IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ijm/journl/v2y2009i1p32-48.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Income tax statistics analysis: A comparison of microsimulation versus group simulation

Author

Listed:
  • Heiko Müller

    (Ruhr-University of Bochum, Faculty of Economics, Universitätsstr. 150, 44801 Bochum, Germany, and arqus, Quantitative Tax Research)

  • Caren Sureth

    (University of Paderborn, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Warburger Str. 100, 33098)

Abstract

Microsimulation based on income tax statistics may be useful in tax reform discussions. Unfortunately, access to appropriate data is still rather restricted and expensive for ad-hoc analyses, and individual data is often even not available at all. In this paper we take Germany and its data situation as a proxy for many countries? restrictions in terms of tax data availability. Analyzing how much reliability and robustness of results we lose if we employ group simulation instead of microsimulation, we compare both methods. Investigating tax scale effects by the group model leads to very good results. Determining the financial effects of modified tax bases, the deviation from the microsimulation results increases, especially if tax base cuts vary between taxpayers. In addition, we take account of the class of taxpayers with a negative taxable income. Neglecting this class we identify a systematic underestimation of the financial consequences of a modified tax base with the group model assuming a progressive tax scale. If the group simulation data is not arranged according to the taxable income, but rather according to the total amount of income, we also find a tendency towards higher deviations from the microsimulation results. Quantifying the tax revenue effects of alternative tax settings the group simulation model represents a good compromise between the desire to capture the complex reality and the achievable accuracy when facing limited resources and data. Furthermore, for those cases in which group simulation is the appropriate tool, we provide a very simple method to interpolate a suitable income distribution and thereby the tax distribution within the classes. This interpolation makes future estimates of tax revenues a lot easier. We conclude that, although microsimulation in general is the superior approach, a group simulation model remains of interest, especially for analyses of rather old data and cross-country analyses, when sufficiently detailed data for micro analyses is missing.

Suggested Citation

  • Heiko Müller & Caren Sureth, 2009. "Income tax statistics analysis: A comparison of microsimulation versus group simulation," International Journal of Microsimulation, International Microsimulation Association, vol. 2(1), pages 32-48.
    • Handle: RePEc:ijm:journl:v:2:y:2009:i:1:p:32-48
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ima.natsem.canberra.edu.au/IJM/V2_1/IJM_2_1_3.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2007. "How Progressive is the U.S. Federal Tax System? A Historical and International Perspective," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(1), pages 3-24, Winter.
    2. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Sutherland, Holly, 1999. "Accounting for the Family in European Income Tax Systems," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(5), pages 565-598, September.
    3. Austan Goolsbee, 2000. "What Happens When You Tax the Rich? Evidence from Executive Compensation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(2), pages 352-378, April.
    4. Morrisson, Christian, 2000. "Historical perspectives on income distribution: The case of Europe," Handbook of Income Distribution, in: A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), Handbook of Income Distribution, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 217-260, Elsevier.
    5. Kakwani, Nanok C, 1977. "Measurement of Tax Progressivity: An International Comparison," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 87(345), pages 71-80, March.
    6. Wagstaff, Adam & van Doorslaer, Eddy & van der Burg, Hattem & Calonge, Samuel & Christiansen, Terkel & Citoni, Guido & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Gerfin, Michael & Gross, Lorna & Hakinnen, Unto, 1999. "Redistributive effect, progressivity and differential tax treatment: Personal income taxes in twelve OECD countries," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 73-98, April.
    7. Gerhard Wagenhals, 2001. "Incentive and Redistribution Effects of the German Tax Reform 2000," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(3), pages 316-332, May.
    8. Emmanuel Saez & Michael R. Veall, 2003. "The Evolution of High Incomes in Canada, 1920-2000," Quantitative Studies in Economics and Population Research Reports 382, McMaster University.
    9. Anthony Atkinson & Thomas Piketty, 2007. "Top incomes over the twentieth century: A contrast between continental european and english-speaking countries," Post-Print halshs-00754859, HAL.
    10. Adam Wagstaff & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2001. "What Makes the Personal Income Tax Progressive? A Comparative Analysis for Fifteen OECD Countries," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 8(3), pages 299-316, May.
    11. Peter Haan & Viktor Steiner, 2005. "Distributional Effects of the German Tax Reform 2000 - A Behavioral Microsimulation Analysis," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 125(1), pages 39-49.
    12. A.B. Atkinson & F. Bourguignon (ed.), 2000. "Handbook of Income Distribution," Handbook of Income Distribution, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    13. Christhart Bork & Hans-Georg Petersen, 1999. "Revenue and Distributional Effects of the Current Tax Reform Proposals in Germany - An Evaluation by Microsimulation," Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 26, Universität Potsdam, Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    14. Joachim Merz, 2000. "The Distribution of Income of Self-employed, Entrepreneurs and Professions as Revealed from Micro Income Tax Statistics in Germany," FFB-Discussionpaper 27, Research Institute on Professions (Forschungsinstitut Freie Berufe (FFB)), LEUPHANA University Lüneburg.
    15. Gerhard Wagenhals, 2004. "Tax-benefit microsimulation models for Germany: A Survey," Diskussionspapiere aus dem Institut für Volkswirtschaftslehre der Universität Hohenheim 235/2004, Department of Economics, University of Hohenheim, Germany.
    16. Sutherland, H., 1995. "Static Microsimulation Models in Europe: A Survey," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 9523, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    17. Berglas, Eitan, 1971. "Income Tax and the Distribution of Income: An International Comparison," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 26(4), pages 532-545.
    18. Callan, Tim & Sutherland, Holly, 1997. "The impact of comparable policies in European countries: Microsimulation approaches," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 627-633, April.
    19. Thomas Piketty, 2003. "Income Inequality in France, 1901-1998," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(5), pages 1004-1042, October.
    20. Zandvakili, Sourushe, 1994. "Income Distribution and Redistribution through Taxation: An International Comparison," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 473-491.
    21. Atkinson, A. B. & Piketty, Thomas (ed.), 2007. "Top Incomes Over the Twentieth Century: A Contrast Between Continental European and English-Speaking Countries," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199286881.
    22. Pudney, Stephen & Sutherland, Holly, 1994. "How reliable are microsimulation results? : An analysis of the role of sampling error in a U.K. tax-benefit model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 327-365, March.
    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. Henriette Houben & Ralf Maiterth, 2010. "Breite Bemessungsgrundlage und niedriger Proportionaltarif als alternative Erbschaftsteuerreform – Eine empirische Analyse," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 11(2), pages 204-222, May.

