Main menu:

History of RPE Thought

Posts by Tag

RSS New from the CCPA

  • CCPA's National Office has moved! May 11, 2018
      The week of May 1st, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives' National Office moved to 141 Laurier Ave W, Suite 1000, Ottawa ON, K1P 5J2. Please note that our phone, fax and general e-mail will remain the same: Telephone: 613-563-1341 | Fax: 613-233-1458 | Email: ccpa@policyalternatives.ca  
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • What are Canada’s energy options in a carbon-constrained world? May 1, 2018
    Canada faces some very difficult choices in maintaining energy security while meeting emissions reduction targets.  A new study by veteran earth scientist David Hughes—published through the Corporate Mapping Project, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives and the Parkland Institute—is a comprehensive assessment of Canada’s energy systems in light of the need to maintain energy security and […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • The 2018 Living Wage for Metro Vancouver April 25, 2018
    The cost of raising a family in British Columbia increased slightly from 2017 to 2018. A $20.91 hourly wage is needed to cover the costs of raising a family in Metro Vancouver, up from $20.61 per hour in 2017 due to soaring housing costs. This is the hourly wage that two working parents with two young children […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Mobility pricing must be fair and equitable for all April 12, 2018
    As Metro Vancouver’s population has grown, so have its traffic congestion problems. Whether it’s a long wait to cross a bridge or get on a bus, everyone can relate to the additional time and stress caused by a transportation system under strain. Mobility pricing is seen as a solution to Metro Vancouver’s transportation challenges with […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
  • Budget 2018: The Most Disappointing Budget Ever March 14, 2018
    Premier Pallister’s Trump-esque statement that budget 2018 was going to be the “best budget ever” has fallen a bit flat. Instead of a bold plan to deal with climate change, poverty and our crumbling infrastructure, we are presented with two alarmist scenarios to justify further tax cuts and a lack of decisive action: the recent […]
    Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives
Progressive Bloggers

Meta

Recent Blog Posts

Posts by Author

Recent Blog Comments

The Progressive Economics Forum

The Benefits of Public Spending

A year and a half ago I published an updated study on tax incidence in Canada. It found that the Canadian tax system is progressive up to the middle of the income distribution, then flattens out before becoming regressive at the very top. (Interestingly, a short piece on the US tax system by Citizens for Tax Justice just came out the other day. They come to a roughly similar conclusion, although the US system is progressive further up the distribution before becoming regressive; ultimately it is hard to compare due to differences in methodology.)

Of course, taxation is only one side of the equation. How progressive is the other side – public spending – in Canada? The CCPA revealed an answer to this question (that has been keeping bureaucrats at the Ministry of Finance awake in the middle of the night) by Hugh Mackenzie and Richard Shillington. Canada’s Quiet Bargain: The Benefits of Public Spending finds that, on average, Canadians benefit by $17,000 per year from public services, with more than half of that coming from health care, education and transfer payments. The benefit is much higher than that for the lowest income groups, then the average benefit (in dollar terms) flattens out through the remainder of the distribution. The authors also break these numbers down by level of government and category of public spending.

My only complaint is that the authors do not present their results by deciles and as a percentage of income, although the latter is easily approximated from the figures. Combined with my study, it shows that taxes, transfers and public spending together are highly progressive through a good chunk (up to the seventh or eighth decile) of the distribution. After that it is harder to tell if the progressive result vis-a-vis income is enough to offset the regressive taxation incidence within the top decile. This next step would enable what is called a “full incidence” framework of the impact of the public sector on distribution in Canada.

Anyway, the authors deserve a big hand, as this exercise is more complicated than one might think at first glance. And this is the first such study of expenditure incidence published in Canada (please tell me if I missed something). Plus, there is a neat calculator on the webpage linked above that allows you to calculate the benefits you receive from public spending.

Here is the CP story on the study via the Globe.

Enjoy and share:

Comments

Comment from Andrew Jackson
Time: April 15, 2009, 10:15 am

I forget the details but I believe the Department of Finance did a similar study many moons ago

Comment from Marc Lee
Time: April 15, 2009, 10:40 am

There was an internal study (I have a hard copy of it) but I do not think it was ever publicly released. If it was, I would like to know.

Write a comment





Related articles