Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 11 - Different Approaches to Social Protection

  • from Part II - From Laissez Faire to Welfare States: 1930 to 1970
  • Vito Tanzi, International Institute of Public Finance (IIPF), Germany
  • Book:
    Monitoring the State or the Market
    Published online:
    07 December 2023
    Print publication:
    21 December 2023, pp 73-84

  • Summary

    From the 1960s on there had been a bifurcation in the welfare states’ approaches to social protection. Many (continental) European countries had chosen high taxes, high public spending, and universal programs. The United States and some others, especially, Anglo-Saxon countries, had used tax burdens reduced, by “tax expenditures,” for some groups. These groups benefited from the reduction in their tax burdens in the same way as the citizens in continental European countries were helped by higher public spending. The tax expenditure tended to be more beneficial to richer individuals while the focused spending programs became progressively less focused, because of political pressures and corrupt practices to expand accessibility to the programs. Tax expenditures also reduced the tax burden on corporations, creating corporate welfare programs. There was a tendency to see social spending as welfare but not tax expenditures.