IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlstud/v29y2000i2p797-820.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Taxes versus Legal Rules as Instruments for Equity: A More Equitable View

Author

Listed:
  • Sanchirico, Chris William

Abstract

Most law and economic analysis evaluates legal rules solely on basis of the efficiency criterion, the justification being that distributive goals are best accomplished through the tax code. Within the same framework used to formalize this justification, this paper shows that (1) even in the presence of an optimally redistributive tax, any concern for "equity" dictates that legal rules should deviate from efficient standards in a manner that redistributes toward the less well-off: (2) any showing that differences in taxable attributes such as income or wealth are the dominant components of overall inequality would go only to the direction of the proper equity adjustment to legal rules, not to the fact that some adjustment should be made; and (3) the role of equity adjustments to legal rules is not limited to correcting inequalities arising within the legal system but extends to correcting inequalities arising in other areas of the economy. Copyright 2000 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Sanchirico, Chris William, 2000. "Taxes versus Legal Rules as Instruments for Equity: A More Equitable View," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 797-820, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:29:y:2000:i:2:p:797-820
    DOI: 10.1086/468094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/468094
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/468094?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 search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Steven Shavell, 2003. "Economic Analysis of Welfare Economics, Morality and the Law," NBER Working Papers 9700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Guy Davidov, 2007. "The (changing?) idea of labour law," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 146(3-4), pages 311-320, September.
    3. Ganuza Juan-Jose & Gomez Fernando, 2006. "Caution, Children Crossing: Heterogeneity of Victim's Cost of Care and the Negligence Rule," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(3), pages 365-397, January.
    4. Lee Kangoh, 2016. "Risk Aversion, the Hand Rule, and Comparison between Strict Liability and the Negligence Rule," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 261-274, July.
    5. Hackney, James Jr., 2003. "Law and neoclassical economics theory: a critical history of the distribution/efficiency debate," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 361-390, September.
    6. Barriola, Illan & Deffains, Bruno & Musy, Olivier, 2023. "Law and inequality: A comparative approach to the distributive implications of legal systems," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Blumkin, Tomer & Margalioth, Yoram & Sadka, Efraim, 2007. "Anti-discrimination rules versus income taxation in the pursuit of horizontal equity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 1167-1176, June.
    8. Thomas J. Miceli, 2014. "Economic Models of Law," Working papers 2014-13, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    9. Garoupa, Nuno & Stephen, Frank, 2003. "A Note on Optimal Law Enforcement with Legal Aid," CEPR Discussion Papers 4113, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2003. "Found Money? Split-Award Statutes and Settlement of Punitive Damages Cases," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 134-164.
    11. Blumkin, Tomer & Margalioth, Yoram, 2008. "On terror, drugs and racial profiling," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 194-203, September.
    12. Olof Johansson-Stenman, 2005. "Distributional Weights in Cost-Benefit Analysis—Should We Forget about Them?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).
    13. Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gómez, 2003. "Optimal negligence rule under limited liability," Economics Working Papers 759, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised May 2004.
    14. Cass R. Sunstein, 2015. "Unhelpful Abstractions and the Standard View," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 12(1), pages 68-71, January.

    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:ucp:jlstud:v:29:y:2000:i:2:p:797-820. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLS .

    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.