IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_661.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Indirect Taxation in Greece: Evaluation and Possible Reform

Author

Listed:
  • Georgia Kaplanoglou
  • David Michael Newbery

Abstract

The paper assesses the distributional and efficiency/disincentive aspects of the Greek indirect tax system, which provides 60% of total tax revenue. The marginal welfare costs of broad commodity groups were computed to identify welfare-improving directions of reform. The disincentive effects were estimated from marginal indirect tax rates using Household Expenditure Survey data. The indirect tax structure is shown to be unnecessarily complicated and inefficient, without achieving any redistributive goals. The UK indirect tax structure was shown to be simpler, more equitable and more efficient to implement and administer when simulated on Greek consumers.

Suggested Citation

  • Georgia Kaplanoglou & David Michael Newbery, 2002. "Indirect Taxation in Greece: Evaluation and Possible Reform," CESifo Working Paper Series 661, CESifo Group Munich.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_661
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cesifo-group.de/DocDL/cesifo_wp661.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Madden, David, 1995. "Labour Supply, Commodity Demand and Marginal Tax Reform," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 105(429), pages 485-497, March.
    2. William Gale, 1997. "What can America learn from the British tax system?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 341-369, November.
    3. Deaton, Angus, 1981. "Optimal Taxes and the Structure of Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(5), pages 1245-1260, September.
    4. Sah, Raaj Kumar, 1983. "How much redistribution is possible through commodity taxes?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 89-101, February.
    5. Ahmad, Ehtisham & Stern, Nicholas, 1984. "The theory of reform and indian indirect taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 259-298, December.
    6. Newbery, David M., 1997. "Optimal tax rates and tax design during systemic reform," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 177-206, January.
    7. Slemrod, Joel, 1990. "Optimal Taxation and Optimal Tax Systems," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 157-178, Winter.
    8. Newbery, David M, 1989. "The Theory of Food Price Stabilisation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(398), pages 1065-1082, December.
    9. Evan Davis & John Kay, 1985. "Extending the VAT base: problems and possibilities," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, February.
    10. MacKinnon, James G. & White, Halbert, 1985. "Some heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimators with improved finite sample properties," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 305-325, September.
    11. Michael Keen, 1997. "Peculiar institutions: A British perspective on tax policy in the United States," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 371-400, November.
    12. Michael Keen, 1997. "Peculiar institutions: A British perspective on tax policy in the United States," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 371-400, November.
    13. David M Newbery, 1993. "Tax and expenditure policies in Hungary ," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 1(2), pages 245-272, June.
    14. Blundell, Richard W & Walker, Ian, 1982. "Modelling the Joint Determination of Household Labour Supplies and Commodity Demands," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 351-364, June.
    15. Atkinson, A. B. & Stiglitz, J. E., 1976. "The design of tax structure: Direct versus indirect taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(1-2), pages 55-75.
    16. Deaton, Angus, 1979. "Optimally uniform commodity taxes," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 2(4), pages 357-361.
    17. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    18. Karageorgas, Dionysios, 1973. "The Distribution of Tax Burden by Income Groups in Greece," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 83(330), pages 436-448, June.
    19. Madden, David, 1997. "Conditional Demands and Marginal Tax Reform," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 59(2), pages 237-255, May.
    20. André DECOSTER & Erik SHCOKKAERT, 1989. "Equity and efficiency of a reform of Belgian indirect taxes," Discussion Papers (REL - Recherches Economiques de Louvain) 1989023, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    21. A. B. Atkinson, 1977. "Optimal Taxation and the Direct versus Indirect Tax Controversy," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 10(4), pages 590-606, November.
    22. Feldstein, Martin S, 1972. "Distributional Equity and the Optimal Structure of Public Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 62(1), pages 32-36, March.
    23. Deaton, Angus S & Muellbauer, John, 1980. "An Almost Ideal Demand System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 312-326, June.
    24. William Gale, 1997. "What can America learn from the British tax system?," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 18(4), pages 341-369, November.
    25. Agha, Ali & Haughton, Jonathan, 1996. "Designing VAT Systems: Some Efficiency Considerations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 303-308, May.
    26. Deaton, Angus & Stern, Nicholas, 1986. "Optimally uniform commodity taxes, taste differences and lump-sum grants," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 263-266.
    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. Fred Schroyen, 2003. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," UFAE and IAE Working Papers 595.03, Unitat de Fonaments de l'Anàlisi Econòmica (UAB) and Institut d'Anàlisi Econòmica (CSIC).
    2. François Bourguignon & Amedeo Spadaro, 2006. "Microsimulation as a tool for evaluating redistribution policies," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 4(1), pages 77-106, April.
    3. Eirini Andriopoulou & Alexandros Karakitsios & Panos Tsakloglou, 2017. "Inequality and Poverty in Greece:Changes in Times of Crisis," GreeSE – Hellenic Observatory Papers on Greece and Southeast Europe 116, Hellenic Observatory, LSE.
    4. Michael Savage, 2016. "Indirect tax reform and the specification of demand: the case of Ireland," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 23(2), pages 368-399, April.
    5. O'Donoghue, Cathal & Baldini, Massimo & Mantovani, Daniela, 2004. "Modelling the redistributive impact of indirect taxes in Europe: an application of EUROMOD," EUROMOD Working Papers EM7/01, EUROMOD at the Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    6. Jonathan Goyette, 2012. "Optimal tax threshold: the consequences on efficiency of official vs. effective enforcement," Cahiers de recherche 12-07, Departement d'Economique de l'École de gestion à l'Université de Sherbrooke.
    7. Georgia Kaplanoglou, 2004. "Household Consumption Patterns, Indirect Tax Structures and Implications for Indirect Tax Harmonisation - A Three Country Perspective," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 35(1), pages 83-107.
    8. Schroyen, Fred, 2005. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 957-966, June.
    9. Andrej Cupák & Peter Tóth, 2017. "Measuring the Efficiency of VAT reforms: Evidence from Slovakia," Working and Discussion Papers WP 6/2017, Research Department, National Bank of Slovakia.

    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:_661. 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: (Klaus Wohlrabe). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.