Kwansei Gakuin University Rep Title Author(s) 税制改正にともなう家計の所得弾性値 : 高齢者パネルデータによる実証分析 Uemura, Toshiyuki, 上村, 敏之 ; Kitamura Takayuki, 金田, 陸幸 Citation 経済学論究, 69(4): 1-16 Issue Date 2016-3-20 URL http://hdl.handle.net/10236/14671 Right http://kgur.kawansei.ac.jp/dspace
The Income Elasticity for Households according to 2007 Tax Reform: A Panel Study of Elderly Individuals in Japan In developed countries, many studies estimated the income elasticity of tax using panel data. Meanwhile, few studies can be found in Japan due to the lack of availably of panel data. We use the Longitudinal Survey of Middle-aged and Elderly Persons, which is a large-scale panel survey conducted by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) of Japan, and estimate the income elasticity of tax for households that are close to retiring. We use the difference in difference method (DID) and fixed effect regression with instrumental variable considering the income tax reform in 2007. We find that both the elasticity of salary income and that of taxable income are significantly negative, which suggests that the decrease in tax rate reduces the labor supply of elderly households. Toshiyuki Uemura Tomoki Kitamura Takayuki Kaneda JEL H21, H24, H31 * 71 H24- - -005 1
69 4 Keywords income elasticity, tax reform, marginal tax rate, labor supply 1 2013 2001 2005 2013 Feldstein 1995 Treasury department 4,000 1986 Tax Reform Act 19861985 middle high highest 3 Net-of-Tax Rate 1 ETI Elasticity of Taxable Income 1 3 Auten and Carroll 1999 2
Statistics of Income SOI Individual Income Tax File 22% 1985 1985 1989 1989 1985 2SLS 0.57 1 Moffitt and Wilhelm 2000 1983 1989 Survey of Consumer Finance SCF adjusted gross income Feldstein 1995 1.76 1.99 1 2SLS 0.35 0.97 Gruber and Saez 2002 1979 1990 NBER 1980 TRA81 TRA86 Auten and Carroll 1999 2SLS 0.4 0.12 Saez 2003 The University of Michigan Tax Panel 1979 1981 2SLS 0.31 adjusted gross income 0.18 Kopczuk 2005 Statistics of Income/University of Michigan 3
69 4 Panel of tax returns Gruber and Saez 2002 2SLS 0.003 Looney and Singhal 2006 1990 1996 SIPP Survey of Income and Program Participation 1987 1990 NBER Tax Panel SIPP 0.75 Tax Panel 0.71 Giertz 2007 Gruber and Saez 2002 CWHS Full SOI 1990 0.2 1980 1990 0.15 1980 0.12 Kopczuk 2005 14 26% 2007 5.216 0.985 11.908 2.544 4
2 3 4 2 2.1. 2005 11 1 2010 2005 10 50 59 2.2. 2005 2010 12 5
69 4 16 23 70 2006 2010 65 38 38 1,000 38 38 16 23 63 70 48 = 2006 330 10% 330 900 20% 900 1,800 6
30% 1,800 37% 2007 195 5% 195 330 10% 330 695 20% 695 900 23% 900 1,800 33% 1,800 40% 2006 2007 330 2006 10%2007 5% 10% 2007 T C 1) τ t i z it z it T it T it i t τ it τ it T it z it τ it t 1% z it T it ln ln ln 1 1) 2007 7
69 4 ln ln ln 1 +4 3,000 1 2005 10 50 59 2) 1 2005 2010 τ > 0 2.3. Saez et al. 2012 i t z it z it τ it 2 2007 T C 2006 2007 2) 4 5 8
