IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/pubeco/v97y2013icp9-17.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reconciling alternative views about the appropriate social discount rate

Author

Listed:
  • Burgess, David F.

Abstract

This paper shows that, in an economy with an exogenous rate of return and a given capital income tax distortion, and with lump sum taxes as the marginal tax instrument, the SOC and MCF criteria both correctly identify all worthwhile projects if the criteria are properly applied. The equivalence between the SOC and MCF criteria continues to hold i) if distortionary taxes are used to balance the budget, and ii) if the rate of return to capital is endogenous. Apparent differences between the SOC and MCF criteria arise from different definitions of a project's indirect revenue effect. Neither criterion has an implementation advantage because the information requirements for each are identical.

Suggested Citation

  • Burgess, David F., 2013. "Reconciling alternative views about the appropriate social discount rate," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 9-17.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:pubeco:v:97:y:2013:i:c:p:9-17
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2012.08.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272712000965
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    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. Sandmo, Agnar & Dreze, Jacques H, 1971. "Discount Rates for Public Investment in Closed and Open Economies," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 38(152), pages 395-412, November.
    2. Sjaastad, Larry A & Wisecarver, Daniel L, 1977. "The Social Cost of Public Finance," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(3), pages 513-547, June.
    3. Wildasin, David E, 1984. "On Public Good Provision with Distortionary Taxation," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 22(2), pages 227-243, April.
    4. David F. Burgess, 1988. "Complementarity and the Discount Rate for Public Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 527-541.
    5. Bradford, David F, 1975. "Constraints on Government Investment Opportunities and the Choice of Discount Rate," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 887-899, December.
    6. Charles L. Ballard & Don Fullerton, 1992. "Distortionary Taxes and the Provision of Public Goods," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 117-131, Summer.
    7. Tatsuo Hatta, 1977. "A Theory of Piecemeal Policy Recommendations," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 44(1), pages 1-21.
    8. Peter Diamond, 1968. "The Opportunity Costs of Public Investment: Comment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 82(4), pages 682-688.
    9. Liu, Liqun, 2003. "A marginal cost of funds approach to multi-period public project evaluation: implications for the social discount rate," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(7-8), pages 1707-1718, August.
    10. Chris Jones, 2005. "Why the Marginal Social Cost of Funds is not the Shadow Value of Government Revenue," ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics 2005-449, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics.
    11. Bev Dahlby, 2008. "The Marginal Cost of Public Funds: Theory and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262042509, January.
    12. Stephen A. Marglin, 1963. "The Opportunity Costs of Public Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 77(2), pages 274-289.
    13. Jones, Chris, 2005. "Applied Welfare Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199281978.
    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. David F. Burgess & Richard O. Zerbe, 2013. "Appropriate discounting for benefit–cost analysis," Chapters,in: Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 7, pages 247-263 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Glenn P. Jenkins & Armin Zeinali, 2014. "Cost-Effective Infrastructure Choices In Education: Location, Build Or Repair," Development Discussion Papers 2013-08, JDI Executive Programs.
    3. Frits Bos & Thomas van der Pol & Gerbert Romijn, 2018. "Should CBA’s include a correction for the marginal excess burden of taxation?," CPB Discussion Paper 370, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    4. Burgess, David F. & Zerbe, Richard O., 2013. "The most appropriate discount rate," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(03), pages 391-400, December.
    5. Moore, Mark A. & Boardman, Anthony E. & Vining, Aidan R., 2013. "The choice of the social discount rate and the opportunity cost of public funds," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(03), pages 401-409, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Social discount rate; Project evaluation;

    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:pubeco:v:97:y:2013:i:c:p:9-17. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505578 .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.