Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:05:51.524Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
Series:   Elements in Behavioural and Experimental Economics

Public Finance with Behavioural Agents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2022

Raphaël Lardeux
Raphaël Lardeux
Affiliation:
Insee and CRED Université Paris II

Summary

Recent developments in behavioural economics have deeply influenced the way governments design public policies. They give citizens access to online simulators to cope with tax and benefits systems and increasingly rely on nudges to guide individual decisions. The recent surge of interest in Behavioural Public Finance is grounded on the conviction that a better understanding of individual behaviours could improve predictions of tax revenue and help design better-suited incentives to save for retirement, search for a new job, go to school or seek medical attention. Through a presentation of the most recent developments in Behavioural Public Finance, this Element discusses the way Behavioural Economics has improved our understanding of fiscal policies.
Get access

Keywords

public financebehavioural biasidentificationsufficient statisticsstructural model
Type
Element
Information
Series: Elements in Behavioural and Experimental Economics
Online ISBN: 9781009029087
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 22 December 2022

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aaron, H., ed. (1999). Behavioural Dimensions of Retirement Economics. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Abadie, A. and Cattaneo, M. D. (2018). Econometric methods for program evaluation. Annual Review of Economics, 10(1):465–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Abeler, J. and Jäger, S. (2015). Complex tax incentives. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7(3):1–28.Google Scholar
Allcott, H. and Kessler, J. B. (2019). The welfare effects of nudges: A case study of energy use social comparisons. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 11(1):236–76.Google Scholar
Allcott, H., Lockwood, B. B. and Taubinsky, D. (2019). Regressive sin taxes, with an application to the optimal soda tax. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3):1557–626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allcott, H. and Taubinsky, D. (2015). Evaluating behaviorally motivated policy: Experimental evidence from the lightbulb market. American Economic Review, 105(8):2501–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andreoni, J., Erard, B. and Feinstein, J. (1998). Tax compliance. Journal of Economic Literature, 36(2):818–60.Google Scholar
Angrist, J. and Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics: An Empiricist’s Companion. Princeton University Press, 1st ed.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, A. B. and Stiglitz, J. E. (2015). Lectures on Public Economics: Updated edition. Number 10493 in Economics Books. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Auerbach, A. and Feldstein, M., eds. (2013). Handbook of Public Economics, volumes 1–5. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Babcock, L., Congdon, W., Katz, L. and Mullainathan, S. (2012). Notes on behavioral economics and labor market policy. IZA Journal of Labor Policy, 1(1):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baicker, K., Mullainathan, S. and Schwartzstein, J. (2015). Behavioral hazard in health insurance. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(4):1623–67.Google Scholar
Baily, M. N. (1978). Some aspects of optimal unemployment insurance. Journal of Public Economics, 10(3):379–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, A. V. and Duflo, E., eds. (2017). Handbook of Field Experiments. North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banerjee, A. V. and Mullainathan, S. (2008). Limited attention and income distribution. American Economic Review, 98(2):489–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardsley, N., Cubitt, R., Loomes, G. et al. (2010). Experimental Economics: Rethinking the Rules. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benjamin, D. J., Heffetz, O., Kimball, M. S. and Rees-Jones, A. (2014). Can marginal rates of substitution be inferred from happiness data? Evidence from residency choices. American Economic Review, 104(11):3498–528.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Benzarti, Y. (2017). How taxing is tax filing? Using revealed preferences to estimate compliance costs. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(4):38–57.Google Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Behavioral welfare economics. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2/3):267–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. and Rangel, A. (2009). Beyond revealed preference: Choice-theoretic foundations for behavioral welfare economics. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(1):51–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernheim, B. D. and Taubinsky, D. (2018). Behavioral public economics. In Bernheim, B. D., DellaVigna, S. and Laibson, D., eds., Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Foundations and Applications 1, volume 1, section 5, pages 381–516. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Bertrand, M. and Mullainathan, S. (2001). Do people mean what they say? Implications for subjective survey data. American Economic Review, 91(2):67–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertrand, M., Mullainathan, S. and Shafir, E. (2004). A behavioral-economics view of poverty. American Economic Review, 94(2):419–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D. and Madrian, B. C. (2018). Behavioral household finance. In Bernheim, B. D., DellaVigna, S. and Laibson, D., eds., Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Foundations and Applications 1, volume 1, section 3, pages 177–276. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Bettinger, E. P., Long, B. T., Oreopoulos, P. and Sanbonmatsu, L. (2012). The role of application assistance and information in college decisions: Results from the H&R Block FAFSA experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(3):1205–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhargava, S., Loewenstein, G. and Sydnor, J. (2017). Choose to lose: Health plan choices from a menu with dominated option. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(3):1319–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhargava, S. and Manoli, D. (2015). Psychological frictions and the incomplete take-up of social benefits: Evidence from an IRS field experiment. American Economic Review, 105(11):3489–529.Google Scholar
Boutchenik, B. and Lardeux, R. (2020). The take-up of unemployment benefit extensions. INSEE Working Papers G2020-02, Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques.Google Scholar
Card, D., Johnston, A., Leung, P., Mas, A. and Pei, Z. (2015a). The effect of unemployment benefits on the duration of unemployment insurance receipt: New evidence from a regression kink design in Missouri, 2003–2013. American Economic Review, 105(5):126–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, D., Lee, D. S., Pei, Z. and Weber, A. (2015b). Inference on causal effects in a generalized regression kink design. Econometrica, 83(6):2453–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carson, R. T. (2012). Contingent valuation: A practical alternative when prices aren’t available. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 26(4):27–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carvalho, L. S., Meier, S. and Wang, S. W. (2016). Poverty and economic decision-making: Evidence from changes in financial resources at payday. American Economic Review, 106(2):260–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cattaneo, M. D., Idrobo, N. and Titiunik, R. (2020). A Practical Introduction to Regression Discontinuity Designs: Foundations. Elements in Quantitative and Computational Methods for the Social Sciences. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chandra, A., Handel, B. and Schwartzstein, J. (2019). Behavioral economics and health-care markets. In Bernheim, B. D., DellaVigna, S. and Laibson, D., eds., Handbook of Behavioral Economics Foundations and Applications 2, volume 2, section 6, pages 459–502. North-Holland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, T. Y., Huang, W. and Wang, Y. (2018). Something in the air: Pollution and the demand for health insurance. Review of Economic Studies, 85(3):1609–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chetty, R. (2006). A general formula for the optimal level of social insurance. Journal of Public Economics, 90(10):1879–901.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chetty, R. (2009). Sufficient statistics for welfare analysis: A bridge between structural and reduced-form methods. Annual Review of Economics, 1(1):451–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chetty, R. (2015). Behavioral economics and public policy: A pragmatic perspective. American Economic Review, 105(5):1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chetty, R. and Finkelstein, A. (2013). Social insurance: Connecting theory to data. In Auerbach, A., Chetty, R., Feldstein, M. and Saez, E., eds., Handbook of Public Economics, volume 5, Section 3, pages 111–93. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N. and Saez, E. (2013). Using differences in knowledge across neighborhoods to uncover the impacts of the EITC on earnings. American Economic Review, 103(7):2683–721.Google Scholar
Chetty, R., Looney, A. and Kroft, K. (2009). Salience and taxation: Theory and evidence. American Economic Review, 99(4):1145–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Congdon, W. J., Kling, J. R. and Mullainathan, S. (2011). Policy and Choice: Public Finance through the Lens of Behavioral Economics. Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Cruces, G., Perez-Truglia, R. and Tetaz, M. (2013). Biased perceptions of income distribution and preferences for redistribution: Evidence from a survey experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 98:100–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Currie, J. (2006). The Take-Up of Social Benefits. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Damgaard, M. T. and Gravert, C. (2018). The hidden costs of nudging: Experimental evidence from reminders in fundraising. Journal of Public Economics, 157:15–26.Google Scholar
