Eurasian Economic Review

, Volume 9, Issue 4, pp 459–466 | Cite as

Unit versus ad valorem tax comparisons in a simple New Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model

  • Kazuki HiragaEmail author
Original Paper


This paper compares unit and ad valorem taxes using a New Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model. We show that the ad valorem tax increase is superior to the unit tax increase with respect to the comparative statics, while is equivalent to under the log-linear setting, even when price stickiness and monopolistic competition are present.


Unit tax Ad valorem tax New Keynesian dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model 

JEL Classification

E62 H20 



I gratefully acknowledge Go Kotera, Tomohito Okabe and Hiroaki Hayakawa. Financial support from the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (No. 16K17135) is grateful acknowledge.


  1. Adachi, T., & Fabinger, M. (2017). Multi-dimensional pass-through, incidence, and the welfare burden of taxation in oligopoly. Mimeo.Google Scholar
  2. Blackorby, C., & Murty, S. (2007). Unit versus ad-valorem taxes: Monopoly in general equilibrium. Journal of Public Economics,91, 817–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackorby, C., & Murty, S. (2013). Unit versus ad-valorem taxes: The private ownership of monopoly in general equilibrium. Journal of Public Economic Theory,15, 547–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bui, D. (2018). Fiscal policy and national saving in emerging Asia: Challenge or opportunity? Eurasian Economic Review,8, 305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Calvo, G. (1983). Staggered prices in utility maximization framework. Journal of Monetary Economics,12, 383–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Corsetti, G., & Pesenti, P. (2009). The simple geometry of transmission and stabilization in closed and open economy. NBER international seminar on macroeconomics 2007 (pp. 65–116). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Delipalla, S., & Keen, M. (1992). The comparison between ad-valorem and specific taxation under imperfect competition. Journal of Public Economics,49, 351–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Eggertsson, G. (2011). What fiscal policy is effective at zero interest rate? NBER Macroeconomic Annual,2011, 59–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forni, L., Monteforte, L., & Sessa, L. (2009). The general equilibrium effects of fiscal policy: Estimates for the Euro area. Journal of Public Economics,93, 559–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Häckner, J., & Herzing, M. (2016). Welfare Effects of Taxation in Oligopolistic Markets. Journal of Economic Theory,163, 141–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Iwata, Y. (2011). The government spending multiplier: Insights from Japan. International Finance,14, 231–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Schmitt-Grohé, S., & Uribe, M. (2004). Solving dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models using a second-order approximation to the policy function. Journal of Economic Dynamics and.Control,28, 755–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Suits, D., & Musgrave, R. (1953). Ad valorem and unit versus compared. Quarterly Journal of Economics,67, 598–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Wang, K., Chou, P. (2018). Specific versus ad valorem taxes in the presence of cost and quality differences. International Tax and Public Finance25, 1197–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Weyl, G., & Fabinger, M. (2013). Pass-through as an economic tool: Principles of incidence under imperfect competition. Journal of Political Economy,121(3), 528–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Eurasia Business and Economics Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Political Science and EconomicsTokai UniversityTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations