Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/146544
|
| Title: | 租稅累進性、政府移轉性支出與所得分配—以臺灣縣市為例
Tax Progressivity, Government Transfer Payments and Income Distribution: Evidence from Taiwan |
| Authors: | 陳弈臻
Chen, Yi-Chen |
| Contributors: | 黃智聰
Jr-Tsung Huang
陳弈臻
Chen, Yi-Chen |
| Keywords: | 所得分配
租稅累進性
政府移轉支出
動態空間自我迴歸模型
廣義動差法
Income Distribution
Tax Progressivity
Government Transfer Payments
Dynamic spatial autoregressive model
Generalized Moment of Method |
| Date: | 2023 |
| Issue Date: | 2023-08-02 13:58:35 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 所得分配是否均等是一個重要的議題，尤其近年來出現貧富差距擴大的現象，政府需要積極思考如何制訂有效的政策避免所得分配不均持續惡化。本研究之目的即在探討租稅累進性、政府移轉性支出等因素對所得分配之影響，以臺灣20個縣市1998年至2021年家庭收支調查資料為研究標的，希望找出對於改善所得分配有效之政策方向。
本研究使用廣義動差法（Generalized Moment of Method, 簡稱GMM）於動態空間自我迴歸模型（Dynamic spatial autoregressive model，簡稱DSAR）中，估計各縣市租稅累進性及政府移轉性支出等因素對所得分配之影響。實證結果顯示，租稅累進性、實質社會福利支出、實質災害救助、大專以上受教育人口比率及工業就業人口比率越高，吉尼係數越小，所得分配會越平均；而實質老年農民福利津貼及實質平均每戶可支配所得越高，吉尼係數越大，所得分配越不均。
The equal distribution of income is an important issue, particularly with the growing wealth gap in recent years. The government needs to actively consider how to formulate effective policies to prevent a further deterioration of income inequality. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of tax progressivity and government transfer payments on income distribution, using the survey of family income and expenditure data from 1998 to 2021 in the 20 counties and cities of Taiwan as the research subject. The goal is to identify the most effective policy direction for improving income distribution.
This study utilizes the Generalized Method of Moments (GMM) in a Dynamic Spatial Autoregressive Model (DSAR) to estimate the effects of factors such as tax progressivity and government transfer payments on income distribution across different counties and cities. The empirical results indicate that higher levels of progressive taxation, real social welfare expenditure, real disaster relief, the ratio of the population with higher education, and the ratio of industrial employment lead to a lower Gini coefficient, suggesting a more equal income distribution. On the other hand, higher levels of real welfare subsidies for elderly farmers and higher average disposable income per household result in a higher Gini coefficient, indicating a more unequal income distribution. |
| Reference: | 一、中文文獻
李駿謙（2004），《我國所得稅制度重分配效果之解析》。臺北市：國立政治大學財政研究所未發表碩士論文。
林宗弘（2015），「臺灣階級不平等擴大的原因與後果」。《臺灣經濟預測與政策》，45（2），頁45-68。
林金源、朱雲鵬（2003），「移轉所得對臺灣所得分配的影響」。《人文及社會科學集刊》，15（3），頁501-538。
林俊宏、張振皓、王淳玄（2019），「臺灣教育不均與所得差距之關係：空間計量方法應用」。《長庚人文社會學報》，12（1），頁1-23。
林德昌（2016），《台灣所得分配決定因素之探討(1999-2013) 》。臺北市：國立臺灣大學經濟學研究所未發表碩士論文。
袁心敏（2020），《社會福利支出是否影響所得分配? 臺灣縣市別追蹤資料的實證研究》。新竹市：國立清華大學公共政策與管理研究所未發表碩士論文。
徐美、莊奕琦、陳晏羚（2015），「臺灣家戶所得不均度來源分析初探」,《社會科學論叢》，9（1），頁1-32。
孫克難、羅時萬（2014），「臺灣綜所稅改革之稅負公平性探討」，《政治科學論叢刊》，61，頁71-108。
單珮玲、靜宇文（2018），「臺灣各縣市所得分配不均因素探討」，《財稅研究期刊》，47（3），頁108-137。
劉瑞文（2001），「產業結構變遷對國內就業與所得分配的影響」，《經濟論文叢刊》，29（2），頁203-233。
鄭保志、李宜（2010），「臺灣政府各項移轉收支的重分配效果比較：1976 ~ 2006之全面性與局部性分析」。《經濟論文叢刊》，38（2），頁233 – 288。
鄭淑如、饒志堅（2001），「我國政府社會福利支出對家庭所得分配之影響」，《主計月報》，548，頁71-80。
詹文碩、陳以禮、陳郁雯、詹文碩（譯）（2015），《二十一世紀資本論》。新北市：衛城出版。（Thomas Piketty, Marc Leroy, 2013）。
二、英文文獻
Aiyar, S. and C. Ebeke (2020), “Inequality of Opportunity, Inequality of Income and Economic Growth.” World Development, 136, 105115.
