IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v213y2022ics0047272722001165.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The psychology of taxing capital income: Evidence from a survey experiment on the realization rule

Author

Listed:
  • Liscow, Zachary
  • Fox, Edward

Abstract

We conduct the first survey experiment to understand public attitudes about the realization rule for capital gains. This rule requires that assets usually must be sold before gains on them are taxed and thus makes taxing capital income much harder. We have three main findings. First, respondents strongly prefer to wait to tax gains on stocks until sale: 75% to 25%. But the flip side is that there is surprisingly strong support for taxing gains on assets at sale or transfer, including at death, in areas where current law never taxes those gains. Second, these stated views change only modestly when randomized participants observe a policy debate composed of videos explaining both the pros and cons of taxing before sale, though the pro and con treatments have large effects individually. And, third, among many possible explanations of these attitudes, we find particular evidence for three: mental accounting; status quo effects; and a desire to tax consumption, not income.

Suggested Citation

  • Liscow, Zachary & Fox, Edward, 2022. "The psychology of taxing capital income: Evidence from a survey experiment on the realization rule," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:213:y:2022:i:c:s0047272722001165
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104714
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272722001165
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2022.104714?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Slemrod, Joel, 2006. "The Role of Misconceptions in Support for Regressive Tax Reform," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 59(1), pages 57-75, March.
    2. Zachary Liscow & Abigail Pershing, 2022. "Why Is So Much Redistribution In-Kind and Not in Cash? Evidence from a Survey Experiment," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 75(2), pages 313-354.
    3. de Bartolome, Charles A. M., 1995. "Which tax rate do people use: Average or marginal?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 79-96, January.
    4. Michael R. Ransom & Gordon B. Dahl, 1999. "Does Where You Stand Depend on Where You Sit? Tithing Donations and Self-Serving Beliefs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(4), pages 703-727, September.
    5. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    6. Ilyana Kuziemko & Michael I. Norton & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2015. "How Elastic Are Preferences for Redistribution? Evidence from Randomized Survey Experiments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1478-1508, April.
    7. Mark Grinblatt & Matti Keloharju, 2001. "What Makes Investors Trade?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(2), pages 589-616, April.
    8. Alberto Alesina & Stefanie Stantcheva & Edoardo Teso, 2018. "Intergenerational Mobility and Preferences for Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(2), pages 521-554, February.
    9. Terrance Odean, 1998. "Are Investors Reluctant to Realize Their Losses?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(5), pages 1775-1798, October.
    10. Mark Grinblatt & Matti Keloharju, 2000. "What Makes Investors Trade?," Yale School of Management Working Papers ysm146, Yale School of Management, revised 01 Nov 2001.
    11. Nicholas Barberis & Wei Xiong, 2009. "What Drives the Disposition Effect? An Analysis of a Long‐Standing Preference‐Based Explanation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(2), pages 751-784, April.
    12. Locke, Peter R. & Mann, Steven C., 2005. "Professional trader discipline and trade disposition," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 401-444, May.
    13. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    14. Sheffrin,Steven M., 2013. "Tax Fairness and Folk Justice," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521195621, January.
    15. Marco Di Maggio & Amir Kermani & Kaveh Majlesi, 2020. "Stock Market Returns and Consumption," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(6), pages 3175-3219, December.
    16. Malcolm Baker & Stefan Nagel & Jeffrey Wurgler, 2007. "The Effect of Dividends on Consumption," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 38(1), pages 231-292.
    17. Weinzierl, Matthew, 2017. "Popular acceptance of inequality due to innate brute luck and support for classical benefit-based taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 54-63.
    18. Gordon B. Dahl, 2002. "The 10% Flat Tax: Tithing and the Definition of Income," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 40(1), pages 120-137, January.
    19. Fisman, Raymond & Gladstone, Keith & Kuziemko, Ilyana & Naidu, Suresh, 2020. "Do Americans want to tax wealth? Evidence from online surveys," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. 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.
    21. Benjamin Loos & Steffen Meyer & Michaela Pagel, 2020. "The Consumption Effects of the Disposition to Sell Winners and Hold Losers," NBER Working Papers 26668, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Samuel M. Hartzmark & David H. Solomon, 2019. "The Dividend Disconnect," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(5), pages 2153-2199, October.
    2. Karolis Liaudinskas, 2022. "Human vs. Machine: Disposition Effect among Algorithmic and Human Day Traders," Working Paper 2022/6, Norges Bank.
    3. Li, Yan & Yang, Liyan, 2013. "Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 715-739.
    4. von Beschwitz, Bastian & Massa, Massimo, 2020. "Biased short: Short sellers' disposition effect and limits to arbitrage," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    5. Sarmiento, Julio & Rendón, Jairo & Sandoval, Juan S. & Cayon, Edgardo, 2019. "The disposition effect and the relevance of the reference period: Evidence among sophisticated investors," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    6. Dorn, Daniel & Strobl, Günter, 2023. "Rational disposition effects: Theory and evidence," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    7. Vassilis A. Efthymiou & George N. Leledakis, 2014. "The price impact of the disposition effect on the ex-dividend day of NYSE and AMEX common stocks," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 711-724, April.
    8. Spencer Bastani & Daniel Waldenström, 2021. "Perceptions of Inherited Wealth and the Support for Inheritance Taxation," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 532-569, April.
    9. Weber, Martin & Welfens, Frank, 2007. "The Repurchase Behavior of Individual Investors: An Experimental Investigation," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-44, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    10. Massa, Massimo & von Beschwitz, Bastian, 2015. "Biased Shorts: Stock Market Implications of Short Sellers? Disposition Effect," CEPR Discussion Papers 10535, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Ben-David, Itzhak & Hirshleifer, David, 2011. "Beyond the Disposition Effect: Do Investors Really Like Gains More Than Losses?," Working Paper Series 2011-13, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    12. Massimo Massa & Bastian von Beschwitz, 2015. "Biased Shorts: Short sellers’ Disposition Effect and Limits to Arbitrage," International Finance Discussion Papers 1147, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    13. Weber, Martin & Welfens, Frank, 2007. "An individual level analysis of the disposition effect : empirical and experimental evidence," Papers 07-45, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    14. Brettschneider, Julia & Burro, Giovanni & Henderson, Vicky, 2021. "Wide framing disposition effect: An empirical study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 330-347.
    15. Choi, Darwin, 2019. "Disposition sales and stock market liquidity," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 19-36.
    16. Chirvi, Malte & Schneider, Cornelius, 2020. "Preferences for wealth taxation: Design, framing and the role of partisanship," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 260, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2015. "Lottery-related anomalies: the role of reference-dependent preferences," Globalization Institute Working Papers 259, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    18. Fochmann, Martin & Heinemann-Heile, Vanessa & Huber, Hans-Peter & Maiterth, Ralf & Sureth, Caren, 2022. "Firms' tax rate misperception: Measurement, drivers, and distortionary effects," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 275, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    19. Jin, Miao & Liu, Yu-Jane & Meng, Juanjuan, 2019. "Fat-finger event and risk-taking behavior," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 126-143.
    20. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.

    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:pubeco:v:213:y:2022:i:c:s0047272722001165. 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/505578 .

    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.