IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Tax Progression: International and Intertemporal Comparisons Using LIS Data

Listed author(s):
  • Kirill Pogorelskiy

    ()

  • Stefan Traub

    ()

  • Christian Seidl

    ()

Registered author(s):

    Based on the earlier work of one of the authors, this paper develops a unified methodology to compare tax progression for dominance relations under different income distributions. We address it as uniform tax progression for different income distributions and present the respective approach for both continuous and discrete cases, the latter also being employed for empirical investigations. Using dominance relations, we define tax progression under different income distributions as a class of natural extensions of uniform tax progression in terms of taxes, net incomes, and differences of first moment distribution functions. To cope with different monetary units and different supports of the income distributions involved, we utilized their transformations to population and income quantiles. Altogether, we applied six methods of comparing tax progression, three in terms of taxes and three in terms of net incomes, which we utilized for empirical analyses of comparisons of tax progression using data from the Luxembourg Income Study. This is the first paper that performs international and intertemporal comparisons of uniform tax progression with actual data.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.lisdatacenter.org/wps/liswps/551.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg in its series LIS Working papers with number 551.

    as
    in new window

    Length: 108 pages
    Date of creation: Sep 2010
    Publication status: Published in Tax Progression in OECD Countries: An Integrative Analysis of Tax Schedules and Income Distributions. New York: Springer, 2013. Also in ECINEQ Working Paper 184, 2010. http://www.ecineq.org/milano/WP/ECINEQ2010-184.pdf.
    Handle: RePEc:lis:liswps:551
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    11, Porte des Sciences, L-4366 Esch-Belval

    Phone: +352 466 644 5950
    Web page: http://www.lisdatacenter.org
    Email:


    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.:

    as
    in new window


    1. Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Schneider, Hilmar, 2009. "Demografie und Ungleichheit: Der Einfluss von Veränderungen der Haushaltsstruktur auf die Einkommensverteilung in Deutschland," IZA Discussion Papers 4197, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    2. Poterba, James M., 2007. "Income inequality and income taxation," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 623-633.
    3. Yingying Deng & Monica Prasad, 2009. "Taxation and the Worlds of Welfare," LIS Working papers 480, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    4. Timothy Smeeding & Gunther Schmaus & Brigitte Buhmann & Lee Rainwater, 1988. "Equivalence Scales, Well-Being, Inequality and Poverty: Sensitivity Estimates Across Ten Countries Using the LIS Database," LIS Working papers 17, LIS Cross-National Data Center in Luxembourg.
    5. Gastwirth, Joseph L & Glauberman, Marcia, 1976. "The Interpolation of the Lorenz Curve and Gini Index from Grouped Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(3), pages 479-483, May.
    6. G.B. Hainsworth, 1964. "The Lorenz Curve As A General Tool Of Economic Analysis," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 40(91), pages 426-441, September.
    7. Thomas Piketty & Emmanuel Saez, 2003. "Income Inequality in the United States, 1913–1998," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 118(1), pages 1-41.
    8. Glewwe, Paul, 1991. "Household equivalence scales and the measurement of inequality : Transfers from the poor to the rich could decrease inequality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 211-216, March.
    9. Peichl, Andreas & Pestel, Nico & Schneider, Hilmar, 2009. "Mehr Ungleichheit durch kleinere Haushalte? Der Einfluss von Veränderungen der Haushaltsstruktur auf die Einkommensverteilung in Deutschland," IZA Standpunkte 18, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
    10. Udo Ebert & Patrick Moyes, 2003. "Equivalence Scales Reconsidered," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 319-343, January.
    11. Charles Blackorby & David Donaldson, 1984. "Ethical Social Index Numbers and the Measurement of Effective Tax-Benefit Progressivity," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 17(4), pages 683-694, November.
    12. Mookherjee, Dilip & Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1982. "A Decomposition Analysis of the Trend in UK Income Inequality," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 886-902, December.
    13. Kakwani, Nanak, 1987. "Measures of Tax Progressivity and Redistribution Effect: A Comment," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 42(3), pages 431-434.
    14. Molly Martin, 2006. "Family structure and income inequality in families with children, 1976 to 2000," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 43(3), pages 421-445, August.
    15. Jenkins, Stephen P, 1995. "Accounting for Inequality Trends: Decomposition Analyses for the UK, 1971-86," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 62(245), pages 29-63, February.
    16. Xavier Sala-i-Martin, 2006. "The World Distribution of Income: Falling Poverty and … Convergence, Period," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(2), pages 351-397.
    17. R. A. Musgrave & Tun Thin, 1948. "Income Tax Progression, 1929-48," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 498-498.
    18. Suits, Daniel B, 1977. "Measurement of Tax Progressivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(4), pages 747-752, September.
    19. Hemming, R. & Keen, M. J., 1983. "Single-crossing conditions in comparisons of tax progressivity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 373-380, April.
    20. C. P. Khetan & S. N. Poddar, 1976. "Measurement of Income Tax Progression in a Growing Economy: The Canadian Experience," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 9(4), pages 613-629, November.
    21. Liu, Pak-Wai, 1984. "A Note on Two Summary Measures of Tax Progressivity," Public Finance = Finances publiques, , vol. 39(3), pages 412-419.
    22. Aaberge, Rolf & Melby, Ingrid, 1998. "The Sensitivity of Income Inequality to Choice of Equivalence Scales," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 44(4), pages 565-569, December.
    23. Jenkins, Stephen P & Cowell, Frank A, 1994. "Parametric Equivalence Scales and Scale Relativities," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 104(425), pages 891-900, July.
    24. Schaefer, Thilo & Peichl, Andreas, 2007. "Wie progressiv ist Deutschland?," FiFo Discussion Papers - Finanzwissenschaftliche Diskussionsbeiträge 08-5, University of Cologne, FiFo Institute for Public Economics.
    25. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    26. Coulter, Fiona A E & Cowell, Frank A & Jenkins, Stephen P, 1992. "Equivalence Scale Relativities and the Extent of Inequality and Poverty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(414), pages 1067-1082, September.
    27. Buhmann, Brigitte, et al, 1988. "Equivalence Scales, Well-Being, Inequality, and Poverty: Sensitivity Estimates across Ten Countries Using the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) Database," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 34(2), pages 115-142, June.
    28. Thomas Piketty, 2003. "Income Inequality in France, 1901-1998," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(5), pages 1004-1042, October.
    29. Dardanoni, Valentino & Lambert, Peter J., 2002. "Progressivity comparisons," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 99-122, October.
    30. Jakobsson, Ulf, 1976. "On the measurement of the degree of progression," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 5(1-2), pages 161-168.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lis:liswps:551. 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: (Piotr Paradowski)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.