Kontakt 2012, 14(3):340-352 | DOI: 10.32725/kont.2012.036

How to compensate families for the VAT unification: to reduce tax in employed people or to increase allowances in the poorest ones?Health and Social Sciences - Review

Petr Janský1,*, Klára Kalíšková2
1 Národohospodářský ústav AVČR, v. v. i., a Institut ekonomických studií, Fakulta sociálních věd, Univerzita Karlova v Praze
2 CERGE-EI, společné pracoviště Centra pro ekonomický výzkum a postgraduální vzdělání Univerzity Karlovy a Národohospodářského ústavu AVČR, v. v. i., Praha

Social and tax policies in the Czech Republic are interconnected in a number of dimensions including the redistribution and thus, they considerably participate in the measure of the redistribution. In the article presented here, we analyze particular interactions between social and tax policies with a regard to changes in the measure of the redistribution and with putting emphasize on planned changes in the value added tax (VAT) and policies aimed at supporting families and children. In the main part of the article, we estimate impacts of compensations for the VAT unification in families with children to be of 17.5% and evaluate an increase in the tax reduction by 150 CZK per child monthly since 2012 and possible alternatives. In this way, we present an extension and continuation of estimates of impacts of the VAT unification at 17.5% in IDAE studies at CERGE-EI, which will reduce realistic incomes of households on average by about 0.8%, i.e. 200 CZK monthly during a long-term period. According to our estimate, compensatory provisions of the government would reduce the proportion of households negatively affected by the VAT unification from 80 to 65% and the drop in realistic incomes would be essentially compensated in families with children (households with children would lose 35 CZK monthly on average). However, the increase in the tax reduction does not sufficiently compensate the poorest families, since it mainly helps families with employed parents. The main advantage of this mechanism is, however, the fact that it affects a great proportion of households with children in general. We furthermore analyze the increase in children's allowances as an alternative form of the compensation of families with children. It would more positively affect the poorest families, but it exerts impacts on a lower percentage of families with children. A combination of the increase in the tax reduction per child by 120 CZK and increase in children's allowances by 115 CZK makes it possible to combine advantages of the two compensatory mechanisms without changing costs paid from the state budget compared to the governmental proposal of the increase in the reduction in tax per child by 150 CZK. This combined proposal at least partially compensates 99% of all the families with children and sufficiently protects even the poorest families.

Keywords: social policy; tax policy; value added tax; families with children; children's allowances; reductions in tax

Received: February 13, 2012; Accepted: June 5, 2012; Published: September 27, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Janský P, Kalíšková K. How to compensate families for the VAT unification: to reduce tax in employed people or to increase allowances in the poorest ones? Kontakt. 2012;14(3):340-352. doi: 10.32725/kont.2012.036.
Download citation

References

  1. Benešová R (2010). Hledání modelu péče o nesoběstačné rodinné členy. Kontakt, Praha. 12/4: 435-445. Go to original source...
  2. Besley T, Rosen H (1999). Sales taxes and prices: an empirical analysis. National tax journal. 52/2: 157-178. Go to original source...
  3. Budinský P, Valenčík R (2009). Teorie redistribučních systémů. Politická ekonomie. 5: 644-659. Go to original source...
  4. Carbonnier C (2005). Is Tax Shifting Asymmetric: Evidence from French VAT reforms, 1995-2000. Jourdan Sciences Économiques (PSE), Paris, Working Paper, 34.
  5. Carbonnier C (2007). Who pays sales taxes? Evidence from French VAT reforms, 1987-1999. Journal of Public Economics. 91/5-6: 1219-1229. Go to original source...
  6. Caspersen E, Metcalf G (1995). Is a value added tax progressive? Annual versus lifetime incidence measures. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 4387.
  7. Crawford I, Keen M, Smith S (2010). Value added tax and excises. In Institute for Fiscal Studies: Dimensions of Tax Design: The Mirrlees, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 275-362.
  8. Dušek L, Janský P (2011a). Dopady sjednocení sazeb DPH na 20 % na životní úroveň domácností. Studie think tanku IDEA při CERGE-EI, 12 s.
  9. Dušek L, Janský P (2011b). Jak by sjednocení DPH na 17,5 % dopadlo na domácnosti a veřejné rozpočty. Studie think tanku IDEA při CERGE-EI, 18 s.
  10. Dušek L, Janský P (2012). Návrhy daňových změn: kolik přidají veřejným rozpočtům? Ekonomická revue - Central European Review of Economic Issues. 15/1: 51-62. Go to original source...
  11. Hamermesh DS (1980). Factor market dynamics and the incidence of taxes and subsidies. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 95/4: 751-764. Go to original source...
  12. Höhne S (2008). Role dávek státní sociální podpory při redukci chudoby rodin s dětmi. FÓRUM sociální politiky. 2/5: 33-56.
  13. Izák V (2011). Vliv vládních výdajů a daní na ekonomický růst (empirická analýza). Politická ekonomie, Vysoká škola ekonomická. 2: 147-163. Go to original source...
  14. Jahoda R (2004). Interakce sociálního a daňového systému a pracovní pobídky. Studie VÚPSV, v. v. i.
  15. Klazar S a kol. (2006). Zatížení spotřebního koše daněmi ze spotřeby v České republice. Závěrečná výzkumná zpráva na Vysoké škole ekonomické.
  16. Klazar S a kol. (2007). Dopad harmonizace sazeb DPH v ČR. Acta Oeconomica Pragensia. 15/1: 45-55. Go to original source...
  17. Kotlán I, Machová Z, Janíčková L (2011). Vliv zdanění na dlouhodobý ekonomický růst. Politická ekonomie. 2011/5: 638-658. Go to original source...
  18. Lapáček M (2008). Solidarita, ekvivalence a příjmová nerovnost v českém sociálním systému. FÓRUM sociální politiky. 2/1: 6-14.
  19. OECD (2011). Taxing Wages 2009-2010. [online]. [cit. 2012-04-20]. Dostupné z: http://taxwatch.org.au/ssl/CMS/files_cms/219_OECD%20taxing%20wages.pdf
  20. Peltzman S (2000). Prices rise faster than they fall. Journal of Political Economy. 108/3: 466-502. Go to original source...
  21. Poterba JM (1996). Retail price reactions to changes in state and local sales taxes. National Tax Journal. 49: 165-176. Go to original source...
  22. Prušvic D, Přibyl J (2006). Komparace zatížení pracovních příjmů reprezentativních typů domácností zaměstnanců v České a Slovenské republice osobní důchodovou daní a příspěvky na sociální zabezpečení, VÚPSV, v. v. i.