穷人之间的分歧:自由化的巴西税收优惠调查实验

IF 1.5 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
S. Berens, Ida Bastiaens
{"title":"穷人之间的分歧:自由化的巴西税收优惠调查实验","authors":"S. Berens, Ida Bastiaens","doi":"10.1177/14680181241246769","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite globalization’s distributional impacts, we know little about (potentially differential) tax preferences of trade winners and losers, especially within social classes. We assess tax burden preferences to sustain public good provision using a vignette experiment with randomized tax instruments in the context of a liberalizing economy. More specifically, we analyze data from an original, randomized household survey of 1008 individuals in Sao Paulo State, Brazil, in 2019. We study preferences for increases in personal income, value-added, or corporate income taxes to improve funding for the universal health care system after Brazil adopts its free trade deal with the European Union. Findings reveal that the trade-losing poor support progressive taxes, whereas the trade-winning poor favor regressive instruments. By dividing the poor, globalization may create a barrier against more progressive fiscal strategies in emerging economies.","PeriodicalId":46041,"journal":{"name":"Global Social Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Divisions among the poor: A survey experiment of tax preferences in liberalizing Brazil\",\"authors\":\"S. Berens, Ida Bastiaens\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14680181241246769\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite globalization’s distributional impacts, we know little about (potentially differential) tax preferences of trade winners and losers, especially within social classes. We assess tax burden preferences to sustain public good provision using a vignette experiment with randomized tax instruments in the context of a liberalizing economy. More specifically, we analyze data from an original, randomized household survey of 1008 individuals in Sao Paulo State, Brazil, in 2019. We study preferences for increases in personal income, value-added, or corporate income taxes to improve funding for the universal health care system after Brazil adopts its free trade deal with the European Union. Findings reveal that the trade-losing poor support progressive taxes, whereas the trade-winning poor favor regressive instruments. By dividing the poor, globalization may create a barrier against more progressive fiscal strategies in emerging economies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46041,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Social Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Social Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181241246769\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Social Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14680181241246769","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管全球化对分配产生了影响,但我们对贸易赢家和输家的(潜在差别)税收偏好知之甚少,尤其是在社会阶层内部。在经济自由化的背景下,我们通过随机税收工具的小实验来评估税收负担偏好,以维持公共产品的提供。更具体地说,我们分析了 2019 年巴西圣保罗州 1008 人的原始随机家庭调查数据。我们研究了在巴西通过与欧盟的自由贸易协定后,人们对增加个人所得税、增值税或企业所得税以改善全民医疗保健系统资金的偏好。研究结果显示,贸易失败的穷人支持累进税,而贸易胜利的穷人则倾向于累退税。通过分化穷人,全球化可能会对新兴经济体采取更进步的财政战略造成障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Divisions among the poor: A survey experiment of tax preferences in liberalizing Brazil
Despite globalization’s distributional impacts, we know little about (potentially differential) tax preferences of trade winners and losers, especially within social classes. We assess tax burden preferences to sustain public good provision using a vignette experiment with randomized tax instruments in the context of a liberalizing economy. More specifically, we analyze data from an original, randomized household survey of 1008 individuals in Sao Paulo State, Brazil, in 2019. We study preferences for increases in personal income, value-added, or corporate income taxes to improve funding for the universal health care system after Brazil adopts its free trade deal with the European Union. Findings reveal that the trade-losing poor support progressive taxes, whereas the trade-winning poor favor regressive instruments. By dividing the poor, globalization may create a barrier against more progressive fiscal strategies in emerging economies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Social Policy
Global Social Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Global Social Policy is a fully peer-reviewed journal that advances the understanding of the impact of globalisation processes upon social policy and social development on the one hand, and the impact of social policy upon globalisation processes on the other hand. The journal analyses the contributions of a range of national and international actors, both governmental and non-governmental, to global social policy and social development discourse and practice. Global Social Policy publishes scholarly policy-oriented articles and reports that focus on aspects of social policy and social and human development as broadly defined in the context of globalisation be it in contemporary or historical contexts.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信