DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Excise Taxes and the Distribution of Taxes Under Tax Reform

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Excise Taxes and the Distribution of Taxes Under Tax Reform Sinc e 193 7 TAX FOUNDATION Federal Excise Taxes and the Distribution of Taxes Under Tax Reform BY J. SCOTT MOOD Y ECONOMIST TAX FOUNDATION JANUARY 1999 BACKGROUND PAPER 1N0.29 About the Tax Foundation In 1937, civic-minded businessmen envisioned an independent group of researchers who, by gathering data and publishing information on the public sector in an objective, unbiased fashion , could counsel government, industry and the citizenry on public finance . Six decades later, in a radically different public arena, the Tax Foundation continues to fulfil l the mission set out by its founders . Through newspapers, radio, television, and mass distributio n of its own publications, the Foundation supplies objective fiscal information and analysis to policymakers, business leaders, and the general public . The Tax Foundation's research record has made it an oft-quoted source in Washington an d state capitals, not as the voice of left or right, not as the voice of an industry or even of busines s in general, but as an advocate of a principled approach to tax policy, based on years of profes- sional research . Today, farsighted individuals, businesses, and charitable foundations still understand the nee d for sound information on fiscal policy.As a nonprofit, tax exempt 501(c)(3) organization, the Tax Foundation relies solely on their voluntary contributions for its support . Federal Excise Taxes and the Distribution of Taxes Under Tax Reform BY J . SCOTT MOODY ECONOMIST TAX FOUNDATION ANUARY 1999 BACKGROUND PAPER I NO .2 9 ©1999 Tax Foundatio n Price: $2 5 $60 annual subscription for six issues Tax Foundatio n 1250 H Street, NW Suite 750 Washington, DC 2000 5 202-783-2760 Te l 202-783-6868 Fa x www.taxfoundation .org tf@taxfoundation .org Table of Contents Introduction 1 A Look Back at Federal Excise Taxes 3 I. Who Bears the Burden of Federal Excise Taxes? 3 The Tax Foundation Excise Tax Incidence Model 3 II. An Overview of Federal Excise Taxes 6 The Most Regressive Excise Taxes 6 Moderately Regressive Excise Taxes 6 Slightly Regressive Excise Taxes 8 Conclusion 8 III. Tax Reform and Excise Taxes 9 Methodology 12 exempt under a consumption tax . As lev- Introduction els of wealth and levels of income tend t o be closely related, upper-income taxpayer s The most familiar aspect of tax fairness sim- also tend to own relatively large amounts ply relates to how the burden of a tax or a of wealth . Thus, replacing an income ta x tax system is spread among the taxpayers . with a consumption tax tends to reduce the In recent years, the distribution of the tax progressivity of the tax system, everything burden in the U .S. and the changes in that else held constant . distribution have played prominent roles i n From an economic perspective, the best guiding tax policy, including tax reform . tax rate structure has a single tax rate . A Naturally, major changes in the distribu - single tax rate minimizes the economi c tion of the tax burden are most likely whe n growth-robbing distortions imposed by the the nation seriously contemplates funda- tax system. Rightly or wrongly, social policy mental tax reform. In the current climate, considerations have historically dictated a the primary motivations for fundamental ta x progressive tax system . Progressivity can be reform are faster economic growth and sim - achieved in a consumption tax through vari - plification of the code. However, changes i n the tax burden's distribution are so impor- tant politically and socially that no eco- nomic or administrative improvements ca n "The elimination of these be considered without a thorough analysi s excises as part of tax of all possible distributional effects . As to economic growth, the scoffing of reform would advance critics does not deter many reasonable ana- the goals of tax reform lysts from believing that a more economi- cally neutral tax system will encourage a per- on virtually all fronts." manently higher level of economic output . In contrast to the controversy regarding additional economic growth, there is a ors exemptions, credits, and through a strong consensus that the current tax sys- graduated rate structure . However, each of tem is far too complicated, that this com- these devises increases the complexity o f plexity is harmful, and that great savings can the new system and diminishes the