Discussion Papers, Policy Papers, Books & Reports, Bulletin, Newsletter, Economic Policy Lunchtime Meetings, Workshops & Conferences, Events Diary, Previous Events Programme Areas, Current Research Projects, Networks, Vacancies Programme Directors, Researchers Lists, Noticeboard Press Releases, Coverage, Request a Press Release Data?, Resources for Economists, Data on Other sites Membership information Login, Create a Profile, Profile Benefits, Your Profile Settings, Forgot Your Password? Site Map, How to find us, How to Order Publications, Privacy Policy, Feedback How to find us, Frequently Asked Questions, ESRC Site Guide, Frequently Asked Questions, Vacancies, How to Search Site Map, How to find us, How to Order Publications, Privacy Policy, Feedback CEPR Home Page You have items in your shopping cart.  Click to view your cart
Google


DP6196 Do Taxes Explain European Employment? Indivisible Labour, Human Capital, Lotteries and Savings

Author(s): Lars Ljungqvist , Thomas J Sargent
Publication Date: March 2007
Keyword(s): aggregation theories , employment lotteries , human capital , indivisible labour , labour supply elasticity , labour taxation , social and private insurance
JEL(s): E24 , E62
Programme Areas: International Macroeconomics
Link to this Page: www.cepr.org/pubs/dps/DP6196.asp.asp


Adding generous government supplied benefits to Prescott's (2002) model with employment lotteries and private consumption insurance causes employment to implode and prevents the model from matching outcomes observed in Europe. To understand the role of a 'not-so-well-known aggregation theory' that Prescott uses to rationalize the high labour supply elasticity that underlies his finding that higher taxes on labour have depressed Europe relative to the US, this paper compares aggregate outcomes for economies with two arrangements for coping with indivisible labour: (1) employment lotteries plus complete consumption insurance, and (2) individual consumption smoothing via borrowing and lending at a risk-free interest rate. The two arrangements support equivalent outcomes when human capital is not present; when it is present, allocations differ because households' reliance on personal savings in the incomplete markets model constrains the 'career choices' that are implicit in their human capital acquisition plans relative to those that can be supported by lotteries and consumption insurance in the complete markets model. Nevertheless, the responses of aggregate outcomes to changes in tax rates are quantitatively similar across the two market structures. Thus, under both aggregation theories, the high disutility that Prescott assigns to labour is an impediment to explaining European non-employment and benefits levels. Moreover, while the identities of the non-employed under Prescott's tax hypothesis differ between the two aggregation theories, they all seem counterfactual.


Full text Search:
Enter a DP Number:

Access other features of the site by loging in with your personal profile. Purchase a copy of the paper in PDF format. Purchase a printed copy of the paper. How to subscribe to the CEPR Discussion Paper series Send an email to a colleague with details of the paper. Obtain Plain Text details of this paper which you can copy in to a word document or email allowing you to easily cite this paper! Help in purchasing and downloading papers. CEPR RSS feeds information page.

Your current location: Publications > Discussion Papers
Top CEPR, 53-56 Great Sutton Street, London EC1V 0DG
United Kingdom.
Tel: +44 (0)20 7183 8801     Fax: +44 (0)20 7183 8820
Email: cepr@cepr.org     Webmaster: webmaster@cepr.org
Home
With the support of the European Union: Support for bodies active at European level in the field of active European citizenship