Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE

Year 2025, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 62 - 77, 30.06.2025
https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1676719

Abstract

Understanding the direction of the relationship between public expenditures and tax revenues is critical for achieving fiscal balances and formulating sustainable public policies. The study, which aims to analyze the long-run relationship between public expenditures and tax revenues in Palestine, covers the period 2011Q1-2024Q2 and consists of 54 quarterly observations. In the analysis of the study, the FKPSS unit root test and Fourier cointegration (FSHIN) analysis, which allow for slow and soft breaks and are more successful in capturing structural changes, are used as econometric methods. In addition, the causality relationship between the variables is determined by the Toda Yamamoto causality. According to the unit root test results of the variables, it is concluded that both public expenditures and tax revenues variables are non-stationary at the level. As a result of the FSHIN cointegration test, no long-run cointegration relationship was found between public expenditures and tax revenues. According to the Toda Yamamoto causality test, while there is no causality relationship from tax revenues to public expenditures at the 5% level of significance, there is a unidirectional causality relationship from public expenditures to tax revenues at the 5% level of significance. The results support the validity of the Expenditure-Tax Hypothesis and reveal that public expenditures increase tax revenues by stimulating economic activity. The study shows the fragility and external dependence of the fiscal structure in Palestine and provides policy recommendations for long-term fiscal sustainability.

