Scott Sumner bringt zusätzliche Beispiele für die von Mankiw diskutierte Wirkung hoher Grenzsteuersätze, die einem durchaus bekannt vorkommen:
His article caused me to think about my own life. We live in a two family house, which we will probably sell in about 7 years. To avoid a massive capital gains tax on the first floor we will be forced to leave the apartment idle for at least the last two years we live here (maybe more.) That allows us to claim it as our own residence (at least I think this is true, consult your tax expert first) as there is a large cap gains exclusion on owner-occupied units. Then there are my disposable contact lens. When I first heard this idea 15 years ago, the price tag (more than $600 a year) seemed too high, relative to the added convenience. Then my wife told me that the government was willing to pay more than 40% of the cost (because income spent on these is free of income and payroll taxes.) Suddenly the price was only a dollar a day–and that was an amount I was willing to pay. So taxes cause valuable output to be withheld from the market and it also cause goods to be produced that are not highly valued by consumers.
Übrigens sind auch die Kommentare sehr lesenswert, in denen z.B. über die Wachstumseffekte verschiedener Steuerarten diskutiert wird, oder darüber, dass angebotsorientierte Ökonomie viel mehr als nur Steuerraten betrifft.
Aus dem Hollerbusch 