--%>

Problem on deadweight loss

Assume that the domestic demand for television sets is explained by Q = 40,000 − 180P and that the supply is provided by Q = 20P. When televisions can be freely imported at a price of $160, then how many televisions would be generated in the domestic market? By how much domestic producer excess and deadweight losses modify when the government establishes a $20 tariff per television set? What when the tariff was $70?

E

Expert

Verified

Whenever televisions can be freely imported at a price of PW = $160, the domestic producers will generate 20(160) = 3200 television sets. The Domestic demand is 40,000 – 180*160 = 11,200 units.

705_2.jpg

Whenever the import duty of $20 is mentioned, the efficient price of importing televisions is $180. At such price, domestic firms will supply 20(180) = 3600 televisions, and demand will be 40,000 – 180(180) = 7600. The domestic producer surplus will raise by region C = (180 – 160)(3200) + 0.5(180 – 160)(3600 – 3200) = 68,000. The tariff makes a deadweight equivalent to region F + K = 0.5(180 – 160)(3600 – 3200) + 0.5(180 – 160)(11,200 – 7600) = 40,000.

The import duty of $70 increases the efficient import price to $230. You can observe from the graph that this is above the equilibrium price of $200 which would prevail in the domestic market devoid of any foreign trade.  Therefore, imposing such a big import duty is equivalent to banning trade in this industry together. The latest price will be $200 and the quantity demanded 4000. Associative to the free trade equilibrium, producer excess would now raise by area B + C = 0.5(200)(4000) – 0.5(160)(3200) = 144,000. The $70 import tariff makes a deadweight loss equivalent to region F + G + J + K = 0.5(200 – 160)(11,200 – 3200) = 160,000.

   Related Questions in Microeconomics

  • Q : Ratio of percentage changes in quantity

    The ratio of the percentage change within the quantity of beef sold over the percentage change within the price of pork is: (1) price elasticity of demand for beef. (2) price elasticity of demand for pork. (3) income elasticity of dem

  • Q : Walfare function expected utility

    please help me in doing the attached documents

  • Q : Opportunity Costs to Society of Funding

    The clearest signals of the opportunity costs to society of funding one investment in place of another are relative: (w) interest rates, expected rates of return, and also expected economic profit. (x) production costs for various goo

  • Q : Difference between planned and actual

    Differentiate between planned and actual saving and investment. Answer: There is a big difference between (a) planned S and I and (b) Actual saving and investment.<

  • Q : Elasticity of demand as price-total

    Increasing the price of a product definitely raises total revenue when the elasticity of demand is as: (w) infinity. (x) unitary. (y) relatively elastic. (z) relatively inelastic.

  • Q : Price ceilings and price floors Price

    Price ceilings and price floors: 1) cause surpluses and shortages respectively. 2) make the rationing function of free markets more efficient. 3) interfere with the rationing function of prices. 4) shift demand and supply curves and therefore have no effect on the rat

  • Q : Pricing strategy In a competitive

    In a competitive pricing strategy how does one can arrive for a multi-service practice where there are no specific products in question?

  • Q : Problem on Budget constraints James and

    James and Louisa each have an income of $30, which they each spend on tomatoes and all other goods.  They buy tomatoes at their local farmers market, which charges $3 per pound.  Define the units for all other goods so that their price is $1 per unit. 

  • Q : State Statutory liquidity ratio or SLR

    State SLR (or Statutory liquidity ratio): It is the ratio of net or total demand and time deposits of commercial bank that, it has to keep in the form of specified liquid assets.

  • Q : Kinked demand curve model of

    The kinked demand curve model of oligopolistic pricing behavior reflects the concept which: (1) price hikes fail to accommodate small hikes in costs. (2) other firms ignore price hikes by single firms. (3) other firms match any price cuts by any singl