Türkiye'de Daha Eşitlikçi Vergi Politikaları için Mikrosimülasyon Analizi: 2003-2013

Öz

Türkiye, yüksek gelir dağılımı eşitsizliği yaşayan bir ülke olarak, son 10 yılda, bölüşümü ciddi biçimde etkilediği bilinen vergi politikalarında özellikle bireysel gelir vergisi tarifesinde önemli değişiklikler gerçekleştirmiştir. İlk değişikliğin gerçekleştiği 2005 yılında en üst gelir diliminin tabi olduğu vergi oranının düşürülmesiyle üst gelir gruplarının vergi yükü azaltılırken; 2008 yılında alt gelir gruplarının vergi yükünü düşüren Asgari Geçim İndirimi (AGİ) uygulamasına başlanmıştır. Bu dönemde bazı ürünlerin KDV oranlarında değişikliklere gidilmesine rağmen, özellikle enerji ve iletişim hizmetlerindeki özel tüketim vergileri yoluyla hanelerin dolaylı vergi yükü artmaya devam etmiştir. Bu değişikliklerin, gelirin yeniden dağılımında çelişkili sonuçlara yol açacağı açıktır. Ancak bugüne kadar Türkiye’de kapsamlı biçimde tüm bu değişiklikleri inceleyen bir çalışma yapılmamıştır. Bu açığı kapatmak amacıyla, bu çalışmada birey ve hanelerin doğrudan ve dolaylı vergi yüklerini hesaplamak için hazırlanmış Türkiye’nin ilk Mikrosimülasyon Modeli’nin sonuçlarını sunuyoruz. Mikrosimülasyon tekniği farklı politika önerilerinin sonuçlarını karşılaştırma olanağı tanıması nedeniyle özellikle kamu politikalarının etkilerinin incelenmesinde etkin bir araçtır. Bu yazıda, hem son 10 yıldaki politika değişikliklerinin birey ve hanelerin vergi yüklerinde ve ikincil dağılımdaki sonuçları incelenmiş hem de daha eşitlikçi bir vergi politikası için olası vergi politikası simülasyonlarının sonuçları karşılaştırılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mikrosimülasyon
• Vergi Politikaları
• Gelir Dağılımı
• Türkiye
• Dolaysız Vergiler

A Microsimulation Analysis for a More Progressive Tax Policies in Turkey: 2003 - 2013

Öz

The incidence of public finance policies has been an important area of research in applied economic studies last couple of decades, particularly for the countries who are struggling to cope with high inequality and poverty rates. Turkey as a country with high income inequality has experienced changes in its tax policies last 10 years, particularly in the personal income tax schedule. The changes have included serious cuts in top tax rates (from 45% to 35%), and reduction in the number of income brackets. Most importantly Cost of Living Allowance for workers was introduced in 2008. Along with these changes, indirect taxes have continued to be the dominant revenue source for the government thanks to high excises. As these developments can have contradictory redistributive impacts, there has been no work to investigate the impact of these changes on distribution. For this aim, in this paper we present the first microsimulation model for Turkey which is designed to estimate both direct and indirect tax burdens on individual and household level. Microsimulation method is an efficient tool as it gives researchers and policy makers the opportunity to compare the results of the different policy recommendations. In addition to evaluating the impacts of tax policy changes last 10 years, we present the results of different simulations conducted to create more progressive tax policies for Turkey 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Microsimulation Models
• Tax Policies
• Income Distribution
• Turkey
• Direct Taxes

