International Tax and Public Finance

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 145–158 | Cite as

The Multi-Period Cost-Benefit Rule with Mobile Capital and Distorted Labor

  • Liqun Liu


Lind (1990) argues that capital mobility should be incorporated into the discussions of the social discount rate. He finds that when labor market distortion is ignored in that context, the appropriate discount rate for both project benefits and costs is the net rate of return, and the gross rate of return does not enter into the rule. Taking into account the labor market distortion, we find that a project’s impacts on government receipts should be incorporated into its evaluation and that costs should be multiplied by a marginal cost of funds (MCF) before being compared with benefits. Although the net rate continues to be the correct discount rate to use, the gross rate enters into the rule by having effects on the project’s receipt impacts and the MCF.


cost benefit analysis discount rate marginal cost of funds capital mobility 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Atkinson, A. B. and N. H. Stern 1974). “Pigou, Taxation, and Public Goods,” Review of Economic Studies 41, 119–128.Google Scholar
  2. Bazelon, C. and K. Smetters 1999). “Discounting Inside the Washington D.C. Beltway,” Journal of Economic Perspective 13, 213–228.Google Scholar
  3. Bradford, D. F 1975). “Constraints on Government Investment Opportunities and the Choice of Discount Rate,”American Economic Review 65, 887–899.Google Scholar
  4. Browning, E. K., T. Gronberg and L. Liu 2000). “Alternative Measures of the Marginal Costs of Funds,” Economic Inquiry 38, 591–599.Google Scholar
  5. Burgess, D. F 1988). “Complementarity and the Discount Rate for Public Investment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics 103, 527–541.Google Scholar
  6. Burgess, D. F 1989). “The Social Opportunity Cost of Capital in the Presence of Labour Market Distortions,” Canadian Journal of Economics 22, 245–261.Google Scholar
  7. Diamond, P. and J. Mirrlees 1971). “Optimal Taxation and Public Production I: Production Efficiency,” American Economic Review 61, 8–27.Google Scholar
  8. Diamond, P. and J. Mirrlees 1976). “Private Constant Returns and Public Shadow Prices,” The Review of Economic Studies 43, 41–47.Google Scholar
  9. Dreze, J. and N. H. Stern 1987). “The Theory of Cost-Benefit Analysis.” In A. J. Auerbach and M. Feldstein (eds.), Handbook of Public Economics vol. 2. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  10. Edwards, S 1986). “Country Risk, Foreign Borrowing, and the Social Discount Rate in an Open Developing Economy,” Journal of International Money and Finance 5, S79–S96.Google Scholar
  11. Feldstein, M 1964). “Net Social Benefit Calculation and the Public Investment Decision,” Oxford Economic Papers 16, 114–131.Google Scholar
  12. Gordon, R. H 1986). “Taxation of Investment and Savings in a World Economy,” American Economic Review 76, 1086–1102.Google Scholar
  13. Gordon, R. H. and A. L. Bovenberg 1996). “Why Is Capital So Immobile Internationally? Possible Explanations and Implications for Capital Income Taxation,” American Economic Review 86, 1057–1075.Google Scholar
  14. Gronberg, T. and L. Liu 2001). “The Second-Best Level of a Public Good: An Approach Based on the Marginal Excess Burden,” Journal of Public Economic Theory 3, 431–453.Google Scholar
  15. Harberger, A. C 1973. Project Evaluation: Collected Essays. Chicago: Markham.Google Scholar
  16. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 1996). Climate Change 1995: Economics and Social Dimensions of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lind, R. C 1982). “A Primer on the Major Issues Relating to the Discount Rate for Evaluating National Energy Options.” In R. C. Lind (ed.), Discounting for Time and Risk in Energy Policy. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  18. Lind, R. C 1990). “Reassessing the Government’s Discount Rate Policy in Light of New Theory and Data in a World Economy with a High Degree of Capital Mobility,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 18, S8–S28.Google Scholar
  19. Liu, L 2003). “A Marginal Cost of Funds Approach to Multi-Period Public Project Evaluation: Implications for the Social Discount Rate,” Journal of Public Economics 87, 1707–1718.Google Scholar
  20. Liu, L 2004). “The Marginal Cost of Funds and the Shadow Prices of Public Sector Inputs and Outputs,” International Tax and Public Finance 11, 17–29.Google Scholar
  21. Liu, L., A. J. Rettenmaier and T. R. Saving 2004). “A Generalized Approach to Multi-Generation Project Evaluation,” Southern Economic Journal, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  22. Lyon, R. M 1990). “Federal Discount Rate Policy, the Shadow Price of Capital, and Challenges for Returns,” Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 18, S29–S50.Google Scholar
  23. Marglin, S. A 1963). “The Opportunity Costs of Public Investment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics77, 274–289.Google Scholar
  24. Mendelsohn, R 1981). “The Choice of the Discount Rate for Public Projects,” American Economic Review 71, 239–241.Google Scholar
  25. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 1992). Circular No. A-94: Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs. Washington, D.C.: Office of Management and Budget.Google Scholar
  26. Pestieau, P. M 1975). “The Role of Taxation in the Determination of the Social Discount Rate,” International Economic Review 16, 362–368.Google Scholar
  27. Sandmo, A.and J. H. Dreze 1971). “Discount Rates for Public Investments in Closed and Open Economies,” Economica 38, 395–412.Google Scholar
  28. Sjaastad, L. A. and D. L. Wisecarver 1977). “The Social Cost of Public Finance,” Journal of Political Economy 85, 513–547.Google Scholar
  29. Usher, D 1969). “On the Social Rate of Discount: Comment,” American Economic Review 59, 927–929.Google Scholar
  30. Usher, D 1982). “Comment.” In R. C. Lind (ed.), Discounting for Time and Risk in Energy Policy. Washington, D.C.: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  31. Wilson, J. D 1982). “Optimal Linear Income Taxation in the Presence of Emigration,” Journal of Public Economics 18, 363–379.Google Scholar
  32. Wilson, J. D 1991). “Optimal Public Good Provision with Limited Lump-Sum Taxation,” American Economic Review 81, 153–166.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Private Enterprise Research CenterTexas A&M UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations