IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/crs/wpaper/2016-15.html

Dynamic Bargaining over Redistribution in Legislatures

Author

Listed:
  • Facundo Piguillem

    (Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance (EIEF))

  • Alessandro Riboni

    (Ecole Polytechnique)

Abstract

In modern democracies, public policies are negotiated by elected policymakers. When they agree to replace the current status quo, the approved policy becomes the status quo in the next period. Yet, these two ingredients, bargaining and endogenous status quo, are absent from most macroeconomic models. We revisit the classical capital taxation problem including both ingredients. We analyze a growth model where agents are heterogenous in wealth. We nd that legislators may avoid high taxes, because doing so may improve the bargaining power of \poorer" legislators in future negotiations. Equilibrium capital taxes are between 12% and 55%, depending on the calibration. We also nd that a status quo bias could lead to growth cycles: decades with low taxes and growing capital are fol lowed by decades with high taxes and decreasing capital (and vice versa).

Suggested Citation

  • Facundo Piguillem & Alessandro Riboni, 2016. "Dynamic Bargaining over Redistribution in Legislatures," Working Papers 2016-15, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
  • Handle: RePEc:crs:wpaper:2016-15
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://crest.science/RePEc/wpstorage/2016-15.pdf
    File Function: Crest working paper version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marina Azzimonti & Laura Karpuska & Gabriel Mihalache, 2023. "Bargaining Over Taxes And Entitlements In The Era Of Unequal Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 64(3), pages 893-941, August.
    2. Saito, Yuta, 2015. "Capital Tax as a Consequence of Bargaining," MPRA Paper 65338, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Facundo Piguillem & Alessandro Riboni, 2015. "Spending-Biased Legislators: Discipline Through Disagreement," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(2), pages 901-949.
    4. T. Renee Bowen & Ying Chen & H?lya Eraslan, 2014. "Mandatory versus Discretionary Spending: The Status Quo Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(10), pages 2941-2974, October.
    5. Yanlei Ma, 2014. "Income Inequality, Political Polarization and Fiscal Policy Gridlock," 2014 Meeting Papers 547, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Bowen, T. Renee & Chen, Ying & Eraslan, Hülya & Zápal, Jan, 2017. "Efficiency of flexible budgetary institutions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 148-176.
    7. Zapal, Jan, 2020. "Simple Markovian equilibria in dynamic spatial legislative bargaining," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    8. Baron, David P. & Bowen, T. Renee, 2013. "Dynamic Coalitions," Research Papers 2128, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    9. Yuta Saito, 2019. "Political Representation and Legislative Bargaining over Redistribution," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 25(3), pages 251-262, August.
    10. Marina Azzimonti & Laura Karpuska & Gabriel Mihalache, 2020. "Bargaining over Mandatory Spending and Entitlements," Department of Economics Working Papers 20-02, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    11. Hülya Eraslan & Kirill S. Evdokimov & Jan Zápal, 2022. "Dynamic Legislative Bargaining," Springer Books, in: Emin Karagözoğlu & Kyle B. Hyndman (ed.), Bargaining, chapter 0, pages 151-175, Springer.
    12. Marina Azzimonti & Gabriel P. Mihalache & Laura Karpuska, 2020. "Bargaining over Taxes and Entitlements," NBER Working Papers 27595, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Tasos Kalandrakis, 2016. "Pareto efficiency in the dynamic one-dimensional bargaining model," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 28(4), pages 525-536, October.
    14. Saito, Yuta, 2016. "Dynamic Bargaining over Redistribution with Endogenous Distribution of Political Power," MPRA Paper 71130, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • E60 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - General
    • H00 - Public Economics - - General - - - General

    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:crs:wpaper:2016-15. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Secretariat General (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crestfr.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.