IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/duk/dukeec/97-12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Dynamic Effects of Taxes and Subsidies on Market Structure andEconomic Growth

Author

Listed:
  • Peretto, Pietro F.

Abstract

It is becoming increasingly clear that the evaluation of policy measures that affect the growth performance of the economy requires adequate treatment of their effects on technological change. Environmental policy and regulations fit in this category. In this paper, I study the effects of taxes and subsidies on the growth path of the economy in a model where market structure is endogenous and jointly determined with the rate of technological change. An important reason for considering market structure is the argument proposed by Carlton and Loury that a Pigouvian production tax on polluting firms is not sufficient to achieve social efficiency when the number of firms is endogenous. I investigate the implications of this argument for an economy that exhibits endogenous growth. The analysis is positive. I ask questions like, What are the effects on growth and market structure of a production tax? What are the effects of the specific procedure with which the tax is introduced? For example, What are the effects of a tax that is announced today but implemented at a later date? Does this implementation lag matter, and if so, how? Similarly, What are the effects of a tax that is announced today but that will be introduced at a later date with some probability? In other words, What is the effect of uncertainty about the implementation of the tax? Finally, What is the effect of a tax that is announced and implemented today and then removed at a later date? Two sets of results emerge. First, one cannot unambiguously conclude that a production tax -- an instrument very similar to the carbon tax -- reduces environmental damages. If one focuses on steady state effects only, the tax leads to lower aggregate production, lower production per firm, more firms, and unchanged growth. If the damage function depends on both the level of activity per firm and the number of firms, the tax does not necessarily reduce damages. Second, the transitional dynamics of the model imply that the procedure of introduction of the tax matters. Moreover, the model exhibits hysterisis and temporary policies have permanent effects. A production tax that is introduced and then removed "traps" the economy in a steady state with lower growth, higher aggregate production, higher production per firm, and a larger number of firms. This policy is unambiguously bad: growth falls and both arguments in the environmental damage function increase. A tax that seems likely to be implemented at some future date -- so that agents assign a positive probability to the event -- but that then is not implemented has similar, although milder, effects. The analysis suggests that a government that intends to introduce the tax must pay attention to the timing and transparency of its actions. More generally, the analysis is suggests that much care must be taken in the specification of the dynamics of the model in policy simulations.

Suggested Citation

  • Peretto, Pietro F., 1997. "The Dynamic Effects of Taxes and Subsidies on Market Structure andEconomic Growth," Working Papers 97-12, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:97-12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.duke.edu/Papers/Abstracts97/abstract.97.12.html
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Malerba, Franco, 1992. "Learning by Firms and Incremental Technical Change," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(413), pages 845-859, July.
    2. Ciccone, Antonio & Matsuyama, Kiminori, 1996. "Start-up costs and pecuniary externalities as barriers to economic development," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, pages 33-59.
    3. Robert J. Barro, 2013. "Inflation and Economic Growth," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 14(1), pages 121-144, May.
    4. Kiminori Matsuyama, 1991. "Increasing Returns, Industrialization, and Indeterminacy of Equilibrium," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 617-650.
    5. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    6. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
    7. Backus, David K. & Kehoe, Patrick J. & Kehoe, Timothy J., 1992. "In search of scale effects in trade and growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 377-409, December.
    8. Murphy, Kevin M & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1989. "Industrialization and the Big Push," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(5), pages 1003-1026, October.
    9. Quah, Danny, 1993. "Empirical cross-section dynamics in economic growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 37(2-3), pages 426-434, April.
    10. Kiminori Matsuyama, 1995. "Complementarities and Cumulative Processes in Models of Monopolistic Competition," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(2), pages 701-729, June.
    11. Peretto, Pietro F, 1996. "Sunk Costs, Market Structure, and Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 895-923, November.
    12. Durlauf, Steven N & Johnson, Paul A, 1995. "Multiple Regimes and Cross-Country Growth Behaviour," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(4), pages 365-384, Oct.-Dec..
    13. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change, Market Rivalry, and the Evolution of the Capitalist Engine of Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 53-80, March.
    14. Peretto, Pietro F, 1998. "Technological Change and Population Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 283-311, December.
    15. Klevorick, Alvin K. & Levin, Richard C. & Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1995. "On the sources and significance of interindustry differences in technological opportunities," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 185-205, March.
    16. Quah, Danny, 1997. "Empirics for Growth and Distribution: Stratification, Polarization, and Convergence Clubs," CEPR Discussion Papers 1586, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Paul Krugman, 1991. "History versus Expectations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 651-667.
    18. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, January.
    19. Smulders, Sjak & van de Klundert, Theo, 1995. "Imperfect competition, concentration and growth with firm-specific R & D," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 139-160, January.
    20. Baumol, William J, 1986. "Productivity Growth, Convergence, and Welfare: What the Long-run Data Show," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 1072-1085, December.
    21. Quah, Danny T, 1997. "Empirics for Growth and Distribution: Stratification, Polarization, and Convergence Clubs," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 27-59, March.
    22. Ethier, Wilfred J, 1982. "National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 389-405, June.
    23. Quah, Danny T, 1996. "Convergence Empirics across Economies with (Some) Capital Mobility," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 95-124, March.
    24. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 1998. "Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 313-335, December.
    25. Peretto, Pietro & Smulders, Sjak, 1998. "Specialization, Knowledge Dilution, and Scale Effects in an IO-Based Growth Model," Working Papers 98-07, Duke University, Department of Economics.
    26. Romer, Paul M, 1987. "Growth Based on Increasing Returns Due to Specialization," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 56-62, May.
    27. van de Klundert, Theo & Smulders, Sjak, 1997. " Growth, Competition and Welfare," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(1), pages 99-118, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • E10 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - General
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - 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:duk:dukeec:97-12. 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: (Department of Economics Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://econ.duke.edu/ .

    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 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.

    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.