Skip to main content

Marriage Tax Breaks

Nick Clegg has criticised Conservative plans to give tax breaks to married couples (click here).  The Conservative plan is to allow tax allowances of up to £150 per year to be transferred between spouses.  For example, an unemployed husband could transfer £150 of his tax allowance to his wife.  Are there good economic reasons why a government would do this? 




Well-raised and socialised children provide a positive externality (i.e., benefit) to society.  Mother or fathers who take career breaks to raise children typically do so at their own expense.  In other words, society gets the benefit, but a family bears the cost.  There is therefore an argument for subsiding parents through the tax system by allowing transferable allowances (although £150 is a paltry amount).

The next question is whether this should be provided to both unmarried and married parents.  The statistics and majority of evidence clearly show that the latter provides a more stable environment in which to raise and nurture children, whereas the former is more likely to produce children which impose negative externalties (i.e., costs) upon society.  Given this, tax breaks should only be given to married couples with children.  Although this may be against liberal / Liberal ideals, there is a good economic justification as to why the Conservative plan is a sensible policy.   

Popular posts from this blog

The CEO: The Rise and Fall of Britain's Captains of Industry

Michael Aldous and I had our book The CEO: The Rise and Fall of Britain's Captains of Industry published a few weeks ago. You can find out more about it and buy it at Cambridge University Press's website . It is also available at Amazon , Waterstones , and Barnes & Noble .  The CEO has already been reviewed in The Sunday Times , The Observer and Financial Times .

The Railway Mania

My colleague and former PhD student Gareth Campbell has created a website about the British Railway Mania - click here . This episode has been described by the Economist as probably the greatest bubble in human history. Gareth's website provides background on the Mania and posits some explanations for the 'bubble'. In his explanation of why the bubble happened, Gareth places a lot of emphasis on investor myopia regarding future dividends and uncalled capital. His study of investors during the episode does not support the view that this episode was fuelled by naive and irrational investors. 

How Valuable Are Connections?

Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, James Kwak and Todd Mitton have written a paper on whether firms connected to Timothy Geithner benefited from these connections. They do so by looking at how stocks of these firms reacted to the announcement that he was a nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008. They find that there were large abnormal returns for connected firms. Below is the paper's abstract and the full paper is available here . The announcement of Timothy Geithner as nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008 produced a cumulative abnormal return for financial firms with which he had a connection. This return was about 6% after the first full day of trading and about 12% after ten trading days. There were subsequently abnormal negative returns for connected firms when news broke that Geithner's confirmation might be derailed by tax issues. Excess returns for connected firms may reflect the perceived impact of relying on the advice of a small ne...