References

  • Abual-Foul, B. & Baghestani, H. (2023). “The Causal Relation between Government Revenue and Spending: Evidence from Egypt and Jordan”. Journal of Economics and Finance, 45(3): 260–269.
  • Abu-Eideh, O. (2015). “Economic Development under Political Instability: The Case of the Palestinian Economy”. Journal of Economic Studies, 42(2): 309–323.
  • Akbulut, H. & Yereli, A. B. (2016). “Kamu Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları Nedensellik İlişkisi: 2006–2015 Dönemi İçin Türkiye Örneği”. Sosyoekonomi, 24(27): 103–120.
  • Akkoç, U. & Kargın Akkoç, G. (2017). “Türkiye’de Mali Sürdürülebilirliğin Kantil Eşbütünleşme Yöntemiyle Analizi”. Maliye Dergisi, 172(1): 15–29.
  • Asfour, H. (2018). “Withdrawing from the Oslo Accords: The Day after”. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics, and Culture, 23(2/3): 67–72.
  • Athanasenas, A., Chatziantoniou, I., Filis, G. & Floros, C. (2014). “Government Spending and Revenues in the Greek Economy: Evidence from Nonlinear Cointegration”. Empirica, 41(2): 365–376.
  • Aysu, A. & Bakırtaş, D. (2018). “Kamu Harcamaları ve Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki Asimetrik Nedensellik İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği”. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(1): 1–19.
  • Baghestani, H. & McNown, R. (1994). “Do Revenues or Expenditures Respond to Budgetary Disequilibria?”. Southern Economic Journal, 61(2): 311–322.
  • Becker, R., Enders, W. & Lee, J. (2006). “A Stationarity Test in the Presence of an Unknown Number of Smooth Breaks”. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 3(5): 381–409.
  • Buchanan, J. M. & Wagner, R. E. (1977). Democracy in Deficit: The Political Legacy of Lord Keynes. Academic Press, New York.
  • Bulut, E. & Çil, D. (2024). “Kamu Harcamaları ve Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki Asimetrik Nedensellik İlişkisi: Geçiş Ekonomileri Örneği”. Sosyoekonomi, 32(60): 317–338.
  • Chang, T. & Chiang, G. (2009). “Revisiting the Government Revenue-expenditure Nexus: Evidence from 15 OECD Countries Based on the Panel Data Approach”. Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 59(2): 165–172.
  • Çağlar, A. E. & Yavuz, E. (2022). “Türkiye’de Vergi Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları İlişkisinin Araştırılması: Fourier Yaklaşımları ile Kanıtlar”. Business and Economics Research Journal, 13(4): 657–669.
  • Dakurah, H. A., Davies, S. P. & Sampath, R. K. (2001). “Defense Spending and Economic Growth in Developing Countries: A Causality Analysis”. Journal of Policy Modeling, 23(6): 651–668.
  • Dana, T. (2020). “Localising the Economy as a Resistance Response: A Contribution to the 'Resistance Economy' Debate in the Occupied Palestinian Territories”. Journal of Peacebuilding and Development, 15(2): 192–204.
  • Enders, W. & Lee, J. (2012). “The Flexible Fourier Form and Dickey – Fuller Type Unit Root Tests”. Economics Letters, 117, 196-199.
  • Ewing, B. & Payne, J. (1998). “Government Revenue-expenditure Nexus: Evidence from Latin America”. Journal of Economic Development, 23(2): 57–69.
  • Ewing, B. T., Payne, J. E., Thompson, M. A. & Al-Zoubi, O. M. (2006). “Government Expenditures and Revenues: Evidence from Asymmetric Modeling”. Southern Economic Journal, 73(1): 190–200.
  • Friedman, M. (1978). “The Limitations of Tax Limitation”. Quadrant, 22(8): 22–24.
  • Gounder, N., Narayan, P. K. & Prasad, A. (2007). “An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Government Revenue and Expenditure: The Case of the Fiji Islands”. International Journal of Social Economics, 34(3): 147–158.
  • Hoover, K. D. & Sheffrin, S. M. (1992). “Causation, Spending, and Taxes: Sand in the Sandbox or Tax Collector for the Welfare State?”. The American Economic Review, 82(1): 225–248.
  • Kalloub, M. & Odabaş, H. (2019). “Palestinian Economy Assessment: Public Revenues, Expenditures and Current Issues”. 8th SCF International Conference on the Economic and Social Impacts of the Globalization and Liberalization, Antalya, Türkiye.
  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. Macmillan, London.
  • Klein, M. (2018). “The Endurance of the Fragile Oslo Accords”. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics, and Culture, 23(2/3): 58–66.
  • Kollias, C. & Makrydakis, S. (2000). “Tax and Spend or Spend and Tax? Empirical Evidence from Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland”. Applied Economics, 32(5): 533–546.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C. B., Schmidt, P. & Shin, Y. (1992). “Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity against the Alternative of a Unit Root”. Journal of Econometrics, 54: 159–178.
  • Michaillat, P. & Saez, E. (2019). “Optimal Public Expenditure with Inefficient Unemployment”. The Review of Economic Studies, 86(3): 1301–1331.
  • Moreno‐Enguix, M. D. R. & Lorente Bayona, L. V. (2017). “Factors Affecting Public Expenditure Efficiency in Developed Countries”. Politics and Policy, 45(1): 105–143.
  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Omay, T. (2015). “Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier Form to Approximate Smooth Breaks in Unit Root Testing”. Economics Letters, 134: 123–126.
  • Özmen, İ. & Balı, S. (2018). “Vergi Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları Arasındaki İlişki: 14 Avrupa Birliği Ülkesinde Asimetrik Panel Nedensellik Testi”. 4th International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS) Proceedings, 2: 271–284.
  • Peacock, A. T. & Wiseman, J. (1979). The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  • Tsong, C. C., Lee, C. F., Tsai, L. J. & Hu, T. C. (2016). “The Fourier Approximation and Testing for the Null of Cointegration”. Empirical Economics, 51(3): 1085–1113.
  • Turna, F. (2025). “Filistin – İsrail Savaşı: Vergisel ve Ekonomik Yaptırımlar”. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(Filistin Özel Sayısı): 497–516.
  • Von Furstenberg, G. M., Green, R. J. & Jeong, J. H. (1986). “Tax and Spend or Spend and Tax?”. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2): 179–188.
  • Wagner, A. (1883). Finanzwissenschaft (finance Science). C.F. Winter, Leipzig.
  • Yavuz, E., Kılıç, E., Kar, A. & Pazarcı, Ş. (2023). “Mali Sürdürülebilirliğe Giden Yolda Asimetrik Yapı Ne Kadar Etkili? Türkiye Üzerine Yeniden Düşünmek”. Maliye Dergisi, 185(2): 97–124.
  • Yılancı, V. (2017). “Petrol Fiyatları ile Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: Fourier Yaklaşımı”. Ekonometri ve İstatistik, 27: 51–67.
  • Yılancı, V., Şaşmaz, M. Ü. & Öztürk, Ö. F. (2020). “Türkiye’de Kamu Harcamaları ile Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki İlişki: Frekans Alanda Asimetrik Testinden Kanıtlar”. Sayıştay Dergisi, 31(116): 121–139.

