IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rza/wpaper/397.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring the Impact of Marginal Tax Rate Reform on the Revenue Base of South Africa Using a Microsimulation Tax Model

Author

Listed:
  • Yolandé van Heerden and N.J. Schoeman

Abstract

This paper is primarily concerned with the revenue and tax efficiency effects of adjustments to marginal tax rates on individual income as an instrument of possible tax reform. The hypothesis is that changes to marginal rates affect not only the revenue base but also tax efficiency and the optimum level of taxes that supports economic growth. Using an optimal revenue maximising rate (based on Laffer analysis) the elasticity of taxable income is derived with respect to marginal tax rates for each taxable income category. These elasticities are then used to quantify the impact of changes in marginal rates on the revenue base and tax efficiency using a microsimulation (MS) tax model. In this first paper on the research results much attention is paid to the structure of the model and the way in which the data base has been compiled. The model allows for the dissemination of individual taxpayers by income groups, gender, educational level, age group, etc. Simulations include a scenario with higher marginal rates which is also more progressive (as in the 1998/1999 fiscal year) in which case tax revenue increases but the increase is overshadowed by a more than proportional decrease in tax efficiency as measured by its deadweight loss. On the other hand, a lowering of marginal rates (to bring South Africa’s marginal rates more in line with those of its peers) improves tax efficiency but also results in a substantial revenue loss. The estimated optimal individual tax to GDP ratio to maximise economic growth (6.7 per cent) shows a strong response to changes in marginal rates and the results from this research indicate that a lowering of marginal rates would also move the actual ratio closer to its optimum level. Thus, the trade-off between revenue collected and tax efficiency should be carefully monitored when personal income tax reform is being considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Yolandé van Heerden and N.J. Schoeman, 2013. "Measuring the Impact of Marginal Tax Rate Reform on the Revenue Base of South Africa Using a Microsimulation Tax Model," Working Papers 397, Economic Research Southern Africa.
  • Handle: RePEc:rza:wpaper:397
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econrsa.org/node/814
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William Branch & George W. Evans, 2007. "Model Uncertainty and Endogenous Volatility," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(2), pages 207-237, April.
    2. Tonks, Ian, 1983. "Bayesian Learning and the Optimal Investment Decision of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 93(369a), pages 87-98, Supplemen.
    3. Alexander Zimper & Alexander Ludwig, 2007. "Attitude polarization," MEA discussion paper series 07155, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
    4. Bullard, James & Mitra, Kaushik, 2002. "Learning about monetary policy rules," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 1105-1129, September.
    5. Evans, George W. & McGough, Bruce, 2005. "Monetary policy, indeterminacy and learning," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, pages 1809-1840.
    6. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2008. "Ambiguity, Information Quality, and Asset Pricing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 197-228, February.
    7. Gilboa Itzhak & Schmeidler David, 1993. "Updating Ambiguous Beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 33-49, February.
    8. Lubos PÁstor & Veronesi Pietro, 2003. "Stock Valuation and Learning about Profitability," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 1749-1790, October.
    9. George W. Evans & Seppo Honkapohja, 2003. "Adaptive learning and monetary policy design," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, pages 1045-1084.
    10. Campbell, John Y., 1999. "Asset prices, consumption, and the business cycle," Handbook of Macroeconomics,in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 19, pages 1231-1303 Elsevier.
    11. R. M. Cyert & M. H. DeGroot & C. A. Holt, 1978. "Sequential Investment Decisions with Bayesian Learning," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(7), pages 712-718, March.
    12. Hall, Robert E, 1988. "Intertemporal Substitution in Consumption," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 96(2), pages 339-357, April.
    13. Alexander Zimper & Alexander Ludwig, 2009. "On attitude polarization under Bayesian learning with non-additive beliefs," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 181-212, October.
    14. Paolo Ghirardato, 2002. "Revisiting Savage in a conditional world," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(1), pages 83-92.
    15. Shiller, Robert J, 1981. "Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 421-436, June.
    16. Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2011. "Dynamic choice under ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society.
    17. Marinacci, Massimo, 1999. "Limit Laws for Non-additive Probabilities and Their Frequentist Interpretation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 145-195, February.
    18. Weil, Philippe, 1989. "The equity premium puzzle and the risk-free rate puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 401-421, November.