eco- be reaped in both administration and com- nomic gains tax reform would otherwis e pliance costs with the adoption of a muc h promise. simpler tax system . A partial solution to the progressivit y While economic growth and simplifica- problem for consumption taxes may b e tion arc key, the distribution of the tax sys - found by expanding the scope of tax reform . tem remains an important consideration. Traditionally, tax reform has involved replac - The current federal tax system, and the fed - ing the federal personal and corporate in - eral personal and corporate income taxe s come taxes . Some proposals would integrat e in particular, are highly progressive, mean - the federal payroll tax into the tax reform ing that an individual or corporation's tax proposal. Thus far, no major tax reform pro- burden tends to rise faster than income . posal has incorporated federal excise taxes . Most tax reform proposals would re - The federal government imposes a wid e place the federal income tax with som e array of excises that raised an estimated form of consumption tax . `lax rates aside , $55 .5 billion in 1998 . Discussed at greater the essential difference between an incom e length below, these taxes include the excise tax and a consumption tax is the taxatio n on gasoline and diesel fuel, the excise on of saving. Under an income tax, capital in - telephone services, and the excises on beer, come is taxed repeatedly, while saving is tax wine, distilled spirits and tobacco. The elimi- 1 nation of these excises as part of tax refor m sent only 1 percent of the tax collected, tha t would advance the goals of tax reform o n is still over $500 million annually that would virtually all fronts . be saved if the taxes were eliminated. Eliminating excise taxes is helpful to eco- Considering their effect on the distribu- nomic growth because it promotes neutral- tion of the tax burden, excise taxes also tend ity. Tax reform is intended to achieve a neu- to be regressive. A regressive tax is one i n tral tax system, and excise taxes are by thei r which the tax burden is proportionately very nature discriminatory and non-neutral . higher at lower levels of income than a t They lack policy rationale except in thos e higher levels of income .While there are ex- few cases where the tax is clearly linked to ceptions, such as the tax on luxury automo- an expenditure that benefits the payor of th e biles, most excise taxes impose a dispropor- tax and where the tax is no greater than th e tionate burden on lower-income taxpayers . value of those benefits, or where there is Thus, if tax reform were to involve the rev- some well-defined cost to society from an enue-neutral replacement of the personal individual's using a product. Even in such and corporate income taxes and some of cases, eliminating excise taxes would still b e the excise taxes with a consumption tax, the consistent with tax neutrality. net result could well be a tax distribution Eliminating excise taxes would help more acceptable to the Congress and th e simplify the tax code because each of these nation. excises imposes its own administration and compliance costs . Even if these costs repre- Figure 1 Excise Tax Receipts In Constant Dollars and As a Percentage of Total Tax Receipt s FY 1934-199 8 $80 50 % 40 % 10 % 0 11111111!IIII1111111111111111!11111111111111111111111111IIIli11 0 '34 '40 '45 '50 '55 '60 '65 '70 '75 '80 '85 '90 '95 '9 8 Fiscal Yea r Source : Tax Foundation . 2 A Look Back at Federal Excise Taxes I. Who Bears the Historically, excise taxes have been a major source of federal tax revenue . Figure Burden of Federal 1 shows total federal excise tax collections since 1934, in constant 1998 dollars, as well Excise Taxes? as their percentage share of total federa l revenue . In 1934, excise taxes made up 45.8 Tax incidence analysis seeks to discover percent ($14.9 billion) of total federal rev- who bears the real economic burden of a enues. By 1998, the share of federal revenue tax. In a market economy, the individual o r attributed to excise taxes had fallen dramati - business that directly pays a tax is not nec - cally to 3 .4 percent even though excise tax essarily the one that bears the burden of a collections had grown by more than 270 tax in the sense of experiencing a loss o f percent. Clearly, most of the decline in ex- purchasing power due to the tax . The real cise taxes' share is due to higher revenu e tax burden is often spread around as indi- collections from other sources such as in- viduals and businesses attempt to shift th e come