Economics Terms A-Z
A deadweight loss is the irrecoverable reduction in economic efficiency that occurs when a free-market equilibrium is disturbed by a market intervention or other shock to supply and/or demand. In economic theory, free markets are beneficial to society because they allow consumers and producers to exchange goods and services for money and both sides of the market gain at the equilibrium price in terms of consumer surplus and producer surplus. In a simple economy with just one market, the sum of consumer and producer surplus equates to social welfare: the market is then understood to be doing something good for society.
If the government decides to intervene in a market, for example by levying a tax on an item which is being sold by producers to consumers, then this will force a new equilibrium in the market. Consider the market in the graph below, with producer supply S, consumer demand D and a free-market equilibrium of q* units sold at p* per unit. If the government introduces a simple unit tax, which implies a certain amount of tax per unit of the item sold, to be collected from the producers, this forces a parallel shift of the supply to the left and an effective new supply curve of S’. The new equilibrium point is where D crosses S’ at a quantity q’ and a retail or consumer price of p’cons. Although the item is sold at price p’cons this new price includes the tax and the producer only receives the price p’prod per unit. The government then receives (p’cons – p’prod)q’ in tax revenue.
Note how the new quantity q’ is less than the original quantity q* (since less of the item is bought at a higher price). Therefore both consumer surplus and producer surplus reduce. Some of the original consumer surplus and producer surplus has been transformed into tax revenue for the government. However the government is not able to recoup all of the reduction in consumer and producer surplus from the original free-market equilibrium. This is because the tax induces less of the item to be exchanged in the market. Some of the benefits to consumers and producers from the original free-market equilibrium have simply vanished. This is represented by the grey shaded triangle in the graph and it is known as the excess burden of the tax, or a deadweight loss. The size of the deadweight loss is determined by the elasticities of supply and demand.
A deadweight loss is a loss in economic efficiency: before the unit tax, social welfare was higher than after its introduction. Deadweight losses, which are caused by market interventions, are often cited by proponents of free-market economics when arguing for smaller government, less regulation and lower taxes.
However such arguments tend to be somewhat simplistic. In reality, economies are made up of many markets and the actions of participants in one market often have implications for individuals elsewhere in the economy. Government interventions can be very practical responses to market failure. If the market in the example above were that for cigarettes and it were left unregulated and untaxed, cigarette producers and smokers would benefit from their respective surpluses. A unit tax on cigarette packs would reduce those surpluses and there could be a deadweight loss in the market. Yet smoking causes illness and in a society where healthcare is publicly provided, the treatment of smokers’ conditions has to be financed. It may also be beneficial to society as a whole if the tax induced lower consumption of cigarettes and that led to a healthier, more productive workforce. Thus a deadweight loss in one market, while still an irrecoverable reduction in efficiency in that particular market, can sometimes be compensated by gains elsewhere in the economy.
Some economists claim that the act of gift-giving is economically inefficient since the giver is typically not perfectly informed about the recipient’s preferences. Logically, a transfer of money that allows the recipient to choose items for themselves would be more efficient than a guess by the giver as to what items the recipient likes. Projected to whole markets at festive times of the year when (non-monetary) gifts are exchanged, this can invoke deadweight losses in the economy. See Joel Waldfogel’s provocative article, “The Deadweight Loss of Christmas” (American Economic Review, 1993).
Good to know
Some governments restrict the supply of knowledge, e.g. through book-burning, the blocking of internet sites or excessive control of school curricula. This generally results in a significant deadweight loss for society. While such acts may allow governments to achieve certain short-term aims, reducing knowledge in society will stymie progress and growth, making the economy less competitive in the long run. Reinventing the wheel is always inefficient!
When economists say “ceteris paribus” they are talking about the direct effect of X on Y while assuming that the rest of the world stands still. Ceteris is Latin for “other things” and paribus means “equal” so the literal translation is “other things being equal” but in economics it is generally understood to mean that all other things remain equal or constant (while dealing with the issue at hand).
Factor markets (or resource markets) are markets for the inputs to production. A producer is typically a seller in the market for a product (supply SG in the graph below) while simultaneously being a buyer in the markets for its factors of production (demand DF below).
No Deal Brexit and the Threat to Developing Countries
In the cacophony of the Brexit debate the names Phnom Penh, Dhaka and Addis Ababa, if ever spoken, are rarely heard. And yet, with the March deadline looming on the not-too-distant horizon, and little, if anything, seemingly agreed upon, it is they who stand to be most affected, particularly if a no deal comes to pass. And things in that regard are not looking good. For career opportunities and job listings in business, finance, and economics, take a look at our jobs section.