IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Means-Tested versus Universal Transfers: Alternative Models and Value Judgements

  • Creedy, John

This paper illustrates the use of different criteria used to evaluate alternative tax and transfer systems. Means-tested and universal transfer systems are compared, using numerical examples involving a small number of individuals, in order to highlight the precise effects on incomes. The implications of fixed incomes and of endogenous incomes, using CES utility functions, are examined. Comparisons between tax systems involve fundamental value judgements concerning inequality and poverty, and no tax structure can be regarded as unambiguously superior to another. Judgements depend on the degree of inequality aversion and attitudes poverty. However, in cases where means-testing is preferred, the desired tax or taper rate applying to benefits is substantially less than 100 percent. Copyright 1998 by Blackwell Publishers Ltd and The Victoria University of Manchester

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Article provided by University of Manchester in its journal The Manchester School of Economic & Social Studies.

Volume (Year): 66 (1998)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
Pages: 100-117

in new window

Handle: RePEc:bla:manch2:v:66:y:1998:i:1:p:100-117
Contact details of provider: Postal: Manchester M13 9PL
Phone: (0)161 275 4868
Fax: (0)161 275 4812
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:manch2:v:66:y:1998:i:1:p:100-117. 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)

or (Christopher F. Baum)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.