and payroll taxes rather than a declin e burden onto others . in excise tax collections . An oft-repeated and irrefutable conclu- sion of tax incidence analysis is that busi- nesses do not pay taxes—people do . As such, taxes on business, direct or indirect , are shifted to individuals in any of four dif- ferent ways, either separately or in combi- nation . For example, an excise tax imposed on diesel fuel suppliers may be (1) shifted forward to consumers in the form of highe r prices on goods and services ; (2) shifted backward onto labor by reducing wages; (3) shifted backward onto other business sup - pliers; or (4) absorbed by the diesel fuel sup- pliers through lower profits.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SHOULD WE TAX UNHEALTHY FOODS and DRINKS? Donald Marron, Maeve Gearing, and John Iselin December 2015
    SHOULD WE TAX UNHEALTHY FOODS AND DRINKS? Donald Marron, Maeve Gearing, and John Iselin December 2015 Donald Marron is director of economic policy initiatives and Institute fellow at the Urban Institute, Maeve Gearing is a research associate at the Urban Institute, and John Iselin is a research assistant at the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. The authors thank Laudan Aron, Kyle Caswell, Philip Cook, Stan Dorn, Lisa Dubay, William Gale, Genevieve Kenney, Adele Morris, Eric Toder, and Elaine Waxman for helpful comments and conversations; Joseph Rosenberg for running the Tax Policy Center model; Cindy Zheng for research assistance; Elizabeth Forney for editing; and Joanna Teitelbaum for formatting. This report was funded by the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. We thank our funders, who make it possible for Urban to advance its mission. The views expressed are those of the authors and should not be attributed to our funders, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, the Urban Institute, or its trustees. Funders do not determine our research findings or the insights and recommendations of our experts. For more information on our funding principles, go to urban.org/support. TAX POLICY CENTER | URBAN INSTITUTE & BROOKINGS INSTITUTION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A healthy diet is essential to a long and vibrant life. But there is increasing evidence that our diets are not as healthy as we would like. Obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and other conditions linked to what we eat and drink are major challenges globally. By some estimates, obesity alone may be responsible for almost 3 million deaths each year and some $2 trillion in medical costs and lost productivity (Dobbs et al.
    [Show full text]
  • A Proposal for a Simple Average-Based Progressive Taxation System
    A proposal for a simple average-based progressive taxation system DIRK-HINNERK FISCHER, Ph.D.* SIMONA FERRARO, Ph.D.* Preliminary communication** JEL: H21, H24 https://doi.org/10.3326/pse.43.2.2 * We would like to thank the participants of the FairTax special session of the conference “Enterprise and Competitive Environment 2017” for their comments on a draft of this paper. We would also like to thank Ton Notermans of Tallinn University of Technology for his advice on the paper as well as the two anonymous referees. ** Received: January 9, 2019 Accepted: April 1, 2019 Dirk-Hinnerk FISCHER Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, 12611 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0002-1040-8347 Simona FERRARO Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia tee 3, 12611 Tallinn, Estonia e-mail: [email protected] ORCiD: 0000-0001-5175-5348 Abstract 142 This paper is a first theoretical presentation of a simple progressive taxation sys- tem. The system is based on two adaptations of one easily calculable formula that is based on the societal average income of the previous year. The system contrib- utes to academic discussions as it is a novel approach. It is a progressive tax that 43 (2) 141-165 (2019) ECONOMICS PUBLIC does not discriminate against anyone as the progression increases continuously SECTOR and the increase in tax payment does not go beyond the additional income. The analysis in the paper shows that the core advantage of the system is its simple, transparent and adaptable mechanism. Keywords: taxation, flat tax, progressive tax, taxation efficiency 1 INTRODUCTION A DIRK PROPOSAL Complicated taxation systems do not only lead to a significant increase in admin- - HINNERK istrative costs for all parties involved, but they can also lead to unjustified tax FOR exemptions and loopholes.
