Often people think of tax policy largely as a revenue generating exercise - this is not quite right
A very important element of tax policy is its *design* that shapes incentives and the overall macro balance. Some examples ...
The consolidated tax code should be sufficiently progressive
By consolidated i mean including all taxes - e.g. local, provincial, federal etc.
Progressive means consolidated tax rate should rise sufficiently for wealthier households
e.g. Pakistan collects very low tax revenue as share of GDP, but another problem it has is that it relies excessively on indirect taxes -
various forms of consumption taxes that tend to be very regressive in nature.
Lack of effective progressivity in taxation, both due to poor compliance and poor design, favors extreme inequality that is not conducive for inclusive development
Another element of tax policy is shaping incentives
Many dev countries face the simultaneous problem of climate change and high fossil fuels imports. Carbon tax can shift incentives in favor of alternatives faster and sooner
The broader point is that a lot of careful thinking needs to go in the design of tax policy to make sure it delivers at the macro level by shaping incentives and improving overall efficiency
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Is the executive/PM in developing countries constrained by "talent pool" for top leadership positions?
Not really. The market for top talent is global, and as such there is little excuse for incompetence at the top.
One reason for failure to attract competence is environment - it's not about the money: the opportunity to work at the "country level" is super attractive
But executive needs to create the right environment, e.g. delegate properly, that is her job.
Perhaps the most important task of a chief executive, e.g. PM, is that, (a) she appoints the very best people to lead key areas, and (b) delegates proper authority to them
Poor countries need to "build stuff" from the ground up - they are poor precisely because they lack the systems, infrastructure and institutions that are necessary for development
Building this stuff is hard - it requires skills that only a very few typically have
A rich country can afford to appoint incompetent people once in a while because the quality of its systems hedges against incompetence at the top - but a poor country does not have this luxury.
In poor countries, incompetent appointments only perpetuate the cycle of misery
Questions in economics are social in nature which can understandably trigger an ideological/emotional response
But one must resist that initial temptation and start with a formal framework to think objectively about the question at hand
This is what theorists try to do
For a question on the minimum wage, we must start with a theory of how labor market works
A theory does not tell us how labor markets *actually* work, but it guides us by spelling out conditions under which a minimum wage is desirable versus not