Consumption externalities, habit formation, and optimal dynamic non‐linear income taxation under asymmetric information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article proposes a 2‐period model featuring jointly habit formation, consumption externalities, and asymmetric information to investigate their impacts on optimal labour and saving taxes. Regarding the effect of habit formation only, our model suggests that both labour taxation in the first period and a capital subsidy between the first and second periods are used to deter consumption in the first period. However, when the impact of consumption externalities alone is considered, consumption externalities advocate for higher labour taxation for all agents. Finally, our quantitative results show that with the rising degree of consumption externalities, the discrepancy between marginal capital tax rates under full information and their values under asymmetric information falls, so does the change in the gap between the marginal labour income tax rates of the skilled and the unskilled. Conversely, as the degree of habit formation increases, the change in marginal capital tax rates under full information and under asymmetric information expands, so does the change in the gap between the marginal labour income tax rates of the skilled and the unskilled.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".