    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. Anthony B. Atkinson & Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2011. "Top Incomes in the Long Run of History," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 49(1), pages 3-71, March.
    2. Kroh Tanja, 2016. "Wie wirken Steuern auf die Einkommens- und Vermögensverteilung?," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 65(1), pages 022-046, May.
    3. Pawel Bukowski & Filip Novokmet, 2019. "Between Communism and Capitalism: Long-Term Inequality in Poland, 1892- 2015," World Inequality Lab Working Papers hal-02876995, HAL.
    4. Richard Burkhauser & Shuaizhang Feng & Stephen Jenkins & Jeff Larrimore, 2011. "Estimating trends in US income inequality using the Current Population Survey: the importance of controlling for censoring," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(3), pages 393-415, September.
    5. Richard Burkhauser & Shuaizhang Feng & Stephen Jenkins & Jeff Larrimore, 2009. "Recent Trends in Top Income Shares in the USA: Reconciling Estimates from March CPS and IRS Tax Return Data," Working Papers 09-26, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    6. Martin Baur, 2010. "Politics and Income Distribution," Chapters, in: Neri Salvadori (ed.), Institutional and Social Dynamics of Growth and Distribution, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Atkinson, Tony & Leigh, Andrew, 2010. "The Distribution of Top Incomes in Five Anglo-Saxon Countries over the Twentieth Century," IZA Discussion Papers 4937, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    8. Bukowski, Pawel & Novokmet, Filip, 2019. "Between communism and capitalism: long-term inequality in Poland, 1892-2015," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102834, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Sara Torregrosa-Hetland & Oriol Sabaté, 2022. "Income tax progressivity and inflation during the world wars [War finance and inflation in Britain and Germany, 1914–1918]," European Review of Economic History, European Historical Economics Society, vol. 26(3), pages 311-339.
    10. Ilpo Suoniemi & Marja Riihelä & Risto Sullström, 2008. "Tax progressivity and recent evolution of the Finnish income inequality," Working Papers 246, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    11. Bukowski, Pawel & Novokmet, Filip, 2019. "Between communism and capitalism: long-term inequality in Poland, 1892-2015," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102814, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Yingying Deng & Monica Prasad, 2009. "Taxation and the Worlds of Welfare," LIS Working papers 480, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    13. Pawel Bukowski & Filip Novokmet, 2019. "Between communism and capitalism: long-term inequality in Poland, 1892-2015," CEP Discussion Papers dp1628, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    14. Pawel Bukowski & Filip Novokmet, 2019. "Between Communism and Capitalism: Long-Term Inequality in Poland, 1892- 2015," Working Papers hal-02876995, HAL.
    15. Bartels, Charlotte & Waldenström, Daniel, 2021. "Inequality and top incomes," GLO Discussion Paper Series 959, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    16. Torregrosa Hetland, Sara & Sabaté, Oriol, 2021. "Income Taxes and Redistribution in the Early Twentieth Century," Lund Papers in Economic History 224, Lund University, Department of Economic History, revised 05 Sep 2022.
    17. Piketty, Thomas & Bozio, Antoine & Garbinti, Bertrand & Goupille-Lebret, Jonathan & Guillot, Malka, 2020. "Predistribution vs. Redistribution: Evidence from France and the U.S," CEPR Discussion Papers 15415, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Herwig Immervoll & Horacio Levy & Christine Lietz & Daniela Mantovani & Cathal O’Donoghue & Holly Sutherland & Gerlinde Verbist, 2006. "Household Incomes and Redistribution in the European Union: Quantifying the Equalizing Properties of Taxes and Benefits," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Dimitri B. Papadimitriou (ed.), The Distributional Effects of Government Spending and Taxation, chapter 5, pages 135-165, Palgrave Macmillan.
    19. Paul Makdissi & Myra Yazbeck, 2012. "On the Measurement of Indignation," Working Papers 1213E, University of Ottawa, Department of Economics.
    20. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2014. "Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 6(1), pages 230-271, February.

    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:ijm:journl:v:2:y:2009:i:1:p:32-48. 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: Jinjing Li (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.microsimulation.org/ijm/ .

    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.