The author contrasts excise taxes with sales taxes, consumption taxes, licenses, stamp, duties, and other indirect taxes. He describes different types of excises, their relative tax burdens, and how progressive and economically efficient they may be. The main argument for traditional excise taxes, he says, is that they yield substantial revenue with relatively little complaint. A second justification is that the cost of the excessive use of commodities is borne by the purchasers, not by society at large. A third argument is to penalize people for a commodity's use (especially popular with commodities such as alcohol). Arguments against traditional excises: they tend to be regressive, because of the low income elasticity of demand, and they place an unequal burden on families at given income levels. They deprive families of the funds for milk and other essential items, without reducing consumption of taxed goods. High rates tend to increase smuggling and illicit production, often of inferior, even dangerous, substitutes. And the case for them is not strong, resting as it often does on moral grounds. But excise taxes are sure to continue as they yield revenues and are generally more acceptable than other sources of revenue, such as income taxes. Taxes on motor fuel and related motor vehicle levies are among the three most productive excises. They are justified as a charge for the use of roads, in lieu of tolls. In Western Europe, they are seen as progressive, as reaching the people most able to pay -- and incidentally as reducing road congestion. Criticism of such taxes centers on how best to attain desired goals -- for example, sorting out the relative burdens on light and heavy vehicles. Luxury excises tend to be applied to commodities and services with a high income-elasticity of demand, the assumption being that they will reach the people best able to pay them -- achieving equity without relying on increased income taxes, which are difficult to enforce in developing countries and hurt incentives. A luxury excise tax, limited to certain items, is viewed as being progressive, which a sales tax rarely is. But if various rates apply, compliance and administration become complex, and consumers may discriminate among closely related commodities. Moreover, the goods taxed are often widely used by lower income groups (sugar and kerosene are prime examples). For these reasons, many countries are introducing sales taxes, with few rates or a single rate (with exemptions), with simplified processing, and with less ambiguity about what is or is not taxed.
|Date of creation:||28 Feb 1994|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 1818 H Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20433|
Phone: (202) 477-1234
Web page: http://www.worldbank.org/
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wbk:wbrwps:1251. 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: (Roula I. Yazigi)
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.