IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/red/sed017/1553.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inequality, Redistribution and Optimal Trade Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Ali Shourideh

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Roozbeh Hosseini

    (University of Georgia)

Abstract

Recent evidence, as illustrated by Autor et al. (2013) as well as Caliendo et al. (2015), suggests that international trade and global reallocation of production has contributed to domestic reallocation of labor and income inequality. In this paper, we explore the relationship between optimal trade and redistributive policies. In particular, in an environment where international trade affects the relative wages and the allocation of labor across various sectors, we study how taxes and tariffs should be designed in order to balance the efficiency gains from trade with the costs associated with the resulting increased inequality. To do so, we use a two-country Ricardian model of trade which can be thought of as a generalized version of the model developed by Caliendo et al. (2015). More specifically, each country is consisted of many competitive sectors. Workers choose their occupation modeled as a multinomial logit model and the intensity of their work effort in the chosen sector. Accordingly, the multinomial logit captures the idea that different workers have different costs and benefits of working in each sector and yet retains significant tractability in the framework. We assume that countries differ in their comparative advantages across different sectors as well the composition of their work force in terms of their cost of their sectoral choice. We are interested in government policies that are in the form of linear tariffs on imports and exports as well general income taxes. We solve the optimal taxation problem of the world in which all governments coordinate. This can be viewed, for example, as a binding international trade agreement that maximizes welfare of all individuals in all countries and aims at a comprehensive overhaul of tariffs and income taxes. We first show that if governments have access to sector-specific transfers, tax and transfers that depend on workers' sectors, then optimal tariff should be zero. This result is independent of the choice of utility function and social welfare function. Opening to trade, changes the distribution of wages across sectors and increases income inequality. If sector-specific transfers exist, they can be used to completely offset this effect on income without affecting the trade in goods. Hence, government can achieve its desired goal without tariffs. We next turn our attention to a more realistic setup in which governments do not have access to sector-specific transfers. We assume that fiscal policy instruments are incomplete to the extent that they only depend on income (and not other characteristics such as occupation, etc.). This features leads to existence of a deadweight loss from taxation which in turn depends on the distribution of wages in the economy. Since tariffs affect the distribution of wages, they can be efficiently used to lower the deadweight loss of taxation. As a result, optimal trade policy leads to non-zero tariffs even when countries can coordinate their policies. We use our framework characterizes the key determinants of optimal tariffs: comparative advantage, sectoral productivities, as well as the elasticity of sectoral choice in each country.

Suggested Citation

  • Ali Shourideh & Roozbeh Hosseini, 2017. "Inequality, Redistribution and Optimal Trade Policy," 2017 Meeting Papers 1553, Society for Economic Dynamics.
  • Handle: RePEc:red:sed017:1553
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://red-files-public.s3.amazonaws.com/meetpapers/2017/paper_1553.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2013. "The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2121-2168, October.
    2. Lorenzo Caliendo & Maximiliano Dvorkin & Fernando Parro, 2015. "The Impact of Trade on Labor Market Dynamics," NBER Working Papers 21149, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Lorenzo Caliendo & Maximiliano Dvorkin & Fernando Parro, 2019. "Trade and Labor Market Dynamics: General Equilibrium Analysis of the China Trade Shock," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 87(3), pages 741-835, May.
    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. Carroll, Daniel R. & Hur, Sewon, 2020. "On the heterogeneous welfare gains and losses from trade," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-16.
    2. Aleh Tsyvinski & Nicolas Werquin, 2017. "Generalized Compensation Principle," NBER Working Papers 23509, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Daniel Carroll & Sewon Hur, 2023. "On The Distributional Effects Of International Tariffs," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(4), pages 1311-1346, November.
    4. Arnaud Costinot & Iván Werning, 2023. "Robots, Trade, and Luddism: A Sufficient Statistic Approach to Optimal Technology Regulation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2261-2291.
    5. Uwe Thuemmel, 2018. "Optimal Taxation of Robots," CESifo Working Paper Series 7317, CESifo.
    6. Michael E. Waugh, 2019. "The Consumption Response to Trade Shocks: Evidence from the US-China Trade War," NBER Working Papers 26353, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Lyon, Spencer G. & Waugh, Michael E., 2018. "Redistributing the gains from trade through progressive taxation," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 185-202.
    8. V. V. Chari & Juan Pablo Nicolini & Pedro Teles, 2023. "Optimal Cooperative Taxation in the Global Economy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(1), pages 95-130.

