IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/qsh/wpaper/143126.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Who wins, who loses? Tools for distributional policy evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Kasy, Maximilian

Abstract

Most policy changes generate winners and losers. Political economy and optimal policy suggest questions such as: Who wins, who loses? How much? Given a choice of welfare weights, what is the impact of the policy change on social welfare? This paper proposes a framework to empirically answer such questions. The framework is grounded in welfare economics and allows for arbitrary heterogeneity across individuals as well as for endogenous prices and wages (general equilibrium effects). The proposed methods are based on imputation of money-metric welfare impacts for every individual in the data. The key technical contribution of this paper are new identification results for marginal causal effects conditional on a vector of endogenous outcomes. These identification results are required for imputation of individual welfare effects. Based on these identification results, we propose methods for estimation and inference on disaggregated welfare effects, sets of winners and losers, and social welfare effects. We furthermore provide results relating aggregation with social welfare weights to the distributional decomposition literature. %Our framework generalizes approaches used in the empirical optimal tax literature, the distributional decomposition literature, and the literature on determinants of the wage distribution. We apply our methods to analyze the distributional impact of the expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), using variation in state supplements to the federal EITC and the CPS-IPUMS data. We find large negative effects of depressed wages as a consequence of increased labor supply. The estimated effects are largest for earning around 20.000 US$ per year, and for high school dropouts.

Suggested Citation

  • Kasy, Maximilian, 2014. "Who wins, who loses? Tools for distributional policy evaluation," Working Paper 143126, Harvard University OpenScholar.
  • Handle: RePEc:qsh:wpaper:143126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://scholar.harvard.edu/kasy/node/143126
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    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:qsh:wpaper:143126. 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: (Richard Brandon). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/cbrssus.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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.