    19. Cohen, M. & Gilboa, I. & Jaffray, J.Y. & Schmeidler, D., 2000. "An experimental study of updating ambiguous beliefs," Risk, Decision and Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(02), pages 123-133, June.
    20. Abel, Andrew B., 2002. "An exploration of the effects of pessimism and doubt on asset returns," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 1075-1092, July.
    21. Wakker,Peter P., 2010. "Prospect Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521765015, December.
    22. Viscusi, W Kip, 1990. "Do Smokers Underestimate Risks?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1253-1269, December.
    23. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    24. Epstein, Larry G & Zin, Stanley E, 1989. "Substitution, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Consumption and Asset Returns: A Theoretical Framework," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 937-969, July.
    25. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2007. "Learning Under Ambiguity," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1275-1303.
    26. Zimper, Alexander, 2009. "Half empty, half full and why we can agree to disagree forever," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 283-299, August.
    27. Gilboa, Itzhak, 1987. "Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-88, February.
    28. Pok-sang Lam & Stephen G. Cecchetti & Nelson C. Mark, 2000. "Asset Pricing with Distorted Beliefs: Are Equity Returns Too Good to Be True?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 787-805, September.
    29. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    30. Viscusi, W Kip & O'Connor, Charles J, 1984. "Adaptive Responses to Chemical Labeling: Are Workers Bayesian Decision Makers?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 74(5), pages 942-956, December.
    31. Chateauneuf, Alain & Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon, 2007. "Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, pages 538-567.
    32. Bigio, Saki, 2010. "Learning under fear of floating," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1923-1950, October.
    33. Zimper, Alexander, 2012. "Asset pricing in a Lucas fruit-tree economy with the best and worst in mind," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 610-628.
    34. Tetlow, Robert J. & von zur Muehlen, Peter, 2009. "Robustifying learnability," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 296-316, February.
    35. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    36. Kasa, Kenneth, 1999. "Will the Fed Ever Learn?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 21(2), pages 279-292, April.
    37. Wakker, Peter & Tversky, Amos, 1993. "An Axiomatization of Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 147-175, October.
    38. Alon Brav & J.B. Heaton, 2002. "Competing Theories of Financial Anomalies," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(2), pages 575-606, March.
    39. repec:dau:papers:123456789/198 is not listed on IDEAS
    40. Eichberger, Jurgen & Grant, Simon & Kelsey, David, 2007. "Updating Choquet beliefs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(7-8), pages 888-899, September.
    41. Epstein, Larry G. & Schneider, Martin, 2003. "Recursive multiple-priors," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 1-31, November.
    42. Brennan, Michael J. & Xia, Yihong, 2001. "Stock price volatility and equity premium," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 249-283, April.
    43. Assenza, Tiziana & Berardi, Michele, 2009. "Learning in a credit economy," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 1159-1169, May.
    44. Lars Peter Hansen & Thomas J. Sargent, 2007. "Introduction to Robustness," Introductory Chapters,in: Robustness Princeton University Press.
    45. Sarin, Rakesh & Wakker, Peter P, 1998. "Dynamic Choice and NonExpected Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 87-119, November.
    46. Lucas, Robert E, Jr, 1978. "Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(6), pages 1429-1445, November.
    47. George Wu & Richard Gonzalez, 1996. "Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(12), pages 1676-1690, December.
    48. Martin L. Weitzman, 2007. "Subjective Expectations and Asset-Return Puzzles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1102-1130, September.
    49. Giordani, Paolo & Soderlind, Paul, 2006. "Is there evidence of pessimism and doubt in subjective distributions? Implications for the equity premium puzzle," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1027-1043, June.
    50. Viscusi, W Kip, 1991. "Age Variations in Risk Perceptions and Smoking Decisions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 73(4), pages 577-588, November.
    51. Narayana R. Kocherlakota, 1996. "The Equity Premium: It's Still a Puzzle," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 42-71, March.
    52. Massimo Marinacci, 2002. "Learning from ambiguous urns," Statistical Papers, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 143-151, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    microsimulation; tax efficiency; optimal tax; tax reform; personal income tax;

    JEL classification:

    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H31 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Household

    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:rza:wpaper:397. 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: (Charles Tanton). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ersacza.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.