IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

A Note on the Efficient Design of Investment Incentives

  • Alan J. Auerbach

In a recent article in this Journal, Robin Boadway has argued that the appropriate requirement for neutrality is that the present value of the returns from an initial investment of [1pound], using the social discount rate, should be equal for all projects undertaken at the margin. We have few qualifications about this approach itself; although discounting with the social rate of time preference (STP) may be inappropriate in the current context. However, we would take issue with two aspects of Boadwav's application of his view of neutrality. The first problem concerns the appropriate definition of the constraint on firm leverage which would arise from the existence of limited liability. We believe Boadway's assumption to be inappropriate, and find that its replacement with what we argue to be the correct one leads to important revisions in evaluating the neutrality of different incentives. Another point we would make is that Boadway's results depend crucially on the absence of both personal taxes and inflation. We argue below that once realistic account has been taken of these important elements of the problem, general results about the neutrality of different incentives can no longer be derived, so that while Boadway's criterion may be appropriate, its application promises to be very difficult.

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:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 0483.

in new window

Date of creation: Jun 1980
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Auerbach, Alan J. "A Note on the Efficient Design of Investment Incentives." The Economic Journal, Vol. 91, (March 1981), pp. 217-223.
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:0483
Note: PE
Contact details of provider: Postal:
National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.

Phone: 617-868-3900
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

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:nbr:nberwo:0483. 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: ()

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.