Abstract
There are many more pros than cons in this paper. Professor Petersen is quite enthusiastic about the negative income tax (NIT) as a substitute for current welfare state transfers in accordance with what he calls the social aid principle (Fürsorgeprinzip). I do not share his enthusiasm. In my view, NIT is both expensive and inefficient.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Reference
Jerger, J., and A. Spermann. 1995. “Alternatives to Subsidize Low-Wage Employment: The Case for a Targeted Negative-Income Tax Solution in Germany.” International Institute of Public Finance 51st Congress, Lisbon, Portugal, August 21–24 (mimeo).
Statistics Sweden. 1992. Socialutgifterna och utgifternas finansiering år 1990. S42 SM 9201. Stockholm: Statistics Sweden.
Swedish Government. 1990. Reviderad Finansplan 1990/1991. Stockholm: Swedish Government.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Söderström, L. (1997). Comment on Hans-Georg Petersen “Pros and Cons of a Negative Income Tax”. In: Giersch, H. (eds) Reforming the Welfare State. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60497-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-60497-3_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-64431-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-60497-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive