 Interpreting and Using Empirical Estimates of the MCFChris Jones () ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics from Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics Abstract: There is considerable variability in numerical estimates of the marginal social cost of public funds (MCF) due to differences in demand-supply elasticities, differences in the welfare measures of changes in the excess burden of taxation, and differences in the conceptual measure of the MCF used. In a model with standardised parameters, Fullerton finds the different welfare measures of the excess burden make little difference to the numerical estimates, where most of the variance can be explained by conceptual differences. In particular, some studies estimate the conventional Harberger measure of the MCF while others estimate a modified measure. We formally derive the modified MCF in a public good economy and compare it to the conventional measure. Being project specific it must be used and interpreted differently. We also derive the relationship between the actual MCF and the compensated MEB, and extend the conventional MCF to accommodate higher effective marginal tax rates on income due to withdrawal of family and other tax benefits. Key Words: Marginal social cost of public funds, marginal excess burden of taxation. JEL-codes: D61 H20 H40 (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:acb:cbeeco:2010-519 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in ANU Working Papers in Economics and Econometrics from Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.