    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. Chiquiar, Daniel & Covarrubias, Enrique & Salcedo, Alejandrina, 2016. "Labor market consequences of trade openness and competition in foreign markets," Conference papers 332760, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    2. Limão, Nuno & Handley, Kyle, 2013. "Policy Uncertainty, Trade and Welfare: Theory and Evidence for China and the U.S," CEPR Discussion Papers 9615, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. David H. Autor & David Dorn & Gordon H. Hanson, 2016. "The China Shock: Learning from Labor-Market Adjustment to Large Changes in Trade," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 205-240, October.
    4. Shen, Leilei & Silva, Peri, 2018. "Value-added exports and U.S. local labor markets: Does China really matter?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 479-504.
    5. Rafael Dix-Carneiro & Brian K. Kovak, 2017. "Trade Liberalization and Regional Dynamics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(10), pages 2908-2946, October.
    6. Arnarson, Björn Thor & Gullstrand, Joakim, 2016. "Linking Services to Manufacturing Exports," Working Papers 2016:27, Lund University, Department of Economics, revised 24 Feb 2017.
    7. Robert C. Feenstra & Akira Sasahara, 2018. "The ‘China shock,’ exports and U.S. employment: A global input–output analysis," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 1053-1083, November.
    8. Katrin Huber & Erwin Winkler, 2016. "All We Need is Love? Trade-Adjustment, Inequality, and the Role of the Partner," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 873, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    9. Artuc, Erhan & Porto, Guido & Rijkers, Bob, 2019. "Trading off the income gains and the inequality costs of trade policy," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 1-45.
    10. Amiti, Mary & Dai, Mi & Feenstra, Robert C. & Romalis, John, 2020. "How did China's WTO entry affect U.S. prices?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    11. Muftah Faraj & Murad Bein, 2022. "Sustainability of Local Labour Market in South Africa: The Implications of Imports Competition from China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, June.
    12. repec:boi:isrerv:v:16:y:2019:i:2:p:141-147 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Katheryn N. Russ, 2018. "Review Of “Globalization And Inequality” By Elhanan Helpman," Israel Economic Review, Bank of Israel, vol. 16(2), pages 141-147.
    14. Andrés César & Guillermo Falcone, 2020. "Heterogeneous Effects of Chinese Import Competition on Chilean Manufacturing Plants," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Spring 20), pages 1-60, December.
    15. Enghin Atalay & Ali Hortacsu & Mustafa Runyun & Chad Syverson & Mehmet Fatih Ulu, 2023. "Micro- and Macroeconomic Impacts of a Place-Based Industrial Policy," Working Papers 23-12, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    16. Hylke Vandenbussche & William Connell & Wouter Simons, 2022. "Global value chains, trade shocks and jobs: An application to Brexit," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 2338-2369, August.
    17. Adam Jakubik & Victor Stolzenburg, 2021. "The ‘China Shock’ revisited: insights from value added trade flows," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 67-95.
    18. Stephen J. Redding & Esteban Rossi-Hansberg, 2017. "Quantitative Spatial Economics," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 9(1), pages 21-58, September.
    19. Rafael Dix-Carneiro & João Paulo Pessoa & Ricardo Reyes-Heroles & Sharon Traiberman, 2023. "Globalization, Trade Imbalances, and Labor Market Adjustment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 138(2), pages 1109-1171.
    20. Haiwen Zhou, 2018. "Impact of international trade on unemployment under oligopoly," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(4), pages 365-379, May.
    21. Huang, Yi & Lin, Chen & Liu, Sibo & Tang, Heiwai, 2023. "Trade networks and firm value: Evidence from the U.S.-China trade war," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).

    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:red:sed017:1553. 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: Christian Zimmermann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sedddea.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.