    [Show full text]
  • Regressive Sin Taxes
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES REGRESSIVE SIN TAXES Benjamin B. Lockwood Dmitry Taubinsky Working Paper 23085 http://www.nber.org/papers/w23085 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 January 2017 We thank Hunt Allcott, Alan Auerbach, Raj Chetty, Stefano DellaVigna, Emmanuel Farhi, Xavier Gabaix, Nathaniel Hendren, Louis Kaplow, David Laibson, Erzo F.P. Luttmer, Matthew Rabin, Alex Rees-Jones, Emmanuel Saez, Jim Sallee, Florian Scheuer, Stefanie Stantcheva, Matthew Weinzierl, and participants at seminars and conferences for helpful comments and discussions. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2017 by Benjamin B. Lockwood and Dmitry Taubinsky. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Regressive Sin Taxes Benjamin B. Lockwood and Dmitry Taubinsky NBER Working Paper No. 23085 January 2017 JEL No. H0,I18,I3,K32,K34 ABSTRACT A common objection to “sin taxes”—corrective taxes on goods like cigarettes, alcohol, and sugary drinks, which are believed to be over-consumed—is that they fall disproportionately on low-income consumers. This paper studies the interaction between corrective and redistributive motives in a general optimal taxation framework. On the one hand, redistributive concerns amplify the corrective benefits of a sin tax when sin good consumption is concentrated on the poor, even when bias and demand elasticities are constant across incomes.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxation of Land and Economic Growth
    economies Article Taxation of Land and Economic Growth Shulu Che 1, Ronald Ravinesh Kumar 2 and Peter J. Stauvermann 1,* 1 Department of Global Business and Economics, Changwon National University, Changwon 51140, Korea; [email protected] 2 School of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Laucala Campus, The University of the South Pacific, Suva 40302, Fiji; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-55-213-3309 Abstract: In this paper, we theoretically analyze the effects of three types of land taxes on economic growth using an overlapping generation model in which land can be used for production or con- sumption (housing) purposes. Based on the analyses in which land is used as a factor of production, we can confirm that the taxation of land will lead to an increase in the growth rate of the economy. Particularly, we show that the introduction of a tax on land rents, a tax on the value of land or a stamp duty will cause the net price of land to decline. Further, we show that the nationalization of land and the redistribution of the land rents to the young generation will maximize the growth rate of the economy. Keywords: taxation of land; land rents; overlapping generation model; land property; endoge- nous growth Citation: Che, Shulu, Ronald 1. Introduction Ravinesh Kumar, and Peter J. In this paper, we use a growth model to theoretically investigate the influence of Stauvermann. 2021. Taxation of Land different types of land tax on economic growth. Further, we investigate how the allocation and Economic Growth. Economies 9: of the tax revenue influences the growth of the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecotaxes: a Comparative Study of India and China
    Ecotaxes: A Comparative Study of India and China Rajat Verma ISBN 978-81-7791-209-8 © 2016, Copyright Reserved The Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore Institute for Social and Economic Change (ISEC) is engaged in interdisciplinary research in analytical and applied areas of the social sciences, encompassing diverse aspects of development. ISEC works with central, state and local governments as well as international agencies by undertaking systematic studies of resource potential, identifying factors influencing growth and examining measures for reducing poverty. The thrust areas of research include state and local economic policies, issues relating to sociological and demographic transition, environmental issues and fiscal, administrative and political decentralization and governance. It pursues fruitful contacts with other institutions and scholars devoted to social science research through collaborative research programmes, seminars, etc. The Working Paper Series provides an opportunity for ISEC faculty, visiting fellows and PhD scholars to discuss their ideas and research work before publication and to get feedback from their peer group. Papers selected for publication in the series present empirical analyses and generally deal with wider issues of public policy at a sectoral, regional or national level. These working papers undergo review but typically do not present final research results, and constitute works in progress. ECOTAXES: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF INDIA AND CHINA1 Rajat Verma2 Abstract This paper attempts to compare various forms of ecotaxes adopted by India and China in order to reduce their carbon emissions by 2020 and to address other environmental issues. The study contributes to the literature by giving a comprehensive definition of ecotaxes and using it to analyse the status of these taxes in India and China.
