ON THE DESIRABILITY OF TAX COORDINATION WHEN COUNTRIES COMPETE IN TAXES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

in Economic Inquiry (2017)

The paper contains two distinct messages. First, when jurisdictions compete in two independent strategic variables, the decision to coordinate on one variable (a tax rate) induces a carry-over effect on ... [more ▼]

The paper contains two distinct messages. First, when jurisdictions compete in two independent strategic variables, the decision to coordinate on one variable (a tax rate) induces a carry-over effect on the unconstrained instrument (infrastructure expenditures). Consequently, classical results of the tax coordination literature may be qualified. A second message is that the relative flexibility of the strategic instruments, which may depend on the time horizon of the decision-making, does matter. In particular, tax coordination is more likely to be detrimental (in terms of revenue and/or welfare) when countries can compete simultaneously in taxes and infrastructure, rather than sequentially. The reason is that simultaneity eliminates strategic effects between tax and non-tax instruments. [less ▲]

Asymmetric Competition among Nation States: A Differential Game Approach

in Journal of Public Economics (2014)

This paper analyzes the impact of foreign investments on a small country’s economy in the context of international competition. To that end, we model tax and public input competition within a differential ... [more ▼]

This paper analyzes the impact of foreign investments on a small country’s economy in the context of international competition. To that end, we model tax and public input competition within a differential game framework between two unequally sized countries. The model accounts for the widely recognized characteristic that small states are more flexible in their political decision-making than larger countries. However, we also acknowledge that small size is associated with limited institutional capacity in the provision of public services. The model shows that the long-term outcome of international competition crucially depends on the degree of capital mobility. In particular, we show that flexibility mitigates against - but does not eliminate - the likelihood of collapse in a small economy. Finally, we note that the beneficial effect of flexibility in a small state increases with its inefficiency in providing public services and with the degree of international openness. [less ▲]