Federal Tax-Transfer Policy and Intergovernmental Pre-Commitment



each other with symmetrically chosen capital taxes. Straightforwardly, Vgi = b0(gi).

We consider a two-layer federal system: the federal level and the state level. State govern-
ments impose a source-based capital tax
{ti}i=1,2. The tax revenues are recycled by providing
a local public good
{gi}i=1,2 . The federal government provides transfers {si}i=1,2 which are
financed by a federally-uniform labor tax schedule
τ.17 The state and federal budget constraints
thus are

gi = si + tiki and τ X li = X si .                         (6)

i=1,2      i=1,2

The federal transfer system features a gross equalization scheme (Boadway, 2004) in which
transfers have a dual role: they equalize public consumption across states and transfer federal
funds to lower-level governments in response to a vertical imbalance of tax revenues and expen-
ditures.
18 Both levels of government are benevolent. State governments maximize the utility of
the representative household whereas the federal government chooses its policy instruments to
maximize the Benthamite welfare function
i =1 2 Vi().

Pareto-efficiency requires

t1 = t2, τ = 0, and b0(gi) = 1.                                  (7)

Uniform capital taxes ensure production efficiency and a zero labor tax rate leaves the labor-
leisure choice undistorted. Since capital is in fixed supply to the federation, a uniform capital
tax is non-distortionary from society’s perspective and revenues should only be raised through
capital taxation. The rate should be set so as to finance the efficient amount of local public
17Alternatively, {si}i=1,2 can be interpreted as public services which are federally provided and which are perfect
substitutes for the locally provided service. In the sequel we adhere to the “transfer view”. Transfers will more
likely be used for an interstate equalization of public funds and will thus exhibit the tax price effect characterized
in section 6.

18In contrast, a net equalization scheme only involves horizontal transfers (τ ≡ 0). Both types of equalization
schemes are of importance in real-world intergovernmental relations - even within one federation. For instance, in
Germany the municipal equalization system operates on a gross equalization basis while the equalization system
at the state level (Landerfinanzausgleich) is organized as a net equalization scheme.

10



More intriguing information

1. Three Policies to Improve Productivity Growth in Canada
2. Measuring and Testing Advertising-Induced Rotation in the Demand Curve
3. Legal Minimum Wages and the Wages of Formal and Informal Sector Workers in Costa Rica
4. The Challenge of Urban Regeneration in Deprived European Neighbourhoods - a Partnership Approach
5. The name is absent
6. How much do Educational Outcomes Matter in OECD Countries?
7. INSTITUTIONS AND PRICE TRANSMISSION IN THE VIETNAMESE HOG MARKET
8. Running head: CHILDREN'S ATTRIBUTIONS OF BELIEFS
9. What Contribution Can Residential Field Courses Make to the Education of 11-14 Year-olds?
10. I nnovative Surgical Technique in the Management of Vallecular Cyst
11. The name is absent
12. The bank lending channel of monetary policy: identification and estimation using Portuguese micro bank data
13. Research Design, as Independent of Methods
14. Mean Variance Optimization of Non-Linear Systems and Worst-case Analysis
15. The name is absent
16. AGRICULTURAL TRADE IN THE URUGUAY ROUND: INTO FINAL BATTLE
17. Infrastructure Investment in Network Industries: The Role of Incentive Regulation and Regulatory Independence
18. Fighting windmills? EU industrial interests and global climate negotiations
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent