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! ]

Grundeinkommen vs. Kombilohn: Beschäftigungs- und Finanzierungswirkungen und Unterschiede im Empfängerkreis

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Fuest, Clemens
Peichl, Andreas

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

Abstract

In der ökonomischen Literatur wird oft argumentiert, dass Kombilohnmodelle und Grundeinkommenskonzepte im Prinzip nur Varianten einer negativen Einkommenssteuer seien. Dabei wird oft übersehen, dass diese Konzepte sehr unterschiedliche Gruppen der Bevölkerung einbeziehen. Dieser Beitrag bietet einen empirischen Vergleich der Bezugsgruppen dieser Konzepte. Wir zeigen, dass der Übergang zu einem selbst restriktiv ausgestalteten Grundeinkommen die Zahl der Transferempfänger gegenüber dem Status quo ungefähr verdoppeln würde. Beim Kombilohn würde die Zahl der Transferempfänger hingegen nur um rund zehn Prozent ansteigen. Das hat Folgen für die Finanzierbarkeit und die Beschäftigungswirkungen. Das zentrale Resultat unserer Analyse lautet, dass der Unterschied im Empfängerkreis letztlich die Ursache dafür darstellt, dass Kombilohnkonzepte finanzierbar sind und positive Beschäftigungswirkungen entfalten können, während Grundeinkommenskonzepte entweder nicht finanzierbar sind, oder, wegen der erforderlichen Gegenfinanzierung, negative Beschäftigungswirkungen entfalten. -- The economic literature often argues that basic income schemes and low wage subsidies to employees are just special cases of a negative income tax. In this debate, it is ignored that these concepts target different population subgroups. This paper investigates the different target groups and the particular implications on government budget and labour supply. A basic income scheme doubles the number of net benefit receiving persons whereas a more targeted wage subsidy increases this number by only 10%. These differences explain why wage subsidy programs can be financed and evoke positive labour supply effects, while basic income schemes either lead to high costs or to negative employment effects.

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

File URL: http://econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/23271/1/FiFo-CPE-DP_07-09.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by University of Cologne, CPE - Cologne Center for Public Economics in its series FiFo-CPE Discussion Papers - Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge with number 07-9.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:uoccpe:7039

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.fifo-koeln.de/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (ZBW - German National Library for Economics).

Related research
Keywords: Grundeinkommen; Bürgergeld; Kombilohn; Empfängerkreis; Basic income; wage subsidy; benefit recipients;

Find related papers by JEL classification:
I38 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare and Poverty - - - Government Programs; Provision and Effects of Welfare Programs
H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The yearly budget of IDEAS is exactly $0: it relies entirely on volunteer work.

This page was last updated on 2009-12-2.


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.