Advertisement

International Tax and Public Finance

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 625–640 | Cite as

Horizontal inequity under a dual income tax system: principles and measurement

  • Erlend E. Bø
  • Peter J. Lambert
  • Thor O. Thoresen
Article

Abstract

Tax systems with separate taxation of wage and capital income, also called dual income tax systems, have gained relevance through the Mirrlees Review. Obviously, such tax systems are exposed to horizontal equity (HE) failures, or horizontal inequity (HI). HE and HI have a firm grip on assessment of fair tax policies, both from an academic point of view and in general public debate. The dual income tax system of Norway was modified by the tax reform of 2006 precisely because the previous schedule failed to deliver equal tax treatment of equals. This paper discusses the meaning and measurement of HI effects of dual income tax systems, and evaluates the development of HI for Norway over the time period 2000–2008 using microdata. A copula-based identification strategy efficiently establishes a framework for evaluations of HI over time. The dual income tax system and the early announcement of its impending revision during the period under examination created measurement problems which we had to account for by defining a new income concept for the empirical strategy. As expected, we find less HI in Norway after the reform of 2006.

Keywords

Dual income tax Horizontal inequity Reranking Copula estimation 

JEL Classification

D31 D63 H31 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aasness, J., Dagsvik, J. K., & Thoresen, T. O. (2007). The Norwegian tax-benefit model system LOTTE. In A. Gupta & A. Harding (Eds.), Modelling Our Future: Population Ageing, Health and Aged Care, International Symposia in Economic Theory and Econometrics (pp. 513–518). Amsterdam: Elsevier. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alstadsæter, A. (2007). The Achilles heel of the dual income tax. The Norwegian case. Finnish Economic Papers, 20, 5–22. Google Scholar
  3. Alstadsæter, A., & Fjærli, E. (2009). Neutral taxation of shareholder income? Corporate responses to an announced dividend tax. International Tax and Public Finance, 16, 571–604. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aronson, J. R., Johnson, P., & Lambert, P. J. (1994). Redistributive effect and unequal income tax treatment. Economic Journal, 104, 262–270. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Atkinson, A. B. (1980). Horizontal equity and the distribution of the tax burden. In H. Aaron & M. J. Boskin (Eds.), The Economics of Taxation (pp. 3–18). Washington: Brookings Institution. Google Scholar
  6. Auerbach, A., & Hassett, K. (2002). A new measure of horizontal equity. American Economic Review, 92, 1116–1125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Banks, J., & Diamond, P. (2010). The base for direct taxation. In Dimensions of Tax Design: the Mirrlees Review (pp. 548–648). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  8. Bishop, J. A., Formby, J. P., & Lambert, P. (2000). Redistribution through the income tax: the vertical and horizontal effects of noncompliance and tax evasion. Public Finance Review, 28, 335–350. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boadway, R. (2004). The dual income tax system—an overview. CESifo DICE Report, 2(3), 3–8. Google Scholar
  10. Cnossen, S. (2000). Taxing capital income in the Nordic countries: a model for the European Union? In S. Cnossen (Ed.), Taxing Capital Income in the European Union—Issues and Options for Reform (pp. 180–213). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  11. Crawford, C., & Freedman, J. (2010). Small business taxation. In J. Mirrlees, S. Adam, T. Besley, R. Blundell, S. Bond, R. Chote, M. Gammie, P. Johnson, G. Myles, & J. Poterba (Eds.), Dimensions of Tax Design: the Mirrlees Review. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  12. Dardanoni, V., & Lambert, P. J. (2001). Horizontal inequity comparisons. Social Choice and Welfare, 18, 799–816. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duclos, J.-Y., & Lambert, P. J. (2000). A normative and statistical approach to measuring classical horizontal inequity. Canadian Journal of Economics, 33, 87–113. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ebert, U. (1997). Social welfare when needs differ: an axiomatic approach. Economica, 64, 233–244. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Eide, E., von Simson, K., & Strøm, S. (2011). Rank dependent utility, tax evasion and labor supply, forthcoming FinanzArchiv. Google Scholar
  16. Feldstein, M. (1976a). On the theory of tax reform. Journal of Public Economics, 6, 77–104. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Feldstein, M. (1976b). Compensation in tax reform. National Tax Journal, 29, 123–130. Google Scholar
  18. Fjærli, E., & Lund, D. (2001). The choice between owner’s wages and dividends under the dual income tax. Finnish Economic Papers, 14, 104–119. Google Scholar
  19. Galbiati, R., & Vertova, P. (2008). Horizontal equity. Economica, 75, 384–391. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Genser, B., & Reutter, A. (2007). Moving towards dual income taxation in Europe. Finanzarchiv, 63, 436–456. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Griffith, R., Hines, J., & Sørensen, P. B. (2010). International capital taxation. In J. Mirrlees, S. Adam, T. Besley, R. Blundell, S. Bond, R. Chote, M. Gammie, P. Johnson, G. Myles, & J. Poterba (Eds.), Dimensions of Tax Design: the Mirrlees Review. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  22. Jenkins, S. P. (1988). Empirical measurement of horizontal inequity. Journal of Public Economics, 37, 305–329. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Johns, A., & Slemrod, J. (2010). The distribution of income tax noncompliance. National Tax Journal, 63, 397–418. Google Scholar
