IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ntj/journl/v70y2017i4p900-936.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Shaky Case for a Business Cash-Flow Tax over a Business Income Tax

Author

Listed:
  • Lily L. Batchelder

Abstract

Traditional economic theory holds that a business cash-flow tax is superior to a business income tax because it is more efficient and progressive. But much of the literature espousing this view does not explicitly specify the full range of assumptions underlying these claims, let alone explore and empirically justify them. This paper summarizes 11 assumptions underlying the traditional view and considers how well supported they are empirically and as a matter of political economy. It concludes that when each assumption is examined closely, the case for a cash-flow tax over a business income tax becomes considerably shakier and may well collapse.

Suggested Citation

  • Lily L. Batchelder, 2017. "The Shaky Case for a Business Cash-Flow Tax over a Business Income Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 70(4), pages 901-936, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ntj:journl:v:70:y:2017:i:4:p:900-936
    DOI: 10.17310/ntj.2017.4.10
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.17310/ntj.2017.4.10
    Download Restriction: Access is restricted to subscribers and members of the National Tax Association.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17310/ntj.2017.4.10?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.

    More about this item

    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:ntj:journl:v:70:y:2017:i:4:p:900-936. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: The University of Chicago Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ntanet.org/ .

    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.