Vergi Yapısının Ekonomik Büyüme Üzerindeki Etkisi: OECD Ülkelerinden Ampirik Bir Kanıt

Yıl 2017, , 183 - 206, 01.07.2017

Mehmet Hanefi Topal

https://doi.org/10.25272/j.2147-7035.2017.5.3.13

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, vergi yapısının uzun dönem ekonomik büyüme üzerindeki etkisini, 22 OECD ülkesinin 1971-2014 dönemi için araştırmaktır. Konu üzerine daha önce yapılmış çok sayıda çalışma bulunmaktadır. Bununla beraber, ampirik metodoloji farklılıklarına bağlı olarak elde edilen sonuçlar da değişebilmektedir. Ayrıca daha önce yapılmış az sayıda çalışma, panelde yatay kesit bağımlılığını dikkate almıştır. Bu makalede, yatay kesit bağımlılığını dikkate alan panel nedensellik ve dinamik panel tahmin yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Ampirik bulgular, uzun dönem ekonomik büyüme performansı üzerinde tüketim vergilerinin dolaylı vergilerin pozitif, vergi yükü ile gelir ve servet vergilerinin dolaysız vergilerin ise negatif etkisinin olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bu güçlü tahmin sonuçları, uzun dönem ekonomik büyüme performansı için tüketim vergilerinin bozucu olmayan vergiler olduğu iddiasını desteklerken servet vergilerinin büyüme dostu vergiler olduğu iddiasına ise ampirik kanıt sunamamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Vergi Yapısı, Uzun Dönem Ekonomik Büyüme, Maliye Politikası, OECD, Yatay Kesit Bağımlılığı

The Impact of Tax Structure on Economic Growth: An Empirical Evidence from OECD Countries

Öz

The aim of this paper is to investigate the impact of tax structure on long-run economic growth for the period 1971 - 2014 of twenty-two OECD countries. There is a large number of studies on this issue. Besides, the acquired results vary depending on differences of empirical methodology. Also, a limited number of previous studies take in consideration the cross-sectional dependence in the panel. In this article panel causality and dynamic panel estimation methods that show regard to the cross-sectional dependence are used. The empirical findings indicate that consumption indirect taxes have a positive impact and that tax levels with income and property direct taxes have a negative impact on long-run economic growth. These robust estimation results, on the one hand, support the claim that consumption taxes are nondistortionary taxes for long-run economic growth, and on the other hand, can not provide any empirical evidence about the claim that property taxes are growth-friendly taxes.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Tax Structure, Long-run Economic Growth, Fiscal Policy, OECD, Cross-sectional Dependence

