IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The benefits and problems of linking micro and macromodels - Evidence from a flat tax analysis

Microsimulation (MS) and Computable General Equilibrium models (CGE) have both been widely used in policy analysis. Their combination allows the utilisation of the advantages of both types. The aim of this paper is to describe the state-of-the-art in simulation analysis and to illustrate the benefits and problems of linking micro and macro models by analysing flat tax reform proposals for Germany. Taking feedback effects into account has important implications for the evaluation of tax reforms. The analysis shows that a personal income flat tax can indeed overcome the fundamental equity efficiency trade-off while simultaneously increasing the tax revenue. However, this result does not hold for a flat tax combining a personal income flat tax with a corporate cash flow flat tax, even when allowing for an expost loss in revenue, as the top of the distribution still gains the most.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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://www.ucema.edu.ar/publicaciones/download/volume12/peichl.pdf
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 under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Universidad del CEMA in its journal Journal of Applied Economics.

Volume (Year): XII (2009)
Issue (Month): (November)
Pages: 301-329

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:cem:jaecon:v:12:y:2009:n:2:p:301-329
Contact details of provider: Postal: Av. Córdoba 374, (C1054AAP) Capital Federal
Phone: (5411) 6314-3000
Fax: (5411) 4314-1654
Web page: http://www.cema.edu.ar/publicaciones/jae.html
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Stefan Boeters & Michael Feil & Nicole Gürtzgen, 2005. "Discrete Working Time Choice in an Applied General Equilibrium Model," Computational Economics, Society for Computational Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 1-29, November.
  2. Michael Keen & Yitae Kim & Ricardo Varsano, 2008. "The “flat tax(es)”: principles and experience," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer, vol. 15(6), pages 712-751, December.
  3. Luc Savard, 2003. "Poverty and Income Distribution in a CGE-Household Micro-Simulation Model: Top-Down/Bottom Up Approach," Cahiers de recherche 0343, CIRPEE.
  4. Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Jorge Martinez-Vazquez & Klara Sabirianova Peter, 2009. "Myth and Reality of Flat Tax Reform: Micro Estimates of Tax Evasion Response and Welfare Effects in Russia," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 117(3), pages 504-554, 06.
  5. Arthur van Soest, 1995. "Structural Models of Family Labor Supply: A Discrete Choice Approach," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30(1), pages 63-88.
  6. Robert S. Chirinko & Steven M. Fazzari & Andrew P. Meyer, 2004. "That Elusive Elasticity: A Long-Panel Approach to Estimating the Capital-Labor Substitution Elasticity," CESifo Working Paper Series 1240, CESifo Group Munich.
  7. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
  8. Paulus, Alari & Peichl, Andreas, 2008. "Effects of Flat Tax Reforms in Western Europe on Income Distribution and Work Incentives," IZA Discussion Papers 3721, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  9. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a Tool for Evaluating Redistribution Policies," Working Papers 20, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
  10. Andreas Peichl & Thilo Schaefer, 2009. "FiFoSiM - an integrated tax benefit microsimulation and CGE model for Germany," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 2(1), pages 1-15.
  11. Heer, Burkhard & Trede, Mark, 2003. "Efficiency and distribution effects of a revenue-neutral income tax reform," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 87-107, March.
  12. Blundell, Richard & Macurdy, Thomas, 1999. "Labor supply: A review of alternative approaches," Handbook of Labor Economics, in: O. Ashenfelter & D. Card (ed.), Handbook of Labor Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 27, pages 1559-1695 Elsevier.
  13. Ventura, Gustavo, 1999. "Flat tax reform: A quantitative exploration," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 1425-1458, September.
  14. Bohringer, Christoph & Boeters, Stefan & Feil, Michael, 2005. "Taxation and unemployment: an applied general equilibrium approach," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 81-108, January.
  15. Christian Schmidt & Thomas Straubhaar, 1996. "Bevölkerungsentwicklung und Wirtschaftswachstum. Eine Simulationsanalyse für die Schweiz," Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics (SJES), Swiss Society of Economics and Statistics (SSES), vol. 132(III), pages 395-414, September.
  16. Ugo Colombino & Steinar Strøm & Rolf Aaberge, 2000. "Labor supply responses and welfare effects from replacing current tax rules by a flat tax: Empirical evidence from Italy, Norway and Sweden," Journal of Population Economics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 595-621.
  17. Steven P. Cassou & Kevin J. Lansing, 2004. "Growth Effects of Shifting from a Graduated-rate Tax System to a Flat Tax," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(2), pages 194-213, April.
  18. Dunbar, Amy & Pogue, Thomas F., 1998. "Estimating Flat Tax Incidence and Yield: A Sensitivity Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 2), pages 303-24, June.
  19. Davies, James B., 2004. "Microsimulation, CGE and Macro Modelling for Transition and Developing Economies," Working Paper Series UNU-WIDER Research Paper , World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
  20. Rutherford, Thomas F. & Böhringer, Christoph, 2006. "Combining Top-Down and Bottom-up in Energy Policy Analysis: A Decomposition Approach," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-07, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  21. Ballard, Charles L. & Fullerton, Don & Shoven, John B. & Whalley, John, 2009. "A General Equilibrium Model for Tax Policy Evaluation," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 0, number 9780226036335, September.
  22. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521027922 is not listed on IDEAS
  23. Arntz, Melanie & Boeters, Stefan & Gürtzgen, Nicole & Schubert, Stefanie, 2006. "Analysing welfare reform in a microsimulation-AGE model: the value of disaggregation," ZEW Discussion Papers 06-76, ZEW - Zentrum für Europäische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.
  24. Kehoe, Timothy J & Prescott, Edward C, 1995. "Introduction to the Symposium: The Discipline of Applied General Equilibrium," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-11, June.
  25. David Altig, 2001. "Simulating Fundamental Tax Reform in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 574-595, June.
  26. Rutherford, Thomas & Tarr, David & Shepotylo, Oleksandr, 2005. "Poverty effects of Russia's WTO accession : modeling"real"households and endogenous productivity effects," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3473, The World Bank.
  27. Verboven, Frank, 1996. "The nested logit model and representative consumer theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 57-63, January.
  28. Stokey, Nancy L & Rebelo, Sergio, 1995. "Growth Effects of Flat-Rate Taxes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(3), pages 519-50, June.
  29. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
  30. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521233293 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:

  1. SOEP based publications

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cem:jaecon:v:12:y:2009:n:2:p:301-329. 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: (Valeria Dowding)

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.