BHI State Tax Analysis Modeling Program

On May 21, 2014, The Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) released a report entitled, “STAMP is an Unsound Tool for Gauging the Economic Impact of Taxes.” The report makes several criticisms of the Beacon Hill Institute (BHI) State Tax Analysis Modeling Program (STAMP®). BHI responds to the criticisms contained in the Executive Summary of the report. (PDF)

Further reading:

More on STAMP & CGE Models
STAMP Overview
BHI Staff

Why and What of Economic Models

David G. Tuerck
Beacon Hill Institute
February 28, 2002

The Robustness of Regional Computable General Equilibrium Models

Jonathan Haughton, John Barrett and Sorin Codreanu
Department of Economics and Beacon Hill Institute
Suffolk University
February 17, 2003

Response to Rep. Hunter (March 2014)

Update: Keynesian v. Classical Methods in Modeling State Tax Policy (November 2013)

An Appeal to Facts in a “Fact Check”:  Response to Critique of BHI's Renewable Portfolio Standards studies(November 2013)

Response to the Union of Concerned Scientists' "Critique" of BHI's RPS studies (January 2013)

BHI’s response to TP’s Climate Progress blogger Michael Conathan’s critique of NJ wind farm study (August 2011)

The Beacon Hill Institute’s Tax Analysis Modeling Program: A Response to Charney (April 2010)

The Beacon Hill Instituteʹs Analysis of Pennsylvania Tax Policy: STAMPing Out the Nonsense from Our Critics (July 2009)