IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_198.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Taxing Family Size and Subsidising Child-specific Commodities? Optimal Fiscal Treatment of Households with Endogenous Fertility

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandro Cigno
  • Anna Pettini

Abstract

The effects and optimal choice of policy instruments affecting the family (child benefits, taxes on child-specific commodities, etc.) are examined within the context of a household economics model with fertility choice. The simultaneous consideration of child benefits and commodity taxes in the presence of endogenous fertility yields some remarkable results. One is that, if the government can distinguish between child-specific and adult-specific commodities, it may then be optimal to tax family size and subsidize child-specific commodities. Under more restrictive conditions, it is also shown that the tax system should be so designed, that children are a net tax liability if households are differentiated for the husband's income, a net tax asset if households are differentiated for the wife's wage rate.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandro Cigno & Anna Pettini, 1999. "Taxing Family Size and Subsidising Child-specific Commodities? Optimal Fiscal Treatment of Households with Endogenous Fertility," CESifo Working Paper Series 198, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_198
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo_wp198.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ermisch, John F, 1988. "Purchased Child Care, Optimal Family Size and Mother's Employment," CEPR Discussion Papers 238, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. PESTIEAU, Pierre, 1984. "The effects of varying family size on the transmission and distribution of wealth," LIDAM Reprints CORE 594, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    3. Cigno, Alessandro, 1983. "On Optimal Family Allowances," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(1), pages 13-22, March.
    4. Hotz, V Joseph & Miller, Robert A, 1988. "An Empirical Analysis of Life Cycle Fertility and Female Labor Supply," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 56(1), pages 91-118, January.
    5. Mincer, Jacob, 1985. "Intercountry Comparisons of Labor Force Trends and of Related Developments: An Overview," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(1), pages 1-32, January.
    6. Geoffrey Carliner & Christopher Robinson & Nigel Tomes, 1980. "Female Labour Supply and Fertility in Canada," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 13(1), pages 46-64, February.
    7. Pestieau, Pierre, 1984. "The Effects of Varying Family Size on the Transmission and Distribution of Wealth," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 400-417, November.
    8. Cigno, Alessandro, 1993. "Intergenerational transfers without altruism : Family, market and state," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 505-518, November.
    9. Nerlove, Marc & Razin, Assaf & Sadka, Efraim, 1984. "Income distribution policies with endogenous fertility," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 221-230, July.
    10. Mirrlees, James A., 1972. "Population policy and the taxation of family size," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 169-198, August.
    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. Cigno, Alessandro & Pettini, Anna, 2002. "Taxing family size and subsidizing child-specific commodities?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 75-90, April.

    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. Cigno, Alessandro & Pettini, Anna, 2002. "Taxing family size and subsidizing child-specific commodities?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 75-90, April.
    2. Cigno, Alessandro & Pettini, Anna, 1999. "Traitement fiscal optimal des familles quand la fécondité est endogène," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 75(1), pages 239-252, mars-juin.
    3. Henry Ohlsson & Michael Lundholm, 2002. "Who takes care of the children? The quantity-quality model revisited," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 15(3), pages 455-461.
    4. Del Boca, Daniela & Locatelli, Marilena, 2006. "The Determinants of Motherhood and Work Status: A Survey," IZA Discussion Papers 2414, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Schweizer, Urs, 1996. "Endogenous fertility and the Henry George Theorem," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 209-228, August.
    6. Cigno, Alessandro & Luporini, Annalisa & Pettini, Anna, 2003. "Transfers to families with children as a principal-agent problem," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(5-6), pages 1165-1177, May.
    7. Louise Grogan, 2006. "An Economic Examination of the Post-Transition Fertility Decline in Russia," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 363-397.
    8. Elisa‐Rose Birch, 2005. "Studies of the Labour Supply of Australian Women: What Have We Learned?," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 81(252), pages 65-84, March.
    9. Mayssun El-Attar, 2013. "Trust, child care technology choice and female labor force participation," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 507-544, December.
    10. George Hondroyiannis, 2010. "Fertility Determinants and Economic Uncertainty: An Assessment Using European Panel Data," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 33-50, March.
    11. Juan C. Palomino & Gustavo A. Marrero & Brian Nolan & Juan G. Rodriguez, 2020. "Wealth inequality, intergenerational transfers and socioeconomic background," Working Papers 537, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    12. Weber, Andrea Maria & Lauer, Charlotte, 2003. "Employment of Mothers After Childbirth: French-German Comparison," ZEW Discussion Papers 03-50, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Juan C Palomino & Gustavo A Marrero & Brian Nolan & Juan G Rodríguez, 2022. "Wealth inequality, intergenerational transfers, and family background [Intergenerational wealth mobility and the role of inheritance: Evidence from multiple generations]," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(3), pages 643-670.
    14. Martin Werding, 2014. "Children are costly, but raising them may pay," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 30(8), pages 253-276.
    15. González, Libertad, 2004. "Single Mothers and Work," IZA Discussion Papers 1097, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Del Boca, Daniela & Pasqua, Silvia & Pronzato, Chiara D., 2004. "Why Are Fertility and Women's Employment Rates So Low in Italy? Lessons from France and the U.K," IZA Discussion Papers 1274, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. El-Attar, Mayssun, 2007. "Trust, Child Care Technology Choice and Female Labor Force Participation," IZA Discussion Papers 3135, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Felteau, Claude & Lefebvre, Pierre & Merrigan, Philip & Brouillette, Liliane, 1997. "Conjugalité et fécondité des femmes canadiennes : un modèle dynamique estimé à l’aide d’une série de coupes transversales," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 73(1), pages 233-263, mars-juin.
    19. Alan G. Isaac, 2014. "The Intergenerational Propagation of Wealth Inequality," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65(4), pages 571-584, November.
    20. Michelle Sheran Sylvester, 2007. "The Career and Family Choices of Women: A Dynamic Analysis of Labor Force Participation, Schooling, Marriage and Fertility Decisions," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(3), pages 367-399, July.

    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:ces:ceswps:_198. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.