IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/19058.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do people really want a simple tax system? Evidence on preferences towards income tax simplification

Author

Listed:
  • Blesse, Sebastian
  • Buhlmann, Florian
  • Doerrenberg, Philipp

Abstract

Using new survey and experimental data for a representative sample of the German population, we study preferences for tax simplification. The general wisdom seems to suggest that most tax systems are overly complex and that tax simplification is generally desirable. Consistent with this general wisdom, we find that more than 90% of our sample believe that the tax system needs to be simplified. However, there also are efficiency and equity arguments in support of a certain degree of tax complexity and it is puzzling why tax systems remain highly complex despite the conventional view in favor of more simplification. The main purpose of our study then is to investigate if the high support for tax simplification is driven by a lack of awareness about the trade-offs behind simple and complex tax systems. Our data show that the support for simplification decreases as we randomly provide economic arguments against simplification and as we ask respondents if the tax system should account for specific differences in living situations (such as costly care of elderly family members). Overall, our findings suggest that the high support for simpler taxes is to some extent driven by a lack of awareness about the implications of tax simplification.

Suggested Citation

  • Blesse, Sebastian & Buhlmann, Florian & Doerrenberg, Philipp, 2019. "Do people really want a simple tax system? Evidence on preferences towards income tax simplification," ZEW Discussion Papers 19-058, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:19058
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/209722/1/1686406320.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alberto Alesina & Armando Miano & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2023. "Immigration and Redistribution," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl & Sebastian Siegloch, 2017. "The Elasticity of Taxable Income in the Presence of Deduction Possibilities," NBER Chapters, in: Personal Income Taxation and Household Behavior (TAPES), National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2022. "Tax Morale and the Role of Social Norms and Reciprocity - Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 78(1-2), pages 44-86.
    4. Blumkin, Tomer & Ruffle, Bradley J. & Ganun, Yosef, 2012. "Are income and consumption taxes ever really equivalent? Evidence from a real-effort experiment with real goods," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1200-1219.
    5. Christopher Blattman & Julian C. Jamison & Margaret Sheridan, 2017. "Reducing Crime and Violence: Experimental Evidence from Cognitive Behavioral Therapy in Liberia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1165-1206, April.
    6. Spencer Bastani & Daniel Waldenström, 2019. "Salience of Inherited Wealth and the Support for Inheritance Taxation," World Inequality Lab Working Papers hal-02877003, HAL.
    7. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    8. Alberto Alesina & George-Marios Angeletos, 2005. "Fairness and Redistribution," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 960-980, September.
    9. de Bartolome, Charles A. M., 1995. "Which tax rate do people use: Average or marginal?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 79-96, January.
    10. Brennan,Geoffrey & Buchanan,James M., 2006. "The Power to Tax," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521027922.
    11. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Matthieu Lequien & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2017. "Tax Simplicity and Heterogeneous Learning," NBER Working Papers 24049, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Sandro Brusco & Luca Colombo & Umberto Galmarini, 2014. "Tax differentiation, lobbying, and welfare," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 42(4), pages 977-1006, April.
    13. Johannes Abeler & Simon Jäger, 2015. "Complex Tax Incentives," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 1-28, August.
    14. Kay Blaufus & Frank Hechtner & Axel Möhlmann, 2017. "The Effect of Tax Preparation Expenses for Employees: Evidence from Germany," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(1), pages 525-554, March.
    15. Charles L. Ballard & Sanjay Gupta, 2018. "Perceptions and Realities of Average Tax Rates in the Federal Income Tax: Evidence from Michigan," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 71(2), pages 263-294, June.
    16. Cruces, Guillermo & Perez-Truglia, Ricardo & Tetaz, Martin, 2013. "Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 100-112.
    17. Felix J. Bierbrauer & Pierre C. Boyer & Andreas Peichl, 2021. "Politically Feasible Reforms of Nonlinear Tax Systems," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(1), pages 153-191, January.
    18. Dolls, Mathias & Wehrhöfer, Nils, 2021. "Attitudes towards euro area reforms: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    19. Saurabh Bhargava & Dayanand Manoli, 2015. "Psychological Frictions and the Incomplete Take-Up of Social Benefits: Evidence from an IRS Field Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(11), pages 3489-3529, November.
    20. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    21. Raj Chetty & Emmanuel Saez, 2013. "Teaching the Tax Code: Earnings Responses to an Experiment with EITC Recipients," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 1-31, January.
    22. Kay Blaufus & Renate Ortlieb, 2009. "Is Simple Better? A Conjoint Analysis of the Effects of Tax Complexity on Employee Preferences Concerning Company Pension Plans," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 61(1), pages 60-83, January.
    23. Jérémy BOCCANFUSO & Antoine FEREY, 2019. "Inattention and the Taxation Bias," Working Papers 2019-16, Center for Research in Economics and Statistics.
    24. Timm Bönke & Beate Jochimsen & Carsten Schröder, 2013. "Fiscal Federalism and Tax Administration: Evidence from Germany," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1307, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    25. Youssef Benzarti, 2020. "How Taxing Is Tax Filing? Using Revealed Preferences to Estimate Compliance Costs," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 38-57, November.
    26. Blesse, Sebastian & Heinemann, Friedrich, 2020. "Citizens’ trade-offs in state merger decisions: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 438-471.
    27. Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2013. "Decision heuristics and tax perception – An analysis of a tax-cut-cum-base-broadening policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-16.
    28. repec:oup:jeurec:v:15:y:2017:i:2:p:429-462. is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Helmuth Cremer & Firouz Gahvari & Jean-Marie Lozachmeur, 2010. "Tagging and Income Taxation: Theory and an Application," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-50, February.
    30. Kay Blaufus & Sebastian Eichfelder & Jochen Hundsdoerfer, 2014. "Income Tax Compliance Costs of Working Individuals," Public Finance Review, , vol. 42(6), pages 800-829, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    2. Goupille-Lebret, Jonathan & Garbinti, Bertrand & Munoz, Mathilde & Stantcheva, Stefanie & Zucman, Gabriel, 2023. "Tax Design, Information, and Elasticities: Evidence From the French Wealth Tax," CEPR Discussion Papers 18206, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Agersnap, Ole & Bjørkheim, Julie Brun, 2024. "Tax Complexity as Price Discrimination," Discussion Papers 2024/4, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Business and Management Science.
    4. Hoppe, Thomas & Schanz, Deborah & Sturm, Susann & Sureth, Caren & Voget, Johannes, 2020. "The relation between tax complexity and foreign direct investment: Evidence across countries," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 250, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Blesse, Sebastian, 2021. "Are your tax problems an opportunity not to pay taxes? Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Blesse, Sebastian, 2023. "Do your tax problems make tax evasion seem more justifiable? Evidence from a survey experiment," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    3. Bastani, Spencer & Giebe, Thomas & Miao, Chizheng, 2020. "Ethnicity and tax filing behavior," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    4. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    5. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Taxing Humans: Pitfalls of the Mechanism Design Approach and Potential Resolutions," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 107-133.
    6. Hirofumi Kurokawa & Tomoharu Mori & Fumio Ohtake, 2016. "A Choice Experiment on Taxes: Are Income and Consumption Taxes Equivalent?," ISER Discussion Paper 0966, Institute of Social and Economic Research, Osaka University.
    7. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & Clément Imbert & Johannes Spinnewijn & Teodora Tsankova & Maarten Luts, 2021. "How to Improve Tax Compliance? Evidence from Population-Wide Experiments in Belgium," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(5), pages 1425-1463.
    8. Kay Blaufus & Michael Milde, 2021. "Tax Misperceptions and the Effect of Informational Tax Nudges on Retirement Savings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5011-5031, August.
    9. Sielaff, Christian, 2011. "Steuerkomplexität und Arbeitsangebot: Eine experimentelle Analyse," Discussion Papers 2011/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    10. Werner, Peter & Riedl, Arno, 2018. "The role of experiments for policy design," Research Memorandum 022, Maastricht University, Graduate School of Business and Economics (GSBE).
    11. James Alm & Kay Blaufus & Martin Fochmann & Erich Kirchler & Peter N. C. Mohr & Nina E. Olson & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Tax Policy Measures to Combat the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic and Considerations to Improve Tax Compliance: A Behavioral Perspective," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 76(4), pages 396-428.
    12. Nyman, Pär & Aggeborn, Linuz & Ahlskog, Rafael, 2022. "Filling in the blanks. How does information about the Swedish EITC affect labour supply?," Working Paper Series 2022:9, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    13. Bohne, Albrecht & Nimczik, Jan Sebastian, 2018. "Information Frictions and Learning Dynamics: Evidence from Tax Avoidance in Ecuador," IZA Discussion Papers 11536, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Blaufus, Kay & Milde, Michael, 2018. "Learning to save tax-efficiently: Tax misperceptions and the effect of informational tax nudges on retirement savings," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 225, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    15. Andreas R. Kostøl & Andreas S. Myhre, 2021. "Labor Supply Responses to Learning the Tax and Benefit Schedule," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3733-3766, November.
    16. Waldenström, Daniel & Bastani, Spencer, 2020. "The Ability Gradient in Bunching," Working Paper Series 1333, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    17. Engelmann, Dirk & Janeba, Eckhard & Mechtenberg, Lydia & Wehrhöfer, Nils, 2023. "Preferences over taxation of high-income individuals: Evidence from a survey experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    18. Johannes Becker & Jonas Fooken & Melanie Steinhoff, 2019. "Behavioral Effects of Withholding Taxes on Labor Supply," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1417-1440, October.
    19. Baumgart, Eike & Blaufus, Kay & Hechtner, Frank, 2023. "The tax treatment of commuting expenses and job-related mobility," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 280, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    20. Katharina Werner, 2019. "The Role of Information for Public Preferences on Education – Evidence from Representative Survey Experiments," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 82.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Tax Complexity; Preferences Towards Tax Simplification; Randomized Survey Experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    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:zbw:zewdip:19058. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.