Journal of Applied Economic Research
ISSN 2712-7435
Methods for Assessing the Fiscal Effectiveness of Indirect Taxation
E. V. Balatsky 1, N. A. Ekimova 2
1 The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, The Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (CEMI RAS), Moscow, Russia
2 The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to systematize different approaches to the assessment of the fiscal effectiveness of taxation in general and indirect taxation in particular. The article also seeks to elaborate proposals as to which methods are applicable to which analytical tasks. Comparative analysis of the existing practice of evaluating tax systems is used in the report. The results of the study are four types of fiscal effectiveness which were identified by the authors. The first type – budget effectiveness of indirect taxation – characterizes the ability of a tax to provide revenue to the budget. The second one – main effectiveness of indirect taxation – implies measuring the degree of the implementation of the main principle, according to which the trajectory of fiscal charges over time for a effectively working tax system must pass next to the main route, the role of which is played by the GDP trajectory. The third method – marginal effectiveness of taxation – is based on the construction of the production and institutional function and on the identification (based on this function) of the maximum tax burden for business (production) and the state (budget), when exceeding these limits leads to a drop in GDP and budget revenues respectively. The fourth one – institutional effectiveness of taxation – is based on the construction of the production and institutional function and the corresponding equation of distortion of equilibrium prices of macrofactors, which allows one to estimate the validity of the established tax burden from the point of view of the state's implementation of its obligations on formation and maintenance of effective institutions. The main conclusion of the article points to the necessity of a comprehensive assessment of tax systems using all four methods; otherwise one-sided and incomplete results would be turned out. The suggested methodological recommendations can be used for diagnostic and analytical purposes by governing bodies and research teams.
Keywords
budget; efficiency; taxes; diagnostics; institutions; indirect taxation; valuation methods; fiscal efficiency
JEL classification
H240References
1. Myles, G. (2009). Economic Growth and the Role of Taxation. OECD Economic Department Working Papers No. 714. OECD, 63 р. DOI: 10.1787/222781828316.
2. Bazgan, R.-M. (2018). The impact of direct and indirect taxes on economic growth: An empirical analysis related to Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Vol. 12, No. 1, 114–127.
3. Szarowska, I. (2013). Effects of taxation by economic functions on economic growth in the European Union. Proceedings of the 6th International Scientific Conference: Finance and the Performance of Firms in Science, Education and Practice, 746–758.
4. Kneller, R., Bleaney, M., Gemmell, N. (1999). Fiscal policy and growth: Evidence from OECD countries. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 74, Issue 2, 171–190. DOI: 10.1016/S0047-2727(99)00022-5.
5. Gemmell, N., Kneller, R., Sanz, I. (2011). The Timing and Persistence of Fiscal Policy Impacts on Growth: Evidence from OECD Countries. Economic Journal, Vol. 121, Issue 550, F33–F58. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02414.x.
6. Lee, Y., Gordon, R. (2005). Tax Structure and Economic Growth. Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 89, Issue 5-9, 1027–1043. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2004.07.002.
7. Mertens, K., Ravn, M. (2013). The Dynamic Effects of Personal and Corporate Income Tax Changes in the United States. American Economic Review, Vol. 103, No. 4, 1212–1247. DOI: 10.1257/aer.103.4.1212.
8. Bernardi, L. (2013). Recent findings regarding the shift from direct to indirect taxation in the EA-17. MPRA Paper No. 47877, 22 р. Available at: mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/47877/1/MPRA_paper_47877.pdf.
9. Stoilova, D., Patonov, N. (2012). An Empirical Evidence for the Impact of Taxation on Economy Growth in the European Union. Proceedings of Tourism and Management Studies International Conference Algarve, Vol. 3, 1031–1039.
10. Li, J.F., Lin, Z.X. (2015). The Impact of Sales Tax on Economic Growth in the United States: An ARDL Bounds Testing Approach. Applied Economics Letters, Vol. 22, No. 15, 1262–1266. DOI: 10.1080/13504851.2015.1023933.
