Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Among the tax proposals regularly considered by Congress is an additional tax on distilled liquors. The tax would not apply to beer. The price elasticity of supply of liquor is \(4.0,\) and the price elasticity of demand is \(-0.2 .\) The cross-elasticity of demand for beer with respect to the price of liquor is 0.1 a. If the new tax is imposed, who will bear the greater burden-liquor suppliers or liquor consumers? Why? b. Assuming that beer supply is infinitely elastic, how will the new tax affect the beer market?

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. The liquor consumers will bear the greater burden of the tax because the demand for liquor is inelastic and the supply is elastic. b. The new tax will not affect the price of beer, but it will increase the total quantity of beer demanded because the cross-elasticity of demand for beer with respect to the price of liquor is positive and the supply of beer is infinitely elastic.

Step by step solution

01

Determine who will bear the tax burden

The person that will bear the greater burden of the tax can be determined by considering the price elasticity of demand and supply. The supplier will bear the larger portion of the tax if the demand is inelastic (absolute value less than 1) and the supply elastic (greater than 1). Given the price elasticity of demand for liquor is \(-0.2\) and the elasticity of supply is \(4.0\), it means that the demand is inelastic and the supply is elastic. Therefore, the liquor consumers will bear the greater burden of the tax.
02

Determine the effect of the tax on beer market

Considering the cross-elasticity of demand for beer with respect to the price of liquor is \(0.1\), it suggests that as the price of liquor increases due to the tax, the demand for beer also increases. More specifically, a 1% increase in the price of liquor leads to a 0.1% increase in the demand for beer. Bearing in mind that the supply of beer is infinitely elastic (can meet demand at the same price), then the tax on liquor won't affect the price of beer, but will increase the total quantity of beer demanded.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Tax Burden
Understanding who bears the greater burden of a tax is crucial for assessing the impact of tax policies. The tax burden is influenced by both the price elasticity of demand and the price elasticity of supply. When demand is inelastic, meaning consumers are not very responsive to price changes - represented by an elasticity less than the absolute value of 1, they tend to bear a larger share of the tax. Conversely, when supply is elastic, indicated by an elasticity greater than 1, suppliers are more capable of altering their production and can pass on most of the tax to consumers.

In the given scenario, the price elasticity of demand for liquor is (-0.2), signifying a relatively inelastic demand. This suggests that consumers will continue to buy liquor even after a price increase due to the tax. The price elasticity of supply for liquor is 4.0, showing a highly elastic supply. Suppliers can adjust their production easily, but because consumers are less responsive to price changes, they will absorb most of the tax. As a result, liquor consumers are expected to bear the greater tax burden, facing higher prices without significantly reducing their consumption.
Price Elasticity of Supply
The price elasticity of supply measures how much the quantity supplied of a good responds to a change in its price. It's a key concept in economics that helps predict how changes in the market, such as taxation, can affect supply amounts. An elasticity greater than 1, as seen with the supply of liquor at 4.0, signals that producers can increase their output significantly if the price rises.

This high elasticity often indicates the presence of alternatives in production, the ability to switch resources to different goods, or spare capacity. It plays a critical role in determining the tax burden, as mentioned earlier. When the supply is elastic, producers have leverage to slightly adjust prices or they can absorb any additional costs, such as a tax, without losing too much in the way of quantity sold. However, ultimately, the price sensitivity of consumers will dictate how much of the tax can be passed on to them, thus determining the division of tax burden between consumers and producers.
Cross-Elasticity of Demand
Cross-elasticity of demand measures how the quantity demanded of one good responds to a price change in another good. It is a reflection of the interconnectedness between different markets. In this case, the cross-elasticity of demand for beer with respect to the price of liquor is 0.1. This positive cross-elasticity indicates that beer and liquor are substitute goods; as the price of liquor rises due to the tax, some consumers will switch to beer.

As liquor becomes more expensive, we expect to see a slight increase in the demand for beer. Since the supply of beer is infinitely elastic, beer suppliers are capable of meeting any increase in quantity demanded at the same price. Therefore, in the wake of the tax on liquor, we won't see a change in beer prices, but we will observe an increase in the total quantity of beer demanded. This analysis offers insight into how closely related goods can influence each other's markets.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

From time to time, Congress has raised the minimum wage. Some people suggested that a government subsidy could help employers finance the higher wage. This exercise examines the economics of a minimum wage and wage subsidies. Suppose the supply of lowskilled labor is given by \\[ L^{s}=10 w \\] where \(L^{5}\) is the quantity of low-skilled labor (in millions of persons employed each year), and \(w\) is the wage rate (in dollars per hour). The demand for labor is given by \\[ L^{D}=80-10 w \\] a. What will be the free-market wage rate and employment level? Suppose the government sets a minimum wage of \(\$ 5\) per hour. How many people would then be employed? b. Suppose that instead of a minimum wage, the government pays a subsidy of \(\$ 1\) per hour for each employee. What will the total level of employment be now? What will the equilibrium wage rate be?

Currently, the social security payroll tax in the United States is evenly divided between employers and employees. Employers must pay the government a tax of 6.2 percent of the wages they pay, and employees must pay 6.2 percent of the wages they receive. Suppose the tax were changed so that employers paid the full 12.4 percent and employees paid nothing. Would employees be better off?

Japanese rice producers have extremely high production costs, due in part to the high opportunity cost of land and to their inability to take advantage of economies of large-scale production. Analyze two policies intended to maintain Japanese rice production: (1) a per-pound subsidy to farmers for each pound of rice produced, or (2) a per-pound tariff on imported rice. Illustrate with supply-and-demand diagrams the equilibrium price and quantity, domestic rice production, government revenue or deficit, and deadweight loss from each policy. Which policy is the Japanese government likely to prefer? Which policy are Japanese farmers likely to prefer?

About 100 million pounds of jelly beans are consumed in the United States each year, and the price has been about 50 cents per pound. However, jelly bean producers feel that their incomes are too low and have convinced the government that price supports are in order. The government will therefore buy up as many jelly beans as necessary to keep the price at \(\$ 1\) per pound. However, government economists are worried about the impact of this program because they have no estimates of the elasticities of jelly bean demand or supply. a. Could this program cost the government more than \(\$ 50\) million per year? Under what conditions? Could it cost less than \(\$ 50\) million per year? Under what conditions? Illustrate with a diagram. b. Could this program cost consumers (in terms of lost consumer surplus) more than \(\$ 50\) million per year? Under what conditions? Could it cost consumers less than \(\$ 50\) million per year? Under what conditions? Again, use a diagram to illustrate.

In \(1983,\) the Reagan administration introduced a new agricultural program called the Payment-in-Kind Program. To see how the program worked, let's consider the wheat market: a. Suppose the demand function is \(Q^{D}=28-2 P\) and the supply function is \(Q^{S}=4+4 P\), where \(P\) is the price of wheat in dollars per bushel, and \(Q\) is the quantity in billions of bushels. Find the freemarket equilibrium price and quantity. b. Now suppose the government wants to lower the supply of wheat by 25 percent from the freemarket equilibrium by paying farmers to withdraw land from production. However, the payment is made in wheat rather than in dollarshence the name of the program. The wheat comes from vast government reserves accumulated from previous price support programs. The amount of wheat paid is equal to the amount that could have been harvested on the land withdrawn from production. Farmers are free to sell this wheat on the market. How much is now produced by farmers? How much is indirectly supplied to the market by the government? What is the new market price? How much do farmers gain? Do consumers gain or lose? c. Had the government not given the wheat back to the farmers, it would have stored or destroyed it. Do taxpayers gain from the program? What potential problems does the program create?

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Economics Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free