IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cea/doctra/e2004_43.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is an inequality-neutral flat tax reform really neutral?

Author

Abstract

Let us assume a revenue- and inequality-neutral flat tax reform shifting from a graduated-rate tax. Is this reform really distributional neutral? Traditionally, there has been a bias toward the inequality analysis, forgetting other relevant aspects of the income distribution. This kind of reforms implies a set of composite transfers, both progressive and regressive, even though inequality remains unchanged. This paper shows that polarization is a useful tool for characterizing this set of transfers caused by inequality-neutral tax reforms. A simulation exercise illustrates how polarization can be used to discriminate between two inequality-neutral tax alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan Prieto Rodríguez & Juan Gabriel Rodríguez & Rafael Salas, 2004. "Is an inequality-neutral flat tax reform really neutral?," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2004/43, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
    • Handle: RePEc:cea:doctra:e2004_43
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://public.centrodeestudiosandaluces.es/pdfs/E200443.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davies James & Hoy Michael, 1994. "The Normative Significance of Using Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance in Comparing Income Distributions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 520-530, December.
    2. Rolf Aaberge, 2009. "Ranking intersecting Lorenz curves," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 235-259, August.
    3. Cowell, Frank A. & Victoria-Feser, Maria-Pia, 1996. "Poverty measurement with contaminated data: A robust approach," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1761-1771, December.
    4. Coulter, Fiona A E & Cowell, Frank A & Jenkins, Stephen P, 1992. "Differences in Needs and Assessment of Income Distributions," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 77-124, April.
    5. Steven P. Cassou & Kevin J. Lansing, 2004. "Growth Effects of Shifting from a Graduated-rate Tax System to a Flat Tax," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 42(2), pages 194-213, April.
    6. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    7. Buhmann, Brigitte, et al, 1988. "Equivalence Scales, Well-Being, Inequality, and Poverty: Sensitivity Estimates across Ten Countries Using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) Database," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 34(2), pages 115-142, June.
    8. Davies, James & Hoy, Michael, 1995. "Making Inequality Comparisons When Lorenz Curves Intersect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 980-986, September.
    9. Davies, James B. & Hoy, Michael, 2002. "Flat rate taxes and inequality measurement," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 33-46, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Juan Prieto-Rodríguez & Juan Gabriel Rodríguez & Rafael Salas, "undated". "Interactions Inequality-Polarization: Characterization Results(*)," Working Papers 15-05 Classification-JEL , Instituto de Estudios Fiscales.
    2. Francis Menjo Baye, 2010. "Exact Configuration of Poverty,Inequality and Polarization Trends in the Distribution of well-being in Cameroon," Research Papers RP_207, African Economic Research Consortium.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    polarization; inequality; flat tax;

    JEL classification:

    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • D39 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Other
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General

    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:cea:doctra:e2004_43. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Susana Mérida). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/fcanges.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.