Assessment of the Macroeconomic Effects of Changes in the Progressivity of the Taxation Scale within the Framework of the OLG Model

The subject of the study is the Russian income tax system. The purpose of the work is to evaluate the effects of changes in the degree of progressivity of the income tax scale on key macroeconomic variables. A stochastic model of general economic equilibrium with overlapping generations is constructed, where households consisting of two spouses make decisions about the volume of consumption and the number of hours worked by each spouse. The calibration of the model is based on econometric estimates of life cycle parameters built for Russia. Two scenarios were considered: transfers are fixed at the level of the baseline scenario, the entire budget surplus goes to government spending; government spending is fixed at the level of the baseline scenario, the entire budget surplus goes to transfers. Within the framework of each scenario, the overall economic equilibrium was estimated for different values of the parameter of the degree of progressiveness of the taxation scale. The results of the simulation analysis indicate the classic problem of compromise between fairness and efficiency of the tax system. It was found that as the degree of progressivity increases, inequality and output decrease in the first scenario, while in the case of the second scenario, the result turned out to be the opposite. In general, the change in macroeconomic parameters in response to the increasing degree of progressivity of the tax scale in Russia turned out to be significantly less than in other countries, due to, on the one hand, a weak labor supply response, and, on the other hand, a high degree of risk aversion, which is why the potential of tax and transfer policies as a tool in the fight against inequality in Russia appears to be moderate.

1. Blundell R., Pistaferri L., Saporta-Eksten I. Consumption inequality and family labor supply. American Economic Review. 2016;106(2):387–435.

2. Theloudis A. Consumption inequality across heterogeneous families. European Economic Review. 2021;136.

3. Wu C., Krueger D. Consumption insurance against wage risk: Family labor supply and optimal progressive income taxation. American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics. 2021;13(1):79–113.

4. Aiyagari S. R. Uninsured idiosyncratic risk and aggregate saving. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1994;109(3):659–684.

5. Bewley T. A difficulty with the optimum quantity of money. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society. 1983;51(5):1485–1504.

6. Huggett M. The risk-free rate in heterogeneous-agent incomplete-insurance economies. Journal of economic Dynamics and Control. 1993;17(5–6):953–969.

7. Mirrlees J. An exploration in the theory of optimum income taxation. The Review of Economic Studies. 1971;38(2):175–208.

8. Stern N. H. On the specification of models of optimum income taxation. Journal of Public Economics. 1976;6(1–2):123–162.

9. Varian H.R. Redistributive taxation as social insurance. Journal of public Economics. 1980;14(1):49–68.

10. Aiyagari S.R. Optimal capital income taxation with incomplete markets, borrowing constraints, and constant discounting. Journal of Political Economy. 1995;103(6):1158–1175.

11. Erosa A., Gervais M. Optimal taxation in life-cycle economies. Journal of Economic Theory. 2002;105(2):338–369.

12. Imai S., Keane M.P. Intertemporal labor supply and human capital accumulation. International Economic Review. 2004;45(2):601–641.

13. Conesa J.C., Krueger D. On the optimal progressivity of the income tax code. Journal of Monetary Economics. 2006;53(7):1425–1450.

14. Conesa J.C., Kitao S., Krueger D. Taxing capital? Not a bad idea after all! American Economic Review. 2009;99(1):25–48.

15. Peterman W.B. Determining the motives for a positive optimal tax on capital. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control. 2013;37(1):265–295.

16. Ramsey F.P. A Contribution to the Theory of Taxation. The Economic Journal. 1927;37(145):47–61.

17. Peterman W.B. The effect of endogenous human capital accumulation on optimal taxation. Review of Economic Dynamics. 2016;21:46–71.

18. Da Costa C.E., Santos M.R. Age‐Dependent Taxes with Endogenous Human Capital Formation. International Economic Review. 2018;59(2):785–823.

19. Lundberg S. The added worker effect. Journal of Labor Economics. 1985;3(1, Part 1):11–37.

20. Holter H.A., Krueger D., Stepanchuk S. How do tax progressivity and household heterogeneity affect Laffer curves? Quantitative Economics. 2019;10(4):1317–1356.

21. Bick A., Fuchs-Schündeln N. Taxation and labour supply of married couples across countries: A macroeconomic analysis. The Review of Economic Studies. 2018;85(3):1543–1576.

22. Zamnius A. Estimating labor supply elasticities in the Russian Federation using a two earners life cycle model. SSRN. 2024.

23. Martyanova E.V., Polbin A.V. Scenario assessment of macroeconomic effects of progressive taxation in Russia. Finansovyj zhurnal = Financial Journal. 2024;16(1):8–30. (In Russ.).

24. Nesterova K. Estimating the effect of progressive personal income tax schedule for Russia in a global CGEOLG model. Journal of Tax Reform. 2024;10(2):334–354.

25. Zamnius A.V., Polbin A.V., Sinelnikov-Murylev S.G. Wages, age, and economic growth: Estimates for Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki = Economic issues. 2023;(6):94–116.). (In Russ.).

26. Shpilevaya A.Е., Polbin A.V., Sinelnikov-Murylev S.G. Developing an OLG Model with Heterogeneous Preferences and Learning Abilities for Higher Education Policy Analysis. Ekonomicheskij zhurnal Vysshej shkoly ehkonomiki = HSE Economic Journal. 2023;27(3):449–469. (In Russ.).

27. Shpilevaya A.Е., Polbin A.V., Sinelnikov-Murylev S.G. Simulation Analysis of an OLG model with heterogeneous preferences and learning abilities. Ekonomicheskij zhurnal Vysshej shkoly ehkonomiki = HSE Economic Journal. 2024;28(1):44–80. (In Russ.).

28. Heathcote J., Storesletten K., Violante G.L. Optimal tax progressivity: An analytical framework. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2017;132(4):1693–1754.

29. Koval P.K., Polbin A.V. Estimates of households consumer behavior in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki = Economic issues. 2022;(3):98–117. (In Russ.).

30. Guner N., Lopez-Daneri M., Ventura G. Heterogeneity and Government revenues: Higher taxes at the top? Journal of Monetary Economics. 2016;80:69–85.

31. Serrano-Puente D. Optimal progressivity of personal income tax: A general equilibrium evaluation for Spain. SERIEs. 2020;11:407–455.

32. Klepikova E. Labor supply elasticity in Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki = Economic issues. 2016;(9):111–128. (In Russ.).

33. Zamnius A.V., Polbin A.V., Sinelnikov-Murylev S.G. The labor supply elasticity for married men in Russia. Ekonomicheskij zhurnal Vysshej shkoly ehkonomiki = HSE Economic Journal. 2022;26(2):177–212. (In Russ.).