IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2108.09981.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Welfare Effects of Labor Income Tax Changes on Married Couples: A Sufficient Statistics Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Egor Malkov

Abstract

This paper develops a framework for assessing the welfare effects of labor income tax changes on married couples. I build a static model of couples' labor supply that features both intensive and extensive margins and derive a tractable expression that delivers a transparent understanding of how labor supply responses, policy parameters, and income distribution affect the reform-induced welfare gains. Using this formula, I conduct a comparative welfare analysis of four tax reforms implemented in the United States over the last four decades, namely the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. I find that these reforms created welfare gains ranging from -0.16 to 0.62 percent of aggregate labor income. A sizable part of the gains is generated by the labor force participation responses of women. Despite three reforms resulted in aggregate welfare gains, I show that each reform created both winners and losers. Furthermore, I uncover two patterns in the relationship between welfare gains and couples' labor income. In particular, the reforms of 1986 and 2017 display a monotonically increasing relationship, while the other two reforms demonstrate a U-shaped pattern. Finally, I characterize the bias in welfare gains resulting from the assumption about a linear tax function. I consider a reform that changes tax progressivity and show that the linearization bias is given by the ratio between the tax progressivity parameter and the inverse elasticity of taxable income. Quantitatively, it means that linearization overestimates the welfare effects of the U.S. tax reforms by 3.6-18.1%.

