IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/arqudp/106.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

It's all about tax rates: An empirical study of tax perception

Author

Listed:
  • Blaufus, Kay
  • Bob, Jonathan
  • Hundsdoerfer, Jochen
  • Kiesewetter, Dirk
  • Weimann, Joachim

Abstract

In this paper we apply conjoint analysis to study the influence of changes in the tax rate and the tax base on the perceived tax burden. Our results show that the majority of individuals do not make rational tax decisions based on the actual tax burden, but rather use simple decision heuristics. This leads to the importance of the tax rate being significantly overestimated and the importance of the tax base being significantly underestimated. Furthermore we determine framing effects and show that under specific assumptions, a rise in the actual tax burden can lead to a electoral success.

Suggested Citation

  • Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2010. "It's all about tax rates: An empirical study of tax perception," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 106, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:arqudp:106
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/40950/1/636084051.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haufler, Andreas & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2000. "Corporate Tax Systems and Cross Country Profit Shifting," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 306-325, April.
    2. Congdon, William J. & Kling, Jeffrey R. & Mullainathan, Sendhil, 2009. "Behavioral Economics and Tax Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 62(3), pages 375-386, September.
    3. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    4. de Bartolome, Charles A. M., 1995. "Which tax rate do people use: Average or marginal?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 79-96, January.
    5. Krishna, Aradhna & Slemrod, Joel, 2003. "Behavioral Public Finance: Tax Design As Price Presentation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(2), pages 189-203, March.
    6. repec:bla:kyklos:v:48:y:1995:i:3:p:347-68 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Green, Paul E & Devita, Michael T, 1974. "A Complementarity Model of Consumer Utility for Item Collections," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 1(3), pages 56-67, December.
    8. Eckel, Catherine C. & Grossman, Philip J. & Johnston, Rachel M., 2005. "An experimental test of the crowding out hypothesis," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(8), pages 1543-1560, August.
    9. Thiess Buettner & Martin Ruf, 2007. "Tax incentives and the location of FDI: Evidence from a panel of German multinationals," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(2), pages 151-164, April.
    10. Amy Finkelstein, 2009. "E-ztax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(3), pages 969-1010.
    11. Rupert Sausgruber & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2005. "Testing the Mill hypothesis of fiscal illusion," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 122(1), pages 39-68, January.
    12. Kay Blaufus & Renate Ortlieb, 2009. "Is Simple Better? A Conjoint Analysis of the Effects of Tax Complexity on Employee Preferences Concerning Company Pension Plans," Schmalenbach Business Review (sbr), LMU Munich School of Management, vol. 61(1), pages 60-83, January.
    13. McCaffery, Edward J. & Baron, Jonathan, 2003. "The Humpty Dumpty blues: Disaggregation bias in the evaluation of tax systems," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 230-242, July.
    14. Yadav, Manjit S, 1994. "How Buyers Evaluate Product Bundles: A Model of Anchoring and Adjustment," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 21(2), pages 342-353, September.
    15. Heinz König & François Laisney & Michael Lechner & Winfried Pohlmeier, 1995. "Tax Illusion and Labour Supply of Married Women: Evidence from German Data," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 347-368, August.
    16. Green, Paul E & Srinivasan, V, 1978. "Conjoint Analysis in Consumer Research: Issues and Outlook," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(2), pages 103-123, Se.
    17. Fujii, Edwin T & Hawley, Clifford B, 1988. "On the Accuracy of Tax Perceptions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(2), pages 344-347, May.
    18. Brannas, Kurt & Karlsson, Niklas, 1996. "Estimating the perceived tax scale within a labor supply model," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 75-79, July.
    19. Rachel Griffith & Alexander Klemm, 2004. "What has been the tax competition experience of the past 20 years?," IFS Working Papers W04/05, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    20. Johan Willner & Lena Granqvist, 2002. "The Impact on Efficiency and Distribution of a Base-Broadening and Rate-Reducing Tax Reform," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 9(3), pages 273-294, May.
    21. Rosen, Harvey S, 1976. "Taxes in a Labor Supply Model with Joint Wage-Hours Determination," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 44(3), pages 485-507, May.
    22. Michael P. Devereux & Rachel Griffith & Alexander Klemm, 2002. "Corporate income tax reforms and international tax competition [‘Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 449-495.
    23. Hyeong Kim & Thomas Kramer, 2006. "The moderating effects of need for cognition and cognitive effort on responses to multi-dimensional prices," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 193-203, July.
    24. Arrazola, Maria & de Hevia, Jose & Sanz, Jose F., 2000. "More on tax perception and labour supply: the Spanish case," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 15-21, April.
    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. Houben, Henriette & Baumgarten, Jörg, 2011. "Krankt das deutsche Steuersystem am Mittelstandsbauch und der kalten Progession?," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 119, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    2. Sielaff, Christian, 2011. "Steuerkomplexität und Arbeitsangebot: Eine experimentelle Analyse," Discussion Papers 2011/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.

