Journal on Policy & Complex Systems Volume 5, Number 1, Spring 2019 | Page 110

Modeling Tax Distribution in Metropolitan Regions with PolicySpace
Table 2 . Compact Results of the Econometric Tests of the Tax Distribution Alternatives between APCs
Simul 1 Simul 2 Simul 3 Real 1 Real 2
ALTERNATIVE0
[ True ]
−0.01 ***
0.01 ***
−0.01 *
−0.01 ***
−0.01 ***
( 0.00 ) ( 0.00 ) ( 0.01 ) ( 0.00 ) ( 0.00 )
MPF _ DISTRIBUTION
[ True ]
0.02 ***
0.01 ***
0.02 **
0.02 ***
0.02 ***
( 0.00 ) ( 0.00 ) ( 0.01 ) ( 0.00 ) ( 0.00 ) Intercept 0.60 *** 0.9 0.73 *** 0.61 *** 0.02 ***
( 0.01 ) ( 0.64 ) ( 0.03 ) ( 0.01 ) ( 0.00 ) area . APC — — — — −0.00 ***
— — — — ( 0.00 ) pib . index — 0.00 ** 0 — —
— ( 0.00 ) ( 0.00 ) — — inflation — −1.55 11.31 *** — —
— ( 1.10 ) ( 3.15 ) — — ln . population . APC — — — 0.01 ***
— — — ( 0.00 )
number . municipality .
APC
−0.01
0
0.00 **
— ( 0.01 ) ( 0.00 ) — ( 0.00 ) — — — — —
Log-likelihood
506.85
510.85
267.02
260.65
260.65
R-squared Adj
0.98
0.98
0.6
0.98
0.98
AIC
−931.69
−929.7
−516.04
−477.31
−477.31
BIC
−806.65
−789.41
−488.59
−424.9
−424.9
No . of observations
156
156
156
80
80
* p < 0.10 , ** p < 0.05 , *** p < 0.01 . Standard errors in parentheses .
restriction of opportunities . The understanding that such inequality affects the quality of life of the municipalities motivated us to investigate alternatives of tax distribution .
The analysis described in this paper allows us to suggest two central conclusions . The first is that the progressiveness of MPF is striking in the metropolitan regions and its mainte-
107