Logo
    Search

    400. How to Hate Taxes a Little Bit Less

    en-usDecember 12, 2019

    Podcast Summary

    • The Power of Altruism and a Compelling ReasonPeople are willing to give money to the government if they support its cause, and the tendency to be altruistic increases with a specific purpose. Providing a clear purpose can result in greater giving.

      Economist Catherine Eckel's experiment on dictator games showed that people are willing to give money to the government if they support its cause. This contradicts the belief that people won't voluntarily give money to the government. The experiment also revealed that people have a tendency to be altruistic, which increases when there's a compelling reason or a specific cause. Receiving scrutiny from professors could influence a participant's behavior and skew results, as evidenced by economist John List's argument. Eckel's experiment substituted an anonymous person with the American Red Cross, and the participants gave significantly more to the latter. The experiment shows that a concrete purpose results in greater giving.

    • The Benefits of Earmarking Tax Dollars for Specific PurposesAllowing taxpayers to donate their tax dollars for specific purposes, such as disaster relief, could increase compliance and reduce the U.S. tax gap. A market mechanism could further enhance this approach, ultimately encouraging greater generosity and civic engagement among Americans.

      Allowing people to earmark their tax dollars for specific purposes, such as disaster relief, could increase tax compliance and bridge the U.S. tax gap. Research has shown that people are willing to donate almost as much to a government organization as they would to a private one, so giving taxpayers a choice in where their money goes could incentivize compliance. This concept could be further enhanced by creating a market mechanism, where citizens can compete to support their preferred causes. The U.S. tax gap, which is currently at around 15 to 20 percent of the total amount due, could be significantly reduced if taxpayers had a say in where their money goes. Overall, this innovative approach could encourage greater generosity and civic engagement among Americans.

    • The Impact of Tax Policies on Decisions and BehaviorsTax policies affect important life choices such as marriage, having children, and even death. Tax noncompliance rates differ between individuals and employees with automatic tax withholding. While incentives may not work, tax policy plays a vital role in shaping society.

      Tax policy impacts many aspects of people's lives, including decisions such as marriage, having children, and even death. Some individuals go to great lengths to avoid paying taxes, with an estimated 16% of federal taxes not being remitted. However, for employees with wages and salaries, the noncompliance rate is only around 1% due to automatic tax withholding. While offering incentives such as gifts for tax donations may not have a significant impact on compliance, tax policy remains a crucial and pervasive aspect of society that affects countless decisions and behaviors.

    • The Importance of Tax Compliance for Self-Employment and Business PartnershipsFailing to comply with tax regulations can result in tax evasion, which is responsible for a significant portion of the tax gap. While tax avoidance is legal, tax compliance is crucial to avoid consequences for not reporting income properly.

      Self-employment income and business partnerships tend to be fairly opaque, leading to a real temptation to lower the income reported to the IRS. Without third-party reporting, people are more likely to engage in tax evasion, which is responsible for about 80% of the nearly half-trillion-dollar tax gap. However, tax evasion is not the same as tax avoidance, which are legal ways to reduce your taxes. Taxation has been perhaps the most powerful tool that a government can wield, with countless rebellions and revolutions driven by tax issues. Tax avoidance and evasion have been around since ancient times, with records dating back to the 7th century B.C.E. This highlights the importance of tax compliance and the implications of failing to do so.

    • Creative Solutions of Tax Avoidance and Evasion Throughout HistoryTaxes have always prompted innovative ways to avoid or evade them. Wealth taxes in Europe didn't generate much revenue but caused wealthy individuals to leave the country. Despite enforcement advantages, inventive tax evasion will persist.

      Throughout history, taxes have led to creative solutions of avoidance and evasion. The window tax in England resulted in some houses bricking up windows or installing windows that allowed light into two rooms. Similarly, the bachelor tax led to the emergence of professional lady rejectors who for a fee, filled out forms saying that the person had proposed to them and been rejected. With talk of new wealth taxes in the US, it's worth noting that wealth taxes in Europe have had low revenue and led to wealthy individuals leaving the country. While the US has some advantages in enforcing tax reporting, creative solutions to avoid taxes will likely continue.

    • Strategies for improving tax complianceProviding incentives, implementing penalties and audits, building trust, and leveraging social pressures are all effective ways to increase tax compliance.