    [Show full text]
  • Paying for Government in South Carolina: a Citizen's Guide
    P Paying for Government in South Carolina A Citizen’s Guide by Holley Hewitt Ulbrich Ada Louise Steirer June 2003 Strom Thurmond Institute of Government and Public Affairs Clemson University Funded by the R.C. Edwards Endowment and the Office of the President Contents ◗ Before You Read This Booklet . Three ◗ The Ideal Revenue System . Five ◗ Answering Tax Questions . Eight ◗ State Sales and Use Taxes . Ten ◗ Local Sales Taxes . Twelve ◗ State and Local Excise Taxes . Fourteen ◗ Local Property Taxes . Sixteen ◗ State Income Tax . Nineteen ◗ Fees and Charges . Twenty-one ◗ What Can a Citizen Do? . Twenty-three About the Authors Dr. Ulbrich is Alumna Professor Emerita of Economics at Clemson University and Senior Fellow of the Strom Thurmond Institute. She has written extensively about tax policy. Ms. Steirer is a research associate in community and economic development at the Institute. Both have experience as elected and appointed officials. The views presented here are not necessarily those of the Strom Thurmond Institute of Government and Public Affairs or of Clemson University. The Institute sponsors research and public service programs to enhance civic awareness of public policy issues and improve the quality of national, state, and local government. The Institute, a public service activity of Clemson University, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, tax-exempt public policy research organization. Before You Read This Booklet the purpose ◗ This booklet has been written to help citizens of South Carolina understand how their state and local tax system works and why we use the revenue sources we do. Understanding how the system works may not change how you feel about taxes.
    [Show full text]
  • PROGRESSIVE TAX REVENUE RAISERS HI TAX FAIRNESS January 2021
    YES PROGRESSIVE TAX REVENUE RAISERS HI TAX FAIRNESS January 2021 www.hitaxfairness.org HAWAI‘I CAN PULL ITS ECONOMY OUT OF RECESSION BY USING TAX FAIRNESS MEASURES TO RAISE REVENUE & AVOID CUTS As Hawai‘i’s leaders head into 2021 Revenue Proposal Revenue Estimate while facing high unemployment (Millions) rates, an economic recession, and state budget shortfalls, it’s important Low High to keep in mind that deep government Raise income taxes on the richest 2% $12.6 $100.2 spending cuts would have a devastating effect on our already Phase out low tax rates $18.5 $153.9 injured economy, as well as hobble for those at the top social services that have become more and more essential during the Tax investments the same way $80.2 $80.2 pandemic crisis. regular income is taxed That’s because spending is the fuel Increase taxes on wealthy inheritances $6.6 $18.3 that keeps our economic engines running. As the private sector Raise corporate taxes $2.9 $103.0 engine of our economy sputters, the government needs to throttle Make global corporations pay taxes $38.0 $38.0 up its spending in order to keep the in Hawai‘i economy going. Past recessions have Make REITs pay their fair share of taxes $30.0 $60.0 shown us that state spending cuts just exacerbate the economic damage. Increase taxes on the sales of mansions $17.0 $71.5 At this crucial time, cutting government spending would be akin Tax vaping and increase $21.1 $24.1 to taking our foot off the pedal and other tobacco taxes letting the second engine of the Place a fee on sugary drinks $65.8 $65.8 economy sputter as well.