Kaynakça

1. Albayrak, Özlem (2013), “Optimal Vergi Teorisi: Bir Değerlendirme”, Pınar, Abuzer, Ahmet Haşim Köse ve Nihat Falay (Der.), Kriz ve Maliye Düşüncesinde Değişim: İzzettin Önder’e Armağan (SAV Yayınları).
2. Albayrak, Özlem (2011), “Finansal Krizde Uygulanan Vergi Poltikalarının Gelir Dağılımı Etkileri: 2004-2013”, Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 66 (2): 1-34.
3. Albayrak, Özlem (2010), “Redistributive Effects of Indirect Taxes in Turkey, 2003”, Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 2 (1): 123.
4. Anderson, J. E. (2009), “Globalization and Income Distribution: A Specific Factors Continuum Approach”, NBER Working Paper No.14643, www.nber.org/papers/w14643.pdf (23.3.2016).
5. Aslan, Gürdal (2015), “Türkiye’de Asgari Ücretli Çalışanlar: Gerçek Sayıları, Demografi ve İstihdam Bilgileri”, http://kanalfinans.com/turkiyede-asgariÜcretli-çalışanlar-gercek-sayilaridemografi-ve-istihdam-bilgileri-gurdal-aslan.
6. Atkinson, A. B. (2004), “Income Tax and Top Incomes over the Twentieth Century”, Hacienda Pública Española / Revista de Economía Pública, 168 (1/2004): 123-141.
7. Betti, Gianni vd. (2009), “The Siena Micro-Simulation Model (SM2) for the Tax-benefit System in Turkey”, Università di Siena, Dipartimento di Metodi Quantitative Working Paper No: 81, www.econ-pol-unisi.it/dmq/pdf/DMQ_WP_81.pdf, (01.03.2016).
8. Bourguignon, François ve Amadeó Spadaro (2006), “Microsimulation as a Tool for Evaluating Redistribution Policies”, The Journal of Economic Inequality, 4 (1): 77-106.

