首页> 外文OA文献 >Taxing expats: Instrumental versus expressive voting compared
【2h】

Taxing expats: Instrumental versus expressive voting compared

机译:对外籍人士征税:比较工具与表达性投票

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

It is common knowledge that mobile individuals are difficult to tax. Governments accommodate these difficulties by granting special tax reductions to mobile individuals as it is expedient to get some tax revenue from these individuals rather than to lose them as tax payers completely. Taxing according to expediency is, however, criticized by ordinary tax payers who claim that the basic principles of tax equity are consequently violated. Therefore governments have to solve a difficult trade off between the two goals in order to survive. The variables entering in this optimization process remain disguised in the normal case of a representative democracy. In a direct democracy, however, the trade-off between tax expediency and tax equity principles is revealed by voters. In this paper we distinguish between situations where voters vote instrumentally in favour of tax expediency and where voters vote expressively in favour of equity principles. A popular vote in the canton of Zurich of 2009 serves as a natural experiment for testing the instrumental versus expressive voter hypotheses. We find that instrumental voting prevails in small rural municipalities and expressive voting in larger cities. As expressive voters are in majority in the canton, they exert a cross border externality by imposing their will on the majority decisions of the smaller municipalities. This observation may be of a particular importance when, on the federal level, expressive urban voters may impose their will on the voters of rural cantons voting instrumentally.
机译:众所周知,流动个人很难征税。各国政府通过给予流动人口特殊的税收减免来解决这些困难,因为从这些人那里获得一些税收而不是完全失去他们作为纳税人的权宜之计。然而,普通的纳税人批评按权宜宜的税收,他们因此违反了税收公平的基本原则。因此,政府为了生存必须解决两个目标之间的艰难折衷。在代议制民主的正常情况下,进入优化过程的变量仍然是伪装的。但是,在直接民主制中,选民揭示了税收权宜与税收公平原则之间的权衡。在本文中,我们区分了两种情况:选民以工具方式投票赞成税收便利,而选民以表达方式投票赞成平等原则。 2009年苏黎世州的一次普遍投票是检验工具性和表达性选民假设的自然实验。我们发现工具性投票在农村的小城镇中占主导地位,而表达性投票在大城市中盛行。由于富有表现力的选民在全州占多数,他们通过将意愿强加于较小城市的多数决定上来施加跨境外部性。当在联邦一级,富有表现力的城市选民将其意愿强加给有投票权的农村州的选民时,这种观察可能特别重要。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号