    [Show full text]
  • WHO, WHAT, HOW and WHY Fact Sheet
    Ta x , Super+You. Take Control. Years 7-12 Tax 101 Activity 2 WHO, WHAT, HOW AND WHY Fact sheet How do we work out what is a fair amount of tax to pay? • Is it fair that everyone, regardless of Different types of taxes affect their income and expenses, should taxpayers in different ways. pay the same amount of tax? • Is it fair if those who earn the most pay the most tax? • What is a fair amount of tax TYPES OF TAXES AND CHARGES for people who use community resources? Taxes can only be collected if a law has been passed to permit their collection. The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act established a federal system of government when it created TAX STRUCTURES the nation of Australia in 1901. It distributes law-making powers between the national government and the states and territories. There are three tax structures used in Australia: Each level of government imposes different types of taxes and Proportional taxes: the same percentage is levied, charges. During World War II the Australian Government took regardless of the level of income. Company tax is a over all responsibilities for income tax and it has remained the proportional tax as the same rate applies for all companies, major source of federal tax revenue ever since. regardless of the profit earned. Progressive taxes: the higher the income, the higher the Levels of government and their taxes percentage of tax paid. Income tax for individuals is a Federal progressive tax. State or territory Local (Australian/Commonwealth) Regressive taxes: the same dollar amount of tax is paid, regardless of the level of income.
    [Show full text]
  • Hakelberg Rixen End of Neoliberal Tax Policy
    Is Neoliberalism Still Spreading? The Impact of International Cooperation on Capital Taxation Lukas Hakelberg and Thomas Rixen Freie Universität Berlin Ihnestr. 22 14195 Berlin, Germany E.mail: [email protected] and [email protected] Postprint. Please cite as: Hakelberg, L. and T. Rixen (2020). "Is neoliberalism still spreading? The impact of international cooperation on capital taxation." Review of International Political Economy. https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2020.1752769 Acknowledgments Leo Ahrens, Fulya Apaydin, Frank Bandau, Benjamin Braun, Benjamin Faude, Valeska Gerstung, Leonard Geyer, Matthias vom Hau, Steffen Hurka, Friederike Kelle, Christoph Knill, Simon Linder, Daniel Mertens, Richard Murphy, Sol Picciotto, Nils Redeker, Max Schaub, Yves Steinebach, Alexandros Tokhi, Frank Borge Wietzke, Michael Zürn and other participants at the ECPR General Conference in Oslo 2017, the IBEI Research Seminar and Workshop ‘Pol- icy-Making in Hard Times’ in Barcelona in 2017, the Conference of the German Political Sci- ence Association’s (DVPW) Political Economy Section in Darmstadt 2018, the Tax Justice Network’s Annual Conference 2018 in Lima and the Global Governance Colloquium at the Social Science Research Center Berlin (WZB) in May 2019 as well as three anonymous re- viewers provided very helpful comments and suggestions. We thank all of them. Is Neoliberalism Still Spreading? The Impact of International Cooperation on Capital Taxation Abstract The downward trend in capital taxes since the 1980s has recently reversed for personal capital income. At the same time, it continued for corporate profits. Why have these tax rates diverged after a long period of parallel decline? We argue that the answer lies in different levels of change in the fights against tax evasion and tax avoidance.
