IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/poleco/v87y2025ics0176268025000242.html

Fiscal policy preferences: Evidence from conjoint experiments in Poland

Author

Listed:
  • Bartak, Jakub
  • Jabłoński, Łukasz
  • Obłąkowska, Katarzyna

Abstract

The paper examines public preferences for fiscal policy in Poland using two complementary Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint (ACBC) experiments on a representative sample of Polish adults. The first experiment – the expenditure conjoint – tests whether and how much respondents are willing to pay in higher taxes to secure additional public services in several crucial domains. The second experiment – the tax conjoint – follows up on these findings by asking how citizens would prefer to pay, testing support for alternative tax solutions. Each proposed tax package is budget neutral, but varies in how burdens are distributed, allowing for an assessment of progressive versus regressive preferences. The study finds support for increased government spending in key policy areas (defense, health, education, and pensions), accompanied by a willingness to finance these expansions through higher taxes. Despite the conventional view of Poland as tax-averse, many respondents appear willing to accept higher taxes if they perceive tangible returns. The results show also a clear preference for tax solutions that shift the burden toward better-off individuals and enhance tax progression. Overall, these findings suggest that, even in tax-skeptical contexts, public preferences can align in favor of higher taxes when benefits are clearly communicated and fairness concerns are addressed.

Suggested Citation

  • Bartak, Jakub & Jabłoński, Łukasz & Obłąkowska, Katarzyna, 2025. "Fiscal policy preferences: Evidence from conjoint experiments in Poland," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:poleco:v:87:y:2025:i:c:s0176268025000242
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2025.102664
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0176268025000242
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2025.102664?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alesina, Alberto & La Ferrara, Eliana, 2005. "Preferences for redistribution in the land of opportunities," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 897-931, June.
    2. Li, Zili & Washington, Simon P. & Zheng, Zuduo & Prato, Carlo G., 2023. "A Bayesian hierarchical approach to the joint modelling of Revealed and stated choices," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Lewandowski, Daniel & Kurowicka, Dorota & Joe, Harry, 2009. "Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 100(9), pages 1989-2001, October.
    4. Verena Sablotny-Wackershauser & Marcel Lichters & Daniel Guhl & Paul Bengart & Bodo Vogt, 2024. "Crossing incentive alignment and adaptive designs in choice-based conjoint: A fruitful endeavor," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 52(3), pages 610-633, May.
    5. Marek Skawiński & Paweł Chrostek & Paweł Bukowski & Filip Novokmet, 2023. "Income inequality in the 21st century Poland," MF Working Papers 40, Ministry of Finance in Poland.
    6. Adi Brender & Allan Drazen, 2008. "How Do Budget Deficits and Economic Growth Affect Reelection Prospects? Evidence from a Large Panel of Countries," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2203-2220, December.
    7. Sawulski, Jakub & Szewczyk, Nikodem & Rafalska, Kinga & Smółko, Maciej, 2023. "Business power against redistribution: The case of watered-down tax reform in Poland," Business and Politics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 133-151, June.
    8. Bremer, Björn & Bürgisser, Reto, 2023. "Public opinion on welfare state recalibration in times of austerity: evidence from survey experiments," Political Science Research and Methods, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(1), pages 34-52, January.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, Enero-Abr.
    10. Paweł Bukowski & Filip Novokmet, 2021. "Between communism and capitalism: long-term inequality in Poland, 1892–2015," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 187-239, June.
    11. Bansak, Kirk & Bechtel, Michael M. & Margalit, Yotam, 2021. "Why Austerity? The Mass Politics of a Contested Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(2), pages 486-505, May.
    12. Sam Peltzman, 1992. "Voters as Fiscal Conservatives," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 107(2), pages 327-361.
    13. Bojar, Abel & Bremer, Björn & Kriesi, Hanspeter & Wang, Chendi, 2022. "The Effect of Austerity Packages on Government Popularity During the Great Recession," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 52(1), pages 181-199, January.
    14. Beetsma, Roel & Burgoon, Brian & Nicoli, Francesco, 2023. "Is european attachment sufficiently strong to support an EU fiscal capacity: Evidence from a conjoint experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Côté, Elizabeth & Pons-Seres de Brauwer, Cristian, 2023. "Preferences of homeowners for heat-pump leasing: Evidence from a choice experiment in France, Germany, and Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    16. Sarah Berens & Margarita Gelepithis, 2021. "What do people want? Explaining voter tax preferences," Chapters, in: Lukas Hakelberg & Laura Seelkopf (ed.), Handbook on the Politics of Taxation, chapter 24, pages 374-387, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Kris‐Stella Trump, 2023. "Income inequality is unrelated to perceived inequality and support for redistribution," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 104(2), pages 180-188, March.
    18. Thomas Piketty, 1995. "Social Mobility and Redistributive Politics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 551-584.
    19. Begoña Cabeza;, 2023. "Social preferences, support for redistribution, and attitudes towards vulnerable groups," Working Papers 2308, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    20. Matias Giaccobasso & Brad Nathan & Ricardo Perez-Truglia & Alejandro Zentner, 2025. "Where Do My Tax Dollars Go? Tax Morale Effects of Perceived Government Spending," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 223-259, October.
    21. Akinc, Deniz & Vandebroek, Martina, 2018. "Bayesian estimation of mixed logit models: Selecting an appropriate prior for the covariance matrix," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 133-151.
    22. Alesina, Alberto & Angeletos, George-Marios, 2005. "Corruption, inequality, and fairness," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 1227-1244, October.
    23. Wysocki, Maciej & Wojcik, Cezary & Freytag, Andreas, 2024. "Populists and fiscal policy: The case of Poland," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    24. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    25. Erik Schokkaert & Benoît Tarroux, 2021. "Empirical research on ethical preferences: how popular is prioritarianism?," Working Papers 2104, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Etienne (GATE Lyon St-Etienne), Université de Lyon.
    26. Bremer, Björn & Busemeyer, Marius R., 2022. "Fiscal policy preferences, trade-offs, and support for social investment," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(4), pages 684-704, December.
    27. Jesús Ferreiro & M. Teresa García-del-Valle & Carmen Gómez, 2010. "Social preferences and fiscal policies: an analysis of the composition of public expenditures in the European Union," Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(3), pages 347-370, April.
    28. Charles Cunningham & Ken Deal & Yvonne Chen, 2010. "Adaptive Choice-Based Conjoint Analysis," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 3(4), pages 257-273, December.
    29. Sawulski, Jakub & Szewczyk, Nikodem & Kiełczewska, Aneta, 2024. "Information effects in public spending preferences: Evidence from survey experiment in Poland," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    30. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    31. Alberto Alesina & Paola Giuliano, 2010. "The power of the family," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 93-125, June.
    32. Hübscher, Evelyne & Sattler, Thomas & Wagner, Markus, 2021. "Voter Responses to Fiscal Austerity," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 1751-1760, October.
    33. Brzezinski, Michal & Myck, Michał & Najsztub, Mateusz, 2022. "Sharing the gains of transition: Evaluating changes in income inequality and redistribution in Poland using combined survey and tax return data," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    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. Elisa Stumpf & Silke Uebelmesser, 2025. "Preferences for Wealth Redistribution: The Role of Social Background and Merit," Jena Economics Research Papers 2025-008, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.

