IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Simulating the Dynamic Macroeconomic and Microeconomic Effects of the FairTax

  • Sabine Jokisch
  • Laurence J. Kotlikoff

America's aging coupled with high and growing old age health and pension benefits augers for much higher payroll taxes, with potentially damaging effects on the U.S. economy. This prognosis is supported by our analysis of a detailed dynamic life-cycle general equilibrium model, which closely captures projected changes in U.S. demographics. The FairTax offers a potential alternative to this dismal economic future. The FairTax proposes to replace the federal payroll tax, personal income tax, corporate income tax, and estate tax (not modeled here) with a progressive consumption tax delivered in the form of a federal retail sales tax plus a rebate. According to our simulation model, these policy changes would almost double the U.S. capital stock by the end of the century and raise long-run real wages by 19 percent compared to the base case alternative. They would also preclude a doubling of the highly regressive payroll tax. Indeed, the poorest members of each cohort experience remarkably large welfare gains from the FairTax. To be specific, today's elderly poor are predicted to experience a 13 to 14 percent welfare gain. In contrast, their middle class counterparts enjoy a 1 to 2 percent gain, and their richest counterparts experience a .5 to 1 percent welfare loss. Poor baby boomers experience 8 percent gains, while middle- and upper-income boomers experience either very small welfare losses or small gains. Once one moves to generations postdating the baby boomers there are positive welfare gains for all income groups in each cohorts. For example, the poorest members of the generation born in 1990 enjoy a 16 percent welfare gain. Their middle-class and rich contemporaries experience 5 and 2 percent welfare gains, respectively. The welfare gains are largest for future generations. Take the cohort born in 2030. The poorest members of this cohort enjoy a huge 27 percent improvement in their well being. For middle class members of this birth group, there's an 11 percent welfare gain. And for the richest members of the group, the gain is 5 percent. The remarkable point here is the size of the gains from the reform relative to the losses. Yes, some initial high- and middle-income households are made worse off, but their welfare losses are minor compared with the gains available to future generations, particularly the poorest members of future generations. While our model is highly stylized, it suggests that the FairTax offers a real opportunity to improve the U.S. economy's performance and the wellbeing of the vast majority of Americans. The winners from this reform, primarily those who are least well off, experience very major gains, and the losers experience only minor losses.

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.nber.org/papers/w11858.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 11858.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Dec 2005
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Jokisch, Sabine and Laurence J. Kotlikoff. “Simulating the Dynamic Macroeconomic Effects of the FairTax.” The National Tax Journal (2007).
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:11858
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: http://www.nber.orgEmail:


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. Kotlikoff, Laurence J & Smetters, Kent A & Walliser, Jan, 1998. "Social Security: Privatization and Progressivity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 137-41, May.
  2. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Larry Kotlikoff, 2003. "The Developed World's Demographic Transition - the Roles of Capital Flows, Immigration, and Policy," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-133, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  3. Henning Bohn, 2001. "Social Security and Demographic Uncertainty: The Risk-Sharing Properties of Alternative Policies," NBER Chapters, in: Risk Aspects of Investment-Based Social Security Reform, pages 203-246 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Ayse Imrohoroglu & Selahattin Imrohoroglu & Douglas H. Joines, 1999. "Social Security in an Overlapping Generations Economy with Land," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 2(3), pages 638-665, July.
  5. Casey B. Mulligan, 1999. "Substition over Time: Another Look at Life-Cycle Labor Supply," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1998, volume 13, pages 75-152 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Mark Huggett & Gustavo Ventura, 1998. "On the Distributional Effects of Social Security Reform," Working Papers 9801, Centro de Investigacion Economica, ITAM.
  7. Kenneth A. Lewis & Laurence S. Seidman, 2002. "Funding Social Security: The Transition in a Life-Cycle Growth Model," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 28(2), pages 159-180, Spring.
  8. Hansson, Ingemar & Stuart, Charles, 1989. "Social Security as Trade among Living Generations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 1182-95, December.
  9. Ziliak, J. & Kniesner, T.J., 1995. "Estimating Life-Cycle Labor Supply tax Effects," Papers 9589, Tilburg - Center for Economic Research.
  10. Smetters, Kent & Walliser, Jan, 2004. "Opting out of social security," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(7-8), pages 1295-1306, July.
  11. Laitner, John, 1984. "Transition time paths for overlapping-generations models," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 111-129, May.
  12. Elizabeth Docteur & Howard Oxley, 2003. "Health-Care Systems: Lessons from the Reform Experience," OECD Health Working Papers 9, OECD Publishing.
  13. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2004. "The Role of Immigration in Dealing with the Developed World's Demographic Transition," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(3), pages 296-, September.
  14. Whitehouse, Edward, 2001. "Pension systems in 15 countries compared: the value of entitlements," MPRA Paper 14751, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  15. Aart Kraay & Norman Loayza & Luis Servén & Jaume Ventura, 2000. "Country portfolios," Economics Working Papers 913, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  16. MaCurdy, Thomas E, 1981. "An Empirical Model of Labor Supply in a Life-Cycle Setting," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(6), pages 1059-85, December.
  17. Shinichi Nishiyama & Kent Smetters, 2003. "Consumption Taxes and Economic Efficiency in a Stochastic OLG Economy," NBER Working Papers 9492, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Feldstein, Martin & Liebman, Jeffrey B., 2002. "Social security," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 32, pages 2245-2324 Elsevier.
  19. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2005. "Will China Eat Our Lunch or Take us to Dinner? - Simulating the Transition Paths of the U.S., Eu, Japan and China," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-151, Boston University - Department of Economics.
  20. Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Kent Smetters & Jan Walliser, 1999. "Privatizing Social Security in the U.S. -- Comparing the Options," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 2(3), pages 532-574, July.
  21. David A. Wise, 1989. "The Economics of Aging," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number wise89-1, May.
  22. Blundell, Richard & Meghir, Costas & Neves, Pedro, 1993. "Labour supply and intertemporal substitution," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 59(1-2), pages 137-160, September.
  23. Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Robert Hagemann & Giuseppe Nicoletti, 1989. "The Dynamics of an Aging Population: The Case of Four OECD Countries," NBER Working Papers 2797, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  24. Hubbard, R Glenn & Judd, Kenneth L, 1987. "Social Security and Individual Welfare: Precautionary Saving, Borrowing Constraints, and the Payroll Tax," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 630-46, September.
  25. Thomas Cooley & Jorge Soares, 1999. "Privatizing Social Security," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 2(3), pages 731-755, July.
  26. Feldstein, Martin & Horioka, Charles, 1980. "Domestic Saving and International Capital Flows," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 90(358), pages 314-29, June.
  27. David Altig, 2001. "Simulating Fundamental Tax Reform in the United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(3), pages 574-595, June.
  28. Julia Lynn Coronado & Don Fullerton & Thomas Glass, 2000. "Long Run Effects of Social Security Reform Proposals on Lifetime Progressivity," NBER Working Papers 7568, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  29. Sveinbjörn Blöndal & Stefano Scarpetta, 1999. "The Retirement Decision in OECD Countries," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 202, OECD Publishing.
  30. Fehr, Hans & Jokisch, Sabine & Kotlikoff, Laurence J., 2008. "Fertility, mortality and the developed world's demographic transition," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 455-473.
  31. Feldstein, Martin (ed.), 1998. "Privatizing Social Security," National Bureau of Economic Research Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226241012.
  32. Imrohoroglu, Ayse & Imrohoroglu, Selahattin & Joines, Douglas H, 1995. "A Life Cycle Analysis of Social Security," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 83-114, June.
  33. Heckman, James J & Lochner, Lance & Taber, Christopher, 1998. "Tax Policy and Human-Capital Formation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 293-97, May.
  34. Kotlikoff, Laurence J, 1979. "Social Security and Equilibrium Capital Intensity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 93(2), pages 233-53, May.
  35. Fehr, Hans & Halder, Gitte & Jokisch, Sabine & Kotlikoff, Laurence J., 2003. "A simulation model for the demographic transition in the OECD: Data requirements, model structure and calibration," W.E.P. - Würzburg Economic Papers 45, University of Würzburg, Chair for Monetary Policy and International Economics.
  36. HUANG, HE & IMROHOROG[caron]LU, SELAHATTIN & SARGENT, THOMAS J., 1997. "Two Computations To Fund Social Security," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(01), pages 7-44, January.
  37. Alan J. Auerbach & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 1981. "An Examination of Empirical Tests of Social Security and Savings," NBER Working Papers 0730, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  38. Thomas F. Cooley & Jorge Soares, 1999. "A Positive Theory of Social Security Based on Reputation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(1), pages 135-160, February.
  39. Hans Fehr & Sabine Jokisch & Laurence J. Kotlikoff, 2005. "Will China Eat Our Lunch or Take Us Out to Dinner? Simulating the Transition Paths of the U.S., EU, Japan, and China," NBER Working Papers 11668, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  40. Feldstein, Martin S, 1974. "Social Security, Induced Retirement, and Aggregate Capital Accumulation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 82(5), pages 905-26, Sept./Oct.
  41. Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Kent Smetters & Jan Walliser, 2002. "Distributional Effects in a General Equilibrium Analysis of Social Security," NBER Chapters, in: The Distributional Aspects of Social Security and Social Security Reform, pages 327-370 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
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:nbr:nberwo:11858. 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.