Coping with Rising Inequality in Asia: How Effective Are Fiscal Policies?*

This paper discusses the role and effectiveness of redistributive fiscal policies and provides estimates of the effects of taxation and government expenditure on income inequality in Asia. Tax systems around the world tend to be progressive, but government expenditure is generally found to be a more effective tool for redistributing income. In Asia, government spending on social protection has a distinctive differential distributive impact. Social protection spending appears to increase income inequality in Asia, whereas it reduces it in the rest of the world. Government expenditure on housing is also adversely affecting the distribution of income in Asia. Policy options for improving the redistributional effectiveness of fiscal policies in Asia are discussed.

[1]  A. Araar,et al.  Comparison of the Tax System Progressivity Over Time: Theory and Application with Mexican Data , 2014 .

[2]  V. Tanzi.  Redistributing income through the budget in Latin America , 2013 .

[3]  Dalisay S. Maligalig,et al.  Income Polarization in Asia* , 2013, Asian Economic Papers.

[4]  Jose Cuesta,et al.  Analyzing the Distributive Effects of Fiscal Policies: How to Prepare (Analytically) for the Next Crisis , 2012 .

[5]  B. Moreno-Dodson,et al.  The Impact of Tax and Expenditure Policies on Income Distribution: Evidence from a Large Panel of Countries , 2012 .

[6]  V. Vulovic,et al.  Government Fiscal Policies and Redistribution in Asian Countries , 2012 .

[7]  R. Bird,et al.  Value-Added Tax: Onward and Upward? , 2011 .

[8]  D. Duncan,et al.  GLOBAL REFORM OF PERSONAL INCOME TAXATION, 1981-2005: EVIDENCE FROM 189 COUNTRIES , 2009, National Tax Journal.

[9]  D. Duncan,et al.  Tax Progressivity and Income Inequality , 2008 .

[10]  C. Weller.  The Benefits of Progressive Taxation in Economic Development , 2007 .

[11]  James D. Gwartney,et al.  THE IMPACT OF TAX POLICY ON ECONOMIC GROWTH, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, AND ALLOCATION OF TAXES , 2006, Social Philosophy and Policy.

[12]  L. de Mello,et al.  Income Inequality and Redistributive Government Spending , 2003, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[13]  Chih-Chien Jao.  THE IMPACT OF TAX REVENUE AND SOCIAL WELFARE EXPENDITURE ON INCOME DISTRIBUTION IN TAIWAN , 2000 .

[14]  S. Younger.  The Relative Progressivity of Social Services in Ecuador , 1999 .

[15]  R. Blundell,et al.  Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models , 1998 .

[16]  Benedict Clements.  Income Distribution and Social Expenditure in Brazil , 1997, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[17]  D. Fullerton,et al.  LIFETIME VERSUS ANNUAL PERSPECTIVES ON TAX INCIDENCE , 1991, National Tax Journal.

[18]  D. Fullerton,et al.  Lifetime vs. Annual Perspectives on Tax Incidence , 1991 .

[19]  Charles L. Ballard,et al.  A General Equilibrium Model for Tax Policy Evaluation , 1985 .

[20]  Jorge Martínez-Vázquez,et al.  FISCAL INCIDENCE AT THE LOCAL LEVEL , 1982 .

[21]  D. Fullerton,et al.  Estimating the distribution of tax burdens: A comparison of different approaches , 1980 .

[22]  J. Meerman.  Public Expenditure in Malaysia: Who Benefits and Why , 1979, The Journal of Asian Studies.

[23]  H. Aaron,et al.  Public Goods and Income Distribution , 1970 .

[24]  J. Servais.  International Labour Organization (ILO) , 2011 .

[25]  Victor R. Preedy,et al.  United Nations Human Settlements Program , 2010 .

[26]  M. Booth,et al.  THE INCIDENCE OF THE CORPORATE INCOME TAX , 1998 .

[27]  P. Gertler,et al.  The Willingness to Pay for Medical Care: Evidence from Two Developing Countries , 1991 .

[28]  Paul J. Gertler,et al.  The Willingness To Pay for Education in Developing Countries: Evidence from Rural Peru. Living Standards Measurement Study Working Paper No. 54. , 1989 .