Skip to main content

Winners and Losers from Price-Level Volatility: Money Taxation and Information Frictions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Studies in Economic Theory ((ECON.THEORY,volume 31))

Abstract

We analyze an economy with taxes and transfers denominated in dollars and an information friction. It is the information friction that allows for volatility in equilibrium prices and allocations. When the price level is expected to be stable, the competitive equilibrium allocation is Pareto optimal. When the price level is volatile, it is not Pareto optimal, but the stable equilibrium allocations do not necessarily dominate the volatile ones. There can be winners and losers from volatility. We identify winners and losers and describe the effect on them of increases in volatility. Our analysis is an application of the weak axiom of revealed preference in the tax-adjusted Edgeworth box.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Our present interpretation is that the government sets money taxes. Hence we have outside money. Another interpretation (due to Neil Wallace) is that what we call taxes and transfers actually represent past private money borrowing and lending, a case of inside money. Either interpretation is okay. The tax interpretation is the better one for our 2 companion papers on endogenous money taxation.

  2. 2.

    One might think that, in practice, all observed taxes are real taxes. We disagree. Even income taxes are due in dollars this year but based on last year’s dollar income. The money taxes in this paper are meant to be suggestive of general issues arising in modern economies, ones with dollar-denominated financial instruments.

  3. 3.

    Our model is an extension of the exogenous taxation model of Bhattacharya et al. (1998). We are currently working on volatility and endogeneous taxation. We are preparing 2 papers on endogenous money taxation, one on optimal taxation–the other on voting. See Cozzi et al. (2015, 2016).

  4. 4.

    See Chipman (1974) Theorem 3, p. 32.

  5. 5.

    See Balasko-Shell (1993) on balancedness and bonafidelity.

  6. 6.

    See Aumann (1987) for the definition of correlated equilibrium in games. See Peck and Shell (1991) for correlated sunspots in imperfectly competitive market economies. See also Aumann et al. (1985).

References

  • Aumann, R. J. (1987). Correlated equilibrium as an expression of bayesian rationality. Econometrica, 55(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aumann, R. J., Peck, J., & Shell, K. (1985, Revised 1988). Asymmetric information and sunspot equilibria: A family of simple examples. Working Paper 88–34, Center for Analytic Economics, Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balasko, Y. (1978). The transfer problem and the theory of regular economies. International Economic Review, 19(3), 687–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balasko, Y. & Shell, K. (1993). Lump-sum taxation: The static economy. In R. Becker, M. Boldrin, R. Jones, & W. Thomson (Eds.), General equilibrium, growth and trade. Essays in honor of Lionel McKenzie (Vol. 2, pp. 168–180). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, J., Guzman, M. G., & Shell, K. (1998). Price level volatility: A simple model of money taxes and sunspots. Journal of Economic Theory, 81(2), 401–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, D. (1992). Sunspots and incomplete financial markets: The general case. Economic Theory, 2(3), 341–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, D., & Shell, K. (1983). Do sunspots matter? Journal of Political Economy, 91(2), 193–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chipman, J. S. (1974). Homothetic preferences and aggregation. Journal of Economic Theory, 8(1), 26–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cozzi, G., Goenka, A., Kang, M., & Shell. K. (2015). Price-level volatility and optimal nominal taxes: Aggregate welfare. In Working paper. Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cozzi, G., Goenka, A., Kang, M., & Shell, K. (2016). Price-level volatility and optimal nominal taxes: Individual welfare. In Working paper. Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goenka, A., & Préchac, C. (2006). Stabilizing sunspots. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 42(4–5), 544–555.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kajii, A. (2007). Welfare gains and losses in sunspot equilibria. Japanese Economic Review, 58(3), 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peck, J., & Shell, K. (1991). Market uncertainty: Correlated and sunspot equilibria in imperfectly competitive economies. Review of Economic Studies, 58(5), 1011–1029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karl Shell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Cozzi, G., Goenka, A., Kang, M., Shell, K. (2017). Winners and Losers from Price-Level Volatility: Money Taxation and Information Frictions. In: Nishimura, K., Venditti, A., Yannelis, N. (eds) Sunspots and Non-Linear Dynamics. Studies in Economic Theory, vol 31. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44076-7_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics