IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prs/ecoprv/ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_160_4_6925.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

L’individualisation de l’impôt sur le revenu : équitable ou pas ?

Author

Listed:
  • Damien Échevin

Abstract

[eng] An estimate using a microsimulation model suggests that approximately 46% of married couples in France benefit from a tax gain as a result of marriage and 22% suffer a tax penalty. Influenced by factors such as tax allowances, minimum thresholds and specific deductions, the annual average tax gain per household is 1080, and the penalty is 185. Tax individualisation cancels gains and losses resulting from marriage at a total cost to households of approx. 3.7 billion, or7% of income tax revenue (2002 Finance Act). The tax on earned income is reduced by 286 on average for women. Astudy of the redistributive effects of the reform, taking into account the potential effects of female participation in the labour market, shows that redistribution increases overall after the reform. Vertical fairness increases, while horizontal unfairness remains unchanged. The specific effect on the female labour supply slightly but significantly reduces the redistributive effects of the reform. [fre] À partir d’un modèle de micro-simulation, on évalue à près de 46% la proportion de couples mariés en France bénéficiant d’un gain fiscal moyen annuel au mariage de + 1080 et à 22% la proportion de couples mariés pénalisés par le mariage pour un montant de -185 en moyenne par ménage (du fait de l’existence de la décote, du minimum de perception, d’abattements spécifiques…). L’individualisation de l’impôt sur le revenu (IR) annule les gains et les pertes au mariage pour un coût global pour les ménages de l’ordre de 3,7 Md , soit 7% de l’IR (loi de finances pour 2002). La taxe sur l’activité est réduite de 286 en moyenne pour les femmes. Une analyse des effets redistributifs de la réforme prenant en compte les effets potentiels sur la participation féminine au marché du travail montre que la redistribution augmente globalement suite à la réforme, du fait d’un renforcement de l’équité verticale et sans modification de l’inéquité horizontale. L’effet propre à l’offre de travail des femmes réduit légèrement mais significativement les effets redistributifs de la réforme.

Suggested Citation

  • Damien Échevin, 2003. "L’individualisation de l’impôt sur le revenu : équitable ou pas ?," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 160(4), pages 149-165.
    • Handle: RePEc:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_160_4_6925
    DOI: 10.3406/ecop.2003.6925
    Note: DOI:10.3406/ecop.2003.6925
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3406/ecop.2003.6925
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_160_4_6925
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3406/ecop.2003.6925?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michel Glaude, 1991. "L'originalité du système du quotient familial," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 248(1), pages 51-67.
    2. Karine Van der Straeten & Alain Trannoy & Nathalie Picard & Cyrille Hagneré, 2003. "L’importance des incitations financières dans l’obtention d’un emploi est-elle surestimée ?," Économie et Prévision, Programme National Persée, vol. 160(4), pages 49-78.
    3. Alm, James & Whittington, Leslie A., 1996. "The Rise and Fall and Rise ... Of the Marriage Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 49(4), pages 571-589, December.
    4. James Alm & Stacy Dickert-Conlin & Leslie A. Whittington, 1999. "Policy Watch: The Marriage Penalty," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 193-204, Summer.
    5. Henri Sterdyniak, 1992. "Pour défendre le quotient familial," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 256(1), pages 5-24.
    6. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/3469 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Sophie Buffeteau & Damien Echevin, 2003. "Taxation, Marriage and Labor Supply: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in France," Cahiers de recherche 0340, CIRPEE.
    8. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    9. Alm, James & Whittington, Leslie A., 1996. "The Rise and Fall and Rise ... of the Marriage Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 49(4), pages 571-89, December.
    10. Marc Gurgand & David Margolis, 2001. "RMI et revenus du travail : une évaluation des gains financiers à l'emploi," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 346(1), pages 103-122.
    11. Duclos, Jean-Yves, 1997. "The asymptotic distribution of linear indices of inequality, progressivity and redistribution," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 51-57, January.
    12. Donaldson, David & Weymark, John A., 1980. "A single-parameter generalization of the Gini indices of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 67-86, February.
    13. Stéphane Paillaud & Didier Eyssartier, 1998. "Pâris, un outil d'évaluation dynamique du système fiscalo-social," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 318(1), pages 41-64.
    14. Jean-Marie Monnier, 2000. "L'équivalence fiscale des revenus et la réforme de l'impôt sur le revenu," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00677605, HAL.
    15. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3469 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Harvey S. Rosen, 1987. "The Marriage Tax is Down But Not Out," NBER Working Papers 2231, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Feenberg, Daniel R. & Rosen, Harvey S., 1995. "Recent Developments in the Marriage Tax," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 48(1), pages 91-101, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/1u4nmlgre68gopcegtmgm6cb5s is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Guillaume Allegre & Hélène Périvier & Muriel Pucci Porte, 2019. "Imposition des couples en France et statut marital : simulation de trois réformes du quotient conjugal," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03403186, HAL.
    3. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/1u4nmlgre68gopcegtmgm6cb5s is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Monemou, Ouo-Ouo Waïta, 2015. "Contribution à l'amélioration de la performance en matière d'imposition sur le revenu en République de Guinée," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/15109 edited by Castagnède, Bernard.

    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. Herwig Immervoll & Henrik Jacobsen Kleven & Claus Thustrup Kreiner & Nicolaj Verdelin, 2008. "An Evaluation of the Tax-Transfer Treatment of Married Couples in European Countries," EPRU Working Paper Series 08-03, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    2. Alm, James & Whittington, Leslie A., 1997. "Income taxes and the timing of marital decisions," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 219-240, May.
    3. Janet Holtzblatt & Robert Rebelein, 2000. "Measuring the Effect of the EITC on Marriage Penalties and Bonuses," JCPR Working Papers 127, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    4. James Alm & J. Sebastian Leguizamon, 2015. "Whither the Marriage Tax?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 68(2), pages 251-280, June.
    5. Janet Holtzblatt & Swati Joshi & Nora Cahill & William Gale, 2023. "Racial Disparities in the Income Tax Treatment of Marriage," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 38, pages 25-60, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Stevenson, Adam, 2012. "The Labor Supply and Tax Revenue Consequences of Federal Same-Sex Marriage Legalization," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 65(4), pages 783-806, December.
    7. James Alm & J. Sebastian Leguizamon & Susane Leguizamon, 2023. "Race, Ethnicity, and Taxation of the Family: The Many Shades of the Marriage Penalty/Bonus," National Tax Journal, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(3), pages 525-560.
    8. James Alm & Leslie Whittington, 2003. "Shacking Up or Shelling Out: Income Taxes, Marriage, and Cohabitation," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 169-186, September.
    9. Lin, Emily Y. & Tong, Patricia K., 2012. "Marriage and Taxes: What Can We Learn From Tax Returns Filed by Cohabiting Couples?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 65(4), pages 807-826, December.
    10. David T. Ellwood, 1999. "The Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit and Social Policy Reforms on Work, Marriage, and Living Arrangements," JCPR Working Papers 124, Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint Center for Poverty Research.
    11. Leturcq, Marion, 2012. "Will you civil union me? Taxation and civil unions in France," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(5), pages 541-552.
    12. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Tabi, Martin, 1999. "Inégalité et redistribution du revenu, avec une application au Canada," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 75(1), pages 95-122, mars-juin.
    13. Van Kerm, Philippe, 2006. "Comparisons of income mobility profiles," ISER Working Paper Series 2006-36, Institute for Social and Economic Research.
    14. Reagan Baughman & Stacy Dickert-Conlin & Scott Houser, 2002. "How well can we track cohabitation using the sipp? A consideration of direct and inferred measures," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 39(3), pages 455-465, August.
    15. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5270 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Jean–Yves Duclos & Phillipe Grégoire, 2002. "Absolute and Relative Deprivation and the Measurement of Poverty," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 48(4), pages 471-492, December.
    17. Jérôme Gautié & David Margolis, 2009. "Introduction," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 429(1), pages 3-19.
    18. Aaberge, Rolf & Havnes, Tarjei & Mogstad, Magne, 2013. "A Theory for Ranking Distribution Functions," IZA Discussion Papers 7738, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Dickert-Conlin, Stacy & Houser, Scott, 1998. "Taxes and Transfers: A New Look at the Marriage Penalty," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 51(2), pages 175-217, June.
    20. Duclos, Jean-Yves & Jalbert, Vincent & Araar, Abdelkrim, 2000. "Classical Horizontal Inequity and Reranking: an Integrated Approach," Cahiers de recherche 0002, Université Laval - Département d'économique.
    21. François Legendre & Jean-Paul Lorgnet & Florence Thibault, 2003. "La distribution des incitations financières au travail en France : l'évaluation du modèle Myriade," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(4), pages 23-48.

    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:prs:ecoprv:ecop_0249-4744_2003_num_160_4_6925. 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: Equipe PERSEE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.persee.fr/collection/ecop .

    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.