In writing this week's column, I want to offer the following question:
Would there be any value in assigning the incidence of the tax to match the burden of the tax?
Obviously, tax burden will be different for each individual and for each good at every point in time, so you can't ever get it exactly right but it could be estimated closer-- let's say the sales tax become 50% you pay it at the register/50% the company pays after the fact. Would there be any effects from this? Clearly, theory dictates that incidence is independent of burden...but it is in actuality? Could we see some "irrational" response to this? My mind is spinning all over this possibility; I'm curious to see what anyone else has to say.