Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Niemeier, Ernst
Year of Publication: 
[Journal:] Wirtschaftsdienst [ISSN:] 1613978X [Publisher:] Springer [Place:] Heidelberg [Volume:] 92 [Year:] 2012 [Issue:] 9 [Pages:] 624-625
Das Ehegattensplitting gilt als Besteuerungsprinzip, das der Förderung von Ehe und Familie dient. Ernst Niemeier ist der Auffassung, dass es vor allem die horizontale Steuergerechtigkeit wahren soll. Er setzt sich auch mit dem Diskussionsbeitrag eines Autorenteams des DIW auseinander, das negative Anreizwirkungen für die Arbeitsaufnahme eines vorher nicht erwerbstätigen Ehepartners feststellt. Das DIW-Autorenteam nimmt dazu kritisch in einer Replik Stellung, auf die Ernst Niemeier in einer Erwiderung antwortet.
Abstract (Translated): 
These articles debate the pros and cons of the full income-splitting tax procedure. Ernst Niemeier defends this taxation scheme, because in his opinion it is not aimed at furthering families or children but making sure that a couple does not have to pay more taxes than two singles. He argues that there are constitutional reasons to treat equal incomes equally, which he refers to as 'horizontal justice'. Furthermore, he rejects evidence of a negative labour supply effect on the second earner. A team of authors at the DIW find his argumentation not at all convincing. First, they say, determining tax justice or ability to pay is ultimately a political question and cannot be determined by scientists or the courts. Thus, a constitutional determination of marriage taxation on the existing full income-splitting procedure is excessive. Second, the empirical evidence of negative labour supply effects of full income splitting for the second earner can simply not be denied. Niemeier argues why such supply effects cannot exist.
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.