Loading…
Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey
I survey the male and female labor supply literatures, focusing on implications for effects of wages and taxes. For males, I describe and contrast results from three basic types of model: static models (especially those that account for nonlinear taxes), life-cycle models with savings, and life-cycl...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of economic literature 2011-12, Vol.49 (4), p.961-1075 |
---|---|
Main Author: | |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543 |
container_end_page | 1075 |
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 961 |
container_title | Journal of economic literature |
container_volume | 49 |
creator | Keane, Michael P. |
description | I survey the male and female labor supply literatures, focusing on implications for effects of wages and taxes. For males, I describe and contrast results from three basic types of model: static models (especially those that account for nonlinear taxes), life-cycle models with savings, and life-cycle models with both savings and human capital. For women, more important distinctions are whether models include fixed costs of work, and whether they treat demographics like fertility and marriage (and human capital) as exogenous or endogenous. The literature is characterized by considerable controversy over the responsiveness of labor supply to changes in wages and taxes. At least for males, it is fair to say that most economists believe labor supply elasticities are small. But a sizable minority of studies that I examine obtain large values. Hence, there is no clear consensus on this point. In fact, a simple average of Hicks elasticities across all the studies I examine is 0.31. Several simulation studies have shown that such a value is large enough to generate large efficiency costs of income taxation. For males, I conclude that two factors drive many of the differences in results across studies. One factor is use of direct versus ratio wage measures, with studies that use the former tending to find larger elasticities. Another factor is the failure of most studies to account for human capital returns to work experience. I argue that this may lead to downward bias in elasticity estimates. In a model that includes human capital, I show how even modest elasticities—as conventionally measured—can be consistent with large efficiency costs of taxation. Fow women, in contrast, it is fair to say that most studies find large labor supply elasticities, especially on the participation margin. In particular, I find that estimates of "long-run" labor supply elasticities—by which I mean estimates that allow for dynamic effects of wages on fertility, marriage, education and work experience—are generally quite large. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1257/jel.49.4.961 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_940980815</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>23071663</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>23071663</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0E1LxDAQBuAgCq6rN69C8eLF1mQySRNvy-IXLHhwPYc0TWFLd1uTVtx_b2TFg6cZhoeX4SXkktGCgSjvWt8VqAsstGRHZAYcVK5YKY7JjFKAnAomTslZjC2lFAFwRrKVrfqQvU3D0O0zu6uztf3y8T5bpFv49PtzctLYLvqL3zkn748P6-Vzvnp9elkuVrlDFGOuKqWgaoA7W0EpbOW0aqSCtCM4VEp4V2r0SgorBYB0yOtG10rUWlYC-ZzcHHKH0H9MPo5mu4nOd53d-X6KRiPViiomkrz-J9t-Crv0nNEMONWC84RuD8iFPsbgGzOEzdaGvWHU_JRlUlkGtUGTykr86sDbOPbhz6a0kknJ-TePPmMX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>912309533</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey</title><source>EconLit s plnými texty</source><source>EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate</source><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>American Economic Association Journals</source><creator>Keane, Michael P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Keane, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><description>I survey the male and female labor supply literatures, focusing on implications for effects of wages and taxes. For males, I describe and contrast results from three basic types of model: static models (especially those that account for nonlinear taxes), life-cycle models with savings, and life-cycle models with both savings and human capital. For women, more important distinctions are whether models include fixed costs of work, and whether they treat demographics like fertility and marriage (and human capital) as exogenous or endogenous. The literature is characterized by considerable controversy over the responsiveness of labor supply to changes in wages and taxes. At least for males, it is fair to say that most economists believe labor supply elasticities are small. But a sizable minority of studies that I examine obtain large values. Hence, there is no clear consensus on this point. In fact, a simple average of Hicks elasticities across all the studies I examine is 0.31. Several simulation studies have shown that such a value is large enough to generate large efficiency costs of income taxation. For males, I conclude that two factors drive many of the differences in results across studies. One factor is use of direct versus ratio wage measures, with studies that use the former tending to find larger elasticities. Another factor is the failure of most studies to account for human capital returns to work experience. I argue that this may lead to downward bias in elasticity estimates. In a model that includes human capital, I show how even modest elasticities—as conventionally measured—can be consistent with large efficiency costs of taxation. Fow women, in contrast, it is fair to say that most studies find large labor supply elasticities, especially on the participation margin. In particular, I find that estimates of "long-run" labor supply elasticities—by which I mean estimates that allow for dynamic effects of wages on fertility, marriage, education and work experience—are generally quite large.