      Increasing tax compliance is a challenge despite people agreeing that paying taxes is their civic duty. Correspondence from the government tends to increase compliance, as people realize the government knows they exist. While incentives like carrots or sticks work, evidence suggests that sticks work better, as seen in the fear of audits. However, the budget cuts in the IRS have impacted their stick as penalties for failing to pay taxes are not severe enough. Social pressure also plays a role in compliance, as people tend to pay if they see others paying. Trust in the government is crucial, and people tend to comply if they feel the government is trustworthy. Overall, increasing compliance requires a combination of incentives and social and government pressure.

    • Allowing Taxpayers to Choose Where Their Money GoesGiving taxpayers the ability to allocate their taxes to specific causes they support can improve compliance and increase donations. Providing accessible data can improve trust and give people a sense of control over their taxes.

      Allowing taxpayers to allocate their tax dollars towards specific causes they support can significantly increase compliance and donation amounts. Studies show that people are twice as likely to give to a specific cause than a general fund and donate roughly two and a half times more. Paying taxes can be an unpleasant task, especially when the benefits are diffuse and the cost looks bigger. Making the data accessible, such as through a website that allows taxpayers to allocate their tax dollars across a pie chart, can address both recoupling and agency. Allowing people to express their opinions about how their taxes are spent can change tax compliance. However, lab studies may not accurately reflect real-world responses.

    • Allowing Taxpayers to Allocate Their Tax DollarsBy allowing taxpayers to allocate 10% of their taxes to specific categories, compliance could increase by 15%. Participatory budgeting could be implemented on a federal level without radically realigning the budget.

      Allowing taxpayers to allocate a portion of their tax dollars to specific categories could increase compliance by up to 15 percent, according to a study by Lamberton. However, the challenge is that the spending a taxpayer may prefer is not always the government's priority. By allowing taxpayers to allocate just 10 percent of their total tax bill, Lamberton suggests a compromise that would maintain funding for essential projects while providing taxpayers with agency. Participatory budgeting, already tried by local governments, could work on the federal level, and the federal tax form could serve as a mechanism to implement it. Evidence from Lamberton's research shows that participatory budgeting would not cause a radical realignment of the federal budget.

    • The Japanese Economy and Rural ImbalanceUrbanization is leaving rural areas with aging populations and depleted tax bases. Japan's hometown tax system incentivizes citizens to donate to their hometowns, supporting local infrastructure and services.

      The Japanese economy is enviable due to its ability to balance multiple outcomes, including economic freedom, equity, and growth. However, structural issues persist as the economy is heavily concentrated in a few megacities, leaving the rest of the country in deficit and relying on significant redistribution efforts. This imbalance is not unique to Japan and is also happening in other countries, including the U.S., as urbanization increases. The trend of young people leaving rural areas for cities is leaving hometowns with aging populations and depleted tax bases. One potential solution is Japan's hometown tax system, which incentivizes citizens to donate to their hometowns, increasing tax payments and supporting local infrastructure and services.

    • The Success of Japan's Hometown Tax SystemJapan's hometown tax system allows citizens to buy regional products that are tax-deductible from national tax, fostering competition among different regions and creating entrepreneurial spirits, but the program is criticized for favoring higher-income households.

      Japan's hometown tax system, furusato nozei, has been successful in creating a market mechanism that allows citizens to choose regional products they want to buy. These products are tax-deductible from national tax, inspiring competition among different villages and regions and creating entrepreneurial spirits. Catalogs of goods are available based on different prefectures and villages to enable citizens to select their products. The system has been successful, with more than four and a half billion U.S. dollars in hometown tax donations in 2018. However, the program is criticized for favoring higher-income households, and charitable giving in Japan is not as prominent as in the United States.

    • The Power of Japan's Hometown Tax SystemThe hometown tax system is a successful means of tax deductibility and helps rural areas in Japan attract funding for specific causes, but its regulations require extra caution to distribute funds equally and avoid abuse by local governments.