Kaynakça

• Acosta-Ormaechea, Santiago and Jiae Yoo, (2012), Tax Composition and Growth: A Broad Cross- Country Perspective, IMF Working Paper, No: 12/257 (October).
• Ahmad, Shahzad, Maqbool H. Sial and Nisar Ahmad (2016), “Taxes and Economic Growth: an Empirical Analysis of Pakistan”, European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 5(2), pp. 16-29.
• Akram, Tanweer and Akram Das (2017), The Dynamics of Government Bond Yields in the Eurozone, Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, Working Paper, No: 889.
• Andrews, Donald W. K. (2005), “Cross-Section Regression with Common Shocks”, Econometrica, 73(5), pp. 1551–1585.
• Arachi, G., Valeria Bucci, and Alessandra Casarico (2015), “Tax Structure and Macroeconomic Performance”, International Tax and Public Finance, 22(4), pp. 635-662.
• Arnold, Jens M. (2008), Do Tax Structures Affect Aggregate Economic Growth? Emprical Evidence from A Panel of OECD Countries, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Working Paper, No: 2008(51),October.
• Arnold, Jens M., Bert Brys, Christopher Heady, Åsa Johansson, Cyrille Schwellnus and Laura Vartia (2011), “Tax Policy for Economic Recovery and Growth”, The Economic Journal, 121(550), pp. 59-80.
• Ataç, Beyhan (2013), Maliye Politikası: Gelişimi, Amaçları, Araçları ve Uygulama Sorunları, 10. Baskı, Turhan Kitabevi, Ankara.
• Barro, Robert J. (1990), “Government Spending in a Simple Model of Endogenous Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 98 (5), pp. 103–125.
• Barro, Robert J. (1991), “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries”, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106(2), pp. 407-443.
• Benos, Nikos (2009). Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth: Empirical Evidence from EU Countries, http://www2.aueb.gr/conferences/Crete2009/papers_recent/Benos.pdf, Erişim: 14.02.2017.
• Bleaney, Michael, Norman Gemmell and Richard Kneller (2001), “Testing the Endogenous Growth Model: Public Expenditure, Taxation, and Growth Over The Long Run”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 34(1), pp. 36-57.
• Bozoklu, Şeref ve Veli Yılancı (2013), “Finansal Gelişme ve İktisadi Büyüme Arasındaki Nedensellik Ilişkisi: Gelişmekte Olan Ekonomiler İçin Analiz”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), ss. 161-187.
• Branson, Johannah and C. Knox Lovell (2001), “A Growth Maximising Tax Structure for New Zealand”, International Tax and Public Finance, 8(2), pp. 129-146.
• Breusch, T. S. and A. R. Pagan (1980), “The Lagrange Multiplier Test and Its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics.” The Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), pp. 239-253.
• Bujang, Imbarine, Taufik Abd Hakim and Ismail Ahmad (2013), “Tax Structure and Economic Indicators in Developing and High-Income OECD Countries: Panel Cointegration Analysis”, Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 7, pp. 164-173.
• Canavire-Bacarreza, Gustavo, Jorge Martinez-Vazquez and Violeta Vulovic (2013), Taxation and Economic Growth in Latin America. Inter-American Development Bank, Working Paper, No: 431.
• Çevik, Savaş and Chang-Gyu Oh (2013), “Tax Structure and Economic Growth: A Panel Data from OECD Countries”, Regional Industry Review, 36(1), pp. 31-54.
• Çevik, Savaş (2015), “Domestic Saving and Tax Structure: Evidence from Turkey”, Sosyoekonomi, 2015(1), January-March, pp. 87-112.
• Di Sanzo, Silvestro, Mariano Bella and Giovanni Graziano (2017), “Tax Structure and Economic Growth: A Panel Cointegrated VAR Analysis”, Italian Economic Journal, Vol. 3 (2017), pp. 1- 15.
• Doğaner-Gönel, Feride (2013), Kalkınma Ekonomisi, 2. Baskı, Eflatun Yayınları, Ankara.
• Dumitrescu, Elena-Ivona and Christopher Hurlin (2012), “Testing for Granger Non-causality in Heterogeneous Panels”, Economic Modelling, 29(4), pp.1450-1460.
• Durkaya, Mehmet ve Servet Ceylan (2006), “Vergi Gelirleri ve Ekonomik Büyüme”, Maliye Dergisi, Sayı 150 (Ocak-Haziran), ss. 79-89.
• Easterly, William and Sergio Rebelo (1993), “Fiscal Policy and Economic Growth: An Empirical Investigation”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 32(3), pp. 417-458.
• Fedeli, Silvia and Francesco Forte (2012), “Public Debt and Unemployment Growth: The Need for Fiscal and Monetary Rules. Evidence from OECD Countries (1981-2009)”, Economia Politica, 29(3), pp. 409-438.
• Fölster, Stefan and Magnus Henrekson (2001), “Growth Effects of Government Expenditure and Taxation in Rich Countries”, European Economic Review, 45(8), pp. 1501-1520.
• Gemmell, Norman, Richard Kneller and Ismael Sanz (2007). Tax Composition and Economic Growth in OECD Countries. Unpublished, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
• Gemmell, Norman, Richard Kneller and Ismael Sanz (2014), “The Growth Effects of Tax Rates in the OECD”, Canadian Journal of Economics, 47(4), pp. 1217-1255.
• Gober, Jerald R. and Jane O. Burns (1997), “The Relationship Between Tax Structures and Economic Indicators”, Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 6(1), pp. 1-24.
• Goulder, Lawrence H. (1995), “Environmental Taxation and The Double Dividend: A Reader's Guide”, International Tax and Public Finance, 2(2), pp. 157-183.