KAMU HARCAMALARI VE VERGİ GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİNİN FOURIER YÖNTEMİ İLE TESTİ: FİLİSTİN ÖRNEĞİ

Year 2025, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 62 - 77, 30.06.2025
https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1676719

Abstract

Kamu harcamaları ile vergi gelirleri arasındaki ilişkinin yönünü anlamak, mali dengelerin sağlanması ve sürdürülebilir kamu politikalarının oluşturulması açısından kritik bir öneme sahiptir. Kamu harcamaları ile vergi gelirleri arasındaki uzun dönemli ilişkinin Filistin özelinde incelenmesinin amaçlandığı çalışma 2011Ç1-2024Ç2 dönemini kapsamakta ve 54 çeyrek dönemlik gözlemden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmanın analizinde ekonometrik yöntem olarak yavaş ve yumuşak kırılmalara izin veren ve yapısal değişimleri yakalamada daha başarılı olan FKPSS birim kök testinden ve Fourier eşbütünleşme (FSHIN) analizinden yararlanılmıştır. Ayrıca değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi Toda Yamamoto nedensellik ile tespit edilmiştir. Değişkenlerin birim kök test sonuçlarına göre, hem kamu harcamaları hem de vergi gelirleri değişkeninin seviyesinde durağan olmadığı sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. FSHIN eşbütünleşme testi sonucunda ise kamu harcamaları ile vergi gelirleri arasında uzun dönemde eşbütünleşme ilişkisi tespit edilememiştir. Toda Yamamoto nedensellik testi sonucuna göre vergi gelirlerinden kamu harcamalarına doğru istatistiki olarak %5 anlam düzeyinde nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilemezken, kamu harcamalarından vergi gelirlerine doğru istatistiki olarak %5 anlam düzeyinde tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, Harcama-Vergi Hipotezi’nin geçerliliğini desteklerken, kamu harcamalarının ekonomik faaliyetleri teşvik ederek vergi gelirlerini artırıcı bir rol oynadığını ortaya koymaktadır. Çalışma, Filistin’de mali yapının kırılganlığını ve dışa bağımlılığını ortaya koyarak, uzun dönemde mali sürdürülebilirlik için politika önerileri sunmaktadır.

References

  • Abual-Foul, B. & Baghestani, H. (2023). “The Causal Relation between Government Revenue and Spending: Evidence from Egypt and Jordan”. Journal of Economics and Finance, 45(3): 260–269.
  • Abu-Eideh, O. (2015). “Economic Development under Political Instability: The Case of the Palestinian Economy”. Journal of Economic Studies, 42(2): 309–323.
  • Akbulut, H. & Yereli, A. B. (2016). “Kamu Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları Nedensellik İlişkisi: 2006–2015 Dönemi İçin Türkiye Örneği”. Sosyoekonomi, 24(27): 103–120.
  • Akkoç, U. & Kargın Akkoç, G. (2017). “Türkiye’de Mali Sürdürülebilirliğin Kantil Eşbütünleşme Yöntemiyle Analizi”. Maliye Dergisi, 172(1): 15–29.
  • Asfour, H. (2018). “Withdrawing from the Oslo Accords: The Day after”. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics, and Culture, 23(2/3): 67–72.
  • Athanasenas, A., Chatziantoniou, I., Filis, G. & Floros, C. (2014). “Government Spending and Revenues in the Greek Economy: Evidence from Nonlinear Cointegration”. Empirica, 41(2): 365–376.
  • Aysu, A. & Bakırtaş, D. (2018). “Kamu Harcamaları ve Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki Asimetrik Nedensellik İlişkisi: Türkiye Örneği”. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 51(1): 1–19.
  • Baghestani, H. & McNown, R. (1994). “Do Revenues or Expenditures Respond to Budgetary Disequilibria?”. Southern Economic Journal, 61(2): 311–322.
  • Becker, R., Enders, W. & Lee, J. (2006). “A Stationarity Test in the Presence of an Unknown Number of Smooth Breaks”. Journal of Time Series Analysis, 3(5): 381–409.
  • Buchanan, J. M. & Wagner, R. E. (1977). Democracy in Deficit: The Political Legacy of Lord Keynes. Academic Press, New York.
  • Bulut, E. & Çil, D. (2024). “Kamu Harcamaları ve Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki Asimetrik Nedensellik İlişkisi: Geçiş Ekonomileri Örneği”. Sosyoekonomi, 32(60): 317–338.
  • Chang, T. & Chiang, G. (2009). “Revisiting the Government Revenue-expenditure Nexus: Evidence from 15 OECD Countries Based on the Panel Data Approach”. Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 59(2): 165–172.
  • Çağlar, A. E. & Yavuz, E. (2022). “Türkiye’de Vergi Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları İlişkisinin Araştırılması: Fourier Yaklaşımları ile Kanıtlar”. Business and Economics Research Journal, 13(4): 657–669.
  • Dakurah, H. A., Davies, S. P. & Sampath, R. K. (2001). “Defense Spending and Economic Growth in Developing Countries: A Causality Analysis”. Journal of Policy Modeling, 23(6): 651–668.
  • Dana, T. (2020). “Localising the Economy as a Resistance Response: A Contribution to the 'Resistance Economy' Debate in the Occupied Palestinian Territories”. Journal of Peacebuilding and Development, 15(2): 192–204.
  • Enders, W. & Lee, J. (2012). “The Flexible Fourier Form and Dickey – Fuller Type Unit Root Tests”. Economics Letters, 117, 196-199.
  • Ewing, B. & Payne, J. (1998). “Government Revenue-expenditure Nexus: Evidence from Latin America”. Journal of Economic Development, 23(2): 57–69.
  • Ewing, B. T., Payne, J. E., Thompson, M. A. & Al-Zoubi, O. M. (2006). “Government Expenditures and Revenues: Evidence from Asymmetric Modeling”. Southern Economic Journal, 73(1): 190–200.
  • Friedman, M. (1978). “The Limitations of Tax Limitation”. Quadrant, 22(8): 22–24.
  • Gounder, N., Narayan, P. K. & Prasad, A. (2007). “An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Government Revenue and Expenditure: The Case of the Fiji Islands”. International Journal of Social Economics, 34(3): 147–158.
  • Hoover, K. D. & Sheffrin, S. M. (1992). “Causation, Spending, and Taxes: Sand in the Sandbox or Tax Collector for the Welfare State?”. The American Economic Review, 82(1): 225–248.
  • Kalloub, M. & Odabaş, H. (2019). “Palestinian Economy Assessment: Public Revenues, Expenditures and Current Issues”. 8th SCF International Conference on the Economic and Social Impacts of the Globalization and Liberalization, Antalya, Türkiye.
  • Keynes, J. M. (1936). The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money. Macmillan, London.
  • Klein, M. (2018). “The Endurance of the Fragile Oslo Accords”. Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics, and Culture, 23(2/3): 58–66.
  • Kollias, C. & Makrydakis, S. (2000). “Tax and Spend or Spend and Tax? Empirical Evidence from Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland”. Applied Economics, 32(5): 533–546.
  • Kwiatkowski, D., Phillips, P. C. B., Schmidt, P. & Shin, Y. (1992). “Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationarity against the Alternative of a Unit Root”. Journal of Econometrics, 54: 159–178.
  • Michaillat, P. & Saez, E. (2019). “Optimal Public Expenditure with Inefficient Unemployment”. The Review of Economic Studies, 86(3): 1301–1331.
  • Moreno‐Enguix, M. D. R. & Lorente Bayona, L. V. (2017). “Factors Affecting Public Expenditure Efficiency in Developed Countries”. Politics and Policy, 45(1): 105–143.
  • North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Omay, T. (2015). “Fractional Frequency Flexible Fourier Form to Approximate Smooth Breaks in Unit Root Testing”. Economics Letters, 134: 123–126.
  • Özmen, İ. & Balı, S. (2018). “Vergi Gelirleri ve Kamu Harcamaları Arasındaki İlişki: 14 Avrupa Birliği Ülkesinde Asimetrik Panel Nedensellik Testi”. 4th International Congress on Political, Economic and Social Studies (ICPESS) Proceedings, 2: 271–284.
  • Peacock, A. T. & Wiseman, J. (1979). The Growth of Public Expenditure in the United Kingdom. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  • Tsong, C. C., Lee, C. F., Tsai, L. J. & Hu, T. C. (2016). “The Fourier Approximation and Testing for the Null of Cointegration”. Empirical Economics, 51(3): 1085–1113.
  • Turna, F. (2025). “Filistin – İsrail Savaşı: Vergisel ve Ekonomik Yaptırımlar”. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 11(Filistin Özel Sayısı): 497–516.
  • Von Furstenberg, G. M., Green, R. J. & Jeong, J. H. (1986). “Tax and Spend or Spend and Tax?”. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2): 179–188.
  • Wagner, A. (1883). Finanzwissenschaft (finance Science). C.F. Winter, Leipzig.
  • Yavuz, E., Kılıç, E., Kar, A. & Pazarcı, Ş. (2023). “Mali Sürdürülebilirliğe Giden Yolda Asimetrik Yapı Ne Kadar Etkili? Türkiye Üzerine Yeniden Düşünmek”. Maliye Dergisi, 185(2): 97–124.
  • Yılancı, V. (2017). “Petrol Fiyatları ile Ekonomik Büyüme Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi: Fourier Yaklaşımı”. Ekonometri ve İstatistik, 27: 51–67.
  • Yılancı, V., Şaşmaz, M. Ü. & Öztürk, Ö. F. (2020). “Türkiye’de Kamu Harcamaları ile Vergi Gelirleri Arasındaki İlişki: Frekans Alanda Asimetrik Testinden Kanıtlar”. Sayıştay Dergisi, 31(116): 121–139.
There are 39 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Policy of Treasury
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Aytül Bişgin 0000-0003-2488-3541

