IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ecinqu/v33y1995i1p45-53.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

In-Kind versus Cash Transfers in the Presence of Distortionary Taxes

Author

Listed:
  • Gahvari, Firouz

Abstract

In-kind transfers can Pareto-dominate cash transfers as a means of income redistribution if in-kind transfers and leisure are Hicks substitutes and leisure is a normal good. The result holds when redistributive instruments also include a linear income tax. The paper proves that, if the poor receive more in-kind transfers (and the rich less) than what they would choose for themselves, then, compared to cash transfers, there will be a higher labor supply by the poor, a lower labor supply by the rich, and higher levels of aggregate pretax income and tax revenues. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Gahvari, Firouz, 1995. "In-Kind versus Cash Transfers in the Presence of Distortionary Taxes," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 33(1), pages 45-53, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:ecinqu:v:33:y:1995:i:1:p:45-53
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhuan Pei, 2017. "Eligibility Recertification and Dynamic Opt-In Incentives in Income-Tested Social Programs: Evidence from Medicaid/CHIP," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(1), pages 241-276, February.
    2. Bearse, P. & Glomm, G. & Janeba, E., 2000. "Why poor countries rely mostly on redistribution in-kind," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 463-481, March.
    3. Lopez-Rodriguez, David, 2011. "The scope of political redistribution with proportional income taxation," MPRA Paper 44150, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2012.
    4. Blomquist, Soren & Christiansen, Vidar, 1998. "Topping Up or Opting Out? The Optimal Design of Public Provision Schemes," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(2), pages 399-411, May.
    5. DEL REY CANTELI, Elena, 1998. "The effects of economic integration on the provision of mandatory education as a redistributive policy," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 1998057, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    6. Alberto Pench, 2018. "Intra Generational Solidarity and Long Term Care: A Role for In Kind Transfers," ECONOMIA PUBBLICA, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2018(1), pages 35-57.
    7. Balestrino, Alessandro, 1999. "User Charges as Redistributive Devices," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 1(4), pages 511-524.
    8. Alessandro Balestrino, 2000. "Mixed Tax Systems and the Public Provision of Private Goods," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 7(4), pages 463-478, August.
    9. Earl L. Grinols & Peri Silva, 2012. "Intervention Efficiency, Incentive Symmetry, and Information," Development Working Papers 334, Centro Studi Luca d'Agliano, University of Milano, revised 16 Jul 2012.
    10. Matthew Greenblatt, 2020. "In-kind transfers and home production," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 1189-1211, December.
    11. Spencer Bastani & Sören Blomquist & Luca Micheletto, 2020. "Child Care Subsidies, Quality, and Optimal Income Taxation," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1-37, November.
    12. Sören Blömquist & Vidar Christiansen, 1998. "Price Subsidies Versus Public Provision," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 5(3), pages 283-306, July.
    13. Boyle, Melissa A. & Lahey, Joanna N., 2016. "Spousal labor market effects from government health insurance: Evidence from a veterans affairs expansion," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 63-76.
    14. Elena Del Rey, 2001. "Economic Integration and Public Provision of Education," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 203-218, June.
    15. Janet Currie & Firouz Gahvari, 2008. "Transfers in Cash and In-Kind: Theory Meets the Data," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 46(2), pages 333-383, June.
    16. Firouz Gahvari & Enlinson Mattos, 2007. "Conditional Cash Transfers, Public Provision of Private Goods, and Income Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 491-502, March.
    17. Wilde, Parke E. & Ranney, Christine K., 1996. "The Distinct Impact Of Food Stamps On Food Spending," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 21(1), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Calcott, Paul, 2000. "Health care evaluation, utilitarianism and distortionary taxes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 719-730, September.
    19. Balestrino, Alessandro, 1997. "Education policy in a non-altruistic model of intergenerational transfers with endogenous fertility," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 157-169, February.

    More about this item

    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:oup:ecinqu:v:33:y:1995:i:1:p:45-53. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/weaaaea.html .

    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.