of provider:
Postal: The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street LONDON WC1E 7AE
Phone: (+44) 020 7291 4800
Fax: (+44) 020 7323 4780
Email:
Web page: http://www.ifs.org.uk

Order Information:
Postal: The Institute for Fiscal Studies 7 Ridgmount Street LONDON WC1E 7AE
Email:

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Emma Hyman).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

  1. Scholz, John Karl, 1996. "In-Work Benefits in the United States: The Earned Income Tax Credit," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 156-69, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Eissa, Nada & Liebman, Jeffrey B, 1996. "Labor Supply Response to the Earned Income Tax Credit," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 111(2), pages 605-37, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  3. Duncan, Alan & Giles, Christopher, 1996. "Labour Supply Incentives and Recent Family Credit Reforms," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 142-55, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Whitehouse, Edward, 1996. "Designing and Implementing In-Work Benefits," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(434), pages 130-41, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Cited by:
(explanations, Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.)

  1. Waltraud Schelkle, 2000. "Subsidizing Low Earnings: German Debates and U.S. Experiences," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 69(1), pages 5-16.
  2. Mike Brewer, 2000. "Comparing in-work benefits and financial work incentives for low-income families in the US and the UK," IFS Working Papers W00/16, Institute for Fiscal Studies. [Downloadable!]
  3. Michael Keen, 1997. "Peculiar institutions: A British perspective on tax policy in the United States," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 371-400, November. [Downloadable!]
  4. Wolfgang Ochel, 2001. "Welfare to Work in the US: A Model for Germany?," CESifo Working Paper Series CESifo Working Paper No. , CESifo Group Munich. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Mike Brewer & Tom Clark & Matthew Wakefield, 2002. "Five years of social security reforms in the UK," IFS Working Papers W02/12, Institute for Fiscal Studies. [Downloadable!]
  6. Hilary Hoynes & Richard Blundell, 2001. "Has "In-Work" Benefit Reform Helped the Labour Market?," NBER Working Papers 8546, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. R. Walker & M. Wiseman, . "Britain's New Deal and the Next Round of U.S. Welfare Reform," Institute for Research on Poverty Discussion Papers 1223-01, University of Wisconsin Institute for Research on Poverty. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? There is a FAQ (frequently asked questions).

This page was last updated on 2009-11-22.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.