IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2604.19044.html

Fair Commodity Taxation

Author

Listed:
  • Eric Gao
  • Daniel Luo

Abstract

We study economies where consumers interact independently with many monopolists. When consumer valuations over goods are correlated, correlation can distort the induced distribution of consumer surplus (information rents). We identify which shifts in the correlation structure over values make the induced distribution more or less fair, in the sense of second order stochastic dominance. We then investigate the role taxation can have on information rents, and show the tax authority never benefits from randomizing the allocation of goods. We characterize the set of mechanisms that are on the fairness-efficiency frontier under regularity conditions on the distribution of types. Furthermore, under these conditions all allocations on the fairness-efficiency frontier ration the good more than an unregulated monopolist. Finally, we discuss implications of our model for luxury commodity taxation.

Suggested Citation

  • Eric Gao & Daniel Luo, 2026. "Fair Commodity Taxation," Papers 2604.19044, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2604.19044
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2604.19044
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hunt Allcott & Benjamin Lockwood & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Ramsey Strikes Back: Optimal Commodity Tax and Redistribution in the Presence of Salience Effects," AEA Papers and Proceedings, American Economic Association, vol. 108, pages 88-92, May.
    2. Hunt Allcott & Benjamin B Lockwood & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2019. "Regressive Sin Taxes, with an Application to the Optimal Soda Tax," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1557-1626.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kory Kroft & Jean-William Laliberté & René Leal-Vizcaíno & Matthew J Notowidigdo, 2024. "Salience and Taxation with Imperfect Competition," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(1), pages 403-437.
    2. Hausman, Catherine & Stolper, Samuel, 2021. "Inequality, information failures, and air pollution," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    3. Antonio Diez de los Rios, 2022. "A macroeconomic model of an epidemic with silent transmission and endogenous self‐isolation," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 55(S1), pages 581-625, February.
    4. Juan Carlos Salgado Hernandez & Shu Wen Ng & Sally C Stearns & Justin G Trogdon, 2023. "Cost-benefit analysis of alternative tax policies on sugar-sweetened beverages in Mexico," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 18(10), pages 1-13, October.
    5. Xavier Ruiz del Portal, 2020. "Two reasons for not using commodity taxation in the presence of an optimal income tax," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 232(1), pages 9-28, March.
    6. Bastani, Spencer & Giebe, Thomas & Miao, Chizheng, 2020. "Ethnicity and tax filing behavior," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    7. Brett Hollenbeck & Kosuke Uetake, 2021. "Taxation and market power in the legal marijuana industry," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 52(3), pages 559-595, September.
    8. Wang, Ao, 2023. "Sieve BLP: A semi-nonparametric model of demand for differentiated products," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 325-351.
    9. Spencer Bastani & Sebastian Koehne, 2024. "How Should Consumption Be Taxed?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 80(3), pages 259-302.
    10. Pierre Bachas & Lucie Gadenne & Anders Jensen, 2024. "Informality, Consumption Taxes, and Redistribution," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(5), pages 2604-2634.
    11. Sandro Ambuehl & Sebastian Blesse & Philipp Doerrenberg & Christoph Feldhaus & Axel Ockenfels, 2023. "Politicians’ Social Welfare Criteria – An Experiment with German Legislators," ifo Working Paper Series 391, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    12. Germ'an Reyes, 2022. "Coarse Wage-Setting and Behavioral Firms," Papers 2206.01114, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    13. Tarduno, Matthew, 2025. "Elasticities and tax incidence in urban ridesharing markets: Evidence from Chicago," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    14. Wisarut Suwanprasert, 2024. "Trade Theory with Behavioral Agents," PIER Discussion Papers 216, Puey Ungphakorn Institute for Economic Research.
    15. Gonçalves, Judite & Pereira dos Santos, João, 2020. "Brown sugar, how come you taste so good? The impact of a soda tax on prices and consumption," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    16. Maria Alessandra Antonelli & Valeria De Bonis & Angelo Castaldo & Alessandrao Gandolfo, 2022. "Sin goods taxation: an encompassing model," Public Finance Research Papers 52, Istituto di Economia e Finanza, DSGE, Sapienza University of Rome.
    17. Abi-Rafeh, Rossi & Dubois, Pierre & Griffith, Rachel & O'Connell, Martin, 2023. "The Effects of Sin Taxes and Advertising Restrictions in a Dynamic Equilibrium," CEPR Discussion Papers 18527, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    18. Renke Schmacker & Sinne Smed, 2023. "Sin Taxes and Self-Control," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 1-34, August.
    19. Xiang, Di & Zhan, Lue & Bordignon, Massimo, 2020. "A reconsideration of the sugar sweetened beverage tax in a household production model," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    20. Yukihiro Nishimura, 2025. "Supplementary Commodity Taxes, Labor Tax, and the Tax-mix," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 25-08-Rev., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Mar 2026.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2604.19044. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.