IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kgu/wpaper/305.html

Strategic Price Competition between Local Governments with the Brand Externalities of Reciprocal Gifts in the Hometown Tax Donation (Furusato Nozei) System in Japan

Author

Listed:
  • Toshiyuki Uemura

    (School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University)

Abstract

This study analyzes donation price competition between leader local governments with strong brand power and follower local governments with weak brand power, where multiple local governments offer similar local products as reciprocal gifts under the hometown tax donation (Furusato Nozei) system in Japan. We construct a strategic price competition model in which the strategic variables are donation prices and the timing of decision-making is sequential, with some governments acting first and others acting second in the presence of the brand externalities of reciprocal gifts. Based on a theoretical model grounded in household utility maximization and local governments' net donation revenue maximization, we formulate donation price reaction functions and demonstrate the policy implications for surplus through a comparative static analysis. To validate this theoretical model, we estimate donation demand functions using spatial econometric analysis. In an analysis targeting governments in Hokkaido offering reciprocal gifts with the well-known Hokkaido brand, the coefficients indicating complementarity between reciprocal gifts are significant due to brand externalities. Consistent with the theoretical model's assumptions, the empirical analysis also suggests the existence of leader governments, confirming the structure of strategic price competition, where the donation price of leader governments influences that of follower governments. The contributions of this study lie in its theoretical model of strategic price competition for the hometown tax donation system, comparative static analysis, and empirical verification of the existence of leader governments using spatial econometric analysis based on the haversine distance. We find that strengthening the brand power of reciprocal gifts is crucial for gaining a surplus.

Suggested Citation

  • Toshiyuki Uemura, 2026. "Strategic Price Competition between Local Governments with the Brand Externalities of Reciprocal Gifts in the Hometown Tax Donation (Furusato Nozei) System in Japan," Discussion Paper Series 305, School of Economics, Kwansei Gakuin University.
  • Handle: RePEc:kgu:wpaper:305
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://192.218.163.163/RePEc/pdf/kgdp305.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2026
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anderson, Simon, 1987. "Spatial competition and price leadership," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 369-398.
    2. Fudenberg, Drew & Tirole, Jean, 1984. "The Fat-Cat Effect, the Puppy-Dog Ploy, and the Lean and Hungry Look," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(2), pages 361-366, May.
    3. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, December.
    4. Nirvikar Singh & Xavier Vives, 1984. "Price and Quantity Competition in a Differentiated Duopoly," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 15(4), pages 546-554, Winter.
    5. Braid, Ralph M., 1986. "Stackelberg price leadership in spatial competition," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 439-449, December.
    6. Case, Anne C. & Rosen, Harvey S. & Hines, James Jr., 1993. "Budget spillovers and fiscal policy interdependence : Evidence from the states," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 285-307, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Belleflamme,Paul & Peitz,Martin, 2015. "Industrial Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107069978.
    2. Banerjee, Dyuti S. & Chatterjee, Ishita, 2014. "Exploring Stackelberg profit ordering under asymmetric product differentiation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 309-315.
    3. Lau, Sau-Him Paul, 2001. "Aggregate Pattern of Time-dependent Adjustment Rules, II: Strategic Complementarity and Endogenous Nonsynchronization," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 98(2), pages 199-231, June.
    4. Daniel Ferreira & Thomas Kittsteiner, 2016. "When Does Competition Foster Commitment?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(11), pages 3199-3212, November.
    5. Junjie Zhou & Xiaoshuai Fan & Ying-Ju Chen & Christopher S. Tang, 2021. "Information Provision and Farmer Welfare in Developing Economies," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 230-245, 1-2.
    6. Ya‐chin Wang & Leonard F.s. Wang, 2009. "Equivalence Of Competition Mode In A Vertically Differentiated Duopoly With Delegation," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 77(4), pages 577-590, December.
    7. Tabasso, D, 2009. "Temporary Contracts and Monopsony Power in the UK Labour Market," Economics Discussion Papers 8938, University of Essex, Department of Economics.
    8. Fischer, Carolyn, 2011. "Market power and output-based refunding of environmental policy revenues," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 212-230, January.
    9. Andaluz, J. & Elsadany, A.A. & Jarne, G., 2017. "Nonlinear Cournot and Bertrand-type dynamic triopoly with differentiated products and heterogeneous expectations," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation (MATCOM), Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 86-99.
    10. Philippe Aghion & Richard Blundell & Rachel Griffith & Peter Howitt & Susanne Prantl, 2009. "The Effects of Entry on Incumbent Innovation and Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(1), pages 20-32, February.
    11. Magnus Hoffmann & Grégoire Rota‐Graziosi, 2020. "Endogenous timing in the presence of non‐monotonicities," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(1), pages 359-402, February.
    12. Gerda Dewit & Dermot Leahy, 2009. "Oligopsonistic Cats and Dogs," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 35(3), pages 257-274, November.
    13. Bouckaert, Jan & Degryse, Hans, 1995. "Phonebanking," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 229-244, February.
    14. Luís Cabral, 2018. "We’re Number 1: Price Wars for Market Share Leadership," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2013-2030, May.
    15. Marco Haan, 2001. "The Economics of Free Internet Access," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 157(3), pages 359-379, September.
    16. Kresimir Zigic & Jiri Strelicky & Michal Kunin, 2020. "Private and Public IPR Protection in a Vertically Differentiated Software Duopoly," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp671, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    17. Albert Banal‐Estañol & Marco Ottaviani, 2006. "Mergers with Product Market Risk," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 577-608, September.
    18. Zhang, Jianqiang & Cao, Qingning & He, Xiuli, 2020. "Manufacturer encroachment with advertising," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    19. Vives, Xavier & Jun, Byoung, 2001. "Incentives in Dynamic Duopoly," CEPR Discussion Papers 2899, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    20. Fabian Herweg & Daniel Müller, 2014. "Price Discrimination in Input Markets: Quantity Discounts and Private Information," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(577), pages 776-804, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H71 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • H72 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - State and Local Budget and Expenditures
    • H77 - Public Economics - - State and Local Government; Intergovernmental Relations - - - Intergovernmental Relations; Federalism

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:kgu:wpaper:305. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Toshihiro Okada (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dekgujp.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.