9. Cogneau, Denis ve Anne-Sophie Robilliard (2007), “Growth, Distribution and Poverty in Madagascar: Learning from a Microsimulation Model in a General Equilibrium Framework”, Spadaro, Amadeo (Der), Microsimulation as a Tool for the Evaluation of Public Policies: Methods and Applications (Fundacion BBVA): Bölüm 3.
10. Creedy, John (1998), The Dynamics of Inequality and Poverty (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar).
11. Davies, James B. (2004), “Microsimulation, CGE and Macro Modelling for Transition and Developing Economies”, World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU/WIDER) Discussion Papers, No. 2004-8, Helsinki, http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/52988/1/389142778.pdf (01.03.2016).
12. Duclos, Jean-Yves (2000), “Gini Indices and the Redistribution of Income”, International Tax and Public Finance, 7 (2): 141-162.
13. Duclos, Jean-Yves ve Abdelkrim Araar (2006), Poverty and Equity: Measurement, Policy and Estimation with DAD (Springer and International Development Research Centre), http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-97152-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html (11.04.11).
14. Fontana, Giuseppe (2009), “Whither New Consensus Macroeconomics? The Role of Government and Fiscal Policy in Modern Macroeconomics”, Levy Economics Institute, Working Paper, No. 563, http://www.levyinstitute.org/pubs/wp_563.pdf (01.03.2016).
15. Gunther, B. G. ve R. van der Hoeven (2004) “The Social Dimension of Globalization: A Review of the Literature”, International Labour Review, 143 (1-2): 7-43.
16. Harding, Ann (2007), “Challenges and Opportunities of Dynamic Microsimulation Modelling”, The 1st General Conference of the International Microsimulation, http://utah.natsem.canberra.edu.au/storage/CHALLENGES%20AND%20OPPORTUNITI ES%20OF%20DMSM.pdf (01.03.2016).
17. Harding, Ann ve Anil Gupta (2007) (Der.), Modelling Our Future: Population Ageing, Social Security and Taxation, International Symposia in Economic Theory and Econometrics, Cilt 5, (Elsevier). IMF (2012), World Economic Outlook (Washington DC).
18. Immervoll, Herwig, Henrik J. Kleven, Claus T. Kreiner ve Emmanuel Saez (2007), “Welfare Reform in European Countries: A Microsimulation Analysis”, The Economic Journal, 117 (516): 1- 44.
19. Immervoll, H., H. Levy, J. R. Nogueira, C. O’Donoghue ve R. B. de Siqueira (2006), “The Impact of Brazil’s Tax-Benefit System on Inequality and Poverty”, IZA Discussion Papers, No. 2114, http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/33838/1/520217772.pdf (01.03.2016).
20. Jenkins, Stephen P. (1991), “The Measurement of Inequality”, Osberg, Lars (Der.), Economic Inequality and Poverty: International Perspectives (New York: M. E. Sharpe): 3-39.
21. Köse, Ahmet H., Abuzer Pınar ve Serdal Bahçe (2013), Türkiye’de Hanehalklarının SosyoEkonomik Oluşumu: Gelir Dağılımı ve Maliye Poltikalarının Belirlenmesi (TÜBİTAK SOBAG Projesi, No: 107K480).
22. Leahy, Eimear, Seán Lyons ve Richard S.J. Tol (2010), The Distributional Effects of Value Added Tax in Ireland (ESRI Working Paper, No. 366).
23. OECD (2014), Vergi Verileri, http://stats.oecd.org/index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLE_I6 (17.02.2016).
24. OECD (2011), Divided We Stand: Why Inequality Keeps Rising: An Overview of Growing Income Inequalities in OECD Countries.
25. Osberg, Lars (1991) (Der.), Economic Inequality and Poverty: International Perspectives (New York: M. E. Sharpe).
26. Papadimitriou, Dimitri B. (Der.) (2006), The Distributional Effects of Government Spending and Taxation (Palgrave).
27. Pettersson, Thomas ve Tomas Pettersson (2007), “Lifetime Redistribution Through Taxes, Transfers and Non-Cash Benefits”, Harding, Ann ve Anil Gupta (Der.), Modelling Our Future: Population Ageing, Social Security and Taxation (Elsevier): 205.
28. Rajan, Raghuram G. (2010), Fault Lines: How Hidden Fractures Still Threaten the World Economy, (Collins Business).
29. Sen, Amartya K. (1997), On Economic Inequality (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
30. Setterfield, Mark (2014), “Wages, Demand, and US Macroeconomic Travails”, Cynamon, Barry, Steven Fazzari ve Mark Setterfield (Der.), After the Great Recession: The Struggle for Economic Recovery and Growth (Cambridge): 158.
31. Shorrocks, Anthony F. (1988), “Aggregation Issues in Inequality Measurements”, Eichhorn, Wolfgang (Der.), Measurement of Inequality in Economics: Theory and Applications of Economic Indices (Springer-Verlag: New York): 429-451.
32. Spadaro, Amedeo (2007), Microsimulation as a Tool for the Evaluation of Public Policies: Methods and Applications (Bilbao: Fundación BBVA).
33. Sosyal Sigortalar Kurumu (2003), Yıllık İstatistikler, http://www.ssk.gov.tr/wps/sskroot/istatistikk/istatistik2003/default.jsp (05.11.2008).
34. Sutherland, Holly (2001), “An Integrated European Benefit-Tax Model”, EUROMOD Working Paper, EM9/01, http://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/68965/1/332995399.pdf, (14.02.2016).
35. Treeck, Till (2014), “Did Inequality Cause the US Financial Crisis?”, Journal of Economic Surveys 28 (3): 421-448.
36. Vera, Leonardo V. (2009), “Fiscal Policy”, School of Economics, Ciudad Universitaria Research Papers, http://www.leonardovera.com/research_papers/PKE8.pdf (02.01.2010).
37. Wagstaff, Adam ve Eddy van Doorslaer (2001), “What Makes the Personal Income Tax Progressive? A Comparative Analysis for Fifteen OECD Countries”, International Tax and Public Finance, 8 (3): 299-316.
38. Weinberg, Daniel H. (2006), “Income Data Quality Issues in the CPS”, Monthly Labour Review, 129: 38.
39. Zaidi, Asghar ve Katherine Rake (2001), “Dynamic Microsimulation Models: A Review and Some Lessons for SAGE”, Simulating Social Policy in an Ageing Society (SAGE) Discussion Paper 2., https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Asghar_Zaidi2/publication/265280929_Dynamic_Mic rosimulation_Models_A_Review_and_Some_Lessons_for_SAGE/links/54982cf90cf2eeef c30f7c4c.pdf (01.03.2016).