IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ctl/louvre/1989023.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Equity and efficiency of a reform of Belgian indirect taxes

Author

Listed:
  • André DECOSTER

    (KUL)

  • Erik SHCOKKAERT

    (KUL)

Abstract

In this paper we apply the theory of tax reform to derive empirical results about the structure of indirect taxes in Belgium. We focus on the equity-efficiency trade-off and try to formulate conclusions which are relevant for policy makers. To integrate the merit good component in the indirect taxes on tobacco and transportation, we compute the implicit valuation attached to them by policy makers. This component is considerable and affects the whole structure of tax rates.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:ctl:louvre:1989023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40723887
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Henk-Wim de Boer & Egbert Jongen, 2017. "Optimal Income Support for Lone Parents in the Netherlands: Are We There Yet?," CPB Discussion Paper 361, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Peter Tóth & Andrej Cupák & Marian Rizov, 2021. "Measuring the efficiency of VAT reforms: a demand system simulation approach," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 73(3), pages 1218-1243.
    3. Olivier Bargain & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2014. "Comparing inequality aversion across countries when labor supply responses differ," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 21(5), pages 845-873, October.
    4. Kaplanoglou, Georgia & Newbery, David Michael, 2003. "Indirect Taxation in Greece: Evaluation and Possible Reform," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(5), pages 511-533, September.
    5. Olivier Bargain & Mathias Dolls & Dirk Neumann & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2011. "Tax-Benefit Systems in Europe and the US: Between Equity and Efficiency," CESifo Working Paper Series 3534, CESifo.
    6. Fred Schroyen & Jørgen Aasness, 2006. "Marginal indirect tax reform analysis with merit good arguments and environmental concerns: Norway, 1999," Discussion Papers 455, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    7. Henk-Wim de Boer & Egbert Jongen, 2017. "Optimal Income Support for Lone Parents in the Netherlands: Are We There Yet?," CPB Discussion Paper 361.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Olivier Bargain & Claire Keane, 2010. "Tax–Benefit‐revealed Redistributive Preferences Over Time: Ireland 1987–2005," LABOUR, CEIS, vol. 24(s1), pages 141-167, December.
    9. Schroyen, Fred, 2005. "An alternative way to model merit good arguments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(5-6), pages 957-966, June.
    10. Jacobs, Bas & Jongen, Egbert L.W. & Zoutman, Floris T., 2017. "Revealed social preferences of Dutch political parties," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 81-100.
    11. Kenneth Clements & Wana Yang & Dongling Chen, 2001. "The matrix approach to evaluating demand equations," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(8), pages 957-967.
    12. Mathew Adagunodo, 2013. "Petroleum Products Pricing Reform in Nigeria: Welfare Analysis from Household Budget Survey," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(4), pages 459-472.
    13. Bart Capéau & Erwin Ooghe, 2003. "Merit goods and phantom agents," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 8(8), pages 1-5.
    14. Alain Babatounde & Bart Capeau & Romain Houssa, 2023. "Welfare effects of indirect tax policies in West Africa," DeFiPP Working Papers 2301, University of Namur, Development Finance and Public Policies.
    15. 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.

    More about this item

    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:ctl:louvre:1989023. 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: Sebastien SCHILLINGS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iruclbe.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.