trustme.bro/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim
Tax incidence is independent of whether the tax is levied legally on consumers or producers.
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
2 sources for · 0 against

Peer-reviewed literature notes that tax incidence equivalence is a basic tenet in microeconomics, demonstrating that the burden of a tax is independent of who has the statutory obligation to pay it.

Evidence for · 2
2001 · cited by 3
A basic tenet in elementary microeconomics is tax incidence equivalence. This tenet holds that the burden of a unit tax on buyers and sellers is independent of who actually pays the tax. By contrast, policymakers and the public often mistake statutory incidence for economic incidence. Recent evidence of the empirical validity of tax incidence equivalence is mixed. In this paper, using competitive laboratory markets, I test both tax incidence equivalence and an analogous theorem I refer to as subsidy incidence equivalence. For sufficiently large markets, the results show strong support for both theories. In these markets, there is little to no evidence, even in the short run, of the popular misperception that statutory incidence equals economic incidence. In smaller markets in which competitive forces are weaker and relative bargaining strengths may play a role, the evidence for tax incidence equivalence is weaker as minor price discrepancies may persist between markets.
See more details
The analysis

rails:sufficiency:supported:single_source:for=1+1p:against=0+0p | v55:sufficiency

More for · 1
cited by 0
Excise taxes on alcoholic beverages are per unit taxes levied by governments to raise revenue or used as corrective taxes to control health-related externalities Excise taxes on alcoholic beverages are per unit taxes levied by governments to raise revenue or used as corrective taxes to control health-related externalities associated with consumption of alcohol. Almost all countries tax alcohol. This page addresses the economics and politics of alcohol excise taxation. Excise taxation is expected to have some impact on retail prices of alcohol beverages. A standard exercise in economics is to analyze "who actually pays the tax." Is it consumers, producers, or both? Tax incidence analysis is the study of how a tax burden is shared between consumers and producers, regardless of statutory legal obligations to collect the tax. In simple terms, this is an issue of whether an excise tax is fully passed-through to final consumers or not. Pass-through rates of less than 100% imply that some portion of a tax is shifted forward to consumers and the remaining portion is shifted backwards to producers. Tax pass-throughs to retail prices depend on the elasticity of demand relative to the elasticity of supply. In competitive markets, increases in retail prices will be greater (smaller) as elasticity of demand decreases (increases) and elasticity of supply increases (decreases). These same principles apply in the long-run, except the expectation for many industries is that long-run supply is perfectly elastic (constant cost industry), and an excise tax will be fully shifted to retail prices. The pass-through rate in this case is 1.0 or 100%. Some empirical studies report a pass-through of more than 100%. There are several reasons why this might occur. First, there are menu costs of price changes that lead to sticky prices, so producers and retailers recognize that less frequent price changes might be optimal over the longer-run. Second, the market might be non-competitive and rival producers strategize on pass-throughs, which depend generally on complex features of demand functions. Third, price structures across brands and beverages are complex reflecting substitution possibilities, and some products may have pass-throughs of less than unity while others more than unity. In addition to direct effects on price, a tax based on alcohol content can result in producer substitution toward non-taxed features (Barzel effect) while a simple unit tax on gallonage can result in consumer substitution toward higher quality, higher-priced brands and beverages (Alchian-Allen effect). Other substitutions, such as trading-down to lower-priced brands and…
Everything we examined (2)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.
  1. Tax and Subsidy Incidence Equivalence Theories: Experimental Evidence from Competitive Marketspeer-reviewedno side taken
  2. Alcohol taxreferenceno side taken
This receipt carries no identity, shared or not. Sharing publishes your connection to it, not your data.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.
This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt