Public Economics: Tax & Transfer Policies (Master PPD & APE, Paris School of Economics) Thomas Piketty Academi

1. Public Economics: Tax & Transfer Policies (Master PPD & APE, Paris School of Economics)Thomas PikettyAcademic year 2013-2014 Lecture 4: Income Taxes Over Time & Across Countries(October 29th2013) (check on line for updated versions)

2. The modern progressive incometax • The modern progressive incometaxwascreated in 1909 in the UK, 1913 in the US, 1914 in France, 1922 in India, 1932 in Argentina, etc., and isbasedupon the principle of a comprehensivetax base • Comprehensiveincometax: t = t(y) with y = total incomefrom all incomecategories (wages + pensions + self-employmentincome + rent + dividend + interest + etc.) • ≠ schedularincometax: differenttax rates for differentincomecategories (UK system in 19c)

3. Effective vs. Marginal tax rates • Effective or averagetax rate = t(y)/y • t(y) progressive if and only if t(y)/y riseswith y • Marginaltax rate = t’(y) • t(y) convex = t’’(y)>0, i.e. t’(y) riseswith y • Convexityimpliesprogressivity (but not necessary: as wewillsee, U-shaped pattern of marginal tax rates whentransfers are takenintoaccount) • Most progressive income taxes use a bracket system: fixed marginal tax rates withinincomebrackets • But one canalso use continuous system • Exemple of computations usingtaxschedulesfrom France and the US: seeexcel file

4. Taxingindividuals or couples? • In manyEuropean countries (Scandinavia, UK, Italy, Spain,.), incometax t(y) isbaseduponindividualincome y: whether one lives in a couple or not isirrelevant • In France, Germany & US (for bottomhalf of pop), incometaxiscomputedat the level of married couples using « split » system (« quotient conjugual »): incometax = 2 x t[ (y1+y2)/2 ], with y1,y2= spousesincomes • With t(y) convex, thisfavoursunequal couples; if y1=y2, thereis no taxadvantageat all • Key question: unitaryhousehold or not? • The split system canreinforcegenderinequality; the individual system favoursfemalelaborsupply

9. The top marginal tax rate • Top marginal tax rate = marginal tax rate applying to the highestincomes • Chaotichistoryduringpastcentury • US and UK inventedconfiscatorytax rates for veryhighincomes; thenbig reversal since 1980s • Same pattern for top inheritancetax rates: US-UK inventedconfiscatory top rates, thenbig reversal since 1980s (see Lectures 6-7) • Until 1970s, top tax rates on « unearnedincome » (capital income) oftenhigherthan top tax rate on « earnedincome » (laborincome) • Reversal since 1980s: free capital flowswith no exchange of information, specialtaxregimes for capital income >>> regressivityat the top (seeFrance 2010)

13. From an elitetax to a mass tax • In every country, the incometaxat the time itiscreatedistargeted on the top 1-2% of the population; thenitisgraduallyextended to the entire population (or at least to 50-60% of the population). This makestax revenues much more significant: the mass incometaxis an important part of the rise of the modern fiscal state • Seee.g. graph on fraction of pop subject to tax in France. Seemy2001 book (chapters 4-5) for a completepolitico-economichistory of the French incometax • Explanations for this transition fromelite to mass tax ? Is it happening everywhere in developing countries?

15. Explanations: Economics/Technology (rise of large corporations and wage-earner status >> easier to tax) or Politics (social acceptability of tax, fiscal consent) ? Probably both • On the political economy of fiscal development: • Besley-Persson, “On the Origins of State Capacity”, 2009 [article in pdf format] • Kleven-Kreiner-Saez, “Why Can Modern Governments Tax so much?”, 2009, [article in pdf format]) •  An interesting contrast: income tax in India and China; see T. Piketty & N. Qian, « Income inequality and progressive income taxation in China and India: 1986-2015 », AEJ 2009 [article in pdf format]