Tax smoothing in a business cycle model with capital-skill complementarity

This paper undertakes a normative investigation of the quantitative properties of optimal tax smoothing in a business cycle model with state contingent debt, capital-skill complementarity, endogenous skill formation and stochastic shocks to public consumption as well as total factor and capital equipment productivity. Our main finding is that an empirically relevant restriction which does not allow the relative supply of skilled labour to adjust in response to aggregate shocks, signi cantly changes the cyclical properties of optimal labour taxes. Under a restricted relative skill supply, the government fi nds it optimal to adjust labour income tax rates so that the average net returns to skilled and unskilled labour hours exhibit the same dynamic behaviour as under fl exible skill supply.

Human Capital in Economic Development: From Labour Productivity to Macroeconomic Impact

Micro-econometric evidence reveals high private returns to education, most prominently in low-income countries. However, it is disputed to what extent this translates into a macro-economic impact. This paper projects the increase in human capital from higher education in Malawi and uses a dynamic applied general equilibrium model to estimate the resulting macroeconomics impact. This is contingent upon endogenous adjustments, in particular how labour productivity affects competitiveness and if this in turn stimulates exports. Choice among commonly applied labour market assumptions and trade elasticities results in widely different outcomes. Appraisal of such policies should consider not only the impact on human capital stocks, but also adjustments outside the labour market.

Debunking Mill’s “Fourth Fundamental Proposition on Capital”

J S Mill’s enigmatic "Fourth Proposition on Capital" has been brought to our notice by Steven Kates (2015). Kates takes a positive view of the proposition. Our focus is not, however, on Kates, but on the aforesaid proposition. The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate, via close examination of Mill’s explanatory examples, just how unsatisfactory are its foundations. We conclude that the doubters are justified: Mill’s Fourth Proposition is, demonstrably, a muddle.