Impacts of consumption tax salience on residents’ consumption: an empirical study based on scenario simulations
(2.Huazhong Normal University 430079)
(3.Jiangxi University of Finance and Economics 330013)
【Abstract】Based on the perspective of behavioral economics and taking the consumption of cigarettes, white wine and cosmetics as examples, the authors make an empirical analysis of the impacts of consumption tax salience on residents’ consumption by the between-group experiment under scenario simulations and the ordered probit model. Research results show that consumption tax salience has significant influences on consumers’ consumption of cigarettes, white wine and cosmetics, in the case of a control over income and some other factors. This means that the propensities of consumers for reducing consumption of cigarettes, white wine and cosmetics will be stronger when consumption tax salience gets higher obviously. Additionally, estimation on marginal effects shows that the marginal effects of consumption tax salience on consumers’ propensities for “probably” and “absolutely” reducing consumption of cigarettes, white wine and cosmetics are greater, compared with those of income and other relevant variables. This means that consumption tax salience has significant impacts on residents’ consumption. Therefore, in order to effectively exercise the role of consumption tax in correcting negative externality and regulating residents’ consumption, China should reform the current consumption tax system, adopting the method of levying consumption tax beyond price, and levy it in retailing, so as to improve consumption tax salience and effectively regulate residents’ consumption and demands.
【Keywords】 consumption tax salience; residents’ consumption; consumption tax reform;
(Translated by YAO Lan)
. ① The statistics of the Ministry of Finance on fiscal revenue and expenditure in 2015 showe that domestic consumption tax revenue was up to CNY 1054.2 billion in 2015, which increased by 18.4% on a year-on-year basis and accounted for 8.44% of the total revenue tax. [^Back]
. ① Source: China Tobacco Yearbook (1991–1995) and the overview ofChina’s market in 2014. [^Back]
. ② Source: 2014 China Youth Tobacco Survey Report, which was released by China Center for Disease Control and Prevention in May 2014. [^Back]
. ③ Foreign scholars defined “tax salience” as the visibility of tax to taxpayers (or tax burden undertakers). [^Back]
. ① In this paper, the assumptions that “tax is levied within price” and “tax is levied beyond price” are different from “tax included in price” and “tax excluded in price.” The methods of calculating the latter two are different. But the methods of calculating the former two are the same, and the difference lies in whether its price and tax are separated when a commodity is sold. [^Back]
. ① Source: the 2013 white paper of Chinese women’s cosmetic consumption, which was released by HealthBeauty and the Public Opinion Research Institute of Renmin University of China and China Industrial Information Issuing Center on December 6, 2013. [^Back]
1. Fang, F. & Yu, J. Economics Perspectives (经济学动态), (3) (2014).
2. Jia, K. & Zhang, X. Contemporary Finance & Economics (当代财经), (4) (2014).
3. Li, C. & Xu, J. Finance & Trade Economics (财贸经济), (11) (2015).
4. Li, C. & Xu, J. Finance & Trade Economics (), (11) (2015).
5. Pan, Y. Journal of Shanghai Jiaotong University (Philosophy and Social Sciences) (上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版)), (3) (2009).
6. Sun, J. & Huo, X. Chinese Rural Economy (中国农村经济), (3) (2013).
7. Tong, J. & Zhou, Z. Journal of Xiamen University (Arts & Social Sciences) (厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)), (3) (2011).
8. Zheng, R., Gao, S. & Hu, D. Finance & Trade Economics (财贸经济), (3) (2013).
9. Zhou, Q., Xu, Y. & Luo, J. Journal of Guizhou University (Social Sciences) (贵州大学学报(社会科学版)), (4) (2014).
10. Atkinson, A.B., & Stiglitz, J.E., The Design of Tax Structure:Direct versus Indirect Taxation. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1976, pp. 55–75.
11. Akbay, C., Tiryaki, G. Y., & Gul, A., Consumer Characteristics Influencing Fast Food Consumption in Turkey. Food Control, Vol. 18, No. 8, 2007, pp. 904–913.
12. Chetty, R., Looney, A., & Kroft, K., Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence. American Economic Review, Vol. 99, No. 4, 2009, pp. 1145–1177.
13. Chetty, R., & Saez, E., Teaching the Tax Code: Earnings Responses to an Experiment with EITC Recipients. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2013, pp. 1–31.
14. Chen, X., Kaiser, H. M., & Rickard, B. J., The Impacts of Inclusive and Exclusive Taxes on Healthy Eating: An Experimental Study. Food Policy, Vol. 56, 2015, pp. 13–24.
15. Finkelstein, A., E-ztax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 124, No. 3, 2009, pp. 969–1010.
16. Feldman, N. E., & Ruffle, B. J., The Impact of Tax Exclusive and Inclusive Prices on Demand. SSRN Working Paper, No. 1302, 2012.
17. Goldin, J., Sales Tax Not Included: Designing Commodity Taxes for Inattentive Consumers. Yale Law Journal, Vol. 122, No. 1, 2012, pp. 258–301.
18. Goldin, J., Optimal Tax Salience. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 131, 2015, pp. 115–123.
19. Goldin, J., & Homonoff, T., Smoke Gets in Your Eyes: Cigarette Tax Salience and Regressivity. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2013, pp. 302–336.
20. Goldin, J., & Listokin, Y., Tax Expenditure Salience. American Law and Economics Review, Vol. 16, No. 1, 2014, pp. 144–176.
21. Hanson, A., & Sullivan, R., Incidence and Salience of Alcohol Taxes: Do Consumers Overreact? Public Finance Review, Vol. 44, No. 3, 2016, pp. 344–369.
22. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A., Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 2, 1979, pp. 263–292.
23. Mirrlees, J. A., An Exploration in the Theory of Optimum Income Taxation. Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 38, No. 2, 1971, pp. 175–208.
24. Morone, A., & Nemore, F., Tax Salience: An Experimental Investigation. MPRA Paper, No. 63814, 2015.
25. Rivers, N., & Schaufele, B., Salience of Carbon Taxes in the Gasoline Market. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 74, 2015, pp. 23–36.
26. Simon, H. A., Rational Choice and the Structure of the Environment. Psychological Review, Vol. 63, No. 2, 1956, pp. 129–138.
27. Schenk, D. H., Exploiting the Salience Bias in Designing Taxes. Yale Journal on Regulation, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2011, pp. 253–310.
28. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D., Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, Vol. 185, No. 4157, 1974, pp. 1124–1131.
29. Welsch, H., & Kühling, J., Pro–environmental Behavior and Rational Consumer Choice: Evidence from Surveys of Life Satisfaction. Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 31, No. 3, 2010, pp. 405–420.
30. Zheng, Y., McLaughlin, E. W., & Kaiser, H. M., Salience and Taxation: Salience Effect versus Information Effect. Applied Economics Letters, Vol. 20, No. 5, 2013, pp. 508–510.