Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Progressivity, inequality reduction and merging-proofness in taxation

Contents:

Author Info

  • JU, Biung-Ghi
  • MORENO-TERNERO, Juan D.

Abstract

Progressivity, inequality reduction and merging-proofness are three wellknown axioms in taxation. We investigate implications of each of the three axioms through characterizations of several families of taxation rules and their logical relations. We also study the preservation of these axioms under two operators on taxation rules, the so-called convexity operator and minimal-burden operator, which give intuitive procedures for determining tax schedules.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://alfresco.uclouvain.be/alfresco/download/attach/workspace/SpacesStore/0ca39f8e-4283-4d46-b1bc-7c692d51625a/coredp_2006_75.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE) in its series CORE Discussion Papers with number 2006075.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 00 Sep 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:cor:louvco:2006075

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Voie du Roman Pays 34, 1348 Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgium)
Phone: 32(10)474321
Fax: +32 10474304
Email:
Web page: http://www.uclouvain.be/core
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: taxation; progressivity; inequality reduction; mergingproofness; convexity operator; minimal-burden operator;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Ju, Biung-Ghi & Miyagawa, Eiichi & Sakai, Toyotaka, 2007. "Non-manipulable division rules in claim problems and generalizations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 1-26, January.
  2. JU, Biung-Ghi & MORENO-TERNERO, Juan D., . "On the equivalence between progressive taxation and inequality reduction," CORE Discussion Papers RP -2050, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  3. Biung-Ghi Ju, 2003. "Manipulation via merging and splitting in claims problems," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 8(2), pages 205-215, October.
  4. Moulin, Herve, 2004. "On Scheduling Fees to Prevent Merging, Splitting and Transferring of Jobs," Working Papers 2004-04, Rice University, Department of Economics.
  5. M. Angeles de Frutos, 1999. "Coalitional manipulations in a bankruptcy problem," Review of Economic Design, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 255-272.
  6. Eichhorn, Wolfgang & Funke, Helmut & Richter, Wolfram F., 1984. "Tax progression and inequality of income distribution," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 127-131, October.
  7. Thon, Dominique, 1987. "Redistributive properties of progressive taxation," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 185-191, October.
  8. Young, H. P., 1988. "Distributive justice in taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 321-335, April.
  9. Le Breton, Michel & Moyes, Patrick & Trannoy, Alain, 1996. "Inequality Reducing Properties of Composite Taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 71-103, April.
  10. Thomson, William, 2003. "Axiomatic and game-theoretic analysis of bankruptcy and taxation problems: a survey," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 249-297, July.
  11. Thomson, William & Yeh, Chun-Hsien, 2008. "Operators for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 177-198, November.
  12. Chambers, Christopher P. & Thomson, William, 2002. "Group order preservation and the proportional rule for the adjudication of conflicting claims," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 235-252, December.
  13. Moulin, Herve, 2001. "Axiomatic Cost and Surplis-Sharing," Working Papers 2001-06, Rice University, Department of Economics.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. William Thomson, 2012. "New variable-population paradoxes for resource allocation," RCER Working Papers 575, University of Rochester - Center for Economic Research (RCER).
  2. William Thomson, 2014. "New variable-population paradoxes for resource allocation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 255-277, February.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cor:louvco:2006075. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alain GILLIS).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.