Suggested Citation

  • Egor Malkov, 2021. "Welfare Effects of Labor Income Tax Changes on Married Couples: A Sufficient Statistics Approach," Papers 2108.09981, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2108.09981
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2108.09981
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard Blundell & Luigi Pistaferri & Itay Saporta-Eksten, 2018. "Children, Time Allocation, and Consumption Insurance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 126(S1), pages 73-115.
    2. Marianne P. Bitler & Jonah B. Gelbach & Hilary W. Hoynes, 2006. "What Mean Impacts Miss: Distributional Effects of Welfare Reform Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 988-1012, September.
    3. Martin Feldstein, 1999. "Tax Avoidance And The Deadweight Loss Of The Income Tax," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(4), pages 674-680, November.
    4. Bick, Alexander & Brüggemann, Bettina & Fuchs-Schündeln, Nicola & Paule-Paludkiewicz, Hannah, 2019. "Long-term changes in married couples' labor supply and taxes: Evidence from the US and Europe since the 1980s," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 44-62.
    5. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2012. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US: New Results," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 525, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    6. repec:bin:bpeajo:v:49:y:2019:i:2018-01:p:257-345 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Blomquist, Sören & Simula, Laurent, 2019. "Marginal deadweight loss when the income tax is nonlinear," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 47-60.
    8. David Domeij & Jonathan Heathcote, 2004. "On The Distributional Effects Of Reducing Capital Taxes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 45(2), pages 523-554, May.
    9. Amy Finkelstein & Nathaniel Hendren, 2020. "Welfare Analysis Meets Causal Inference," NBER Working Papers 27640, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Daniel Feenberg & Elisabeth Coutts, 1993. "An introduction to the TAXSIM model," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(1), pages 189-194.
    11. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer & Andreas Peichl, 2021. "Politically Feasible Reforms of Nonlinear Tax Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 153-191, January.
    12. Bar Michael & Leukhina Oksana, 2009. "To Work or Not to Work: Did Tax Reforms Affect Labor Force Participation of Married Couples?," The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics, De Gruyter, vol. 9(1), pages 1-30, July.
    13. Nada Eissa & Jeffrey B. Liebman, 1996. "Labor Supply Response to the Earned Income Tax Credit," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 111(2), pages 605-637.
    14. Cho, Jang-Ok & Rogerson, Richard, 1988. "Family labor supply and aggregate fluctuations," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2-3), pages 233-245.
    15. Claudia Goldin, 2014. "A Grand Gender Convergence: Its Last Chapter," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1091-1119, April.
    16. Raj Chetty, 2009. "Sufficient Statistics for Welfare Analysis: A Bridge Between Structural and Reduced-Form Methods," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 451-488, May.
    17. Auerbach, Alan J. & Hines, James Jr., 2002. "Taxation and economic efficiency," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 21, pages 1347-1421, Elsevier.
    18. Fatih Guvenen & Greg Kaplan, 2017. "Top Income Inequality in the 21st Century: Some Cautionary Notes," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue October, pages 2-15.
    19. Nezih Guner & Remzi Kaygusuz & Gustavo Ventura, 2012. "Taxation and Household Labour Supply," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(3), pages 1113-1149.
    20. Olivier Bargain & Kristian Orsini & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "Comparing Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the United States: New Results," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 49(3), pages 723-838.
    21. Eissa, Nada & Hoynes, Hilary Williamson, 2004. "Taxes and the labor market participation of married couples: the earned income tax credit," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(9-10), pages 1931-1958, August.
    22. Arnaud Dupuy & Simon Weber, 2022. "Marriage Market Counterfactuals Using Matching Models," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(353), pages 29-43, January.
    23. Robert J. Barro & Charles J. Redlick, 2011. "Macroeconomic Effects From Government Purchases and Taxes," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 51-102.
    24. Auerbach, Alan J., 1985. "The theory of excess burden and optimal taxation," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 61-127, Elsevier.
    25. Eissa, Nada & Kleven, Henrik Jacobsen & Kreiner, Claus Thustrup, 2008. "Evaluation of four tax reforms in the United States: Labor supply and welfare effects for single mothers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3-4), pages 795-816, April.
    26. Dahlby, Bev, 1998. "Progressive taxation and the social marginal cost of public funds," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 105-122, January.
    27. Amy Finkelstein & Nathaniel Hendren, 2020. "Welfare Analysis Meets Causal Inference," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(4), pages 146-167, Fall.
    28. Robert J. Barro & Jason Furman, 2018. "Macroeconomic Effects of the 2017 Tax Reform," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 49(1 (Spring), pages 257-345.
    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. Egor Malkov, 2021. "Welfare Effects of the Labor Income Tax Changes on Married Couples: A Sufficient Statistics Approach," Working Papers 590, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    2. Felix Bierbrauer & Pierre Boyer & Andreas Peichl & Daniel Weishaar, 2023. "The Taxation of Couples," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 405, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    3. Florian Buhlmann & Benjamin Elsner & Andreas Peichl, 2018. "Tax refunds and income manipulation: evidence from the EITC," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(6), pages 1490-1518, December.
    4. Eissa, Nada & Kleven, Henrik Jacobsen & Kreiner, Claus Thustrup, 2008. "Evaluation of four tax reforms in the United States: Labor supply and welfare effects for single mothers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(3-4), pages 795-816, April.
    5. Matteo Picchio & Giacomo Valletta, 2018. "A welfare evaluation of the 1986 tax reform for married couples in the United States," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(3), pages 757-807, June.
    6. Naveen Singhal, 2021. "Discrete Choice Models for Estimating Labor Supply: Working Paper 2021-04," Working Papers 57027, Congressional Budget Office.
    7. Ganghua Mei & Lei Yue, 2022. "Labor supply and time use: evidence from cohabiting women in the United States," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(44), pages 5133-5158, September.
    8. Marc K. Chan & Robert Moffitt, 2018. "Welfare Reform and the Labor Market," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 347-381, August.
    9. Kumar, Anil & Liang, Che-Yuan, 2020. "Estimating taxable income responses with elasticity heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    10. Ferey, Antoine, 2022. "Redistribution and Unemployment Insurance," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 345, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    11. Bastian, Jacob E. & Jones, Maggie R., 2021. "Do EITC expansions pay for themselves? Effects on tax revenue and government transfers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    12. Hirte, Georg & Tscharaktschiew, Stefan, 2018. "The impact of anti-congestion policies and the role of labor-supply margins," CEPIE Working Papers 04/18, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).
    13. Charles Gottlieb & Maren Froemel, 2015. "General Equilibrium Effects of Targeted Transfers: The case of EITC," 2015 Meeting Papers 1264, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Bargain, Olivier & Orsini, Kristian & Peichl, Andreas, 2011. "Labor Supply Elasticities in Europe and the US," IZA Discussion Papers 5820, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Blomquist, Sören & Simula, Laurent, 2019. "Marginal deadweight loss when the income tax is nonlinear," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 211(1), pages 47-60.
    16. Rolf Aaberge & Ugo Colombino, 2014. "Labour Supply Models," Contributions to Economic Analysis, in: Handbook of Microsimulation Modelling, volume 127, pages 167-221, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    17. Colas, Mark & Sachs, Dominik, 2022. "The Indirect Fiscal Benefits of Low-Skilled Immigration," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 352, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    18. Olivier Bargain & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2011. "Tax-Benefit Systems in Europe and the US: Between Equity and Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 3534, CESifo.
    19. Olivier Bargain & André Decoster & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2013. "Welfare, labor supply and heterogeneous preferences: evidence for Europe and the US," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 789-817, October.
    20. Raj Chetty & Adam Guren & Day Manoli & Andrea Weber, 2013. "Does Indivisible Labor Explain the Difference between Micro and Macro Elasticities? A Meta-Analysis of Extensive Margin Elasticities," NBER Macroeconomics Annual, University of Chicago Press, vol. 27(1), pages 1-56.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2108.09981. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.