In-kind transfers can Pareto-dominate cash transfers as a means of income redistribution if in-kind transfers and leisure are Hicks substitutes and leisure is a normal good. The result holds when redistributive instruments also include a linear income tax. The paper proves that, if the poor receive more in-kind transfers (and the rich less) than what they would choose for themselves, then, compared to cash transfers, there will be a higher labor supply by the poor, a lower labor supply by the rich, and higher levels of aggregate pretax income and tax revenues. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press.
Download Info
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page
whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be
available.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Oxford University Press in its journal Economic Inquiry.
Volume (Year): 33 (1995) Issue (Month): 1 (January) Pages: 45-53 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:33:y:1995:i:1:p:45-53
Contact details of provider: Postal: Oxford University Press, Great Clarendon Street, Oxford OX2 6DP, UK Fax: 01865 267 985 Email: Web page: http://ei.oupjournals.org/
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
Related research
Keywords:
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.)