Ib Econ Past Papers Apr 2026
When the timer buzzed, her hand was cramped, but her confidence was not. She compared her answer to the markscheme. She had missed one key point: the role of cross-elasticity of demand for substitutes. A point lost, but a lesson learned.
She didn’t stop there.
Then she wrote: “While demerit goods (e.g., cigarettes) generate negative consumption externalities, taxation is not always the optimal solution. If demand is inelastic, the tax may not reduce quantity significantly, and deadweight loss may be small, but the tax becomes regressive.” She cited a real-world example: Singapore’s high tobacco taxes versus the black market in e-cigarettes.
When she finished with ten minutes to spare, she leaned back. The student next to her was still erasing furiously. Ib Econ Past Papers
Next, she pulled out Paper 2, November 2022. The insert was a news article about rising coffee prices in Vietnam due to a drought. The questions were brutal: calculate the PED, explain two supply-side factors, and evaluate the effectiveness of a price ceiling.
She began to sketch. Demand and supply curves. A vertical wedge for the tax. The shrinking of consumer and producer surplus. And there it was—the Harberger triangle. Deadweight loss. Not just a term from a glossary, but a real loss of total welfare. She labeled everything: Pc for consumers, Pp for producers, Qt for quantity after tax, Qe for equilibrium.
She walked out of the exam hall into the spring sun. Two more papers to go. But she wasn’t worried. She had the archives on her side. When the timer buzzed, her hand was cramped,
It was three days before the final IB Economics exam, and Maya had a problem. Not a problem of supply and demand—though her anxiety was certainly spiking—but a problem of strategy. Her textbook was highlighted into a rainbow blur, her flashcards had fused together in a coffee spill, and her brain could define “allocative efficiency” in her sleep. But she knew, deep down, that knowing the definition wasn’t enough. The IB didn’t ask for definitions. It asked for application .
Looking into IB Econ past papers hadn’t just taught her the syllabus. It had taught her the exam’s personality —its love for diagrams, its obsession with evaluation, its hatred for one-sided arguments. And in doing so, it had turned a stressed student into a strategist.
Maya highlighted the article like a surgeon. She underlined: “Farmers are switching to durian production.” That was opportunity cost. “Global demand for robusta beans has surged.” That was a demand shifter. The calculation? 12% price increase, 8% quantity decrease. PED = -0.67. Inelastic. A point lost, but a lesson learned
The past papers had whispered their secrets to her.
Maya chose a question from Microeconomics: “Explain how the introduction of a per-unit tax on a good can lead to a deadweight loss. Using a diagram, evaluate whether governments should always tax demerit goods.”
She wrote steadily. Diagrams first. Then definitions. Then real-world examples: carbon taxes in Sweden, sugar taxes in Mexico. For evaluation, she used the “depends on” framework: “The effectiveness depends on the elasticity of demand, the presence of merit good alternatives, and the government’s ability to enforce the tax.”
She grabbed a blank sheet of paper and set a timer for 45 minutes.
By the end of the night, she had done three papers. Her room was a sea of diagrams, evaluation points, and examiner’s notes scribbled in red. But something had changed. The exam was no longer a monster hiding in the dark. It was a predictable machine. Paper 1 was always theory and evaluation. Paper 2 was data response and real-world application. Paper 3 (HL) was calculation and policy.
