YOLSUZLUKLARIN VERGİ GELİRLERİ ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİ: DİNAMİK PANEL VERİ ANALİZİ

Öz

Kamu gücünün kişisel çıkarlar amacıyla kötüye kullanılması şeklinde tanımlanan yolsuzluklar; vergi kaçakçılığına, düzensiz vergi istisnalarına ve zayıf vergi idaresine yol açması durumunda vergi gelirlerinin azalmasına neden olabilir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, farklı vergi türlerinin yolsuzluklarla olan ilişkisini ortaya koymak ve hangi vergilerin yolsuzluk yapılmasına daha uygun olduğunu tespit etmektir. Çalışmada, yolsuzluklar ile vergi gelirleri arasındaki ilişki, 25 OECD üyesi ülkenin 1984-2007 yılları arasındaki verileri temel alınarak, sistem GMM yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. Yapılan bu analizde, yolsuzluklarla farklı vergi türleri arasında negatif ve istatistiksel açıdan anlamlı ilişkiler bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Yolsuzluk, Vergi Gelirleri, Dinamik Panel Veri

THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON TAX REVENUE: A DYNAMIC PANEL DATA ANALYSIS

Öz

Corruption, defined as the misuse of public power for private benefit, can lead to decrease tax revenues since it causes to tax evasion, improper tax exemptions or weak tax administration. The main objective of this study is to demonstrate the relationship between corruption and various types of taxes and to determine which taxes are more appropriate for corruption. In this study, the relationship between corruption and tax revenue is analyzed by system GMM method, using 25 OECD countries’ yearly data for the period 1984-2007. The results show that there is a negative and statistically significant relationship between corruption and different types of taxes

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Corruption, Tax Revenue, Dynamic Panel Data

Kaynakça

1. ADES, A., RAFAEL, D.T. (1997). The new economics of corruption: A survey and some new results. Political Studies, XLV, 496-515. ss.
2. AL-MARHUBI, F. A. (2000). Corruption and inflation. Economics Letters, 66, 199–202. ss.
3. ARELLANO, M., BOND, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277-297. ss.
4. ARELLANO, M., BOVER, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of Econometrics, 68, 29-51. ss.
5. ASHER, M.G. (2001). Design of tax systems and corruption. Conference on Fighting Corruption: Common Challenges and Shared Experiences, Singapore, Konrad Adenauer Stiftung and the Institute of International Affairs.
6. BAĞDİGEN, M., DÖKMEN, G. (2006). Yolsuzluklarla kamu harcamaları arasındaki ilişkinin ampirik bir analizi: Türkiye örneği. ZKÜ Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2 (4), 23-38. ss.
7. BAĞDİGEN, M., TUNCER, M. (2004). Yolsuzluğun kamu gelirleri üzerine etkisi: Belediye gelirleri üzerine ampirik bir çalışma. Vergi Dünyası, 272, 168-174. ss.
8. BALTAGI, H. B. (2005) Econometric analysis of panel data. Third Edition, England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

9. BEŞKAYA, A., BAĞDİGEN, M. (2008) The relationship between corruption and government revenues: A time series analysis of the Turkish case, 1980-2005. Yapı Kredi Economic Review, 19(1), 67-84. ss.
10. BLUNDELL, R., BOND, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115-143. ss.
11. BLUNDELL, R., BOND, S., WINDMEIJER, F. (2000). Estimation in dynamic panel data models: improving on the performance of the standard GMM estimator. B. BALTAGI (ed), Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels, advances in econometrics 15, JAI Press, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science,
12. CHOI, IN. (2001). Unit root test for panel data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272. ss.
13. DEL MONTE, A., PAPAGNI, E. (2001). Public expenditure, corruption, and economic growth: The case of Italy. European Journal of Economy, 17, 1-16. ss.
14. DÖKMEN, G. (2005). Yolsuzluk ve kamu harcamaları ilişkisi: Türkiye örneği. Basılmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Zonguldak Karaelmas Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.
15. FRIEDMAN, E., SIMON, J., KAUFMANN, D. (2000). Dodging the grabbing hand: The determinants of unofficial activity in 69 countries. Journal of Public Economics, 76, 459- 493. ss.
16. GHURA, D. (1998). Tax revenue in sub-saharan africa: Effects of economic policies and corruption. IMF Working Paper, WP/98/135, September.
17. GUPTA, S., DAVOODI, H., TERME, A. (1998). Does corruption affect income inequality and poverty? IMF Working Paper, WP/98/76.
18. GUPTA, S., DAVOODI, H., TIONGSON, E. (2000) Corruption and the provision of health care and education services. IMF Working Paper, WP/00/116, June.
19. HALL, R. JONES, C. (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114(1), 83-116. ss.
20. JUNG, H., KWON, H. U. (2007). An alternative system GMM estimation in dynamic panel models. Hi-Stat Discussion Paper Series, No.217, Hitotsubashi University Research Unit.
21. HSIAO, C. (2003). Analysis of panel data, Second Edition, New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. HWANG, J. (2002). A note on the relationship between corruption and government revenue. Journal of Economic Development, 27 (2), 161-178. ss.
23. IMAM, P.,JACOBS, D.F. (2007). Effect of corruption on tax revenues in the Middle East. IMF Working Paper, WP/07/270, November.
24. JOHNSON, S., KAUFMAN, D., LOBATON, P.Z. (1998). Regulatory discretion and the unofficial economy. American Economic Review, LXXXVIII, 387-92. ss.
25. KLITGARD, R. (1988). Controlling corruption, Berkeley: Universty of California Press.
26. LEITE, C., WEIDEMANN, J. (1999). Does mother nature corrupt? Naturel resources, corruption, and economic growth. IMF Working Paper, WP//99/85, July.
27. LEVIN, Andrew, LIN, C., CHU, C. S. (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108, 1-24. ss.
28. MAURO, P. (1995). Corruption and growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110 (3), 681- 712. ss.
29. MAURO, P. (1998). Corruption and the composition of government expenditure. Journal of Public Expenditure, 69, 263-279. ss.
30. MORGAN, L. (1998). Corruption: causes, consequences and policy ımplications: A literature review. The Asia Foundation Working Paper Series, No. 9.
31. ROODMAN, D. (2006). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to “Difference” and “System” GMM in Stata. Center for Global Development Working Paper, Number 103.
32. SHLEIFER, A., VISHY, R.W. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108 (3), 599-617. ss.
33. SOTO, M. (2007). System GMM estimation with a small number of individuals. [Erişim adresi]:https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/=pej2007&paper_id=70down load. cgi? db_name, [Erişim tarihi: 02.03.2010].
34. TANZI, V., Zee, H. (2000). Tax policy for margining markets: Developing countries. IMF Working Paper No. 35, Washington, DC.
35. TANZI, V. (1998). Corruption around the world: Causes, consequences, scope, and cures. IMF Working Paper, WP/98/63, May.
36. TANZI, V., DAVOODI, H. (1997). Corruption, public investment, and growth. IMF Working Paper, WP/97/139, October.
37. TANZI, V., DAVOODI, H. (2000). Corruption, growth, and public finances. IMF Working Paper, WP/00/182, November.
38. WEI, S.J. (2000). How taxing is corruption on international investors? The Review of Economics and Statistics, LXXXII (1), 1-11. ss.
39. WORLD BANK (1997). Helping countries control corruption: Causes, consequences, and reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.