Skip to main content
Log in

On the limits to rent-seeking waste

  • Published:
Public Choice Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Conclusions

The general equilibrium framework developed in this paper for analyzing the limits to rent-seeking waste goes beyond the existing literature by incorporating tax-financed, public subsidies and rent-protecting activities into a rent-seeking environment. We show that the limits to rent-seeking waste depend on the extent to which government subsidizes rent seekers and rent defenders through tax-financed grants, contracts and favors. As observed by Tullock (1967), the diversion of resources toward efforts to acquire a monopoly rent causes a social waste in addition to the excess burden of monopoly pricing measured by the Harberger triangle. In the absence of government subsidies to rent-seeking and under competitive conditions, this additional waste cannot exceed the maximum monopoly rent attainable. However, if government subsidizes expenditures on rent-seeking, then the additional waste can exceed the Tullock rectangle of monopoly rent and, in the limit, equal the economy's maximum potential social surplus.

Rent avoidance expenditures reduce the rent to be captured and thus discourage rent-seeking. If rent avoidance is a relatively efficient mechanism for transferring consumer surplus to rent granters, then rent-seeking expenditures are displaced by less wasteful expenditures on rent defending. As a result, under competitive conditions, unsubsidized demand for private rent protection may be socially efficient. Nonetheless, the upper limit to rent-seeking waste depends on constitutionally determined maximum rates of public subsidies to rent-seeking and rent-avoidance activities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Appelbaum, E. and Katz, E. (1986a). Transfer seeking and avoidance: On the full social costs of rent-seeking.Public Choice 48: 175–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, E. and Katz, E. (1986b). Rent-seeking and entry.Economics Letters 20: 207–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Appelbaum, E. and Katz, E. (1987). Seeking rents by setting rents: The political economy of rent seeking.The Economic Journal 97 (September): 685–699.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J.T. and DiLorenzo, T.J. (1982). The political economy of political philosophy: Discretionary spending by Senators on staff.American Economic Review 72: 1153–1161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J.T. and DiLorenzo, T.J. (1985).Destroying democracy, Washington, DC: Cato Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhagwati, J.N. (1982). Directly unproductive, profit-seeking (DUP) activities.Journal of Political Economy 90: 988–1002.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, M.A. and Heijdra, B.J. (1988). In search of rent-seeking. In C.K. Rowley, R.D. Tollison and G. Tullock (Eds.),The political economy of rent-seeking, 27–49. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, J.M. (1980). Rent-seeking under external diseconomies. In J.M. Buchanan, R.D. Tollison and G. Tullock (Eds.),Toward a theory of the rent-seeking society, 183–194. College Station: Texas A&M Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekelund, R.B. and Tollison, R.D. (1984). A rent-seeking theory of French mercantilism. In J.M. Buchanan and R.D. Tollison (Eds.),The theory of public choice — II, 206–223. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fudenberg, D. and Tirole, J. (1987). Understanding rent dissipation: On the use of game theory in industrial organization.American Economic Review Proceedings 77 (May): 176–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harberger, A.C. (1954). Monopoly and resource allocation.American Economic Review Proceedings 44 (May): 77–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, R.S., Shugart II, W.F. and Tollison, R.D. (1985). Free entry and efficient rent-seeking.Public Choice 46: 247–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A.L. and Katz, E. (1987). Hierarchical structure and the social costs of bribes and transfers.Journal of Public Economics 34: 129–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, A.O. (1974). The political economy of the rent-seeking society.American Economic Review 64 (June): 291–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, R.A. (1975). The social costs of monopoly and regulation.Journal of Political Economy 83: 807–827.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tollison, R.D. (1982). Rent seeking: A survey.Kyklos 35: 575–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1967). The welfare costs of tariffs, monopoly, and theft.Western Economic Journal 5: 224–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1980). Efficient rent-seeking. In J.M. Buchanan, R.D. Tollison and G. Tullock (Eds.),Toward a theory of the rent-seeking society, 97–112. College Station: Texas A&M Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tullock, G. (1988). Rents and rent-seeking. In C.K. Rowley, R.D. Tollison and G. Tullock (Eds.),The political economy of rent-seeking, 51–62. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenders, J.T. (1987). On perfect rent dissipation.American Economic Review 77 (June): 456–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young, L. and Magee, S.P. (1987). Black hole tariffs. In S.P. Magee, W.A. Brock and L. Young (Eds.),Endogenous policy theory, 289–300. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

The authors gratefully acknowledge the helpful comments of Gordon Tullock on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Delorme, C.D., Snow, A. On the limits to rent-seeking waste. Public Choice 67, 129–154 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00714395

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00714395

Keywords

Navigation