      The hometown tax system in Japan has become a successful means of tax deductibility. It provides a way for high-earning individuals to contribute to specific causes and provides rewards for donors with nice things. The system also drives the entrepreneurial spirit by creating competition between different regions. However, the system can lead to uneven redistribution of funds and local governments can abuse it. The local governments have started to offer extra gifts as a means to boost their local revenue base by attracting more money from big cities. Therefore, the government has tweaked the regulations about the types and value of gifts that can be marketed. The hometown tax system is seen as a solution for rural areas in Japan.

    • The Pros and Cons of the Japanese Hometown Tax SystemIncentives can be effective in promoting certain behaviors, but over-reliance on them can erode trust and compliance. Any new system must carefully balance incentives with maintaining a sustainable and fair system.

      The Japanese hometown tax system is effective in incentivizing local production, but it also suffers from motivational crowding-out, where intrinsic motivation for paying taxes is replaced by extrinsic rewards that may erode compliance in the long term. The system's success also highlights the importance of incentives in economics, although over-reliance on them can break a pre-existing system of trust and reciprocity. The US could potentially adopt a similar system but would need to carefully consider the implications of competing agencies soliciting donations and eroding trust in government services. Incentives can be powerful tools, but their impact must be balanced against preserving a sustainable and equitable system.

    • How increased awareness of government processes can improve civic engagementLearning about government processes, such as tax allocation, can initially lead to frustration but ultimately improve citizens' relationships with the government. Dialogue and accountability introduced by agencies can lead to greater understanding and encourage government transparency.

      Increased awareness and engagement with government processes, such as tax allocation, can have a positive effect on citizens' relationships with the government and overall civic engagement. Although it may lead to frustration and a backlash effect initially, the conversation and accountability introduced by agency can lead to greater involvement and understanding. It is important to continue the dialogue and encourage government transparency for the benefit of all. This episode of Freakonomics Radio, produced by Stitcher and Dubner Productions, explores the potential benefits and challenges of government involvement. Contact radio@freakonomics.com with your own story ideas.

    Recent Episodes from Freakonomics Radio

    597. Why Do Your Eyeglasses Cost $1,000?

    597. Why Do Your Eyeglasses Cost $1,000?

    A single company, EssilorLuxottica, owns so much of the eyewear industry that it’s hard to escape their gravitational pull — or their “obscene” markups. Should regulators do something? Can Warby Parker steal market share? And how did Ray-Bans become a luxury brand? (Part one of a two-part series.)

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Neil Blumenthal, co-founder and co-CEO of Warby Parker.
      • Dave Gilboa, co-founder and co-CEO of Warby Parker.
      • Jessica Glasscock, fashion historian and lecturer at the Parsons School of Design.
      • Neil Handley, curator of the British Optical Association Museum at the College of Optometrists.
      • Ryan McDevitt, professor of economics at Duke University.
      • Cédric Rossi, equity research analyst at Bryan Garnier.
      • Tim Wu, professor of law, science and technology at Columbia Law School.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 18, 2024

    EXTRA: People Aren’t Dumb. The World Is Hard. (Update)

    EXTRA: People Aren’t Dumb. The World Is Hard. (Update)

    You wouldn’t think you could win a Nobel Prize for showing that humans tend to make irrational decisions. But that’s what Richard Thaler has done. In an interview from 2018, the founder of behavioral economics describes his unlikely route to success; his reputation for being lazy; and his efforts to fix the world — one nudge at a time.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Richard Thaler, professor of behavioral science and economics at the University of Chicago.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 15, 2024

    596. Farewell to a Generational Talent

    596. Farewell to a Generational Talent

    Daniel Kahneman left his mark on academia (and the real world) in countless ways. A group of his friends and colleagues recently gathered in Chicago to reflect on this legacy — and we were there, with microphones.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Maya Bar-Hillel, professor emeritus of psychology at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
      • Shane Frederick, professor of marketing at the Yale School of Management.
      • Thomas Gilovich, professor of psychology at Cornell University.
      • Matt Killingsworth, senior fellow at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Barbara Mellers, professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Eldar Shafir, director of the Kahneman-Treisman Center for Behavioral Science & Public Policy at Princeton University.
      • Richard Thaler, professor of behavioral science and economics at the University of Chicago.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 11, 2024

    595. Why Don't We Have Better Candidates for President?

    595. Why Don't We Have Better Candidates for President?

    American politics is trapped in a duopoly, with two all-powerful parties colluding to stifle competition. We revisit a 2018 episode to explain how the political industry works, and talk to a reformer (and former presidential candidate) who is pushing for change.

