Voting under temptation
In the presence of temptation and self-control preferences as in Gul and Pesendorfer, the optimal policy is to subsidize savings when consumers are tempted by "excessive" impatience (Krusell, Kuruscu and Smith, 2010). However, in the homogeneous agents model, taxation loses an important property in that it fails to reduce the inequality through redistribution. Thus the phenomenon that welfare improves on subsidizing savings may vanish when the agents differ in their abilities to earn income. They may well choose a positive tax if they are from low ability group where the redistribution effect of tax dominates the temptation effect. In a political economy, a situation may easily arise where a negative tax will never be implemented. When agents are homogeneous, as temptation grows, optimal subsidy on saving increases. The corresponding result in the heterogeneous agents case is that as temptation grows, the political support for the subsidy increases.
|Date of creation:||Jan 2012|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7, S. J. S. Sansanwal Marg, New Delhi - 110016|
Web page: http://www.isid.ac.in/~pu/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Faruk Gul & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2004.
"Self-Control and the Theory of Consumption,"
Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 119-158, 01.
- W. Pesendorfer & F. Gul, 1999.
"Temptation and Self-Control,"
Princeton Economic Theory Papers
99f1, Economics Department, Princeton University.
- Marco Bassetto & Jess Benhabib, 2006.
"Redistribution, Taxes and the Median Voter,"
Review of Economic Dynamics,
Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 9(2), pages 211-223, April.
- Chamley, Christophe, 1986. "Optimal Taxation of Capital Income in General Equilibrium with Infinite Lives," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(3), pages 607-22, May.
- Manuel Amador & Ivan Werning & George-Marios Angeletos, 2003.
"Commitment Vs. Flexibility,"
NBER Working Papers
10151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Daron Acemoglu & Michael Golosov & Aleh Tsyvinski, 2008.
"Political Economy of Mechanisms,"
Econometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 619-641, 05.
- Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2002.
"The Revealed Preference Theory of Changing Tastes,"
Annual Meeting Plenary
2002-3, Society for Economic Dynamics.
- Per Krusell & Burhanettin Kuruscu & Anthony A. Smith, Jr., 2000.
"Temptation and Taxation,"
GSIA Working Papers
2001-12, Carnegie Mellon University, Tepper School of Business.
- Laibson, David I., 1997.
"Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting,"
4481499, Harvard University Department of Economics.
- Kenneth L. Judd, 1982.
"Redistributive Taxation in a Simple Perfect Foresight Model,"
572, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
- Judd, Kenneth L., 1985. "Redistributive taxation in a simple perfect foresight model," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 59-83, October.
- E. S. Phelps & R. A. Pollak, 1968. "On Second-Best National Saving and Game-Equilibrium Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 185-199.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ind:isipdp:12-03. 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: (Shamprasad M. Pujar)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.