IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jpbect/v15y2013i4p547-579.html

Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium

Author

Listed:
  • CHARLES BLACKORBY
  • SUSHAMA MURTY

Abstract

In an earlier paper [Blackorby and Murty; 2007] we showed that if a monopoly sector is imbedded in a general equilibrium framework and profits are taxed at one hundred percent, then unit (specific) taxation and ad valorem taxation are welfare-wise equivalent. In this paper, we consider private ownership of the monopoly sector. Given technical difficulties in making a direct general equilibrium comparison of unit and ad valorem taxation, we adopt a technique due to Guesnerie [1980] and Quinzii [1992] in a somewhat different context of increasing returns and non-convex economies to show that neither ad valorem taxation nor unit taxation Pareto dominates the other; although, generally, the two are not welfare-wise equivalent.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Blackorby & Sushama Murty, 2013. "Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 547-579, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jpbect:v:15:y:2013:i:4:p:547-579
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/jpet.2013.15.issue-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sophia Delipalla, 2009. "Commodity Tax Structure And Informal Activity," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(3), pages 283-294, July.
    2. Gagnie Pascal Yebarth, 2025. "On Taxation Policy in Strategic Bilateral Exchange: A review," EconomiX Working Papers 2025-34, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    3. Hiroshi Aiura & Hikaru Ogawa, 2019. "Indirect taxes in a cross-border shopping model: a monopolistic competition approach," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 128(2), pages 147-175, October.
    4. Kuang-Cheng Andy Wang & Ping-Yao Chou & Wen-Jung Liang, 2022. "Commodity taxes and rent extraction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 285-297, April.
    5. de Rus, Ginés & Socorro, M. Pilar, 2022. "Subsidies in air transport markets: The economic consequences of choosing the wrong mechanism," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    6. Valido, Jorge & Pilar Socorro, M. & Hernández, Aday & Betancor, Ofelia, 2014. "Air transport subsidies for resident passengers when carriers have market power," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 388-399.
    7. Christos Kotsogiannis & Konstantinos Serfes, 2014. "The Comparison of ad Valorem and Specific Taxation under Uncertainty," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 16(1), pages 48-68, February.
    8. Olena SOKOLOVSKA & Dmytro SOKOLOVSKYI, 2016. "Modeling Of Consumption Taxes For Different Market Framework: The Case Of Ukraine," ECONOMIC COMPUTATION AND ECONOMIC CYBERNETICS STUDIES AND RESEARCH, Faculty of Economic Cybernetics, Statistics and Informatics, vol. 50(4), pages 75-92.
    9. Kazuki Hiraga, 2019. "Unit versus ad valorem tax comparisons in a simple New Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 9(4), pages 459-466, December.
    10. Plewka, Jörg, 2007. "Fiscal Discrimination Between Consumer Groups: Tax Burden Distribution Under Price Discrimination," Ruhr Economic Papers 19, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    11. McCalman, Phillip, 2023. "Robust trade policy to offset foreign market power," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    12. Jörg Plewka, 2007. "Fiscal Discrimination Between Consumer Groups: Tax Burden Distribution Under Price Discrimination," Ruhr Economic Papers 0019, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    13. Hong Hwang & Chao-Cheng Mai & Ya-Po Yang, 2015. "Specific vs Ad Valorem Strategic Export Subsidies with Taxation Distortion," Review of Development Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(4), pages 820-828, November.
    14. Laszlo Goerke, 2011. "Commodity tax structure under uncertainty in a perfectly competitive market," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 103(3), pages 203-219, July.
    15. Shiou-Yen Chu & Tsaur-Chin Wu, 2023. "Ad valorem versus unit taxes on capital in a dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(6), pages 1435-1456, December.
    16. Henrik Vetter, 2017. "Commodity taxes and welfare under endogenous market conduct," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 137-154, October.
    17. Kojun Hamada & Takao Ohkawa & Makoto Okamura, 2022. "Optimal taxation in a free‐entry Cournot oligopoly: The average cost function approach," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(2), pages 1166-1192, May.
    18. Charles Blackorby & Sushama Murty, 2013. "Unit Versus Ad Valorem Taxes: The Private Ownership of Monopoly in General Equilibrium," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 15(4), pages 547-579, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation

    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:bla:jpbect:v:15:y:2013:i:4:p:547-579. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/apettea.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.