Studiengeb�hren in Deutschland: Drei Thesen und ihr empirischer Gehalt

Abstract

: Several Länder in Germany have introduced, or are about to introduce, tuition fees for higher education. We discuss three hypotheses pertaining to (i) their distributional effects, (ii) their effect on the demand for higher education and study behaviour, and (iii) the competition and financial resources effects. We utilize a large number of empirical studies and other country experiences to assess likely effects in Germany. We conclude that fees are likely to reduce enrolment modestly and that the existing system of higher education financing is probably regressive. Tuition fees will reduce regressiveness only if they replace tax‐financed funding, which conflicts with the objective of increasing resources for universities, however. We are sceptical about the latter happening.

A study on effects of and stance over tuition fees

“…Of note, there are data suggesting that public share of expenditure (e.g. to compensate for tuition fees) helps to limit negative enrolment effects that are due to liquidity constraints [ 16 ], [ 17 ]. On the other hand Kane found that lowering tuition fees in general had a greater effect on the decision to enroll than had targeted support aiming at reducing financial burden of needy people [ 18 ], [ 19 ].…”

Higher Education Reform in Germany: Advocacy and Discourse

“…75 Effects on enrolment figures, especially for students from lower economic backgrounds, vary in the countries that charge fees but are, in most cases, insignificant over the long term. 76 Of course, as with particular disciplinary traditions, national conditions may be incomparable, and the decision to study can be determined by many factors other than tuition fees: availability of loan schemes and stipends, the cost of living, and location primary among them.…”

Kapitalertragsbesteuerung und Kapitalkosten

“…Allerdings ist bei der Verwendung der genannten Werte Vorsicht angebracht. Denn die Daten, die die OECD 2003 veröffentlicht und auf die sich Janeba et al (2007) in ihrer Tabelle 1 beziehen, belegen für deutsche Männer eine effektive Subventionierung im Umfang von 26%. Eine Veränderung von 26% Subventionierung zu 20% Besteuerung in nur wenigen Jahren lässt sich sicherlich nicht auf politische Maßnahmen zurückführen.…”