How Progressive is the U.S. Federal Tax System? A Historical and International Perspective

This paper provides estimates of federal tax rates by income groups in the United States since 1960, with special emphasis on very top income groups. We include individual and corporate income taxes, payroll taxes, and estate and gift taxes. The progressivity of the U.S. federal tax system at the top of the income distribution has declined dramatically since the 1960s. This dramatic drop in progressivity is due primarily to a drop in corporate taxes and in estate and gift taxes combined with a sharp change in the composition of top incomes away from capital income and toward labor income. The sharp drop in statutory top marginal individual income tax rates has contributed only moderately to the decline in tax progressivity. International comparisons confirm that is it critical to take into account other taxes than the individual income tax to properly assess the extent of overall tax progressivity, both for time trends and for cross-country comparisons. The pattern for the United Kingdom is similar to the US pattern. France had less progressive taxes than the US or UK in 1970 but has experienced an increase in tax progressivity and has now a more progressive tax system than the US or the UK.

The Evolution of Top Incomes: A Historical and International Perspective

This paper summarizes the main findings of the recent studies that have constructed top income and wealth shares series over the century for a number of countries using tax statistics. Most countries experience a dramatic drop in top income shares in the first part of the century due to a precipitous drop in large wealth holdings during the wars and depression shocks. Top income shares do not recover in the immediate post war decades. However, over the last 30 years, top income shares have increased substantially in English speaking countries but not at all in continental Europe countries or Japan. This increase is due to an unprecedented surge in top wage incomes starting in the 1970s and accelerating in the 1990s. As a result, top wage earners have replaced capital income earners at the top of the income distribution in English speaking countries. We discuss the proposed explanations and the main questions that remain open.

Income Inequality in the United States, 1913-1998 (series updated to 2000 available)

This paper presents new homogeneous series on top shares of income and wages from 1913 to 1998 in the US using individual tax returns data. Top income and wages shares display a U-shaped pattern over the century. Our series suggest that the 'technical change' view of inequality dynamics cannot fully account for the observed facts. The large shocks that capital owners experienced during the Great Depression and World War II seem to have had a permanent effect: top capital incomes are still lower in the late 1990s than before World War I. A plausible explanation is that steep progressive taxation, by reducing drastically the rate of wealth accumulation at the top of the distribution, has prevented large fortunes to recover fully yet from these shocks. The evidence on wage inequality shows that top wage shares were flat before WWII and dropped precipitously during the war. Top wage shares have started recovering from this shock since the 1960s-1970s and are now higher than before WWII. We emphasize the role of social norms as a potential explanation for the pattern of wage shares. All the tables and figures have been updated to the year 2000, the are available in excel format in the data appendix of the paper.

Impacts of Agricultural Trade Liberalization on Poverty: Sensitivity of Results to Factors Mobiliy Among Sectors

The purposes of this paper are twofold (i) to evaluate changes in welfare gains and their distribution due to trade liberalization when imperfect labor markets are considered, (ii) to evaluate the impact of the recent reforms of European agricultural policy on the world welfare. The results of two versions of a dynamic world computable genaral equilibrium (CGE) model, usign the GTAP database version 6 are compared. In the first version, a standard world CGE approach is followed by perfect labor mobility across sectors. In the second version we assume that labor shift s freely within the aggregated sectors -agriculture, manufactures, services,- but not across them. After a brief description of the two versions, changes in welfare, represented not only by the world GDP but also by the consumption level of two types of household (middle-low and middle-high) in 7 regions (Brazil, China, India, Least developed countries, European Union, United States, Rest of the World) after partial trade liberalization are presented. Theoretical and political consequences of the results are discussed. ...French Abstract : Cet article a un double objectif (i) évaluer les modifications des gains de la libéralisation lorsque certaines imperfections des marchés du travail sont prises en compte, (ii) quantifier les impacts des réformes récentes de la Politique Agricole Commune. Deux versions d'un modèle mondial d'équilibre général, utilisant la base de données GTAP (version 6), sont utilisées à cet effet : dans la première l'hypothèse standard de mobilité parfaite du travail entre secteurs est adoptée, alors que dans la seconde on suppose que si le travail se déplace librement à l'intérieur de secteurs agrégés (agriculture, manufactures, services), il ne peut passer de l'un à l'autre. Après une brève description des principales caractéristiques des deux versions du modèle, les résultats obtenus dans des scénarii de libéralisation partielle, pour 7 régions du monde (Brésil, Chine, Inde, PMA, UE, USA, RDM) et deux types de ménages (riches et pauvres) sont présentés. Les conséquences théoriques et politiques sont ensuite discutées.TRADE LIBERALIZATION; MARKET; EUROPEAN AGRICULTURAL POLICY; LABOR MARKET

Impacts of agricultural trade liberalization on poverty: sensitivity of results to factors mobility among sectors

The Purposes of this paper are twofold (i) to evaluate changes in welfare gains and their distribution due to trade liberalization when imperfect labor markets are considered, (ii) to evaluate the impact of the recent reforms of the European agricultural policy on the world welfare. The results of two versions of a dynamic world computable general equilibrium (CGE) model, using the GTAP database version 6 are compared. In the first version, a standard world CGE approach is followed with perfect labor mobility across sectors. In the second version we assume that labor shifts freely within the aggregated sectors -agriculture, manufactures, services- but not across them .After a brief description of the two versions, changes in welfare, represented not only by the world GDP but also by the consumption level of two types of households (middle-low and middle-high) in 7 regions (Brazil, China, India, Least developed countries, European Union, United States, Rest of the World) after partial trade liberalization are presented. Theoretical and political consequences of the results are discussed.Food Security and Poverty, International Relations/Trade,

Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities

This paper presents a model of optimal labor income taxation where top incomes respond to marginal tax rates through three channels: (1) standard labor supply, (2) tax avoidance, (3) compensation bargaining. We derive the optimal top tax rate formula as a function of the three corresponding behavioral elasticities. The first elasticity (labor supply) is the sole real factor limiting optimal top tax rates. The optimal tax system should be designed to minimize the second elasticity (avoidance) through tax enforcement and tax neutrality across income forms. The optimal top tax rate increases with the third elasticity (bargaining) as bargaining efforts are zero-sum in aggregate. We provide evidence using cross-country times series macro-evidence and CEO pay micro-evidence. The macro-evidence from 18 OECD countries shows that there is a strong negative correlation between top tax rates and top 1% income shares since 1960, implying that the overall elasticity is large. However, top income share increases have not translated into higher economic growth. US CEO pay evidence shows that pay for luck is quantitatively more important when top tax rates are low. International CEO pay evidence shows that CEO pay is strongly negatively correlated with top tax rates even controlling for rm characteristics and performance, and this correlation is stronger in firms with poor governance. These results are consistent with bargaining effects playing a role in the link between top incomes and top tax rates. If bargaining effects in fact exist, optimal tax rates should be higher than commonly assumed.