English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This paper seeks to clarify the extent to which the rule for providing public goods ought to correct for the distortionary cost of raising funds. We argue that, in evaluating public projects, the marginal cost of funds (MCF) concept must be supplemented by a symmetrical concept, which we label the marginal benefit of public projects, or MBP, which indicates the value to individuals of the dollars spent. Each of these concepts can be decomposed into two separate components, one reflecting efficiency and the other characterizing the distributional impact of the project itself or its financing. We conclude that efficiency of the financing cannot be ignored, that distributional considerations are also relevant, and that the availability and optimality of tax instruments is critical for evaluating the appropriateness of proceeding with a public good-cum financing project. However, one can construct special cases, as in Kaplow (1996), where the simple cost-benefit criterion applies.

Integrating Expenditure and Tax Decisions: The Marginal Cost of Funds and the Marginal Benefit of Projects