This research investigates whether workers perceive current deficits as implied future taxes (la Ricardian equivalence) and therefore consider current deficits when formulating their expectations about future net wages. A life cycle model of labor supply that permits workers to be aware of the government's budget constraint over time is constructed and then estimated using microlevel data and state fiscal policy variables. The results reveal that state government budget deficits tend to increase male labor supply more (or decrease it less) the more the state relies on individual income taxes. Such an effect is what would be predicted with “Ricardian” workers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1980. Significant features of fiscal federalism 1979-1980 edition. Washington, DC: Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
2.
Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations. 1987. Fiscal discipline in the federal system: National reform and the experience of the states. Washington, DC: Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations.
3.
Amemiya, Takeshi. 1978. A note on a random coefficients model. International Economic Review19 (3): 793-796.
4.
Barro, Robert J., 1974. Are government bonds net wealth?Journal of Political Economy, November/December, 84 (6): 1095-1112.
5.
Barro, Robert J., 1989. The Ricardian approach to budget deficits. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Spring, 3(2):37-54.
6.
Barth, James R., George Iden, Frank S. Russek, and Mark Wohar. 1991. The effects of federal budget deficits on interest rates and the composition of domestic output. In The great fiscal experiment, edited by Rudolph G. Penner. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Press.
7.
Bernheim, B. Douglas. 1987. Ricardian equivalence: An evaluation of theory and evidence. In NBER macroeconomics annual, edited by Stanley Fischer. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Bernheim, B. Douglas. 1989. A neoclassical perspective on budget deficits. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Spring, 3 (2): 55-72.
9.
Blomquist, N. Soren. 1985. Labour supply in a two-period model: The effect of a nonlinear progressive income tax. Review of Economic Studies52: 515-524.
10.
Blundell, Richard, and Ian Walker. 1986. A life-cycle consistent empirical model of family labour supply using cross-section data. Review of Economic Studies53: 539-558.
11.
Borjas, George J., and Glenn T. Sueyoshi. 1994. A two-stage estimator for probit models with structural group effects. Journal of Econometrics64 (1/2): 165-182.
12.
Browning, Edward, and Jacqueline Browning. 1994. Public finance and the price system. New York: Macmillan.
13.
Conway, Karen Smith. 1994. Reconsidering the effects of fiscal policy on private sector behavior: A unifying view of neutrality. Public Finance Quarterly22 (2): 194-220.
14.
Conway, Karen Smith. 1997. Labor supply, taxes and government spending: A microeconometric analysis. Review of Economics and Statistics79 (1): 50-67.
15.
Fremling, Gertrud M., and John R. Lott, 1989. Deadweight losses and the saving response to a deficit. Economic Inquiry27:117-129.
16.
Hansson, Ingemar, and Charles Stuart. 1987. The welfare costs of deficit finance. Economic Inquiry25:479-496.
17.
eHeckman, James J., and Thomas E. MaCurdy. 1980. A life-cycle model of female labour supply. Review of Economic Studies47:47-74.
18.
Judd, Kenneth L.1987. A dynamic theory of taxation. American Economic Review77 (2): 42-48.
19.
Killingsworth, Mark R.1983. Labor supply. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
20.
MaCurdy, Thomas, David Green, and Harry Paarsch. 1990. Assessing empirical approaches for analyzing taxes and labor supply. Journal of Human Resources25 (3): 415-490.
21.
Moffitt, Robert. 1990. Introduction. Journal of Human Resources25 (3): 313-316.
22.
Mroz, Thomas A.1987. The sensitivity of an empirical model of married women’s hours of work to economic and statistical assumptions. Econometrica55 (4): 765-800.
23.
National Association of State Budget Officers. 1981. Fiscal survey of the states 1980-81. Washington, DC: National Association of State Budget Officers.
24.
Pencavel, John. 1986. Labor supply of men: A survey. In Handbook of labor economics, edited by Orley Ashenfelter and Richard Layard, vol. 1. New York: Elsevier.
25.
Poterba, James. 1994. State responses to fiscal crises: The effects of budgetary institutions and politics. Journal of Political Economy102 (4): 799-821.
26.
Poterba, James. 1995. Capital budgets, borrowing rules, and state capital spending. Journal of Public Economics56:165-187.
27.
Poterba, James. 1997. Do budget rules work? NBER Working Paper No. 5550, National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER): Cambridge, MA.
28.
Quintieri, Beniamino, and Furio Camillo Rosati. 1988. Fiscal policy and labor supply. Public Finance43 (3): 425-439.
29.
Rogers, Diane Lim, and John H. Rogers. 1993. An empirical examination of state government budgets. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Economics, Pennsylvania State University.
30.
Runkle, David E.1991. Liquidity constraints and the permanent-income hypothesis. Journal of Monetary Economics27:973-988.
31.
State tax handbook. 1980. Chicago: Commerce Clearing House.
32.
Triest, Robert K.1990. The effect of income taxation on labor supply in the United States. Journal of Human Resources25 (3): 491-516.
33.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1981. State government finances in 1980. Series GF80, no. 3. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
34.
Zeldes, Stephen. 1989. Consumption and liquidity constraints: An empirical investigation. Journal of Political Economy97:305-346.
35.
Ziliak, James P. and Thomas J. Kniesner, “Estimating Life-Cycle Labor Supply Tax Effects,” University of Oregon Working Paper, November 1996.
