Abstract

AbstractThe distinction between positive economics – describing economic programmes, situations and conditions as they exist – and normative economics – prescribing policies – has a long history. It is an especially important distinction in public economics, which by its nature concerns the actions of government. In this essay, I consider how two relatively recent developments in tax economics alter, blur or at least complicate the classic distinctions between positive and normative economics. The two developments I address are the insights generated by the study of behavioural economics and increased attention to tax evasion and tax enforcement. I organise my thoughts by addressing how three sets of actors central to public finance actually behave and should behave – taxpayers, governments and tax economists. I argue that tax economics should take seriously the substantial presence of behavioural anomalies and tax evasion, and that it has already begun to do so. I suggest some directions this effort might profitably take.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.