Model 15 LOTTE — The Norwegian Tax-Benefit Model System

Aasness, Jørgen; Dagsvik, John K.; Thoresen, Thor Olav

doi:10.1016/s1571-0386(06)16034-2

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Statistics Norway's tax-benefit model LOTTE-Skatt (Aasness, Dagsvik and Thoresen 2007) is a detailed tax calculator used to simulate the direct (non-behavioural) effects of tax and benefit changes on tax revenues and distributional outcomes. The version of the model used in the present study is based on extensive information on individuals and households based on administrative register data, including detailed information from income tax returns, for the Norwegian population in 2019.…”

Section: The Tax-benefit Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To illustrate the trade-o¤ between distributional ambitions and labour supply e¤ects, we turn to simulation results where we use non-behavioural and behavioural models to describe the e¤ects of means testing. We employ models belonging to the Norwegian microsimulation model system LOTTE (Aasness, Dagsvik and Thoresen, 2007). Firstly, we show direct distributional e¤ects by employing a (standard) non-behavioural tax-bene…t model, named LOTTE-Skatt.…”

Section: Use Of Simulation Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As already noted, several countries have already introduced means testing of the child bene…t. In the U.S. there is no general child bene…t scheme 1 but there are several means tested programs directed towards families with children, such as the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), see Ben-Shalom, Mo¢ tt and Scholz (2012). In the UK the universal child bene…t scheme was replaced by a schedule introducing a "High Income Child Bene…t Charge" in 2013, which means that the schedule is tapered o¤ between £ 50,000 and £ 60,000 of earned income: 1% of the child bene…t is paid for every £ 100 of income between £ 50,000 and £ 60,000 earned, based on the highest individual income of the family (rather than joint income, as is often the case in other countries).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Alternatives to Paying Child Benefit to the Rich: Means‐Testing or Higher Tax?

Apps

Rees

Thoresen

et al. 2023

Australian Economic Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There appears to be a general movement away from universal child benefits and towards means‐testing. In the present article we argue that instead of suppressing the labour supply of middle‐income parents by withdrawing the transfer as a function of income, one should consider the alternative of financing a generous universal child benefit by increasing taxation of income. The implications of means‐testing compared with a tax‐financed universal alternative are discussed analytically in a piecewise linear schedule and by combining information from behavioural and non‐behavioural micro‐simulation models. Our results provide support for making child benefit universal instead of means‐tested.

show abstract

Section: The Tax-benefit Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Use Of Simulation Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Alternatives to Paying Child Benefit to the Rich: Means‐Testing or Higher Tax?

Apps

Rees

Thoresen

et al. 2023

Australian Economic Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To determine the distributional effects of a hypothetical tax reform, I use microdata on income and wealth for the whole Norwegian population, and a microsimulation model. The microsimulation, tax‐benefit model LOTTE (Aasness et al ., ), is also used by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance to estimate revenue effects of tax changes. The simulated taxes are virtually identical to real tax payments recorded in the data.…”

Section: Modeling the Housing Taxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Taxation of Housing: Killing Several Birds with One Stone

Bø

2019

Review of Income and Wealth

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Norwegian public policy debate regularly returns to the private housing market. Housing prices have increased by 200 percent in real terms over the last two decades, a large share of households have high debt ratios, and new home buyers face large costs to enter the housing market. In addition, maintaining the welfare state in the face of population aging will likely involve higher tax burdens on the working population in the years to come. As housing is taxed leniently in Norway, increased taxation of housing stands out as a way of killing several birds with one stone: it generates tax revenue, moderates housing prices and increases efficiency. In this paper I discuss the effects on revenue and distribution of a hypothetical change in the taxation of housing in which housing would be taxed as other capital assets. This involves taxing imputed rental income, and a modified wealth taxation schedule. In contrast to other papers on distributional effects of housing taxation, I also take into account the effects of taxation on housing demand. Changes in housing prices that would follow a reform are estimated using a simple user-cost model. I find that the housing tax increase would increase personal tax revenue by 11 percent and make the tax system more progressive. Housing prices would be reduced by 18 percent.

show abstract

Base independence in the analysis of tax policy effects: with an application to Norway 1992–2004

Lambert

Thoresen

2008

Int Tax Public Finance

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The analysis contrasts results of two recently expounded micro-level data approaches to derive robust intertemporal characterizations of redistributional effects of income tax schedules; the fixed-income procedure of Kasten, Sammartino and Toder (1994) and the transplant-and-compare method of Dardanoni and Lambert (2002). Our study is normative in that the Blackorby and Donaldson (1984) index of tax progressivity is employed. This enables contributions from vertical redistribution and horizontal inequity also to be assessed, using for the latter one classical measure and one no reranking measure. When the competing methodologies are applied to Norwegian data for 1992-2004, their respective strengths and weaknesses are revealed. The transplant-and-compare procedure is found to have a number of advantages.

show abstract

Model 15 LOTTE — The Norwegian Tax-Benefit Model System

Cited by 6 publications

References 5 publications

Alternatives to Paying Child Benefit to the Rich: Means‐Testing or Higher Tax?

Alternatives to Paying Child Benefit to the Rich: Means‐Testing or Higher Tax?

Taxation of Housing: Killing Several Birds with One Stone

Base independence in the analysis of tax policy effects: with an application to Norway 1992–2004

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About