    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. Hagen Ackermann & Martin Fochmann & Nadja Wolf, 2016. "The Effect of Straight-Line and Accelerated Depreciation Rules on Risky Investment Decisions—An Experimental Study," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-26, October.
    2. Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2013. "Decision heuristics and tax perception – An analysis of a tax-cut-cum-base-broadening policy," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 1-16.
    3. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina, 2014. "Real tax effects and tax perception effects in decisions on asset allocation," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 156, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    4. Kay Blaufus & Jonathan Bob & Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Christian Sielaff & Dirk Kiesewetter & Joachim Weimann, 2015. "Perception of income tax rates: evidence from Germany," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 457-478, December.
    5. Martin Fochmann & Joachim Weimann & Kay Blaufus & Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Dirk Kiesewetter, 2010. "Grosswage illusion in a real effort experiment," FEMM Working Papers 100009, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    6. Andrea Morone & Francesco Nemore & Simone Nuzzo, 2018. "Experimental evidence on tax salience and tax incidence," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(4), pages 582-612, August.
    7. Sielaff, Christian, 2011. "Steuerkomplexität und Arbeitsangebot: Eine experimentelle Analyse," Discussion Papers 2011/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    8. Fochmann, Martin & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Sadrieh, Abdolkarim, 2009. "The perception of income taxation on risky investments: An experimental analysis of different methods of loss compensation," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 92, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Ackermann, Hagen & Fochmann, Martin, 2014. "The effect of straight-line and accelerated depreciation rules on risky investment decisions: An experimental study," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 158, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    10. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Matthews, Peter Hans & Tabb, Benjamin, 2016. "Progressive taxation in a tournament economy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 64-72.
    11. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    12. Doerrenberg, Philipp & Duncan, Denvil, 2014. "Experimental evidence on the relationship between tax evasion opportunities and labor supply," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 48-70.
    13. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina & Kiesewetter, Dirk, 2016. "Intrinsic and extrinsic effects on behavioral tax biases in risky investment decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 218-231.
    14. Martin Fochmann & Joachim Weimann, 2013. "The Effects of Tax Salience and Tax Experience on Individual Work Efforts in a Framed Field Experiment," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 69(4), pages 511-542, December.
    15. James Alm & Carolyn J. Bourdeaux, 2013. "Applying Behavioral Economics to the Public Sector," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 206(3), pages 91-134, September.
    16. Dominic Coey, 2011. "Estimating Income Tax Salience," Discussion Papers 10-026, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    17. Morone, Andrea & Nemore, Francesco, 2015. "Tax salience: an experimental investigation," MPRA Paper 63814, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Taxing Humans: Pitfalls of the Mechanism Design Approach and Potential Resolutions," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 107-133.
    19. Goldin, Jacob, 2015. "Optimal tax salience," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 115-123.
    20. Asmus Olsen, 2013. "The politics of digits: evidence of odd taxation," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 59-73, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    behavioral public finance; decision heuristics; framing effects; perceived tax burden; tax-cut-cum-base-broadening; tax complexity; tax illusion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H30 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - General
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law
    • M41 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Accounting

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:zbw:arqudp:106. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.arqus.info/ .

    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.