     

    • SOURCES:

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJuly 04, 2024

    594. Your Brand’s Spokesperson Just Got Arrested — Now What?

    594. Your Brand’s Spokesperson Just Got Arrested — Now What?

    It’s hard to know whether the benefits of hiring a celebrity are worth the risk. We dig into one gruesome story of an endorsement gone wrong, and find a surprising result.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • John Cawley, professor of economics at Cornell University.
      • Elizabeth (Zab) Johnson, executive director and senior fellow with the Wharton Neuroscience Initiative at the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Alvin Roth, professor of economics at Stanford University.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 27, 2024

    593. You Can Make a Killing, but Not a Living

    593. You Can Make a Killing, but Not a Living

    Broadway operates on a winner-take-most business model. A runaway hit like Stereophonic — which just won five Tony Awards — will create a few big winners. But even the stars of the show will have to go elsewhere to make real money. (Part two of a two-part series.)

     

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 20, 2024

    EXTRA: The Fascinatingly Mundane Secrets of the World’s Most Exclusive Nightclub

    EXTRA: The Fascinatingly Mundane Secrets of the World’s Most Exclusive Nightclub

    The Berlin dance mecca Berghain is known for its eight-hour line and inscrutable door policy. PJ Vogt, host of the podcast Search Engine, joins us to crack the code. It has to do with Cold War rivalries, German tax law, and one very talented bouncer.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Lutz Leichsenring, executive board member of Clubcommission Berlin and co-founder of VibeLab.
      • PJ Vogt, reporter, writer, and host of the podcast Search Engine.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 17, 2024

    592. How to Make the Coolest Show on Broadway

    592. How to Make the Coolest Show on Broadway

    Hit by Covid, runaway costs, and a zillion streams of competition, serious theater is in serious trouble. A new hit play called Stereophonic — the most Tony-nominated play in history — has something to say about that. We speak with the people who make it happen every night. (Part one of a two-part series.)

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 13, 2024

    591. Signs of Progress, One Year at a Time

    591. Signs of Progress, One Year at a Time

    Every December, a British man named Tom Whitwell publishes a list of 52 things he’s learned that year. These fascinating facts reveal the spectrum of human behavior, from fraud and hypocrisy to Whitwell’s steadfast belief in progress. Should we also believe?

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 06, 2024

    EXTRA: The Opioid Tragedy — How We Got Here

    EXTRA: The Opioid Tragedy — How We Got Here

    An update of our 2020 series, in which we spoke with physicians, researchers, and addicts about the root causes of the crisis — and the tension between abstinence and harm reduction.

     

    • SOURCES:
      • Gail D’Onofrio, professor and chair of emergency medicine at the Yale School of Medicine and chief of emergency services at Yale-New Haven Health.
      • Keith Humphreys, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at Stanford University.
      • Stephen Loyd, chief medical officer of Cedar Recovery and chair of the Tennessee Opioid Abatement Council.
      • Nicole O’Donnell, certified recovery specialist at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Addiction Medicine and Policy.
      • Jeanmarie Perrone, professor of emergency medicine at the University of Pennsylvania.
      • Eileen Richardson, restaurant manager.

     

     

    Freakonomics Radio
    en-usJune 03, 2024

    Related Episodes

    374. How Spotify Saved the Music Industry (But Not Necessarily Musicians)

    374. How Spotify Saved the Music Industry (But Not Necessarily Musicians)

    Daniel Ek, a 23-year-old Swede who grew up on pirated music, made the record labels an offer they couldn’t refuse: a legal platform to stream all the world’s music. Spotify reversed the labels’ fortunes, made Ek rich, and thrilled millions of music fans. But what has it done for all those musicians stuck in the long tail?

    352. Can This Man Stop a Trade War?

    352. Can This Man Stop a Trade War?

    The World Trade Organization is the referee for 164 trading partners, each with their own political and economic agendas. Lately, those agendas have gotten more complicated — especially with President Trump’s tariff blitz. Roberto Azevêdo, head of the W.T.O., tells us why it’s so hard to balance protectionism and globalism; what’s really behind the loss of jobs; and what he’d say to Trump (if he ever gets the chance).