  24. Kaplow, L. (1989). Horizontal equity: measures in search of a principle. National Tax Journal, 42, 139–154. Google Scholar
  25. Kaplow, L. (2000). Horizontal equity: new measures, unclear principles, NBER working paper No. W7649, The National Bureau of Economic Research. Google Scholar
  26. Kaplow, L., & Shavell, S. (2001). Any non-welfarist method of policy assessment violates the Pareto principle. Journal of Political Economy, 109, 281–286. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kaplow, L., & Shavell, S. (2002). Fairness versus Welfare. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Google Scholar
  28. Kay, J. (2010). Commentary by John Kay (to the base for direct taxation, by J. Banks and P. Diamond). In J. Mirrlees, S. Adam, T. Besley, R. Blundell, S. Bond, R. Chote, M. Gammie, P. Johnson, G. Myles, & J. Poterba (Eds.), Dimensions of Tax Design: the Mirrlees Review (pp. 656–663). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  29. King, M. A. (1983). An index of inequality: with applications to horizontal inequity and social mobility. Econometrica, 51, 99–115. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kojadinovic, I., & Yan, J. (2010). Comparison of three semiparametric methods for estimating dependence parameters in copula models. Insurance. Mathematics & Economics, 47, 52–63. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lambert, P. J., & Thoresen, T. O. (2009). Base independence in the analysis of tax policy effects: with an application to Norway 1992–2004. International Tax and Public Finance, 16, 219–252. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ministry of Finance (2003). NOU 2003:9 Skatteutvalget (in Norwegian). Google Scholar
  33. Musgrave, R. A. (1990). Horizontal equity, once more. National Tax Journal, 43, 113–122. Google Scholar
  34. Nelsen, R. B. (2006). An Introduction to Copulas (2nd edn.). New York: Springer. Google Scholar
  35. OECD (2006). Fundamental reform of personal income tax, OECD tax policy studies No. 13, Paris, France. Google Scholar
  36. Plotnick, R. (1981). A measure of horizontal inequity. Review of Economics and Statistics, 63, 283–288. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rosen, H. S. (1978). An approach to the study of income, utility, and horizontal equity. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 92, 307–322. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schneider, F., & Buehn, A. (2009). Shadow economies and corruption all over the world: revised estimates for 120 countries. Economics: The Open Access, Open Assessment, E-journal, October 27, 2009, Version 2. Google Scholar
  39. Slemrod, J. B. (1992). Do taxes matter? Lessons from the 1980s. American Economic Review, 82, 250–256. Google Scholar
  40. Slemrod, J. B. (1995). Income creation or income shifting? Behavioral responses to the tax reform act of 1986. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 85, 175–180. Google Scholar
  41. Slemrod, J., & Yitzhaki, S. (2004). Tax avoidance, evasion, and administration. In A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (Eds.), Handbook of Public Economics (vol. 3, pp. 1425–1470). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. Google Scholar
  42. Statistics Norway (2009a). Dwelling stock, http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/10/09/boligstat_en/.
  43. Statistics Norway (2009b). Stock statistics, http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/11/01/aksjer_en/.
  44. Statistics Norway (2010a). Income statistics for households, http://www.ssb.no/ifhus_en/.
  45. Statistics Norway (2010b). Account statistics. Annual reports for non-financial limited companies, http://www.ssb.no/regnaksje_en/.
  46. Sørensen, P. B. (1994). From the global income tax to the dual income tax: recent tax reforms in the Nordic countries. International Tax and Public Finance, 1, 57–79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sørensen, P. B. (2005a). Neutral taxation and shareholder income. International Tax and Public Finance, 12, 777–801. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sørensen, P. B. (2005b). Dual income taxation: why and how. Finanzarchiv, 61, 559–586. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Thoresen, T. O., & Alstadsæter, A. (2010). Shifts in organizational form under a dual income tax system. Finanzarchiv, 66, 384–418. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Thoresen, T. O., Bø, E. E., Fjærli, E., & Halvorsen, E. (2011). Evaluating the redistributional effects of tax policy changes: with an application to the 2006 Norwegian tax reform, DP 648, Statistics Norway. Google Scholar
  51. Trivedi, P. K., & Zimmer, D. M. (2005). Copula modeling: an introduction for practitioners. Foundations and Trends in Econometrics, 1, 1–111. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yan, J. (2007). Enjoy the joy of copulas: with a package copula. Journal of Statistical Software, 21, 1–21. Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Erlend E. Bø
    • 1
  • Peter J. Lambert
    • 2
  • Thor O. Thoresen
    • 1
  1. 1.Statistics NorwayOsloNorway
  2. 2.Eugene, Oregon and Statistics NorwayUniversity of OregonOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations