0 the weight of a structure, container, or vehicle when it is empty
2 the weight of farm animals when they are dead and sold for meat:
Subsidies, of course, create deadweight losses, while energy tax reductions may have net social benefits.
That is what we should care about, both because we care about revenue effects and because of the effect of taxes on deadweight losses.
From here the idea to decrease the deadweight losses, substituting environmental tax revenues for labor taxes revenues inducing the so-called 'revenue recycling effect'.
We find that the current system is progressive but inefficient in the sense that it introduces gross price distortions resulting in deadweight loss.
If it could do so, marginal rates of transformation (being the ratios between these prices) would be unaffected, and there would be no deadweight loss.
The size of the deadweight loss in the market depends upon demand and supply elasticities.
The deadweight loss from the tax would be about ten times the cost of the public good.
If the reduction of deadweight loss from monopoly pricing exceeds the welfare losses from raising the required tax revenue, social welfare gains result.
