Google
Monday 
May 29, 2023 

AmosWEB means Economics with a Touch of Whimsy!

AmosWEBWEB*pediaGLOSS*aramaECON*worldCLASS*portalQUIZ*tasticPED GuideXtra CrediteTutorA*PLS
LAFFER CURVE: The graphical inverted-U relation between tax rates and total tax collections by government. Developed by economist Arthur Laffer, the Laffer curve formed a key theoretical foundation for supply-side economics of President Reagan during the 1980s. It is based on the notion that government collects zero revenue if the tax rate is 0% and if the tax rate is 100%. At a 100% tax rate no one has the incentive to work, produce, and earn income, so there is no income to tax. As such, the optimum tax rate, in which government revenue is maximized, lies somewhere between 0% and 100%. This generates a curve shaped like and inverted U, rising from zero to a peak, then falling back to zero. If the economy is operating to the right of the peak, then government revenue can be increased by decreasing the tax rate. This was used to justify supply-side economic policies during the Reagan Administration, especially the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981 (Kemp-Roth Act).

Visit the GLOSS*arama


BENEFIT PRINCIPLE:

A taxation principle stating that taxes should be based on the benefits received. The benefit principle works from the proposition that those who receive the greatest benefits should pay the most taxes. The benefit principle is commonly used for near-public goods such as highways, libraries, college, and national parks. This is one of two taxation principles. The other is the ability-to-pay principle, which states taxes should be based on income or the ability to pay taxes.
The benefit principle states that taxes should be based on the benefits received, that is, those who receive the greatest benefits should pay the most taxes. On the surface, this principle is quite logical and easily justified. The people who benefit from public goods are logically the ones who should pay for their provision. Drivers should pay for highways, library patrons should pay for libraries, students should pay tuition, camping enthusiasts should pay for national parks, and the list goes on.

However, the benefit principle does not work well for the efficient provision of public (and near-public) goods. Due to nonrival consumption, such goods are efficiently allocated with a zero price. If those who benefit directly from a public or near-public good pay a price equal to the value derived, as would be the case for private goods, then the "quantity demanded" declines and so too does the overall level of benefit generated. This is not efficient.

From the Market Side

The benefit principle is consistent with the market side of resource allocation, and is thus quite appealing to both economists and the general public. If Duncan Thurly never uses the Shady Valley Municipal swimming pool, then why should he pay for it?

This principle of tax fairness is most often applied to near-public goods that are characterized by nonrival consumption and the ability to exclude nonpayers, such as turnpikes, college education, and public parks. Because nonpayers can be excluded from consuming near-public goods, tax payments (entrance fees, tuition, etc.) can be based on the benefits received. It seems reasonable and fair that if nonpayers CAN be excluded from consumption, then they SHOULD be excluded. It seems reasonable and fair that those who benefit most from government services, those who are willing to pay for government services, should be the primary source of paying for these services.

What About Efficiency?

There is, however, a major problem with the benefit principle. It does not work well for the efficient provision of either public or near-public goods. Due to nonrival consumption, both public and near-public goods are efficiently provided at zero cost, at zero price, to members of society. Just because governments CAN charge for near-public goods, doesn't mean they should. If those who benefit directly from a public or near-public good pay a price equal to the value derived, as would be the case for private goods, then according to the law of demand the "quantity demanded" declines and so too does the overall level of benefit generated. This is not an efficient outcome.

While the benefit principle is commonly used for near-public goods, taking this approach for public goods is exceedingly difficult. Due to the inability to exclude nonpayers from consuming public goods, identifying the benefits received, which would then be the basis for setting the amount of the tax, is virtually impossible. While everyone benefits from national defense, does everyone benefit equally? If not, then who benefits more? And can this be translated into different tax payments?

Ability-to-Pay Principle

An alternative to the benefit principle is the ability-to-pay principle, which states that taxes should be based on the ability to pay taxes, that is, those who have more income should pay more taxes. This principle also makes a great deal of sense, especially for the provision of public goods that are consumed by all. If everyone benefits from public goods, without exclusion, then everyone should pay. However, not everyone CAN pay, so those who CAN afford to pay, need to bear the burden.

Because taxes are a means of transferring the purchasing power of income to governments, the ability to pay is based on income. Those who have more income can afford to pay more taxes, that is, they have a greater ability to pay.

<= BEHAVIORAL ALTERNATIVESBILATERAL MONOPOLY =>


Recommended Citation:

BENEFIT PRINCIPLE, AmosWEB Encyclonomic WEB*pedia, http://www.AmosWEB.com, AmosWEB LLC, 2000-2023. [Accessed: May 29, 2023].


Check Out These Related Terms...

     | tax equity | ability-to-pay principle | taxation principles | taxation basics | horizontal equity | vertical equity | tax proportionality | proportional tax | progressive tax | regressive tax | tax effects | revenue effect | allocation effect | tax efficiency | tax incidence | tax wedge | deadweight loss |


Or For A Little Background...

     | taxes | government functions | efficiency | equity | distribution standards | public finance | allocation | normative economics | economic goals | public goods | near-public goods | consumption rivalry | nonpayer excludability |


And For Further Study...

     | public choice | good types | market failures | public goods: demand | public goods: efficiency | tax multiplier | personal tax and nontax payments | transfer payments |


Search Again?

Back to the WEB*pedia


APLS

GREEN LOGIGUIN
[What's This?]

Today, you are likely to spend a great deal of time wandering around the shopping mall looking to buy either a weathervane with a cow on top or a box of multi-colored, plastic paper clips. Be on the lookout for slightly overweight pizza delivery guys.
Your Complete Scope

This isn't me! What am I?

Lombard Street is London's equivalent of New York's Wall Street.
"The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. "

-- Mark Twain

NDP
Net Domestic Product
A PEDestrian's Guide
Xtra Credit
Tell us what you think about AmosWEB. Like what you see? Have suggestions for improvements? Let us know. Click the User Feedback link.

User Feedback



| AmosWEB | WEB*pedia | GLOSS*arama | ECON*world | CLASS*portal | QUIZ*tastic | PED Guide | Xtra Credit | eTutor | A*PLS |
| About Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Statement |

Thanks for visiting AmosWEB
Copyright ©2000-2023 AmosWEB*LLC
Send comments or questions to: WebMaster