IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/26180.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rules of Thumb and Attention Elasticities: Evidence from Under- and Overreaction to Taxes

Author

Listed:
  • William Morrison
  • Dmitry Taubinsky

Abstract

This paper tests costly attention models of consumers’ misreaction to opaque taxes. We report an online shopping experiment that involves shrouded sales taxes that are exogenously varied within consumer over time. Some consumers systematically underreact to sales taxes while others systematically overreact, but higher stakes decrease both under- and overreaction. This is consistent with consumers using heterogeneous rules of thumb to compute the opaque tax when the stakes are low, but using costly mental effort at higher stakes. The results allow us to differentiate between various theories of limited attention. We also develop novel econometric techniques for quantifying individual differences.

Suggested Citation

  • William Morrison & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2019. "Rules of Thumb and Attention Elasticities: Evidence from Under- and Overreaction to Taxes," NBER Working Papers 26180, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:26180
    Note: LE LS PE POL
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w26180.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jerry Hausman, 2001. "Mismeasured Variables in Econometric Analysis: Problems from the Right and Problems from the Left," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 57-67, Fall.
    2. Xavier Gabaix, 2014. "A Sparsity-Based Model of Bounded Rationality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1661-1710.
    3. Paul Heidhues & Botond Kőszegi & Takeshi Murooka, 2017. "Inferior Products and Profitable Deception," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(1), pages 323-356.
    4. Kory Kroft & Jean-William Laliberté & René Leal-Vizcaíno & Matthew J Notowidigdo, 2024. "Salience and Taxation with Imperfect Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(1), pages 403-437.
    5. Jason Abaluck & Abi Adams, 2017. "What Do Consumers Consider Before They Choose? Identification from Asymmetric Demand Responses," NBER Working Papers 23566, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Vojtěch Bartoš & Michal Bauer & Julie Chytilová & Filip Matějka, 2016. "Attention Discrimination: Theory and Field Experiments with Monitoring Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(6), pages 1437-1475, June.
    7. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2014. "Beyond Happiness and Satisfaction: Toward Well-Being Indices Based on Stated Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2698-2735, September.
    8. Naomi E. Feldman & Bradley J. Ruffle, 2015. "The Impact of Including, Adding, and Subtracting a Tax on Demand," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(1), pages 95-118, February.
    9. Justine S. Hastings & Brigitte C. Madrian & William L. Skimmyhorn, 2013. "Financial Literacy, Financial Education, and Economic Outcomes," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 5(1), pages 347-373, May.
    10. Jacob Goldin & Tatiana Homonoff, 2013. "Smoke Gets in Your Eyes: Cigarette Tax Salience and Regressivity," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 302-336, February.
    11. Kory Kroft & Jean-William Laliberté & René Leal-Vizcaíno & Matthew J Notowidigdo, 2024. "Salience and Taxation with Imperfect Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(1), pages 403-437.
    12. Paulo Natenzon, 2019. "Random Choice and Learning," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 419-457.
    13. Kengo Kato & Yuya Sasaki & Takuya Ura, 2018. "Inference based on Kotlarski's Identity," Papers 1808.09375, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2019.
    14. Saurabh Bhargava & George Loewenstein & Justin Sydnor, 2017. "Choose to Lose: Health Plan Choices from a Menu with Dominated Option," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(3), pages 1319-1372.
    15. Sendhil Mullainathan, 2002. "A Memory-Based Model of Bounded Rationality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(3), pages 735-774.
    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. Andreas R. Kostøl & Andreas S. Myhre, 2021. "Labor Supply Responses to Learning the Tax and Benefit Schedule," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3733-3766, November.
    2. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "To buy or not to buy? Price salience in an online shopping field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    3. Sergiu Burlacu & Austėja Kažemekaitytė & Piero Ronzani & Lucia Savadori, 2022. "Blinded by worries: sin taxes and demand for temptation under financial worries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(1), pages 141-187, February.
    4. Drew Fudenberg & Giacomo Lanzani & Philipp Strack, 2021. "Limit Points of Endogenous Misspecified Learning," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(3), pages 1065-1098, May.
    5. Martin, Daniel & Muñoz-Rodriguez, Edwin, 2022. "Cognitive costs and misperceived incentives: Evidence from the BDM mechanism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    6. Sydnee Caldwell & Scott Nelson & Daniel C. Waldinger, 2021. "Tax Refund Uncertainty: Evidence and Welfare Implications," Working Papers 2021-18, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.

    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. Dmitry Taubinsky & Alex Rees-Jones, 2018. "Attention Variation and Welfare: Theory and Evidence from a Tax Salience Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(4), pages 2462-2496.
    2. Andrew Caplin & Daniel Martin, 2015. "A Testable Theory of Imperfect Perception," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(582), pages 184-202, February.
    3. Tamara Bischof & Michael Gerfin & Tobias Mueller, 2021. "Attention Please! Health Plan Choice and (In-)Attention," Diskussionsschriften dp2111, Universitaet Bern, Departement Volkswirtschaft.
    4. Lu, Kelin, 2022. "Overreaction to capital taxation in saving decisions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    5. Erin T. Bronchetti & Judd B. Kessler & Ellen B. Magenheim & Dmitry Taubinsky & Eric Zwick, 2023. "Is Attention Produced Optimally? Theory and Evidence From Experiments With Bandwidth Enhancements," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 669-707, March.
    6. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. John Cawley & David Frisvold & David Jones & Chelsea Lensing, 2021. "The Pass‐Through of a Tax on Sugar‐Sweetened Beverages in Boulder, Colorado," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 103(3), pages 987-1005, May.
    8. Fox, William F. & Hargaden, Enda Patrick & Luna, LeAnn, 2022. "Statutory incidence and sales tax compliance: Evidence from Wayfair," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    9. Andrea La Nauze & Erica Myers, 2023. "Do Consumers Acquire Information Optimally? Experimental Evidence from Energy Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 10335, CESifo.
    10. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2020. "Memory, Attention, and Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1399-1442.
    11. Sandro Ambuehl & B. Douglas Bernheim & Annamaria Lusardi, 2022. "Evaluating Deliberative Competence: A Simple Method with an Application to Financial Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3584-3626, November.
    12. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    13. Scott Duke Kominers & Xiaosheng Mu & Alexander Peysakhovich, 2019. "Paying for Attention: The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Bayesian Inference," Working Papers 2019-31, Princeton University. Economics Department..
    14. Crawford, Gregory S. & Griffith, Rachel & Iaria, Alessandro, 2021. "A survey of preference estimation with unobserved choice set heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 4-43.
    15. Ronayne, David & Brown, Gordon D.A., 2016. "Multi-attribute decision by sampling: An account of the attraction, comprimise and similarity effects," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1124, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    16. Goldin, Jacob, 2015. "Optimal tax salience," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 115-123.
    17. Dewan, Ambuj & Neligh, Nathaniel, 2020. "Estimating information cost functions in models of rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    18. Johannes Becker & Jonas Fooken & Melanie Steinhoff, 2019. "Behavioral Effects of Withholding Taxes on Labor Supply," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1417-1440, October.
    19. Hunt Allcott & Nathan Wozny, 2014. "Gasoline Prices, Fuel Economy, and the Energy Paradox," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 779-795, December.
    20. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Matthew Thirkettle, 2021. "Discrete Choice under Risk with Limited Consideration," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(6), pages 1972-2006, June.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue

    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:nbr:nberwo:26180. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.