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0515</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2328-8175</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1257/jel.49.4.961</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JECLB3</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Nashville: American Economic Association</publisher><subject>Budget constraints ; Comparative analysis ; Consumption ; Cost control ; Econometrics ; Economic statistics ; Education ; Elasticity ; Elasticity of demand ; Estimated taxes ; Estimates ; Female labour ; Females ; Fertility ; Gender ; Human capital ; Human resources ; Impact analysis ; Income effect ; Income taxes ; Labor economics ; Labor force surveys ; Labor supply ; Labor supply elasticity ; Labour supply ; Life cycles ; Males ; Marriage ; Political economy ; Progressive taxation ; Studies ; Tax rates ; Taxation ; Taxes ; Wages ; Wages & salaries ; Work experience</subject><ispartof>Journal of economic literature, 2011-12, Vol.49 (4), p.961-1075</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2011 The American Economic Association</rights><rights>Copyright American Economic Association Dec 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/912309533/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/912309533?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3748,11688,12847,21394,27924,27925,33223,33224,33611,33612,36060,36061,43733,44363,58238,58471,74221,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Keane, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><title>Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey</title><title>Journal of economic literature</title><description>I survey the male and female labor supply literatures, focusing on implications for effects of wages and taxes. For males, I describe and contrast results from three basic types of model: static models (especially those that account for nonlinear taxes), life-cycle models with savings, and life-cycle models with both savings and human capital. For women, more important distinctions are whether models include fixed costs of work, and whether they treat demographics like fertility and marriage (and human capital) as exogenous or endogenous. The literature is characterized by considerable controversy over the responsiveness of labor supply to changes in wages and taxes. At least for males, it is fair to say that most economists believe labor supply elasticities are small. But a sizable minority of studies that I examine obtain large values. Hence, there is no clear consensus on this point. In fact, a simple average of Hicks elasticities across all the studies I examine is 0.31. Several simulation studies have shown that such a value is large enough to generate large efficiency costs of income taxation. For males, I conclude that two factors drive many of the differences in results across studies. One factor is use of direct versus ratio wage measures, with studies that use the former tending to find larger elasticities. Another factor is the failure of most studies to account for human capital returns to work experience. I argue that this may lead to downward bias in elasticity estimates. In a model that includes human capital, I show how even modest elasticities—as conventionally measured—can be consistent with large efficiency costs of taxation. Fow women, in contrast, it is fair to say that most studies find large labor supply elasticities, especially on the participation margin. In particular, I find that estimates of "long-run" labor supply elasticities—by which I mean estimates that allow for dynamic effects of wages on fertility, marriage, education and work experience—are generally quite large.</description><subject>Budget constraints</subject><subject>Comparative analysis</subject><subject>Consumption</subject><subject>Cost control</subject><subject>Econometrics</subject><subject>Economic statistics</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Elasticity</subject><subject>Elasticity of demand</subject><subject>Estimated taxes</subject><subject>Estimates</subject><subject>Female labour</subject><subject>Females</subject><subject>Fertility</subject><subject>Gender</subject><subject>Human capital</subject><subject>Human resources</subject><subject>Impact analysis</subject><subject>Income effect</subject><subject>Income taxes</subject><subject>Labor economics</subject><subject>Labor force surveys</subject><subject>Labor supply</subject><subject>Labor supply elasticity</subject><subject>Labour supply</subject><subject>Life cycles</subject><subject>Males</subject><subject>Marriage</subject><subject>Political economy</subject><subject>Progressive taxation</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Tax rates</subject><subject>Taxation</subject><subject>Taxes</subject><subject>Wages</subject><subject>Wages & salaries</subject><subject>Work experience</subject><issn>0022-0515</issn><issn>2328-8175</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M2R</sourceid><recordid>eNpd0E1LxDAQBuAgCq6rN69C8eLF1mQySRNvy-IXLHhwPYc0TWFLd1uTVtx_b2TFg6cZhoeX4SXkktGCgSjvWt8VqAsstGRHZAYcVK5YKY7JjFKAnAomTslZjC2lFAFwRrKVrfqQvU3D0O0zu6uztf3y8T5bpFv49PtzctLYLvqL3zkn748P6-Vzvnp9elkuVrlDFGOuKqWgaoA7W0EpbOW0aqSCtCM4VEp4V2r0SgorBYB0yOtG10rUWlYC-ZzcHHKH0H9MPo5mu4nOd53d-X6KRiPViiomkrz-J9t-Crv0nNEMONWC84RuD8iFPsbgGzOEzdaGvWHU_JRlUlkGtUGTykr86sDbOPbhz6a0kknJ-TePPmMX</recordid><startdate>20111201</startdate><enddate>20111201</enddate><creator>Keane, Michael P.