• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

调整成本、企业反应与微观 vs. 宏观劳动力供给弹性:来自丹麦税收记录的证据

Adjustment Costs, Firm Responses, and Micro vs. Macro Labor Supply Elasticities: Evidence from Danish Tax Records.

作者信息

Chetty Raj, Friedman John N, Olsen Tore, Pistaferri Luigi

机构信息

Harvard University and NBER.

出版信息

Q J Econ. 2011 May 1;126(2):749-804. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjr013.

DOI:10.1093/qje/qjr013
PMID:21836746
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3152831/
Abstract

We show that the effects of taxes on labor supply are shaped by interactions between adjustment costs for workers and hours constraints set by firms. We develop a model in which firms post job offers characterized by an hours requirement and workers pay search costs to find jobs. We present evidence supporting three predictions of this model by analyzing bunching at kinks using Danish tax records. First, larger kinks generate larger taxable income elasticities. Second, kinks that apply to a larger group of workers generate larger elasticities. Third, the distribution of job offers is tailored to match workers' aggregate tax preferences in equilibrium. Our results suggest that macro elasticities may be substantially larger than the estimates obtained using standard microeconometric methods.

摘要

我们表明,税收对劳动力供给的影响是由工人的调整成本与企业设定的工时限制之间的相互作用所塑造的。我们构建了一个模型,在该模型中企业发布具有工时要求的工作机会,而工人为找到工作支付搜寻成本。我们通过使用丹麦税收记录分析弯折点处的聚集情况,给出了支持该模型三个预测的证据。第一,更大的弯折点会产生更大的应税收入弹性。第二,适用于更大工人群体的弯折点会产生更大的弹性。第三,工作机会的分布经过调整,以在均衡状态下匹配工人的总体税收偏好。我们的结果表明,宏观弹性可能远大于使用标准微观计量方法获得的估计值。

相似文献

1
Adjustment Costs, Firm Responses, and Micro vs. Macro Labor Supply Elasticities: Evidence from Danish Tax Records.调整成本、企业反应与微观 vs. 宏观劳动力供给弹性:来自丹麦税收记录的证据
Q J Econ. 2011 May 1;126(2):749-804. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjr013.
2
Frictions and taxpayer responses: evidence from bunching at personal tax thresholds.摩擦与纳税人反应:来自个人所得税起征点聚集现象的证据
Int Tax Public Financ. 2021;28(3):612-653. doi: 10.1007/s10797-020-09619-0. Epub 2020 Aug 19.
3
Estimated reduction in obesity prevalence and costs of a 20% and 30% ad valorem excise tax to sugar-sweetened beverages in Brazil: A modeling study.巴西对含糖饮料征收20%和30%从价消费税预计带来的肥胖患病率降低及成本变化:一项建模研究。
PLoS Med. 2024 Jul 17;21(7):e1004399. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004399. eCollection 2024 Jul.
4
Capping the tax exclusion for employment-based health coverage: implications for employers and workers.限制基于就业的医保税收优惠:对雇主和员工的影响。
EBRI Issue Brief. 2009 Jan(325):1, 3-19.
5
Changing the taxable maximum: effect on social security taxes by industry and firm size.改变应税上限:按行业和企业规模划分对社会保障税的影响。
Soc Secur Bull. 1980 Jul;43(7):3-18.
6
Employment growth through labor flow networks.通过劳动力流动网络实现就业增长。
PLoS One. 2013 May 2;8(5):e60808. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060808. Print 2013.
7
Labor market frictions, capital, taxes and employment.劳动力市场摩擦、资本、税收与就业。
Int Tax Public Financ. 2021;28(6):1329-1359. doi: 10.1007/s10797-020-09649-8. Epub 2021 Jan 4.
8
Are lower income smokers more price sensitive?: the evidence from Korean cigarette tax increases.低收入吸烟者对价格更敏感吗?:来自韩国香烟税上调的证据。
Tob Control. 2016 Mar;25(2):141-6. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-051680. Epub 2014 Nov 27.
9
Tax reform for low-wage workers.低薪工人的税收改革。
Soc Work. 2000 Jan;45(1):65-72. doi: 10.1093/sw/45.1.65.
10
The effect of carbon tax incidence on household energy demand and welfare in the U.S.碳税归宿对美国家庭能源需求和福利的影响
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2023 Jan;30(5):13210-13223. doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-22882-4. Epub 2022 Sep 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Frictions and taxpayer responses: evidence from bunching at personal tax thresholds.摩擦与纳税人反应:来自个人所得税起征点聚集现象的证据
Int Tax Public Financ. 2021;28(3):612-653. doi: 10.1007/s10797-020-09619-0. Epub 2020 Aug 19.
2
Household Labor Supply and the Gains from Social Insurance.家庭劳动力供给与社会保险收益
J Public Econ. 2019 Mar;171:18-28. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.01.010. Epub 2018 Feb 2.
3
Provider Incentives and Healthcare Costs: Evidence from Long-Term Care Hospitals.医疗服务提供者激励措施与医疗成本:来自长期护理医院的证据。
Econometrica. 2018 Nov;86(6):2161-2219. doi: 10.3982/ECTA15022.
4
Payment systems and hospital length of stay: a bunching-based evidence.支付系统与医院住院时长:基于整群分析的证据
Int J Health Econ Manag. 2019 Mar;19(1):53-77. doi: 10.1007/s10754-018-9243-2. Epub 2018 May 4.
5
Bunching at the kink: implications for spending responses to health insurance contracts.拐点处的聚集:对医疗保险合同支出反应的影响。
J Public Econ. 2017 Feb;146:27-40. doi: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.011. Epub 2016 Nov 26.
6
MORAL HAZARD IN HEALTH INSURANCE: DO DYNAMIC INCENTIVES MATTER?健康保险中的道德风险:动态激励重要吗?
Rev Econ Stat. 2015 Oct;97(4):725-741. doi: 10.1162/REST_a_00518.
7
THE RESPONSE OF DRUG EXPENDITURE TO NON-LINEAR CONTRACT DESIGN: EVIDENCE FROM MEDICARE PART D.药品支出对非线性合同设计的反应:来自医疗保险D部分的证据。
Q J Econ. 2015 May;130(2):841-899. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjv005. Epub 2015 Feb 8.