Income Taxation when Markets are Incomplete



106


M. Tirelli

It will be clearer as we go along in the paper that our main results hold for
any criterion,
β , which is expressed as a functional of consumers’ present
value vectors,
λ. For reasons of analytic tractability, we stick with the adop-
tion of a specific criterion, and choose the following modified Grossman-
Hart criterion.6

Definition 2 (ModifiedGrossman-Hartcriterion). Forevery (θj, λ,tj) and
all s
S {0}, βj = hj (1 + ts1) is the pricing criterion of firm
j
J2.

2.2. The equilibrium with taxes

Gathering the definitions of agents’ actions and markets we obtain a full
description of our economy,
E(u, f, η, e, θ, R). We provide the following
definition of equili
brium at the policy instrument vector tI in T I .

Let ω = (η, e, θ, u, f), and let E be the set of economies with typical
element
(ω, R).

Definition 3 (E - tI equilibrium). In an economy (ω, R) in E, an equilib-
rium
with tax instruments tI T I, and firm pricing criteria β, is a pair
((x, θ, y), (q, t)) such that:

(i) h, xhh isan individual optimum for consumer h, at (q, y, ω, t, R);
(ii) j, yj is an individual optimum for firm j, at βj;

(iii) j Jl, Eh θjh = 0; j J2, Σh θjh = 1 ;

(iv) t satisfies fiscal budget balance at tI.

Observe that, if (i)-(iv) are satisfied, spot markets clear. Moreover, (iv)
can be written differently depending on the type of fiscal policy assumed.
For the equilibrium to be well defined every
β j must be chosen in the
set of
consistent criteria (see Section 2.1.5). Finally, we define a no-tax
equilibrium
, an E - tI equilibrium setting all tax instruments tI equal to
zero. Observe that our notion of no-tax equilibrium is the one-commodity
analogue of the equilibrium notion in Geanakoplos et al. (1990), when firms’
pricing criteria,
β, are defined as in Dreze (1987); it is the one-commodity
dyj such that yj + dyj is optimal for j and (1, Vuh ) χj-dyj 0 for all shareholders h,
with strict inequality for some
h. Further, we say that βj is shareholder constrained efficient
for j
if, at equilibrium, it supports a decision profile yj that is shareholder constrained
efficient for
j. Assume that lump-sum redistribution is possible at date zero. Then, βj is
shareholder constrained efficient if and only if
h (1, V uh ) ( ∂xh∕∂yj ) dyj Oforevery
dyj such that V fj ∙ dyj = O.

6 This criterion can be shown to be shareholder constrained efficient if: (1) lump-sum
transfers among shareholders are allowed, and (2) shareholders have
competitive price per-
ceptions
(see the previous footnote).



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. Who runs the IFIs?
4. The constitution and evolution of the stars
5. Importing Feminist Criticism
6. Road pricing and (re)location decisions households
7. Linkages between research, scholarship and teaching in universities in China
8. The name is absent
9. Foreword: Special Issue on Invasive Species
10. The name is absent
11. The Impact of Individual Investment Behavior for Retirement Welfare: Evidence from the United States and Germany
12. Implementation of Rule Based Algorithm for Sandhi-Vicheda Of Compound Hindi Words
13. INTERACTION EFFECTS OF PROMOTION, RESEARCH, AND PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FOR U.S. COTTON
14. AGRICULTURAL TRADE IN THE URUGUAY ROUND: INTO FINAL BATTLE
15. The name is absent
16. Distribution of aggregate income in Portugal from 1995 to 2000 within a SAM (Social Accounting Matrix) framework. Modeling the household sector
17. The name is absent
18. Personal Experience: A Most Vicious and Limited Circle!? On the Role of Entrepreneurial Experience for Firm Survival
19. Getting the practical teaching element right: A guide for literacy, numeracy and ESOL teacher educators
20. The Evolution