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

Franchise Fee, Tax/Subsidy Policies and Economic Growth

  • Wang, Vey
  • Lai, Chung-Hui
Registered author(s):

    In this paper, we take a new look at the effects of the subsidy policy and the government’s R&D activities in an R&D-based growth model. The government not only subsidizes the R&D cost of the firms but also engages in R&D activities and, in addition, levies a specific tax on the firms producing the final and the intermediate goods, respectively, in order to finance the expenditure. We find that in the economy there exist two balanced equilibrium growth paths. In an economy with a high growth path, the government’s subsidy policy and its R&D activities will crowd out the private R&D activities, and hence the fiscal policies are of no help to the economic growth. In other words, the intermediate goods firms play an important role in driving the economic growth. By contrast, in an economy with a low growth path, the government that directly engages in R&D activities plays an important role in economic growth. The fiscal policies of the government have a positive effect on the economic growth.

    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: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/27745/1/MPRA_paper_27745.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 27745.

    as
    in new window

    Length:
    Date of creation: 27 Jun 2010
    Date of revision:
    Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:27745
    Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
    Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
    Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
    Web page: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

    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. Peretto, Pietro F., 2007. "Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 353-382, November.
    2. S. P. Anderson & A. de Palma & B. Kreider, 1999. "Tax incidence in differentiated product oligopoly," THEMA Working Papers 99-10, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    3. Koichi Futagami & Junko Doi, 2004. "Commodity Taxation and Economic Growth," The Japanese Economic Review, Japanese Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 46-55.
    4. Gareth Myles, 1996. "Imperfect competition and the optimal combination of ad valorem and specific taxation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 29-44, January.
    5. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, . "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Working Papers 95006, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
    6. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt, 1990. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," NBER Working Papers 3223, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
    8. Junko Doi & Koichi Futagami, 2004. "Commodity Taxation and the Effects of Entry: A Case of Variety Preferences," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 267-279, December.
    9. M. Ishaq Nadiri, 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 4423, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Segerstrom, Paul S, 2000. " The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 277-305, September.
    11. Pengfei Wang & Yi Wen, 2007. "Imperfect competition and indeterminacy of aggregate output," Working Papers 2006-017, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    12. Jinli Zeng & Jie Zhang, . "Subsidies in an R&D growth model with elastic labor," MRG Discussion Paper Series 1206, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    13. Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, 1998. "Measuring The Social Return To R&D," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 113(4), pages 1119-1135, November.
    14. Nadiri, M.I., 1993. "Innovations and Technological Spillovers," Working Papers 93-31, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
    15. Philipp J. H. Schröder, 2004. "The Comparison between Ad Valorem and Unit Taxes under Monopolistic Competition," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 281-292, December.
    16. Carl Davidson & Paul Segerstrom, 1998. "R&D Subsidies and Economic Growth," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 29(3), pages 548-577, Autumn.
    17. Hamilton, Stephen F., 1999. "Tax incidence under oligopoly: a comparison of policy approaches," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 233-245, February.
    18. Paul M Romer, 1999. "Endogenous Technological Change," Levine's Working Paper Archive 2135, David K. Levine.
    19. Besley, Timothy, 1989. "Commodity taxation and imperfect competition : A note on the effects of entry," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 359-367, December.
    20. Delipalla, Sofia & Keen, Michael, 1992. "The comparison between ad valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 351-367, December.
    21. Zvi Griliches, 1991. "The Search for R&D Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 3768, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Stern, Nicholas, 1987. "The effects of taxation, price control and government contracts in oligopoly and monopolistic competition," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 133-158, March.
    23. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth Through Creative Destruction," Scholarly Articles 12490578, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    24. Spence, Michael, 1976. "Product Selection, Fixed Costs, and Monopolistic Competition," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 217-35, June.
    25. Vey Wang & Chung-Hui Lai & Lung-Sheng Lee & Shih-Wen Hu, 2010. "Franchise fee, contract bargaining, and economic growth," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 539-552.
    26. Michael Keen, 1998. "The balance between specific and ad valorem taxation," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(1), pages 1-37, February.
    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:pra:mprapa:27745. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

    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.