IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v15y2019i3p26n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rawls, Taxation and Calabresi & Melamed’s Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Riza Limor

    (School of Law, Ono Academic College, Kiryat Ono, Israel)

Abstract

The paper identifies a new rule in the tax discourse – the versatility rule. Calabresi and Melamed’s landmark article contributed to the legal discussion despite paying relatively little attention to taxation. This paper analyzes income tax, Calabresi and Melamed’s rules and Rawls’ theory, and examines whether Calabresi and Melamed’s pioneering work on liability, property and inalienability rules can be integrated into income tax discourse (and other legitimate property expropriations); and claims that these rules assist in understanding the essence of taxation. The question is analyzed from the Rawlsian perspective since his concern with the “least advantaged” and inequality in society poses a serious global challenge. The paper offers a unique analysis by showing that in the tax field all rules protect the same entitlement at the same time against the same entity – the government. This concurrent implementation of Calabresi and Melamed’s rules in taxation can only take place when taxation is understood as both “giving” and “taking”. Although the paper aims at increasing distributive goals, it appears that efficient outcome is its byproduct. Integrating Calabresi and Melamed’s rules into the tax discourse via Rawls’ theory not only elucidates the versatility rule but also blurs the distinction between the protection and transfer rules, and highlights the reciprocity of the duty and right to pay taxes. Since Calabresi and Melamed’s classical work, many scholars have significantly modified the existing rules and developed new ones, such as the Solomonic entitlement and the pliability rule, though no one has thus far proposed a scenario in which all remedies simultaneously apply against the same entity.

Suggested Citation

  • Riza Limor, 2019. "Rawls, Taxation and Calabresi & Melamed’s Rules," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:15:y:2019:i:3:p:26:n:1
    DOI: 10.1515/rle-2016-0073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2016-0073
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/rle-2016-0073?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 2000. "Should Legal Rules Favor the Poor? Clarifying the Role of Legal Rules and the Income Tax in Redistributing Income," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 29(2), pages 821-835, June.
    2. Shavell, Steven, 1981. "A Note on Efficiency vs. Distributional Equity in Legal Rulemaking: Should Distributional Equity Matter Given Optimal Income Taxation?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(2), pages 414-418, May.
    3. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 1994. "Why the Legal System Is Less Efficient Than the Income Tax in Redistributing Income," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(2), pages 667-681, June.
    4. Nuno Garoupa & Daniel Klerman, 2002. "Optimal Law Enforcement with a Rent-Seeking Government," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 4(1), pages 116-140, January.
    5. Francesco Parisi, 2004. "Positive, Normative and Functional Schools in Law and Economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 259-272, December.
    6. A. Mitchell Polinsky, 1980. "Resolving Nuisance Disputes: The Simple Economics of Injunctive and Damage Remedies," NBER Working Papers 0463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe & Langlais, Eric, 2012. "Social Wealth and Optimal Care," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 271-284.
    2. Hackney, James Jr., 2003. "Law and neoclassical economics theory: a critical history of the distribution/efficiency debate," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 361-390, September.
    3. Langlais, Eric, 2010. "Safety and the Allocation of Costs in Large Accidents," MPRA Paper 25710, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Jean-Baptiste Fleury & Alain Marciano, 2022. "Methodological Individualism and the Foundations of the "Law and Economics" movement," Post-Print hal-03820441, HAL.
    5. Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gómez, 2003. "Optimal negligence rule under limited liability," Economics Working Papers 759, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised May 2004.
    6. Fabbri Marco & GC Britto Diogo, 2018. "Distributive Justice, Public Policies and the Comparison of Legal Rules: Quantify the “Price of Equity”," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(3), pages 1-23, November.
    7. Blumkin, Tomer & Margalioth, Yoram & Sadka, Efraim, 2007. "Anti-discrimination rules versus income taxation in the pursuit of horizontal equity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(5-6), pages 1167-1176, June.
    8. Garoupa, Nuno & Stephen, Frank, 2003. "A Note on Optimal Law Enforcement with Legal Aid," CEPR Discussion Papers 4113, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Éric Langlais, 2008. "Indemnisation des préjudices et fréquence des procès en présence d'une asymétrie d'information sur l'aversion au risque des parties," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 74(2), pages 191-218.
    10. Aronsson, Thomas & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2011. "Animal Welfare and Social Decisions," Working Papers in Economics 485, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    11. Louis Kaplow, 2006. "Discounting Dollars, Discounting Lives: Intergenerational Distributive Justice and Efficiency," NBER Working Papers 12239, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Steven Shavell, 2003. "Economic Analysis of Welfare Economics, Morality and the Law," NBER Working Papers 9700, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Lee Kangoh, 2016. "Risk Aversion, the Hand Rule, and Comparison between Strict Liability and the Negligence Rule," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(2), pages 261-274, July.
    14. Sunstein, Cass R., 2013. "The value of a statistical life: some clarifications and puzzles," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 237-261, August.
    15. Steven Shavell, 2005. "Liability for Accidents," NBER Working Papers 11781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Christine Jolls, 2007. "Behavioral Law and Economics," NBER Working Papers 12879, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Alex Raskolnikov, 2020. "Criminal Deterrence: A Review of the Missing Literature," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 1-59.
    18. Ganuza Juan-Jose & Gomez Fernando, 2006. "Caution, Children Crossing: Heterogeneity of Victim's Cost of Care and the Negligence Rule," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(3), pages 365-397, January.
    19. Andrew F. Daughety & Jennifer F. Reinganum, 2013. "Cumulative Harm, Products Liability, and Bilateral Care," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 15(2), pages 409-442.
    20. A. Mitchell Polinsky & Steven Shavell, 2005. "Economic Analysis of Law," Discussion Papers 05-005, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    property rule; liability rule; inalienability rule; Calabresi and Melamed; pliability rule; taxation; John Rawls; least advantaged; social welfare; distributive justice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:15:y:2019:i:3:p:26:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.