11. Andrasic, J., Kalas, B., Mirovic, V., Milenkovic, N., Pjanic, M. (2018). Econometric Modelling of Tax Impact on Economic Growth: Panel Evidence from OECD Countries. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, Vol. 52, Issue 4, 211–226. DOI: 10.24818/18423264/52.4.18.14.
12. Arnold, J. (2008). Do Tax Structures Affect Aggregate Economic Growth? Empirical Evidence from a Panel of OECD Countries. OECD Economics Department Working Papers No. 643A. OECD, 28 р. DOI: 10.1787/236001777843.
13. Stoilova, D. (2017). Tax structure and economic growth: Evidence from the European Union. Contaduria y Administracion, Vol. 62, No. 3, 1041–1057. DOI: 10.1016/j.cya.2017.04.006.
14. Ojong, C.M., Anthony, O., Arikpo, O.F. (2016). The Impact of Tax Revenue on Economic Growth: Evidence from Nigeria. IOSR Journal of Economics and Finance (IOSR-JEF), Vol. 7, Issue 1, 32–38. DOI: 10.9790/5933-07113238.
15. Akwe, J.A. (2014). Impact of Non-Oil Tax Revenue on Economic Growth: The Nigerian Perspective. International Journal of Finance and Accounting, Vol. 3, No. 5, 303–309. DOI: 10.5923/j.ijfa.20140305.04.
16. Malaysia. Selected Issues (2014). IMF Country Report No. 14/82. International Monetary Fund, Washington, D.C. Available at: www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2014/cr1482.pdf.
17. Zuyenko, M.Iu. (2017). Osnovy vliianiia kosvennykh nalogov na ekonomicheskii rost (Basics of effects of indirect prices on economic growth). Vektor ekonomiki [Vector of Economy], No. 9 (15). Available at: www.vectoreconomy.ru/images/publications/2017/9/economic_theory/Zuyenko.pdf. (In Russ.).
18. Mayburov, I.A., Sokolovskaya, A.M. (2011). Teoriia nalogooblozheniia. Prodvinutyi kurs [Theory of Taxation. An Advanced Course]. IuNITI-DANA. (In Russ.).
19. Tanchev, S. (2016). The Role of the Proportional Income Tax on Economic Growth of Bulgaria. Economic Studies Journal, Vol. 25, Issue 4, 66–77.
20. Ahsan, A., Wiyono, N.H., Kiting, A.S., Djutaharta, T., Aninditya, F. (2013). Impact of Increasing Tobacco Tax on Government Revenue and Tobacco Consumption. SEADI Discussion Paper Series No. 8.
21. La Foucade, A., Gabriel, S., Scott, E., Metivier, C., Theodore, K., Cumberbatch, A., Samuels, T.A., Unwin, N., Laptiste, C., Lalta, S. (2018). Increased taxation on cigarettes in Grenada: potential effects on consumption and revenue. Pan American Journal of Public Health, Vol. 42, 1–7. DOI: 10.26633/RPSP.2018.195.
22. Van Walbeek, C. (2010). A simulation model to predict the fiscal and public health impact of a change in cigarette excise taxes. Tob Control, Vol. 19, No. 1, 31–36. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2008.028779.
23. Solovyeva, N.A. (2017). Sootnoshenie priamykh i kosvennykh nalogov v nalogovoi sisteme gosudarstva i tendentsii ego izmeneniia (The ratio of direct and indirect taxes in the tax system of the state and tendencies of its changes). Ekonomika: vchera, segodnia, zavtra (Economics: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow), Vol. 7, No. 1A, 216–226. (In Russ.).
24. Korovkin, V.V. (2006) Osnovy teorii nalogooblozheniia [Basics of taxation theory]. Moscow, Ekonomist. (In Russ.).
25. Easterly, W., Rebelo, S. (1993). Fiscal policy and economic growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 32, Issue 3, 417–458. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3932(93)90025-B.
26. Balatsky, E.V., Ekimova, N.A. (2019). The Impact of Tax Reforms on the Behaviour of Economic Agents (Indirect Taxation in Russia and the USA. Journal of Tax Reform, Vol. 5, No. 2, 129–147. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2019.5.2.064.
27. Mishustin, M.V. (2016). Faktory rosta nalogovykh dokhodov: makroekonomicheskii podkhod (Factors of Growth of tax Revenues: A Macroeconomic Approach). Ekonomicheskaia politika (Economic Policy), No. 5, 8–27. (In Russ.).
28. Lundeen, A. (2014). Economic Growth Drives the Level of Tax Revenue. Tax Foundation. Available at: taxfoundation.org/economic-growth-drives-level-tax-revenue/.
29. Balatsky, E.V. (2003). Invariantnost' fiskal'nykh tochek Laffera (Invariabilty of Laffers' Fiscal Points). Mirovaia ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniia (World Eсonomy and International Relations), No. 6, 62–71. (In Russ.).
30. Balatsky, E.V. (2003). Using Production-Institutional Functions to Analyze the Influence of Tax Load on Economic Growth. Studies on Russian Economic Development, Vol. 14, No. 2, 134–144.
31. Balatskii, E.V. (2004). The Influence of Fiscal Instruments on Economic Growth: An Evaluation. Studies on Russian Economic Development, Vol. 15, No. 4, 412–419.
32. Balatsky, E.V. (2000). Effektivnost' fiskal'noi politiki gosudarstva [Effectiveness of state fiscal policy]. Problemy prognozirovaniia [Problems of Forecasting], No. 5, 32–45. (In Russ.).
33. Balatsky, E.V., Ekimova, N.A. (2016). Raspredelitelnye modeli rynochnoi ekonomiki (Distribution models of market economy). Terra Economicus, Vol. 14, No. 2, 48–69. (In Russ.).
Acknowledgements
The research was conducted within the framework of the state assignment of the Government of the Russian Federation given to the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation for 2020 (research theme “Technological, structural and social factors of long-term economic growth” (AAAA-A19-119080990043-0))
About Authors
Balatskiy Evgeny Vsevolodovich – Doctor of Economics, Professor, Director of the Center for Macroeconomic Research, The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, Moscow, Russia (125993, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospect, 49), Leading Staff Scientist, The Central Economics and Mathematics Institute, Moscow, Russia (125993, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospect, 49); ORCID 0000-0002-3371-2229; e-mail: evbalatsky@inbox.ru.
Ekimova Natalia Aleksandrovna – Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Leading Researcher, Center for Macroeconomic Studies, The Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation Moscow, Russia (125993, Moscow, Leningradsky Prospect, 49); ORCID: 0000-0001-6873-7146; e-mail: n.ekimova@bk.ru.
For citation
Balatskiy E. V., Ekimova N. A. Methods for Assessing the Fiscal Effectiveness of IndirectTaxation. Journal of Applied Economic Research, 2020, Vol. 19, No. 1, 19–39. DOI: 10.15826/vestnik.2020.19.1.002
Article info
Received March 15, 2020; Revised April 10, 2020; Accepted April 15, 2020
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15826/vestnik.2020.19.1.002
Download full text article:
~991 KB, *.pdf
(Uploaded
02.06.2020)
Created / Updated: 2 September 2015 / 20 September 2021
© Federal State Autonomous Educational Institution of Higher Education «Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N.Yeltsin»
Remarks?
select the text and press:
Ctrl + Enter
Portal design: Artsofte
Contact us
Rector's Office
Rector, Dr. Victor Koksharov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-45-03, e-mail: rector@urfu.ru
Vice-Rector for International Relations, Dr. Maxim Khomyakov
Tel. +7 (343) 375-46-27, e-mail: Maksim.Khomyakov@urfu.ru