The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics

2018 Edition
| Editors: Macmillan Publishers Ltd

Taxation of the Family

  • James Alm
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-349-95189-5_2299

Abstract

In administering an individual income tax, a country must decide what constitutes an ‘individual’. This choice has traditionally been seen as one between making either the family or the individual the ‘unit of taxation’. The choice between the family and individual as the unit of taxation in the income tax – indeed in any tax or transfer programme – is not clear-cut, and involves difficult trade-offs between competing and worthwhile goals. This article examines some of the issues that countries face in choosing the unit of taxation, or what is often referred to as ‘taxing the family’.

JEL Classifications

H2 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Bibliography

  1. Alm, J., and M.I. Melnik. 2005. Taxing the ‘family’ in the individual income tax: An international perspective. Public Finance and Management 5: 67–109.Google Scholar
  2. Alm, J., and L.A. Whittington. 1996. The rise and fall and rise... of the marriage tax. National Tax Journal 49: 571–589.Google Scholar
  3. ———. 1997. Income taxes and the timing of marital decisions. Journal of Public Economics 64: 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. ———. 1999. For love or money? The impact of income taxes on marriage. Economica 66: 297–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Apps, P.F., and R. Rees. 1999. Individual versus joint taxation in models with household production. Journal of Political Economy 107: 393–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berliant, M., and P. Rothstein. 2003. Possibility, impossibility, and history in the origins of the marriage tax. National Tax Journal 56: 303–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bittker, B.I. 1975. Federal income taxation and the family. Stanford Law Review 27: 1388–1463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boskin, M.J., and E. Sheshinski. 1983. Optimal tax treatment of the family. Journal of Public Economics 20: 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bull, N., Holtzblatt, J., Nunns, J.R., and Rebelein, R. 1998. Assessing marriage penalties and bonuses. Working Paper. Washington, DC: Office of Tax Analysis, U.S. Department of the Treasury.Google Scholar
  10. Congressional Budget Office. 1997. For better or for worse: Marriage and the federal income tax. Washington, DC: Congress of the United States.Google Scholar
  11. Feenberg, D.R., and H.S. Rosen. 1995. Recent developments in the marriage tax. National Tax Journal 48: 91–101.Google Scholar
  12. Kleven, H.J., Kreiner, C.T., and Saez, E. 2006. The optimal income taxation of couples. Working Paper No. 12685. Washington, DC: NBER.Google Scholar
  13. Kniesner, T.J., and J.P. Ziliak. 2008. Evidence of tax-induced individual behavioral responses. In Fundamental tax reform: Issues, choices, and implications, ed. J.W. Diamond and G.R. Zodrow. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Steuerle, C.E. 1999. Valuing marital commitment: The radical restructuring of our tax and transfer systems. The Responsive Community 9: 35–45.Google Scholar
  15. US General Accounting Office. 1996. Income tax treatment of married and single individuals, GAO/GGD-96-175. Washington, DC: US General Accounting Office.Google Scholar
  16. Whittington, L.A., and J. Alm. 2003. The effects of public policy on marital status in the United States. In Marriage and the economy: Theory and evidence from advanced industrial societies, ed. S. Grossbard-Shechtman. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Alm
    • 1
  1. 1.