Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Could Higher Taxes on the 1% Stimulate More Academic Economic Research?

Academic economists are well paid by their universities but many superstar academics do additional consulting.   If President Obama raises the marginal tax rate on the high earning economists,  some of these economists will act like economists and will substitute away from discretionary consulting as the after tax wage from consulting declines. Assuming the substitution effect dominates the income effect (i.e that labor supply slopes up), these academic stars may actually do MORE academic research.  I recognize that they could simply take more leisure but for most academics leisure and academic research are perfect substitutes. If these superstar economists return "to the game" and get the "eye of the tiger" back (think of Rocky III) , economic research progress will accelerate and there will be a positive externality for the academy and for society as a whole.   Junior faculty will learn more from their newly engaged senior colleagues and graduate students will learn from the Jedi Masters.  The stars had no incentive to internalize this Lucas/Romer externality but the rise in the marginal tax rate helps to correct this market failure.

So, the point of this blog post is that an unintended consequence of raising taxes on the rich will be an acceleration of progress in academic economics.  This excites me!

Permit me to make a bad analogy:   Abortion is to Consulting as Crime is to Economic Research.


Donohue and Levitt famously argued that legalized abortion reduced crime.  They argued that a small set of criminals create a large share of crimes.  If these folks aren't born then less crime takes place.  In the case of academic economics,  a small set of economists produce most of the research.  If these men and women are diverted into consulting then total research declines sharply.  A tax increase has the reverse effect as the stars are nudged back into the game.

UPDATE:   I should have noted an implicit economic incidence assumption that I'm making here. In the discussion above, I assumed that the superstar consultants bear the full incidence of the marginal tax increase. I recognize that if their skills are inelastically demanded by law firms and by other firms who employ consultants then these firms will bear the incidence and the superstar consultants will experience no reduction in real wages when the marginal tax increases.   If both the superstars and the employers each bear part of the incidence then the academic research community will gain if the superstars have a large elasticity of labor consulting supply as a function of the real after tax consulting wage.


David Barker said...

Still a net loss to society - consulting adds value!

Soccer Dad said...

since the abortion thing seems to rest on elementary errors by the freak guys, perhaps using it demonstrates more that you are not up on old research, or to lazy a writer to find a good analogy

more academic research is good for society
like to see some data showing that economists are a net positive to society; based on H Cain, M Romney, etc one could argue that economist are a net negative

Part of economics is supposed to be science: not just random thoughts, but some numbers.

It would have taken you what, 5 minutes, to actually run some numbers on the salary of top academic economist (say at the 90th percentile) and the salar they get consulting, and marginal rates...to see how big, first order back of the envelope, the effect is...
but no, just tossing off some stuff for your blog is so much more fun !!
and since you don't make any testable predictions, no one can say that you were wrong !!

and, btw, how do economist act ? do we actually have any data ? the only data that I'm aware of (and I'm not in this field, so this is just my ignorance) is that if you look at the personal finances of economists, most of em have a high proportion of money in "safe" assets, like FDIC insured accounts, but most of them, when offereing advice, say to be long on the stock market.

Warisman Bondar said...

Environment problem caused by things, one of it resident growth. Human population growth that excelsior causes economy activity also increase quick. Economic activity / development that progressively increases to contain jeopardy sacrilege and environment so structure impairment and ecosystem basic function that becomes life supporting become to wreck.

Mark Martin said...

Hey! Thank you for sharing your thoughts about dentist in your area. I am glad to stop by your site and know more about dentist. Keep it up! This is a good read. I will be looking forward to visit your page again and for your other posts as well.
Back taxes is a term for taxes that were not paid when due. They are typically taxes that are owed from a prior year.
It's Crucial to Contact the Experts in Back Tax Help.

back tax problem

Alex zender said...

Your blog is very useful to all the people

IT Consulting San Diego
Network Cabling San Diego