IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdh/ebrief/135.html

Ontario's Tax on the Rich: Grasping at Straw Men

Author

Listed:
  • Alexandre Laurin

    (C.D. Howe Institute)

Abstract

Ontario’s new “tax on the rich,” which was introduced in the 2012 Budget, affects 25,000 high-income earners and their families. These families matter a lot for the province’s fortunes: about one of every five income tax dollars in Ontario already comes out of their pockets. Ontario’s personal income tax system already redistributes more income than most other provinces. The province’s top 1 percent of earners shoulder more than one-quarter of all income taxes, while the bottom 75 percent shoulder about 12 percent. The new tax on high-income earners will likely create more economic costs than benefits: taxpayers’ behavioural responses will reduce revenue over the long run by more than the province can expect to collect from the tax hike.

Suggested Citation

  • Alexandre Laurin, 2012. "Ontario's Tax on the Rich: Grasping at Straw Men," e-briefs 135, C.D. Howe Institute.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdh:ebrief:135
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cdhowe.org/public-policy-research/ontario%E2%80%99s-tax-rich-grasping-straw-men
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. N Gregory Mankiw, 2010. "Spreading the Wealth Around: Reflections Inspired by Joe the Plumber," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 285-298.
    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. Bartling, Björn & Cappelen, Alexander W & Ekström, Mathias & Sørensen, Erik Ø. & Tungodden, Bertil, 2018. "Fairness in Winner-Take-All Markets," Working Paper Series 1214, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. François Maniquet, 2017. "Opportunities, Welfare, and Social Justice: A Review of Fishkin's Bottlenecks," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(2), pages 580-591, June.
    3. Cornelissen, Thomas & Himmler, Oliver & Koenig, Tobias, 2013. "Fairness spillovers—The case of taxation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 164-180.
    4. Alexis Anagnostopoulos & Eva Carceles‐Poveda & Yair Tauman, 2021. "Value Preserving Welfare Weights For Social Optimization Problems," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 62(4), pages 1627-1653, November.
    5. Andrew Lister, 2017. "Markets, desert, and reciprocity," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 16(1), pages 47-69, February.
    6. Harju Jarkko, 2014. "Policy evaluation methods in tax research – new evidence and interpretations," Nordic Tax Journal, Sciendo, vol. 2014(1), pages 76-92, May.
    7. Lockwood, Benjamin B. & Weinzierl, Matthew, 2016. "Positive and normative judgments implicit in U.S. tax policy, and the costs of unequal growth and recessions," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 30-47.
    8. Robert Lepenies, 2014. "Economists as political philosophers : a critique of normative trade theory," RSCAS Working Papers 2014/11, European University Institute.
    9. Sala, Hector, 2019. "A fresh look at fiscal redistribution and inequality in the US across electoral cycles," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 195-206.
    10. Marc Fleurbaey & Stéphane Zuber, 2021. "Fair Utilitarianism," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 370-401, May.
    11. Suresh Naidu & Yaw Nyarko & Shing-Yi Wang, 2016. "Monopsony Power in Migrant Labor Markets: Evidence from the United Arab Emirates," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 124(6), pages 1735-1792.
    12. N. Gregory Mankiw, 2013. "Defending the One Percent," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(3), pages 21-34, Summer.
    13. Florian H. Schneider & Fanny Brun & Roberto A. Weber, 2024. "Sorting and wage premiums in immoral work," CEBI working paper series 24-12, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    14. Kyle Glenn, 2021. "Social Labor vs Human Capital: Competing Theories of Skills," Working Papers 2115, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    15. Marika Karanassou & Hector Sala, 2012. "Inequality and Employment Sensitivities to the Falling Labour Share," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 43(3), pages 343-376.
    16. Granaglia, Elena, 2019. "Can market inequalities be justified? The intrinsic shortcomings of meritocracy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 284-290.
    17. Galeotti, Fabio & Kline, Reuben & Orsini, Raimondello, 2017. "When foul play seems fair: Exploring the link between just deserts and honesty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 451-467.
    18. François Maniquet, 2017. "De chacun selon ses capacités à chacun selon ses besoins, ou (même) plus, s’il le souhaite," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 68(1), pages 119-129.
    19. Peter Backus & Alejandro Esteller-Moré, 2014. "Is income redistribution a form of insurance, a public good or both?," Working Papers 2014/33, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    20. Florian H. Schneider & Fanny Brun & Roberto A. Weber, 2020. "Sorting and Wage Premiums in Immoral Work," CESifo Working Paper Series 8456, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies

    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:cdh:ebrief:135. 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: Kristine Gray The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Kristine Gray to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cdhowca.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.