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! ]

Indirect Taxation in Greece: Evaluation and Possible Reform

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Kaplanoglou, Georgia
Newbery, David Michael

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

The paper assesses the distributional and efficiency/disincentive aspects of the Greek indirect tax system, which provides 60% of total tax revenue. The marginal welfare costs of broad commodity groups were computed to identify welfare-improving directions of reform. The disincentive effects were estimated from marginal indirect tax rates using Household Expenditure Survey data. The indirect tax structure is shown to be unnecessarily complicated and inefficient, without achieving any redistributive goals. The UK indirect tax structure was shown to be simpler, more equitable and more efficient to implement and administer when simulated on Greek consumers.

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 file. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocCIDL/cesifo_wp661.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by CESifo GmbH in its series CESifo Working Paper Series with number CESifo Working Paper No. 661.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML, plain text, BibTeX, RIS (EndNote), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2002
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_661

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Poschingerstrasse 5, 81679 Munich
Phone: +49 (89) 9224-0
Fax: +49 (89) 985369
Web page: http://www.cesifo.de

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

Related research
Keywords: indirect tax reform inequality tax efficiency disincentive effects tax simulations

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:
H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
H23 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Externalities; Redistributive Effects; Environmental Taxes and Subsidies
H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household

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. Madden, David, 1995. "Labour Supply, Commodity Demand and Marginal Tax Reform," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 485-97, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Atkinson, A. B. & Stiglitz, J. E., 1976. "The design of tax structure: Direct versus indirect taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1-2), pages 55-75. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Karageorgas, Dionysios, 1973. "The Distribution of Tax Burden by Income Groups in Greece," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 83(330), pages 436-48, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Madden, David, 1997. "Conditional Demands and Marginal Tax Reform," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 59(2), pages 237-55, May.
  5. Newbery, David M., 1997. "Optimal tax rates and tax design during systemic reform," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 177-206, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. Deaton, Angus, 1981. "Optimal Taxes and the Structure of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(5), pages 1245-60, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  7. Sah, Raaj Kumar, 1983. "How much redistribution is possible through commodity taxes?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 89-101, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  8. Slemrod, Joel, 1990. "Optimal Taxation and Optimal Tax Systems," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 157-78, Winter. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  9. Evan Davis & John Kay, 1985. "Extending the VAT base: problems and possibilities," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, February.
  10. Deaton, Angus, 1979. "Optimally uniform commodity taxes," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 357-361. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-26, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Feldstein, Martin S, 1972. "Distributional Equity and the Optimal Structure of Public Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 32-36, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  13. A. B. Atkinson, 1977. "Optimal Taxation and the Direct versus Indirect Tax Controversy," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 10(4), pages 590-606, November. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  14. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Blundell, Richard W & Walker, Ian, 1982. "Modelling the Joint Determination of Household Labour Supplies and Commodity Demands," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 351-64, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  16. Ahmad, Ehtisham & Stern, Nicholas, 1984. "The theory of reform and indian indirect taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 259-298, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. 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!]
  18. Deaton, Angus & Stern, Nicholas, 1986. "Optimally uniform commodity taxes, taste differences and lump-sum grants," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 263-266. [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. Fred Schroyen, 2003. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 595.03, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC). [Downloadable!]
  2. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a Tool for Evaluating Redistribution Policies," Working Papers 20, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. O'Donoghue C & Baldini M & Mantovani D, 2004. "Modelling the Redistributive Impact of Indirect Taxes in Europe: an Application of Euromod," EUROMOD Working Papers em7/01, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research. [Downloadable!]
  4. Georgia Kaplanoglou, 2004. "Household Consumption Patterns, Indirect Tax Structures and Implications for Indirect Tax Harmonisation - A Three Country Perspective," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 35(1), pages 83-107. [Downloadable!]
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? All bibliographic data on IDEAS has been put in the public domain by the publishers.

This page was last updated on 2009-1-6.

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.