Fiscal happiness: an integrated conceptual framework of the channels linking fiscal policies and well-being

Abstract

How, through which channels and under what conditions does fiscal policy affect citizens’ subjective well-being? Happiness economics and the tax literature have developed in parallel, without an integrative framework on the revenue side, although public spending, government size and tax morale have already been linked to well-being. This theoretical article follows a theory synthesis approach (Jaakkola, 2020; MacInnis, 2011), based on a narrative literature review (Scopus, three queries, 2000-2026; 345 distinct documents identified, 137 retained). Four well-being theories (hedonism, eudaimonism, self-determination theory, capabilities approach) are selected according to three criteria: their ability to conceptualise an identifiable dimension of well-being, the existence of mechanisms linking it to the fiscal experience, and their complementarity. The article defines fiscal happiness as a state of cognitive, affective and social subjective well-being resulting from the experience of the tax system. The model rests on five channels, with no established hierarchy among them: material (disposable income, economic security), social (cohesion, perceived fairness), institutional (legitimacy, trust), collective (publicly funded services) and psychological (stress, sense of injustice). It yields ten research propositions, for example: institutional trust partially mediates the effect of perceived tax fairness on fiscal happiness. To our knowledge, it is the first framework that systematically combines self-determination theory with other well-being theories to analyze taxation. The framework is not empirically tested. It applies to tax systems where taxes finance most public spending; Morocco serves as an analytical illustration, not as a test. Three contributions are claimed: conceptual (a definition and a network of neighbouring concepts), theoretical (a five-channel model) and methodological (ten traceable propositions).

Classification JEL: H20, H31, I31, O55

Paper type: Theoretical research