Anderson, T.W. and C. Hsiao (1982), “Formulation and Estimation of Dynamic Models Using Panel Data.” Journal of Econometrics, 18, 47-82.
Arellano, M.A. and S.R. Bond (1991), “Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations.” The Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277-297.
Aronson, J. R., P. Johnson, and P. J. Lambert (1994), “Redistributive Effect and Unequal Income Tax Treatment.” The Economic Journal, 104(423), 262-270.
Baltagi, B. H., B. Fingleton, and A. Pirotte (2014), “Estimating and Forecasting with a Dynamic Spatial Panel Data Model.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 76(1), 112-138.
Cano, L. (2017), “Personal Income Tax and Income Inequality in Ecuador between 2007 and 2011.” CEPAL Review. 2017,56-75.
Datt, G., R. Ray, and C. Teh (2022), “Progressivity and Redistributive Effects of Income Taxes: Evidence from India.” Empirical economics, 63(1), 141-178.
Duncan, D. and K. Sabirianova Peter (2008), “Tax Progressivity and Income Inequality.” Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Research Paper Series, 8-26.
Gregorio, J. D. and J. W. Lee (2002), “Education and Income Inequality: New Evidence from Cross‐Country Data.” Review of Income and Wealth, 48(3), 395-416.
Guillaud, E., M. Olckers, and M. Zemmour (2020), “Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction.” Review of Income and Wealth, 66(2), 444-466.
Heathcote, J., F. Perri, and G. L. Violante (2010), “Unequal We Stand: An Empirical Analysis of Economic Inequality in the United States, 1967-2006.” Review of Economic Dynamics, 13(1), 15-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25071/1874-6322.40542.
Hendel, I., J. Shapiro and P. Willen (2005), “Educational Opportunity and Income Inequality.” Journal of Public Economics, 89(5-6), 841-870.
Jao, C. C. (2000), “The Impact of Tax Revenue and Social Welfare Expenditure on Income Distribution in Taiwan.” Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, 5(1-2), 73-90.
Kakwani, N. C. (1977), “Measurement of Tax Progressivity: An International Comparison.” The Economic Journal, 87(345), 71-80.
Kakwani, N. and P. J. Lambert (1998), “On Measuring Inequity in Taxation: A New Approach.” European Journal of Political Economy, 14, 369-380.
Koutmeridis, T. (2018), “Misallocation, Education Expansion and Wage Inequality.” Available at SSRN 3124897.
Kuznets, S. (1955), “Economic Growth and Income Inequality.” The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1-28.
Levin, A., C. F. Lin, and C. S. J. Chu (2002), “Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties.” Journal of econometrics, 108(1), 1-24.
Lin, C. H. A. (2007), “Education Expansion, Educational Inequality, and Income Inequality: Evidence from Taiwan, 1976-2003.” Social indicators research, 601-615.
Niehues, J. (2010), “Social Spending Generosity and Income Inequality: A Dynamic Panel Approach.” IZA Discussion Paper, No. 5178.
OECD (2015), In It Together: Why Less Inequality Benefits All. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Pickett, K. E. and R. G. Wilkinson (2015), “Income Inequality and Health: A Causal Review.” Social Science and Medicine, 128, 316-326.
Pigou, A. C. (1928), A Study in Public Finance. London: Macmillan.
Rosen, H. S. and T. Gayer (2014), Public Finance. New York: McGraw-Hill Education Press.
Sánchez, A. and A. L. Pérez-Corral (2018), “Government Social Expenditure and Income Inequalities in The European Union.” Hacienda Pública Española, (227), 133-156.
Stanovnik, T. and M.Verbič (2013), “Earnings Inequality and Tax Progressivity in Slovenia, 1991–2009.” Acta Oeconomica, 63(4), 405-421.
三、網站資料與數據來源
中華民國統計資訊網，縣市重要統計指標，112年1月15日，取自網址：https://winsta.dgbas.gov.tw/DgbasWeb/ZWeb/StateFile_ZWeb.aspx#
行政院主計總處（2011、2017-2019、2021-2022）。87-110年家庭收支調查（AA170023-46）【原始數據】，取自中央研究院人文社會科學研究中心調查研究專題中心學術調查研究資料庫。
行政院主計總處(2016-2021)，《家庭收支調查報告》。
行政院國情簡介，社會福利，112年3月5日，取自網址：https://www.ey.gov.tw/state/242165DCC976F60
財政部財稅資料中心（2016-2020），《綜合所得稅申報核定統計專冊》，臺北：財政部財稅資料中心。
衛生福利部，社會福利政策綱領，111年11月28日，取自網址：https://dep.mohw.gov.tw/DOSAASW/cp-535-3227-103.html
衛生福利部，急難救助112年2月8日，取自網址：https://www.mohw.gov.tw/cp-190-226-1.html |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
財政學系
110255017 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110255017 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [財政學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 501701.pdf | | 2463Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
