IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ete/ceswps/ces9833.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The unit of analysis in microsimulation models for personal income taxes: fiscal unit or household?

Author

Listed:
  • André Decoster
  • Guy Van Camp

Abstract

Administrative data on personal income taxes and household budget surveys differ in at least one important respect: the definition of the unit of observation. The sociological concept of a household does not coincide with the administrative definition of a fiscal unit. We investigate whether the evaluation of a reform of income taxes is sensitive to this difference. The empirical results are obtained for a major reform of personal income taxes in Belgium in 1988. We use the technique of statistical matching to link the fiscal data of the Ministry of Finance with the household budget survey. We find that the characteristics of the tax system before and after the reform, such as liability progression and residual progression, are sensitive to the unit of observation and to the data set used. But this sensitivity evaporates at the level of the reform.

Suggested Citation

  • André Decoster & Guy Van Camp, 1998. "The unit of analysis in microsimulation models for personal income taxes: fiscal unit or household?," Working Papers Department of Economics ces9833, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ete:ceswps:ces9833
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/238416/1/DPS9833.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bovenberg, A. L. & van der Ploeg, F., 1994. "Environmental policy, public finance and the labour market in a second-best world," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 349-390, November.
    2. Small, Kenneth A., 1983. "The incidence of congestion tolls on urban highways," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 90-111, January.
    3. de Bovenberg, A Lans & Mooij, Ruud A, 1994. "Environmental Levies and Distortionary Taxation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 84(4), pages 1085-1089, September.
    4. 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.
    5. Schob, Ronnie, 1996. "Evaluating Tax Reforms in the Presence of Externalities," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 48(4), pages 537-555, October.
    6. Lawrence Goulder, 1995. "Environmental taxation and the double dividend: A reader's guide," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 157-183, August.
    7. Bovenberg, A Lans & de Mooij, Ruud A, 1997. "Environmental Levies and Distortionary Taxation: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(1), pages 252-253, March.
    8. Guesnerie, Roger, 1977. "On the direction of tax reform," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, pages 179-202.
    9. Van de gaer, Dirk & Schokkaert, Erik & De Bruyne, Guido, 1992. "Marginal Tax Reform in Different Macroeconomic Regimes," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 47(Supplemen), pages 256-270.
    10. S. Proost & D. Regemorter, 1995. "The double dividend and the role of inequality aversion and macroeconomic regimes," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 2(2), pages 207-219, August.
    11. Mayeres, Inge & Proost, Stef, 1997. " Optimal Tax and Public Investment Rules for Congestion Type of Externalities," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(2), pages 261-279, June.
    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. André DECOSTER & Guy VAN CAMP, 2000. "Redistributive Effects of the Shift from Personal Income Taxes to Indirect Taxes: Belgium 1988-1993," Working Papers Department of Economics ces0007, KU Leuven, Faculty of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
    2. André Decoster & Isabelle Standaert & Christian Valenduc & Guy Van Camp, 2002. "What makes personal income taxes progressive? The case of Belgium," Brussels Economic Review, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles, vol. 45(3), pages 91-112.

    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:ete:ceswps:ces9833. 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: (library EBIB). General contact details of provider: http://feb.kuleuven.be/Economics/ .

    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.