Skip to main content

Marriage Tax Breaks

Nick Clegg has criticised Conservative plans to give tax breaks to married couples (click here).  The Conservative plan is to allow tax allowances of up to £150 per year to be transferred between spouses.  For example, an unemployed husband could transfer £150 of his tax allowance to his wife.  Are there good economic reasons why a government would do this? 




Well-raised and socialised children provide a positive externality (i.e., benefit) to society.  Mother or fathers who take career breaks to raise children typically do so at their own expense.  In other words, society gets the benefit, but a family bears the cost.  There is therefore an argument for subsiding parents through the tax system by allowing transferable allowances (although £150 is a paltry amount).

The next question is whether this should be provided to both unmarried and married parents.  The statistics and majority of evidence clearly show that the latter provides a more stable environment in which to raise and nurture children, whereas the former is more likely to produce children which impose negative externalties (i.e., costs) upon society.  Given this, tax breaks should only be given to married couples with children.  Although this may be against liberal / Liberal ideals, there is a good economic justification as to why the Conservative plan is a sensible policy.   

Popular posts from this blog

How Valuable Are Connections?

Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, James Kwak and Todd Mitton have written a paper on whether firms connected to Timothy Geithner benefited from these connections. They do so by looking at how stocks of these firms reacted to the announcement that he was a nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008. They find that there were large abnormal returns for connected firms. Below is the paper's abstract and the full paper is available here . The announcement of Timothy Geithner as nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008 produced a cumulative abnormal return for financial firms with which he had a connection. This return was about 6% after the first full day of trading and about 12% after ten trading days. There were subsequently abnormal negative returns for connected firms when news broke that Geithner's confirmation might be derailed by tax issues. Excess returns for connected firms may reflect the perceived impact of relying on the advice of a small ne...

Boom and Bust: A Global History of Financial Bubbles

Boom and Bust: A Global History of Financial Bubbles, co-authored with my colleague Will Quinn , is forthcoming in August. It is published by Cambridge University Press and is available for pre-order at Amazon , Barnes and Noble , Waterstones and Cambridge University Press . 

Money, Money, Money

In my copious spare time, I am a notaphilist (i.e., a collector of bank notes).  In the not too distant past, individual banks issued their own notes.  However, today, apart from in N. Ireland and Scotland, central banks around the world have a monopoly of the note issue in most economies.   At Feb. 2011, Northern Irish and Scottish banks had a staggering £1,900m and £3,500m of notes in circulation respectively.   As regular travellers across the Irish Sea realise, these notes are not legal tender.   What is special about banks in N. Ireland and Scotland that they can issue their own notes?  Simply, it is an accident of history.  As legislation was passed which centralised the note issue in England in the Bank of England, Scottish and Irish banks were given certain exemptions.  The result today is that these banks can issue their own notes. N. Irish and Scottish Banks, however, have to hold backing assets (i.e., Bank of England reserve...