A tax and a quota are different policy tools. Yet both shrink the amount traded.
Switch the tool and the lost welfare keeps the same shape. The deadweight-loss triangle holds its area either way. Only the destination of the transfer changes. With a tax it becomes government revenue. With a quota it becomes rent for whoever holds the quota.
For example, say the corner 🏪 shop sells 10 🍬 candies a day. The government caps sales at 6 a day, so 4 trades vanish. Some friends who wanted candy cannot buy it. That frustration over vanished trades is the deadweight loss. The shop holding the selling permit pockets the rent instead.
With demand P=10−Q and supply P=2+Q, compute the deadweight loss of a tax t=2 directly as the area of the Harberger triangle, and check it against the formula DWL=t2/(2(B+D)).
DWL=2(B+D)t2
Tax t=2 — base and height of the DWL triangle.Show proof
The triangle's height (the price wedge) is t=2 and its base (the lost quantity) is ΔQ=Q∗−Qt=4−3=1. The area is 2⋅1/2=1.
The formula gives DWL=22/(2⋅2)=1 — it matches. Deadweight loss grows with the square of the tax rate, so doubling the rate quadruples the loss.
t→2t⇒DWL→4⋅DWL
In the same market, find the deadweight loss of a quota fixing quantity at Qˉ=3, and compare it with the tax rate that produces the same quantity.
DWLquota=2(B+D)(Q∗−Qˉ)2
Quota Qˉ=3 — the equivalent tax rate is t=2.Show proof
Under the quota the demand price is Pd(3)=7 and the supply price is Ps(3)=5, so the price gap is 2. Deadweight loss is (7−5)⋅(4−3)/2=1.
The tax producing the same quantity Qt=3 is t=(B+D)(Q∗−Qˉ)=2⋅1=2, with the same DWL of 1. In the linear model a quota and a tax give the same DWL whenever they give the same quantity — the difference is whether the transfer is tax revenue or quota rent.