DellaVigna, S. (2009). Psychology and economics: Evidence from the field. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(2):315–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DellaVigna, S. (2018). Structural behavioral economics. In Bernheim, B. D., DellaVigna, S. and Laibson, D., eds., Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Foundations and Applications 1, volume 1, chapter 7, pages 613–723. North-Holland.Google Scholar
DellaVigna, S., Heining, J., Schmieder, J. F. and Trenkle, S. (2022). Evidence on job search models from a survey of unemployed workers in Germany. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(2):1181–1232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DellaVigna, S., Lindner, A., Reizer, B. and Schmieder, J. F. (2017). Reference-dependent job search: Evidence from Hungary. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 132(4):1969–2018.Google Scholar
Di Tella, R. and MacCulloch, R. (2006). Some uses of happiness data in economics. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(1):25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, P. and Vartiainen, H. (2012). Behavioral Economics and Its Applications. Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dohmen, T. (2014). Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions. Labour Economics, 30(C):71–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durlauf, S. and Blume, L. (2009). Behavioural and Experimental Economics. The New Palgrave Economics Collection. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Dynarski, S. M. and Scott–Clayton, J. E. (2006). The cost of complexity in federal student aid: Lessons From optimal tax theory and behavioral economics. National Tax Journal, 59(2):319–56.Google Scholar
Farhi, E. and Gabaix, X. (2020). Optimal taxation with behavioral agents. American Economic Review, 110(1):298–336.Google Scholar
Fehr, E., Goette, L. and Zehnder, C. (2009). A behavioral account of the labor market: The role of fairness concerns. Annual Review of Economics, 1(1):355–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, N. E., Katuščák, P. and Kawano, L. (2016). Taxpayer confusion: Evidence from the child tax credit. American Economic Review, 106(3):807–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, A. (2009). E-ztax: Tax salience and tax rates. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(3):969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelstein, A. and Notowidigdo, M. J. (2019). Take-up and targeting: Experimental evidence from SNAP. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 134(3):1505–56.Google Scholar
Frank, R. G. (2012). Behavioral economics and health economics. In Diamond, P. and Vartiainen, H., eds., Behavioral Economics and Its Applications, pages 195–234. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Frey, B. S. and Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40(2):402–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabaix, X. (2014). A sparsity-based model of bounded rationality. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(4):1661.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gabaix, X. (2019). Behavioral Inattention. In Bernheim, B. D., DellaVigna, S. and Laibson, D., eds., Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Foundations and Applications 2, volume 2, chapter 4, pages 261–343. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Gabuthy, Y., Jacquemet, N. and L’Haridon, O. (2021). Économie comportementale des politiques publiques. La Découverte.Google Scholar
Ganong, P. and Noel, P. (2019). Consumer spending during unemployment: Positive and normative implications. American Economic Review, 109(7):2383–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerritsen, A. (2016). Optimal taxation when people do not maximize well-being. Journal of Public Economics, 144:122–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gneezy, U. and Imas, A. (2017). Lab in the field: Measuring preferences in the wild. In Banerjee, A. V. and Duflo, E., eds., Handbook of Field Experiments, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 439–64. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Goldin, J. and Homonoff, T. (2013). Smoke gets in your eyes: Cigarette tax salience and regressivity. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 5(1):302–36.Google Scholar
Goldin, J. and Reck, D. (2022). Optimal defaults with normative ambiguity. Review of Economics and Statistics, 104(1):17–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, J. (2015). Public Finance and Public Policy. Macmillan Learning.Google Scholar
Gruber, J. and Köszegi, B. (2004). Tax incidence when individuals are time-inconsistent: The case of cigarette excise taxes. Journal of Public Economics, 88(9):1959–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, J. H. and Mullainathan, S. (2005). Do cigarette taxes make smokers happier. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 5(1):1–45.Google Scholar