    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. Alpino, Matteo & Asatryan, Zareh & Blesse, Sebastian & Wehrhöfer, Nils, 2022. "Austerity and distributional policy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 112-127.
    2. repec:osf:socarx:wxr67_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Zakharov, Alexei, 2024. "Overestimation of social security payments reduces preferences for spending on social policy," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    4. Steffen Jahn & Daniel Guhl & Ainslee Erhard, 2024. "Substitution Patterns and Price Response for Plant-Based Meat Alternatives," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 509, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    5. Bonnet, Julien & Ciani, Emanuele & Grimalda, Gianluca & Murtin, Fabrice & Pipke, David, 2025. "What explains preferences for redistribution? Evidence from an international survey," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    6. DiGiuseppe, Matthew & Del Ponte, Alessandro, 2023. "Bottom-Up Sovereign Debt Preferences," SocArXiv wxr67, Center for Open Science.
    7. Ardanaz, Martín & Hübscher, Evelyne & Keefer, Philip & Sattler, Thomas, 2024. "Voter Responses to Fiscal Crisis: New Evidence on Preferences for Fiscal Adjustment in Emerging Markets," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 13473, Inter-American Development Bank.
    8. Bernd Hayo & Florian Neumeier, 2017. "Public Attitudes toward Fiscal Consolidation: Evidence from a Representative German Population Survey," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(1), pages 42-69, February.
    9. Monica Bozzano & Simona Scabrosetti, 2024. "What Drives Gender Gaps in Preferences for Redistribution? New Evidence from the European Social Survey," Working papers 118, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    10. Di Tella, Rafael & Galiani, Sebastian & Schargrodsky, Ernesto, 2012. "Reality versus propaganda in the formation of beliefs about privatization," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 553-567.
    11. Vladimir Gimpelson & Daniel Treisman, 2018. "Misperceiving inequality," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 27-54, March.
    12. Welde, Andualem Assefa, 2025. "Corruption, Tax Burden, and Demand for Redistribution in African Countries," EconStor Preprints 320555, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    13. Massimo Bordignon & Nicolò Gatti & Gilberto Turati, 2025. "Are Citizens Willing to Reduce Public Debt? Beliefs, Information and Policy Preferences," CESifo Working Paper Series 12013, CESifo.
    14. Erzo F. P. Luttmer & Monica Singhal, 2011. "Culture, Context, and the Taste for Redistribution," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 3(1), pages 157-179, February.
    15. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    16. Günther, Isabel & Martorano, Bruno, 2025. "Inequality, social mobility and redistributive preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    17. Di Tella, Rafael & Dubra, Juan, 2008. "Crime and punishment in the "American Dream"," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(7), pages 1564-1584, July.
    18. Strehl-Pessina, Matías & Bergolo, Marcelo & Leites, Martin, 2025. "Beyond income: Understanding preferences for redistribution among the top 1%," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    19. Joan Costa-Font & Frank Cowell, 2015. "Social Identity And Redistributive Preferences: A Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 357-374, April.
    20. Gärtner, Manja & Mollerstrom, Johanna & Seim, David, 2017. "Individual risk preferences and the demand for redistribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 49-55.
    21. Bremer, Björn & Bürgisser, Reto, 2022. "Lower Taxes At All Costs? Evidence from a Survey Experiment in Four European Countries," SocArXiv e6ds9, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:poleco:v:87:y:2025:i:c:s0176268025000242. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505544 .

    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.