Othman Sawafta 0000-0002-4169-8180

Publication Date June 30, 2025
Submission Date April 15, 2025
Acceptance Date June 30, 2025
Published in Issue Year 2025 Volume: 8 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Bişgin, A., & Sawafta, O. (2025). TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi, 8(1), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1676719
AMA Bişgin A, Sawafta O. TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi. June 2025;8(1):62-77. doi:10.46737/emid.1676719
Chicago Bişgin, Aytül, and Othman Sawafta. “TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE”. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi 8, no. 1 (June 2025): 62-77. https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1676719.
EndNote Bişgin A, Sawafta O (June 1, 2025) TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi 8 1 62–77.
IEEE A. Bişgin and O. Sawafta, “TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE”, Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 62–77, 2025, doi: 10.46737/emid.1676719.
ISNAD Bişgin, Aytül - Sawafta, Othman. “TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE”. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi 8/1 (June2025), 62-77. https://doi.org/10.46737/emid.1676719.
JAMA Bişgin A, Sawafta O. TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi. 2025;8:62–77.
MLA Bişgin, Aytül and Othman Sawafta. “TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE”. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi, vol. 8, no. 1, 2025, pp. 62-77, doi:10.46737/emid.1676719.
Vancouver Bişgin A, Sawafta O. TESTING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC EXPENDITURES AND TAX REVENUES BY FOURIER METHOD: THE CASE OF PALESTINE. Ekonomi Maliye İşletme Dergisi. 2025;8(1):62-77.