Handel, B. and Schwartzstein, J. (2018). Frictions or mental gaps: What’s behind the information we (don’t) use and when do we care? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(1):155–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handel, B. R. (2013). Adverse selection and inertia in health insurance markets: When nudging hurts. American Economic Review, 103(7):2643–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Handel, B. R. and Kolstad, J. T. (2015). Health insurance for ‘humans’: Information frictions, plan choice, and consumer welfare. American Economic Review, 105(8):2449–500.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harberger, A. C. (1964). The measurement of waste. The American Economic Review, 54(3):58–76.Google Scholar
Hastings, J. and Shapiro, J. M. (2018). How are snap benefits spent? Evidence from a retail panel. American Economic Review, 108(12):3493–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopenhayn, H. A. and Nicolini, J. P. (1997). Optimal unemployment insurance. Journal of Political Economy, 105(2):412–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. and Lemieux, T. (2008). Regression discontinuity designs: A guide to practice. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2):615–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W. (2010). Better late than nothing: Some comments on Deaton (2009) and Heckman and Urzua (2009). Journal of Economic Literature, 48(2):399–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W. (2014). Instrumental variables: An econometrician’s perspective. Statistical Science, 29(3):323–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W. and Rubin, D. B. (2015). Causal Inference for Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Imbens, G. W. and Wooldridge, J. M. (2009). Recent developments in the econometrics of program evaluation. Journal of Economic Literature, 47(1):5–86.Google Scholar
Ito, K. (2014). Do consumers respond to marginal or average price? Evidence from nonlinear electricity pricing. American Economic Review, 104(2):537–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacquemet, N. and L’Haridon, O. (2018). Experimental Economics: Method and Applications. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacquemet, N., Luchini, S. and Malézieux, A. (2020). Comment lutter contre la fraude fiscale? Les enseignements de l’économie comportementale. CEPREMAP. Éditions Rue d’Ulm.Google Scholar
Kagel, J. H. and Roth, A. E., eds. (1995). The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2000). Experienced utility and objective happiness: A moment-based approach, in Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D., eds., Choices, Values and Frames, pages 673–92. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., Diener, E. and Schwarz, N., eds. (1999). Well-Being: Foundations of Hedonic Psychology. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Sugden, R. (2005). Experienced utility as a standard of policy evaluation. Environmental and Resource Economics, 32:161–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P. and Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2):375–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchler, E. and Braithwaite, V. (2007). The Economic Psychology of Tax Behaviour. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleven, H. (2021). Sufficient statistics revisited. Annual Review of Economics, 13:515–38.Google Scholar
Kleven, H. J. (2016). Bunching. Annual Review of Economics, 8:435–64.Google Scholar
Kleven, H. J. and Kopczuk, W. (2011). Transfer program complexity and the take-up of social benefits. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(1):54–90.Google Scholar
Kleven, H. J. and Waseem, M. (2013). Using notches to uncover optimization frictions and structural elasticities: Theory and evidence from Pakistan. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 128(2):669–723.Google Scholar
Kopczuk, W. (2005). Tax bases, tax rates and the elasticity of reported income. Journal of Public Economics, 89(11):2093–119.Google Scholar
Köszegi, B. and Rabin, M. (2006). A model of reference-dependent preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121(4):1133–65.Google Scholar
Köszegi, B. and Rabin, M. (2008). Choices, situations, and happiness. Journal of Public Economics, 92(8–9):1821–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroft, K., Kucko, K., Lehmann, E. and Schmieder, J. (2020). Optimal income taxation with unemployment and wage responses: A sufficient statistics approach. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 12(1):254–92.Google Scholar
Laibson, D. (1997). Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2):443–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lalive, R. (2008). How do extended benefits affect unemployment duration? A regression discontinuity approach. Journal of Econometrics, 142(2):785–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landais, C. (2015). Assessing the welfare effects of unemployment benefits using the regression kink design. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 7(4):243–78.Google Scholar
Landais, C., Michaillat, P., and Saez, E. (2018a). A macroeconomic approach to optimal unemployment insurance: Applications. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(2):182–216.Google Scholar
Landais, C., Michaillat, P., and Saez, E. (2018b). A macroeconomic approach to optimal unemployment insurance: Theory. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 10(2):152–81.Google Scholar
Lardeux, R. (2021). Behavioral cross-influence of a shadow tax bracket: Evidence from bunching where tax liabilities start. CRED Working Paper 5, CRED – Université Paris II.Google Scholar
Lavecchia, A. M., Liu, H. and Oreopoulos, P. (2016). Behavioral economics of education: Progress and possibilities. In Hanushek, E. A., Machin, S. and Woessmann, L., eds., Handbook of the Economics of Education, volume 5, chapter 1, pages 1–74. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Ledyard, J. O. (1995). Public Goods: A Survey of Experimental Research, chapter 2, pages 111–94. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lehmann, E., Marical, F. and Rioux, L. (2013). Labor income responds differently to income-tax and payroll-tax reforms. Journal of Public Economics, 99(C):66–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madrian, B. C. and Shea, D. F. (2001). The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4):1149–87.Google Scholar
Manski, C. F. (2004). Measuring expectations. Econometrica, 72(5):1329–76.Google Scholar
Martinez, S.-K., Meier, S. and Sprenger, C. (2022). Procrastination in the field: Evidence from tax filing. Journal of the European Economics Association, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Mas-Colell, A., Whinston, M. D. and Green, J. R. (1995). Microeconomic Theory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McCaffery, E. J. and Slemrod, J. (2006). Behavioral Public Finance. Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Miller, B. M. and Mumford, K. J. (2015). The salience of complex tax changes: Evidence from the child and dependent care credit expansion. National Tax Journal, 68(3):477–510.Google Scholar
Mirrlees, J. (1971). An exploration in the theory of optimum income taxation. The Review of Economic Studies, 38(2):175–208.Google Scholar
Mirrlees, J. (1986). The theory of optimal taxation. Handbook of Mathematical Economics, volume 3, chapter 24, pages 1197–249. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Mortensen, D. (1986). Job search and labor market analysis. Handbook of Labor Economics, volume 2, chapter 15, pages 849–919. North-Holland.Google Scholar
Mueller, A. I., Spinnewijn, J. and Topa, G. (2021). Job seekers’ perceptions and employment prospects: Heterogeneity, duration dependence, and bias. American Economic Review, 111(1):324–63.Google Scholar
Mullainathan, S., Schwartzstein, J. and Congdon, W. J. (2012). A reduced-form approach to behavioral public finance. Annual Review of Economics, 4(1):511–40.Google Scholar
Mullainathan, S. and Shafir, E. (2013). Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much. Allen Lane.Google Scholar
Nichols, A. N. and Zeckhauser, R. J. (1982). Targeting transfers through restrictions on recipients. American Economic Review, 72(2):372–7.Google Scholar
Nielsen, H. S., Sørensen, T. and Taber, C. (2010). Estimating the effect of student aid on college enrollment: Evidence from a government grant policy reform. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(2):185–215.Google Scholar
O’Donoghue, T. and Rabin, M. (1999). Doing it now or later. American Economic Review, 89(1):103–24.Google Scholar
OECD (2017). Behavioural Insights and Public Policy. https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/governance/behavioural-insights-and-public-policy_9789264270480-en#page1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olafsson, A. and Pagel, M. (2017). The ostrich in us: Selective attention to financial accounts, income, spending, and liquidity. Working Paper 23945, National Bureau of Economic Research.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piketty, T. (1997). La redistribution fiscale face au chômage. Revue française d’économie, 12(1).Google Scholar
Rabin, M. (2000). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem. Econometrica, 68(5):1281–92.Google Scholar
Rabin, M. (2002). A perspective on psychology and economics. European Economic Review, 46(4):657–85.Google Scholar
Rees-Jones, A. (2017). Quantifying loss-averse tax manipulation. The Review of Economic Studies, 85(2):1251–78.Google Scholar
Rees-Jones, A. and Taubinsky, D. (2018). Taxing humans: Pitfalls of the mechanism design approach and potential resolutions. Tax Policy and the Economy, 32(1):107–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rees-Jones, A. and Taubinsky, D. (2020). Measuring ‘schmeduling’. The Review of Economic Studies, 87(5):2399–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rice, T. (2013). The behavioral economics of health and health care. Annual Review of Public Health, 34(1):431–47.Google Scholar
Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J. (1976). Equilibrium in competitive insurance markets: An essay on the economics of imperfect information. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90(4):629–49.Google Scholar
Saez, E. (2001). Using elasticities to derive optimal income tax rates. Review of Economic Studies, 68:205–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saez, E. (2009). Details matter: The impact of presentation and information on the take-up of financial incentives for retirement saving. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1):204–28.Google Scholar
Saez, E. (2010). Do taxpayers bunch at kink points? American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2(3):180–212.Google Scholar
Saez, E., Slemrod, J. and Giertz, S. H. (2012). The elasticity of taxable income with respect to marginal tax rates: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 50(1):3–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saez, E. and Stantcheva, S. (2016). Generalized social marginal welfare weights for optimal tax theory. American Economic Review, 106(1):24–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salanié, B. (2011). The Economics of Taxation. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sandroni, A. and Squintani, F. (2007). Overconfidence, insurance, and paternalism. American Economic Review, 97(5):1994–2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilbach, F. (2019). Alcohol and self-control: A field experiment in India. American Economic Review, 109(4):1290–322.Google Scholar
Schilbach, F., Schofield, H. and Mullainathan, S. (2016). The psychological lives of the poor. American Economic Review, 106(5):435–40.Google Scholar
Schmieder, J. F., von Wachter, T. and Bender, S. (2012a). The long-term effects of UI extensions on employment. American Economic Review, 102(3):514–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmieder, J. F., von Wachter, T. and Bender, S. (2012b). The effects of extended unemployment insurance over the business cycle: Evidence from regression discontinuity estimates over 20 years. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 127(2):701–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmieder, J. F. and von Wachter, T. (2016). The effects of unemployment insurance benefits: New evidence and interpretation. Annual Review of Economics, 8:547–81.Google Scholar
Schmieder, J. F., von Wachter, T. and Bender, S. (2016). The effect of unemployment benefits and nonemployment durations on wages. American Economic Review, 106(3):739–77.Google Scholar
Schnellenbach, J. and Schubert, C. (2015). Behavioral political economy: A survey. European Journal of Political Economy, 40(PB):395–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibold, A. (2021). Reference points for retirement behavior: Evidence from German pension discontinuities. American Economic Review, 111(4):1126–65.Google Scholar
Slemrod, J. (2007). Cheating ourselves: The economics of tax evasion. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 21(1):25–48.Google Scholar
Slemrod, J., Christian, C., London, R. and Parker, J. A. (1997). April 15 syndrome. Economic Inquiry, 35(4):695–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slemrod, J. and Kopczuk, W. (2002). The optimal elasticity of taxable income. Journal of Public Economics, 84(1):91–112.Google Scholar
Spinnewijn, J. (2015). Unemployed but optimistic: Optimal insurance design with biased beliefs. Journal of the European Economic Association, 13(1):130–67.Google Scholar
Stantcheva, S. (2021). Understanding tax policy: How do people reason? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 136(4):2309–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. (2014). Why Nudge?: The Politics of Libertarian Paternalism. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. and Thaler, R. H. (2009). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Taubinsky, D. and Rees-Jones, A. (2018). Attention variation and welfare: Theory and evidence from a tax salience experiment. The Review of Economic Studies, 85(4):2462–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thaler, R. H. (1999). Mental accounting matters. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(3):183–206.Google Scholar
Thaler, R. H. and Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2):175–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wooldridge, J. M. (2002). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. MIT Press.Google Scholar

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Public Finance with Behavioural Agents
  • Raphaël Lardeux, Insee and CRED Université Paris II
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029087
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Public Finance with Behavioural Agents
  • Raphaël Lardeux, Insee and CRED Université Paris II
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029087
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Public Finance with Behavioural Agents
  • Raphaël Lardeux, Insee and CRED Université Paris II
  • Online ISBN: 9781009029087
Available formats
×