Progression-neutral income tax reforms and horizontal inequity
A switch from any given income tax schedule to a tax structure in which two groups of taxpayers are treated differently, each still facing the same degree of progression, can induce an increase in welfare despite causing horizontal inequity (HI). The thrust of much recent research, however, is that removing the HI from an income tax system, by replacing it with a schedule, is itself welfare improving. In this note we reconcile these results, showing that acceptance of HI can be second-best when government must operate with a limited bundle of income tax parameters. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2002
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Shorrocks, A F, 1980. "The Class of Additively Decomposable Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(3), pages 613-625, April.
- Frank A. Cowell, 1980. "On the Structure of Additive Inequality Measures," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(3), pages 521-531.
- Maria Cubel & Peter Lambert, "undated". "A Regional Approach to Income Tax Policy," Discussion Papers 97/8, Department of Economics, University of York.
- Bourguignon, Francois, 1979. "Decomposable Income Inequality Measures," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(4), pages 901-920, July.
- Peter Lambert, & Xavier Ramos, 1995. "Vertical redistribution and horizontal inequity," IFS Working Papers W95/01, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
- Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.