IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jeczfn/v77y2002i1p223-240.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Equitable taxation: Qualitative versus quantitative ratings

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Traub

Abstract

This paper reports on an experimental investigation into the perception of fairness in taxation. 219 subjects rated their own tax burdens, stated their preferred type of tax scale, and proposed fair tax burdens for a number of reference households. While the former two tasks involved qualitative ratings, the latter one required quantitative ratings, that is, the respondents were forced to express their judgments on different types of response scales. Contrasting the subjects' qualitative ratings with their quantitative ratings, we found major inconsistencies. We conclude from this that the task context (for example, the basic political attitude) becomes more prominent in qualitative ratings while individual factors of perception, such as anchor points, become more prominent in quantitative ratings. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2002

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Traub, 2002. "Equitable taxation: Qualitative versus quantitative ratings," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 223-240, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jeczfn:v:77:y:2002:i:1:p:223-240
    DOI: 10.1007/BF03052505
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/BF03052505
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/BF03052505?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:bla:jecsur:v:16:y:2002:i:5:p:621-55 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    3. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1982. "Risk Perception in Psychology and Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(1), pages 1-9, January.
    4. Sarah Lichtenstein & Paul Slovic, 1973. "Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in las vegas," Framed Field Experiments 00169, The Field Experiments Website.
    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. Jeremiah Hurley & Neil Buckley & Katherine Cuff & Mita Giacomini & David Cameron, 2011. "Judgments regarding the fair division of goods: the impact of verbal versus quantitative descriptions of alternative divisions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(2), pages 341-372, July.

    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. Gold, Natalie & List, Christian, 2004. "Framing as Path Dependence," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(2), pages 253-277, October.
    2. Andrew J Lloyd, 2003. "Threats to the estimation of benefit: are preference elicitation methods accurate?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(5), pages 393-402, May.
    3. Friedman, Daniel & Habib, Sameh & James, Duncan & Crockett, Sean, 2018. "Varieties of risk elicitation," Discussion Papers, Research Professorship Market Design: Theory and Pragmatics SP II 2018-501, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    4. Wright, Austin L. & Sonin, Konstantin & Driscoll, Jesse & Wilson, Jarnickae, 2020. "Poverty and economic dislocation reduce compliance with COVID-19 shelter-in-place protocols," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 544-554.
    5. Jolian McHardy & Michael Reynolds & Stephen Trotter, 2012. "The Stackelberg Model as a Partial Solution to the Problem of Pricing in a Network," Working Paper series 19_12, Rimini Centre for Economic Analysis.
    6. Janvier D. Nkurunziza, 2005. "Reputation and Credit without Collateral in Africa`s Formal Banking," Economics Series Working Papers WPS/2005-02, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Stephanie Rosenkranz & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2007. "Can Coasean Bargaining Justify Pigouvian Taxation?," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 74(296), pages 573-585, November.
    8. Vadim Borokhov, 2014. "On the properties of nodal price response matrix in electricity markets," Papers 1404.3678, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2015.
    9. Yuzhou Jiang & Ramteen Sioshansi, 2023. "What Duality Theory Tells Us About Giving Market Operators the Authority to Dispatch Energy Storage," The Energy Journal, , vol. 44(3), pages 89-110, May.
    10. Daniel Sutter & Daniel J. Smith, 2017. "Coordination in disaster: Nonprice learning and the allocation of resources after natural disasters," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 30(4), pages 469-492, December.
    11. Hanming Fang & Peter Norman, 2014. "Toward an efficiency rationale for the public provision of private goods," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(2), pages 375-408, June.
    12. Gan, Li & Ju, Gaosheng & Zhu, Xi, 2015. "Nonparametric estimation of structural labor supply and exact welfare change under nonconvex piecewise-linear budget sets," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 526-544.
    13. Peterson, Jeffrey M. & Boisvert, Richard N. & de Gorter, Harry, 1999. "Multifunctionality and Optimal Environmental Policies for Agriculture in an Open Economy," Working Papers 127701, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    14. Tian, Guoqiang, 2009. "Implementation of Pareto efficient allocations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1-2), pages 113-123, January.
    15. Ahmad Naimzada & Marina Pireddu, 2019. "The first fundamental theorem of welfare in a general equilibrium evolutionary setting," Working Papers 415, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised 06 Jun 2019.
    16. Gajanan Panchal & Vipul Jain & Naoufel Cheikhrouhou & Matthias Gurtner, 2017. "Equilibrium analysis in multi-echelon supply chain with multi-dimensional utilities of inertial players," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(4), pages 417-436, August.
    17. Aldasoro, Iñaki & Delli Gatti, Domenico & Faia, Ester, 2017. "Bank networks: Contagion, systemic risk and prudential policy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 164-188.
    18. Gatti, Nicolas & Cecil, Michael & Baylis, Kathy & Estes, Lyndon & Blekking, Jordan & Heckelei, Thomas & Vergopolan, Noemi & Evans, Tom, 2023. "Is closing the agricultural yield gap a “risky” endeavor?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    19. Aldo Montesano, 2018. "Social welfare for an economy of angelic agents," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 65(2), pages 185-200, June.
    20. Alexei A. Gaivoronski & Per Jonny Nesse & Olai Bendik Erdal, 2017. "Internet service provision and content services: paid peering and competition between internet providers," Netnomics, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 43-79, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Taxation; Fairness; Equity; C91; H24; D63;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:kap:jeczfn:v:77:y:2002:i:1:p:223-240. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.