</creator><general>American Economic Association</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88C</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0T</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111201</creationdate><title>Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey</title><author>Keane, Michael P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Budget constraints</topic><topic>Comparative analysis</topic><topic>Consumption</topic><topic>Cost control</topic><topic>Econometrics</topic><topic>Economic statistics</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Elasticity</topic><topic>Elasticity of demand</topic><topic>Estimated taxes</topic><topic>Estimates</topic><topic>Female labour</topic><topic>Females</topic><topic>Fertility</topic><topic>Gender</topic><topic>Human capital</topic><topic>Human resources</topic><topic>Impact analysis</topic><topic>Income effect</topic><topic>Income taxes</topic><topic>Labor economics</topic><topic>Labor force surveys</topic><topic>Labor supply</topic><topic>Labor supply elasticity</topic><topic>Labour supply</topic><topic>Life cycles</topic><topic>Males</topic><topic>Marriage</topic><topic>Political economy</topic><topic>Progressive taxation</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Tax rates</topic><topic>Taxation</topic><topic>Taxes</topic><topic>Wages</topic><topic>Wages & salaries</topic><topic>Work experience</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Keane, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Healthcare Administration Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Journal of economic literature</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Keane, Michael P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey</atitle><jtitle>Journal of economic literature</jtitle><date>2011-12-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>961</spage><epage>1075</epage><pages>961-1075</pages><issn>0022-0515</issn><eissn>2328-8175</eissn><coden>JECLB3</coden><abstract>I survey the male and female labor supply literatures, focusing on implications for effects of wages and taxes. For males, I describe and contrast results from three basic types of model: static models (especially those that account for nonlinear taxes), life-cycle models with savings, and life-cycle models with both savings and human capital. For women, more important distinctions are whether models include fixed costs of work, and whether they treat demographics like fertility and marriage (and human capital) as exogenous or endogenous. The literature is characterized by considerable controversy over the responsiveness of labor supply to changes in wages and taxes. At least for males, it is fair to say that most economists believe labor supply elasticities are small. But a sizable minority of studies that I examine obtain large values. Hence, there is no clear consensus on this point. In fact, a simple average of Hicks elasticities across all the studies I examine is 0.31. Several simulation studies have shown that such a value is large enough to generate large efficiency costs of income taxation. For males, I conclude that two factors drive many of the differences in results across studies. One factor is use of direct versus ratio wage measures, with studies that use the former tending to find larger elasticities. Another factor is the failure of most studies to account for human capital returns to work experience. I argue that this may lead to downward bias in elasticity estimates. In a model that includes human capital, I show how even modest elasticities—as conventionally measured—can be consistent with large efficiency costs of taxation. Fow women, in contrast, it is fair to say that most studies find large labor supply elasticities, especially on the participation margin. In particular, I find that estimates of "long-run" labor supply elasticities—by which I mean estimates that allow for dynamic effects of wages on fertility, marriage, education and work experience—are generally quite large.</abstract><cop>Nashville</cop><pub>American Economic Association</pub><doi>10.1257/jel.49.4.961</doi><tpages>115</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-0515 |
ispartof | Journal of economic literature, 2011-12, Vol.49 (4), p.961-1075 |
issn | 0022-0515 2328-8175 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_940980815 |
source | EconLit s plnými texty; EBSCOhost Business Source Ultimate; International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection; Social Science Premium Collection; ABI/INFORM Global; American Economic Association Journals |
subjects | Budget constraints Comparative analysis Consumption Cost control Econometrics Economic statistics Education Elasticity Elasticity of demand Estimated taxes Estimates Female labour Females Fertility Gender Human capital Human resources Impact analysis Income effect Income taxes Labor economics Labor force surveys Labor supply Labor supply elasticity Labour supply Life cycles Males Marriage Political economy Progressive taxation Studies Tax rates Taxation Taxes Wages Wages & salaries Work experience |
title | Labor Supply and Taxes: A Survey |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T23%3A43%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Labor%20Supply%20and%20Taxes:%20A%20Survey&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20economic%20literature&rft.au=Keane,%20Michael%20P.&rft.date=2011-12-01&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=961&rft.epage=1075&rft.pages=961-1075&rft.issn=0022-0515&rft.eissn=2328-8175&rft.coden=JECLB3&rft_id=info:doi/10.1257/jel.49.4.961&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E23071663%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-8b882bf23cab275abc98f68227542c4885ec794e865a65226c43df9d85d96b543%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=912309533&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=23071663&rfr_iscdi=true |