IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/42968.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Indirect Taxation and Privatization in a Model of Government's Preference

Author

Listed:
  • Choi, Kangsik

Abstract

By introducing the government's preference for tax revenues into unionized mixed duopolies, this paper investigates how the preference can change the government's choice of tax regimes between ad valorem and specific taxes. Main results are as follows. Given that one of the tax regimes is predetermined, privatization never improves welfare and privatization is preferable for the government when it emphasizes its tax revenue. However, when the tax regime is {\it endogenously} determined by the government, privatization is preferable from the viewpoint of social welfare if the government heavily emphasizes its tax revenue. Thus, there are conflicts of interest between the public firm and the government: If it heavily emphasizes its tax revenue, then the government always has the incentive to levy specific tax, while the public firm has the incentive to be levied by ad valorem. However, there are no conflicts of interest between the public firm and the government when the government levies the specific tax if the government less emphasizes its tax revenue. Interestingly, the government never has the incentive for privatization if the government considers either tax as an option.

Suggested Citation

  • Choi, Kangsik, 2012. "Indirect Taxation and Privatization in a Model of Government's Preference," MPRA Paper 42968, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:42968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/42968/1/MPRA_paper_42968.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Justus Haucap & Christian Wey, 2004. "Unionisation structures and innovation incentives," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(494), pages 149-165, March.
    2. 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.
    3. Edwards, Jeremy & Keen, Michael, 1996. "Tax competition and Leviathan," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 113-134, January.
    4. Bos, Dieter, 1991. "Privatization: A Theoretical Treatment," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198283690.
    5. Philip Du Caju & Erwan Gautier & Daphne Momferatu & Melanie Ward-Warmedinger, 2009. "Institutional Features of Wage Bargaining in 23 European Countries, the US and Japan," Ekonomia, Cyprus Economic Society and University of Cyprus, vol. 12(2), pages 57-108, Winter.
    6. Michael Keen, 1998. "The balance between specific and ad valorem taxation," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 19(1), pages 1-37, February.
    7. Ishida, Junichiro & Matsushima, Noriaki, 2009. "Should civil servants be restricted in wage bargaining? A mixed-duopoly approach," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(3-4), pages 634-646, April.
    8. Brulhart, Marius & Jametti, Mario, 2006. "Vertical versus horizontal tax externalities: An empirical test," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(10-11), pages 2027-2062, November.
    9. Mujumdar, Sudesh & Pal, Debashis, 1998. "Effects of indirect taxation in a mixed oligopoly," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 199-204, February.
    10. Henrick Horn & Asher Wolinsky, 1988. "Bilateral Monopolies and Incentives for Merger," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 19(3), pages 408-419, Autumn.
    11. Torsten Persson & Guido Tabellini, 2002. "Political Economics: Explaining Economic Policy," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262661314, January.
    12. Choi, Kangsik, 2011. "Unions, government's preference, and privatization," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(6), pages 2502-2508.
    13. Michael Rauscher, 2000. "Interjurisdictional Competition and Public-Sector Prodigality: The Triumph of the Market over the State?," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(1), pages 1-89, September.
    14. Brcena-Ruiz, Juan Carlos & Garzn, Mara Begoa, 2009. "Relocation and public ownership of firms," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 71-85, March.
    15. Seade, J, 1985. "Profitable Cost Increases and the Shifting of Taxation : Equilibrium Response of Markets in Oligopoly," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 260, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    16. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:12:y:2008:i:40:p:1-7 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. John Vickers & George Yarrow, 1988. "Privatization: An Economic Analysis," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720116, January.
    18. Michael J. Keen & Christos Kotsogiannis, 2002. "Does Federalism Lead to Excessively High Taxes?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 363-370, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ad Valorem; Specific Tax; Government's Payoff; Social Welfare; Privatization;

    JEL classification:

    • C79 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Other
    • J51 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Labor-Management Relations, Trade Unions, and Collective Bargaining - - - Trade Unions: Objectives, Structure, and Effects
    • L13 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Oligopoly and Other Imperfect Markets
    • L33 - Industrial Organization - - Nonprofit Organizations and Public Enterprise - - - Comparison of Public and Private Enterprise and Nonprofit Institutions; Privatization; Contracting Out
    • D43 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Oligopoly and Other Forms of Market Imperfection
    • H44 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Publicly Provided Goods: Mixed Markets

    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:pra:mprapa:42968. 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: (Joachim Winter) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.