IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/umb/econwp/10128.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Are There Net State Social Benefits or Costs from Legalizing Slot Machine Gambling?

Author

Abstract

The estimated impacts, benefits, and costs of legalizing slot machines in Maryland are analyzed. The analysis provides insight into the components and the total net benefits to the state and its citizens, the role of uncertainty, distributional impacts, and a basic tax alternative. The results forecast net benefits for Maryland both in comparison to doing nothing and in comparison to raising an equivalent amount in taxes. However, if revenue raised from the lower income population has a higher social cost, then doing nothing or raising taxes appears preferred.

Suggested Citation

  • Scott Farrow & Judith Shinogle, 2010. "Are There Net State Social Benefits or Costs from Legalizing Slot Machine Gambling?," UMBC Economics Department Working Papers 10-128, UMBC Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:umb:econwp:10128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.umbc.edu/economics/wpapers/wp_10_128.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Scott Farrow, 2011. "Incorporating Equity in Regulatory and Benefit‐Cost Analysis Using Risk‐Based Preferences," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(6), pages 902-907, June.
    2. Grinols,Earl L., 2004. "Gambling in America," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521830133, January.
    3. Lawrence H. Goulder & Roberton C. Williams III, 2003. "The Substantial Bias from Ignoring General Equilibrium Effects in Estimating Excess Burden, and a Practical Solution," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(4), pages 898-927, August.
    4. Richard O. Zerbe, 2001. "Economic Efficiency in Law and Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1992, March.
    5. repec:reg:rpubli:98 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. David L. Weimer & Aidan R. Vining & Randall K. Thomas, 2009. "Cost–benefit analysis involving addictive goods: contingent valuation to estimate willingness‐to‐pay for smoking cessation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 181-202, February.
    7. Arrow, Kenneth J. & Cropper, Maureen L. & Eads, George C. & Hahn, Robert W. & Lave, Lester B. & Noll, Roger G. & Portney, Paul R. & Russell, Milson & Schmalensee, Richard & Smith, V. Kerry & Stavins, , 1997. "Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation?," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 195-221, May.
    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. Hahn Robert, 2010. "Designing Smarter Regulation with Improved Benefit-Cost Analysis," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 1-19, July.
    2. John B. Loomis, 2013. "Incorporating distributional issues into benefit–cost analysis: why, how, and two empirical examples using non-market valuation," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 9, pages 294-316, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Zhao, Qingbin & Li, Guoqiang & Gu, Xinhua & Lei, Chun Kwok, 2021. "Inequality hikes, saving surges, and housing bubbles," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 349-363.
    4. Stavins, Robert & Hahn, Robert & Cavanagh, Sheila, 2001. "National Environmental Policy During the Clinton Years," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-38, Resources for the Future.
    5. Stavins, Robert, 2004. "Environmental Economics," RFF Working Paper Series dp-04-54, Resources for the Future.
    6. Lawrence Goulder, 2007. "Distributional and Efficiency Impacts of Increased U.S. Gasoline Taxes," Discussion Papers 07-009, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    7. Jared C. Carbone & V. Kerry Smith, 2010. "Valuing ecosystem services in general equilibrium," NBER Working Papers 15844, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Acland, Daniel J. & Greenberg, David H., 2023. "Distributional weighting and welfare/equity tradeoffs: a new approach," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 68-92, March.
    9. Hunt Allcott & Benjamin B Lockwood & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2019. "Regressive Sin Taxes, with an Application to the Optimal Soda Tax," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(3), pages 1557-1626.
    10. Irena Antošová & Jana Stávková, 2019. "Application of the Institute of Income Redistribution in the Form of Social Transfers in EU Countries," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 2, pages 161-172, June.
    11. H. Allen Klaiber & V. Kerry Smith, 2013. "Developing general equilibrium benefit analyses for social programs: an introduction and example," Chapters, in: Scott O. Farrow & Richard Zerbe, Jr. (ed.), Principles and Standards for Benefit–Cost Analysis, chapter 6, pages 194-246, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Rausch, Sebastian & Schwarz, Giacomo A., 2016. "Household heterogeneity, aggregation, and the distributional impacts of environmental taxes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 43-57.
    13. Glenn Jenkins & CHUN-YAN KUO & JOHN GIRALDEZ, 2007. "Canadian Regulatory Cost-Benefit Analysis Guide," Development Discussion Papers 2007-03, JDI Executive Programs.
    14. Geir H. Bjertnæs & Taran Fæhn & Jørgen Aasness, 2008. "Designing an electricity tax system in presence of international regulations and multiple public goals: An empirical assessment," Discussion Papers 555, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    15. Fullerton, Don & Stavins, Robert N., 1998. "How Do Economists Really Think About the Environment?," Discussion Papers 10910, Resources for the Future.
    16. Sharat Ganapati & Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2016. "The Incidence of Carbon Taxes in U.S. Manufacturing: Lessons from Energy Cost Pass-through," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2038R3, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University, revised Mar 2018.
    17. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809258uvvpjn34ekm4 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Jack L. Knetsch, 2005. "The Appropriate Choice Of Valuation Measure In Usual Cases Of Losses Valued More Than Gains," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 50(spec0), pages 393-406.
    19. Clay, Karen & Wright, Gavin, 2005. "Order without law? Property rights during the California gold rush," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 155-183, April.
    20. Sharat Ganapati & Joseph S. Shapiro & Reed Walker, 2020. "Energy Cost Pass-Through in US Manufacturing: Estimates and Implications for Carbon Taxes," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 303-342, April.
    21. Reyer Gerlagh & Matti Liski, 2011. "Public Investment as Commitment," CESifo Working Paper Series 3330, CESifo.

    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:umb:econwp:10128. 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: Christelle Viauroux (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edumbus.html .

    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.