IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdf/wpaper/2014-15.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Taxation and the Sustainability of Collusion: Ad Valorem versus Specific Taxes

Author

Listed:

Abstract

Assuming constant marginal cost, it is shown that a switch from specific to ad valorem taxation has no effect on the critical discount factor required to sustain collusion. This result is shown to hold for Cournot oligopoly as well as for Bertrand oligopoly when collusion is sustained with Nash-reversion strategies or optimal-punishment strategies. In a Cournot duopoly model with linear demand and quadratic costs, it is shown that the critical discount factor is lower with an ad valorem tax than with a specific tax. However, in contrast to Colombo and Labrecciosa (2013), it is shown that revenue is always higher with an ad valorem tax than with a specific tax.

Suggested Citation

  • Azacis, Helmuts & Collie, David R., 2014. "Taxation and the Sustainability of Collusion: Ad Valorem versus Specific Taxes," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2014/15, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdf:wpaper:2014/15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://carbsecon.com/wp/E2014_15.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Delipalla, Sofia & Keen, Michael, 1992. "The comparison between ad valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 351-367, December.
    2. Lambertini, Luca, 1996. "Cartel Stability and the Curvature of Market Demand," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 329-334, October.
    3. Helmuts Azacis & David R Collie, 2018. "Taxation and the sustainability of collusion: ad valorem versus specific taxes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 173-188, October.
    4. Anderson, Simon P. & Engers, Maxim, 1992. "Stackelberg versus Cournot oligopoly equilibrium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 127-135, March.
    5. Anderson, Simon P. & de Palma, Andre & Kreider, Brent, 2001. "The efficiency of indirect taxes under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 231-251, August.
    6. Kowalczyk, Carsten & Skeath, Susan E., 1994. "Pareto ranking optimal tariffs under foreign monopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 355-359.
    7. James W. Friedman, 1971. "A Non-cooperative Equilibrium for Supergames," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(1), pages 1-12.
    8. Michael Keen, 1998. "The balance between specific and ad valorem taxation," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(1), pages 1-37, February.
    9. X. Wang & Jingang Zhao, 2009. "On the efficiency of indirect taxes in differentiated oligopolies with asymmetric costs," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 223-239, April.
    10. Charles D. Kolstad & Lars Mathiesen, 1987. "Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Uniqueness of a Cournot Equilibrium," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 54(4), pages 681-690.
    11. Luca Lambertini & Dan Sasaki, 1999. "Optimal punishments in linear duopoly supergames with product differentiation," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 173-188, June.
    12. Lisa Grazzini, 2006. "A Note on Ad Valorem and Per Unit Taxation in an Oligopoly Model," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 59-74, October.
    13. Seade, Jesus K, 1980. "On the Effects of Entry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(2), pages 479-489, March.
    14. Henrik Vetter, 2013. "Consumption taxes in monopolistic competition: a comment," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 110(3), pages 287-295, November.
    15. Abreu, Dilip, 1986. "Extremal equilibria of oligopolistic supergames," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 191-225, June.
    16. Colombo, Luca & Labrecciosa, Paola, 2013. "How should commodities be taxed? A supergame-theoretic analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 196-205.
    17. Dierickx, I. & Matutes, C. & Neven, D., 1988. "Indirect taxation and cournot equilibrium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 385-399.
    18. Henrik Vetter, 2017. "Commodity taxes and welfare under endogenous market conduct," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 137-154, October.
    19. D. B. Suits & R. A. Musgrave, 1953. "Ad Valorem and Unit Taxes Compared," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 67(4), pages 598-604.
    20. Skeath, Susan E. & Trandel, Gregory A., 1994. "A Pareto comparison of ad valorem and unit taxes in noncompetitive environments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 53-71, January.
    21. Rothschild, R., 1999. "Cartel stability when costs are heterogeneous," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 717-734, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Ya‐Po Yang & Qidi Zhang & Leonard F. S. Wang, 2022. "Tariff simplification, privatization, and welfare superiority," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 73(2), pages 683-707, May.
    3. Honglin Li & Xiaolu Liu, 2021. "Ad valorem versus per unit taxation: a perspective from price signaling," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 134(1), pages 27-47, September.
    4. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2022. "Commodity taxes and rent extraction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 285-297, April.
    5. Helmuts Azacis & David R Collie, 2018. "Taxation and the sustainability of collusion: ad valorem versus specific taxes," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 173-188, October.
    6. Douglas C. Turner, 2022. "Taxation and the sustainability of collusion with asymmetric costs," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 1-48, January.
    7. Todorova, Tamara & Vatoci, Besar, 2020. "Taxation and strategic reaction: A comparison of Cournot, Stackelberg and collusion," MPRA Paper 106487, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2019. "A strategic tax mechanism," MPRA Paper 93602, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    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. Todorova, Tamara & Vatoci, Besar, 2020. "Taxation and strategic reaction: A comparison of Cournot, Stackelberg and collusion," MPRA Paper 106487, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2022. "Commodity taxes and rent extraction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 285-297, April.
    5. Christos Kotsogiannis & Konstantinos Serfes, 2014. "The Comparison of ad Valorem and Specific Taxation under Uncertainty," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(1), pages 48-68, February.
    6. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2018. "Specific versus ad valorem taxes in the presence of cost and quality differences," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 25(5), pages 1197-1214, October.
    7. 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.
    8. de Rus, Ginés & Socorro, M. Pilar, 2022. "Subsidies in air transport markets: The economic consequences of choosing the wrong mechanism," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    9. Colombo, Luca & Labrecciosa, Paola, 2013. "How should commodities be taxed? A supergame-theoretic analysis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 196-205.
    10. Judy Hsu & X. Henry Wang, 2011. "A Note on the Efficiency of Indirect Taxes in an Asymmetric Cournot Oligopoly," Review of Economics & Finance, Better Advances Press, Canada, vol. 1, pages 53-59, February.
    11. David R. Collie, 2019. "Taxation under oligopoly in a general equilibrium setting," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 21(4), pages 738-753, August.
    12. Stamatopoulos, Giorgos, 2019. "A strategic tax mechanism," MPRA Paper 93602, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. X. Wang & Jingang Zhao, 2009. "On the efficiency of indirect taxes in differentiated oligopolies with asymmetric costs," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 96(3), pages 223-239, April.
    14. Henrik Vetter, 2016. "Tax Reform in Monopolistic Competition with Increasing Preferences for Variety," Public Finance Review, , vol. 44(2), pages 245-262, March.
    15. Laszlo Goerke, 2012. "The Optimal Structure of Commodity Taxation in a Monopoly with Tax Avoidance or Evasion," Public Finance Review, , vol. 40(4), pages 519-536, July.
    16. Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2019. "Indirect taxes in a cross-border shopping model: a monopolistic competition approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 147-175, October.
    17. Francisco Galera & Isabel Rodríguez-Tejedo & Juan C. Molero, 2012. "Technology Choice and Unit vs Ad Valorem Tax," Faculty Working Papers 18/12, School of Economics and Business Administration, University of Navarra.
    18. Neelanjan Sen & Rajit Biswas, 2017. "Indirect Taxes in Oligopoly in Presence of Licensing Opportunities," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 61-82, March.
    19. Adachi, Takanori & Fabinger, Michal, 2022. "Pass-through, welfare, and incidence under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    20. François Boldron & Cyril Hariton, 2003. "Access charge and imperfect competition," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 69(3), pages 319-340.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Taxes; Imperfect Competition; Oligopoly; Cartel; Supergame;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H22 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Incidence
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games

    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:cdf:wpaper:2014/15. 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: Yongdeng Xu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecscfuk.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.