e 2SLS ln z it = e ln(1 τ it) + β 1 1(t 2007) + β 2 1(i T ) +β 2 ln z it 1 + γ X + ε i (1) ln(1 τ it ) 2007 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) 2007 1(t 2007) 2007 1 0 1(i T ) i 1 0 X (1) e e = [E(ln z i2007 T ) E(ln z i2006 T )] [E(ln z i2007 C) E(ln z i2006 C)] [E(ln 1 τ i2007 T ) E(ln 1 τ i2006 T )] [E(ln 1 τ i2007 C) E(ln 1 τ i2006 C)] 2005 2010 e 2SLS ln z it = e ln(1 τ it) + β 1 1(t 2007) + β 2 1(i T ) + β 3 ln z it 1 +β 4 t 1(i T ) + β 5 t 1(i C) + γ X + ε i (2) ln(1 τ it ) 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) (2) β 4 t 1(i T ) + β 5 t 1(i C) (1) 3) Feldstein 1995 2006 2007 e 2SLS 3) 9
69 4 ln z i2007 z i2006 = e ln 1 τ i2007 1 τ i2006 + β 1 ln z i2006 + γ X + ε i (3) ln(1 τ i2007 )/(1 τ i2006 ) 1(i T ) (3) e E ln z «i2007 T E ln z «i2007 C z i2006 z i2006 e = E ln 1 τ «i2007 T E ln 1 τ «i2007 C 1 τ i2006 1 τ i2006 2006 2010 e ln zit = e ln 1 τit + β 1 ln z it 1 + β 2 t 1(i T ) z it 1 1 τ it 1 +β 3 t 1(i C) + γ X + ε it (4) ln(1 τ it )/(1 τ it 1 ) 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) 3 2 2007 2006 60 5% 3 2006 10% 4,728 2007 5% 2,934 2006 2007 T C 2006 10% 2007 2006 20%2007 10
2 d 2007 2006 ** 1%* 5% 11
69 4 3 2006 2007 2006 10% 4,728 2,934 2007 5% 2 T C 2006 20% 4 e (1) (2) (3) (4) ln 1 ln(1 τ it )/(1 τ it 1 ) ln ln z it /z it 1 ln X e ln 1 ln 1 5.126 0.985 1% 5 11.908 2.544 5% 12
4 ln 1 ln 1 ln 2.3 ln zit/zit 1 ln 1 ln(1 τit)/(1 τit 1) ln zit 1 t 1(i T ) t 1(i C) ln 1 2007 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) ln 1 2007 1(t 2007) 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) ** 1%* 5% 13
69 4 5 ln 1 ln 1 ln 2.3 ln zit/zit 1 ln 1 ln(1 τit)/(1 τit 1) ln zit 1 t 1(i T ) t 1(i C) ln 1 2007 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) ln 1 2007 1(t 2007) 1(t 2007) 1(i T ) ** 1%* 5% 14
Saez et al. 2012 4 2007 2005 2010 2 5.126 0.985 11.908 2.544 τ > 0 2013 15
69 4 2001 1990 No.9 2005 134 6 1135-1158 Auten, G. and Carroll, R. 1999 The Effect of Income Taxes on Household Income, The Review of Economics and Statistics, vol.81, No.4, pp.681-693. Feldstein, M. 1995 The Effect of Marginal Tax Rates on Taxable Income: A Panel Study of the 1986 Tax Reform Act, Journal of Political Economy, vol.103, No.3, pp.551-572. Giertz, S. 2007 The Elasticity of Taxable Income over the 1980s and 1990s, National Tax Journal, vol.60, No.4, pp.743-768. Gruber, J. and Saez, E. 2002 The Elasticity of Taxable Income: Evidence and Implications, Journal of Public Economics, vol.84, No.1, pp.1-32. Kopczuk, W. 2005 Tax bases, Tax Rates and the Elasticity of Reported Income, Journal of Public Economics, vol.89, No.11-12, pp.2093-2119. Looney, A. and Singhal, M. 2006 The Effect of Anticipated Tax Changes on Intertemporal Labor Supply and the Realization of Taxable Income NBER Working Papers No.12417. Moffitt, R. and Wilhelm, M. 2000 Taxation and the Labor Supply Decisions of the Affluent, in: Slemrod, J. (ed.), Does Atlas Shrug? The Economic Consequences of Taxing the Rich, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, pp.193-234. Saez, E. 2003 The Effect of Marginal Tax Rates on Income: A Panel Study of Bracket Creep, Journal of Public Economics, vol.87, No.5-6, pp.1231-1258. Saez, E., Slemrod, J. and Giertz, S. 2012 The Elasticity of Taxable Income with Respect to Marginal Tax Rates: A Critical Review, Journal of Economic Literature, vol.50, No.1, pp.3-50. 16