    [Show full text]
  • SUGARY DRINK TAXES: How a Sugary Drink Tax Can Benefit Rhode Island
    SUGARY DRINK TAXES: how a sugary drink tax can benefit Rhode Island As of now, seven cities across the nation have successfully implemented sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes, also known as sugary drink taxes. Evaluations of these taxes not only show the important health benefits of adopting this tax but shed light on the best strategies for implementation of this policy. Below are some valuable findings from the cities that have implemented SSB taxes and how this data can be used to implement the tax in Rhode Island. How do SSB taxes impact health? Currently, SSBs are the leading source of added sugar in the American diet and there is extensive evidence showing an association between these beverages and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, dental caries, osteoporosis, and obesity.1 Yet, multiple cities that have implemented the SSB tax have seen downward trends in the consumption of SSBs that could lead to improved health outcomes and greater healthcare savings.1 Three years after implementing the tax, Berkeley saw a 50% average decline in SSB consumption with an increase in water consumption. Similarly, in Philadelphia, the probability of consuming regular soda fell by 25% and the intake of water rose by 44% only six months after the tax was effective.2 Philadelphia adults who typically consumed one regular soda per day before the tax transitioned to drinking soda every three days after the tax.2 This shift in behavior has very important health implications; SSB taxes are linked with a significant reduction in the incidence of cardiovascular diseases and with a decrease in BMI and body weight.
    [Show full text]
  • Issuespaper the Impact of Selective Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverage Taxes
    International Tax and Investment Center June 2016 IssuesPaper The Impact of Selective Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverage Taxes A report by: International Tax and Investment Center Oxford Economics The International Tax and Investment Center (ITIC) Oxford Economics (OE) was founded in 1981 as a is an independent, nonprofit research and education commercial venture with Oxford University’s business organization founded in 1993 to promote tax reform college to provide economic forecasting and modelling and public-private initiatives to improve the investment to UK companies and financial institutions expanding climate in transition and developing economies. abroad. Since then, OE has become one of the world’s foremost independent global advisory firms, providing With a dozen affiliates and offices around the world, ITIC reports, forecasts and analytical tools on 200 countries, works with ministries of finance, customs services and 100 industrial sectors and over 3,000 cities. tax authorities in 85 countries, as well as international and regional financial institutions working on tax policy Headquartered in Oxford, England, with a dozen offices and tax administration issues. ITIC’s analytic agenda, across the globe, OE employs over 250 full-time people, global thematic initiatives, regional fiscal forums, and including more than 150 professional economists, capacity-building efforts are supported by nearly 100 industry experts and business editors—one of the largest corporate sponsors. teams of macroeconomists and thought leadership specialists producing econometric modelling, scenario framing, and economic impact analysis. Oxford Economics is a key adviser to corporate, financial and government decision-makers and thought leaders, with a client base of more than 1000 international organisations, including leading multinational companies and financial institutions; key government bodies and trade associations; and top universities, consultancies, and think tanks.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Taxes and Equity Concerns: a European Perspective
    Environmental taxes and equity concerns: A European perspective Background paper prepared for the Spring Alliance conference “Go green, be social” Lucas Chancel Simon Ilse This document contains three sections and an annex: The first section summarizes the main issues at stake when considering energy-climate tax policies from a social point of view. è This section shows that environmental tax reforms and social progress should not be opposed. Policy tools to neutralize short run negative social effects of carbon taxes exist and in the long run, carbon taxes can have positive social impacts. The second section presents a tale of three European countries; it briefly illustrates challenges faced and opportunities seized by each one of them when trying to implement carbon-energy tax reforms over the past twenty years. è This section shows that countries which included carbon taxes in wider fiscal reform packages, included into wider energy transition packages were successful at integrating environmental, social and economic objectives. The third section discusses options and tools for EU policy makers in order to help Member States pursue fair energy transition pathways. è This section shows that EU level policy instruments, such as the European Semester, can help give general directions for fair energy transitions. But the subsidiarity principle should apply and policy instruments used to protect vulnerable actors should remain at the national, or sub-national level (regions, communities). The annex presents EU Semester recommendations on environmental fiscal reforms for the 27 Member States. The authors would like to thank Paulus Arnoldus, Malgorzata Kicia, Manfred Rosenstock, Emmanuel Combet, the Social Platform Secretariat, Constanze Adolf, Diane Strauss and the participants of the Spring Alliance Conference for their precious comments.
    [Show full text]