• Hall, Robert E. (1968), “Consumption Taxes Versus Income Taxes: Implications For Economic Growth”, In Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Taxation under the Auspices of the National Tax Association Vol. 61 (January), pp. 125-145, National Tax Association, California.
• Harberger, Arnold (1964), “Taxation, Resource Allocation, and Welfare”, In The Role of Direct and Indirect Taxes inThe Federal Reserve System (pp. 25-80), Princeton University Press.
• Helhel, Yeşim and Yakup Demir (2012), “The Relationship Between Tax Revenue and Economic Growth in Turkey: The Period of 1975-2011”, In 3rd International Symposium on Sustainable Development, 31 May-1 June, Sarajevo-Bosnia and Herzegovina.
• Johansson, Åsa, Christopher Heady, Jens Arnold, Bert Brys and Laura Vartia (2008), Taxation and Economic Growth, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Working Paper, No: 620, July.
• Jones, Larry, E., Rodolfo E. Manuelli and Peter E. Rossi (1993), “Optimal Taxation in Models of Endogenous Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 101(3), pp. 485–517.
• Karras, Georgios (1999), “Taxes and Growth: Testing the Neoclassical and Endogenous Growth Models”, Contemporary Economic Policy, 17(2), pp. 177-188.
• Keho, Yaya (2011), “Tax Structure and Economic Growth in Cote d’Ivoire: Are Some Taxes Better Than Others?”, Asian Economic and Financial Review, 1(4), pp. 226-235.
• King, Robert G., & Sergio Rebelo (1990), “Public Policy and Economic Growth: Developing Neoclassical Implications”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2), pp.126-150.
• Kneller, Richard, Michael F. Bleaney and Norman Gemmell (1999), “Fiscal Policy and Growth: Evidence From OECD Countries”, Journal of Public Economics, 74(2), pp. 171-190.
• Koester, Reinhard B. and Roger C. Kormendi (1989), “Taxation, Aggregate Activity and Economic Growth: Cross-Country Evidence on Some Supply-Side Hypotheses, Economic Inquiry, 27(3), pp. 367-386.
• Krusell, Per, Vincenzo Quadrini and Jose Victor Rios-Rull (1996), “Are Consumption Taxes Really Better Than Income Taxes?”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 37(3), pp. 475-503.
• Lee, Young and Roger H. Gordon (2005), “Tax Structure and Economic Growth”, Journal of Public Economics, 89(5), pp. 1027-1043.
• Lucas, Robert E. (1990), “Supply-Side Economics: An Analytical Review”, Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 42, pp. 293-316.
• Mamatzakis, E. C. (2005), “The Dynamic Responses of Growth To Tax Structure for Greece”, Applied Economics Letters, 12(3), pp. 177-180.
• Mangır, Fatih, ve H. Murat Ertuğrul (2012), “Vergi Yükü ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: 1988-2011 Türkiye Örneği”, Maliye Dergisi, Sayı 162 (Ocak-Haziran), ss. 256-265.
• Marsden, Keith (1983), Links between Taxes and Economic Growth: Some Empirical Evidence on Some Supply Side Hypothesis, World Bank Staff Working Papers, No: 605, Washington D.C., USA.
• Martinez-Vazquez, Jorge, Violeta Vulovic and Yongzheng Liu (2011), “Direct Versus Indirect Taxation: Trends, Theory and Economic Significance”, The Elgar Guide to Tax Systems, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 37-92.
• Mendoza, Enrique G., Gian M. Milesi-Ferretti and Patrick Asea (1997), “On the Ineffectiveness of Tax Policy in Altering Long-Run Growth: Harberger's Superneutrality Conjecture”, Journal of Public Economics, 66(1), pp. 99-126.
• Myles, Gareth D. (2009), Economic Growth and Role of Taxation-Theory, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Economics Department, Working Paper, No: 713.
• Pehlivan, Osman (2015), Kamu Maliyesi, Celepler Matbaacılık, Trabzon.
• Pesaran, M. Hashem, Yongcheol Shin and Ron P. Smith (1999), “Pooled Mean Group Estimation of Dynamic Heterogeneous Panels”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(446), pp. 621-634.
• Pesaran, M. Hashem (2004), General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels, Cambridge Working Papers in Economics No. 0435. Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
• Pesaran, M. Hashem (2006). “Estimation and Inference in Large Heterogeneous Panels with a Multifactor Error Structure”, Econometrica, 74(4), pp. 967–1012.
• Pesaran, M. Hashem, Aman Ullah Takashi and Yamagata (2008), “A Bias-Adjusted LM Test of Error Cross-Section Independence” , The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), pp. 105-127.
• Pesaran, M. Hashem and Takashi Yamagata (2008), “Testing Slope Homogeneity in Large Panels.” Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), pp. 50-93.
• Phillips, Peter C. B., and Donggyu Sul (2003), “Dynamic Panel Estimation and Homogeneity Testing Under Cross Section Dependence”, Econometrics Journal, 6(1), pp. 217–259.
• Pınar, Abuzer (2012), Maliye Politikası: Teori ve Uygulama, 5. Baskı, Turhan Kitabevi, Ankara.
• Rebelo, Sergio (1991), “Long-Run Policy Analysis and Long-Run Growth”, Journal of Political Economy, 99(3), pp. 500-521.
• Romer, Paul M. (1990), “Endogenous Technological Change”, Journal of Political Economy, 98(5, Part 2), pp. 71-102.
• Skinner, Jonathan (1988), Taxation and Output Growth in Africa, International Economics Department, World Bank, Working Paper Series, No: 73 (August).
• Smith, L. Vanessa, Stephen Leybourne, Tae-Hwan Kim and Paul Newbold (2004), “More Powerful Panel Data Unit Root Tests With an Application to Mean Reversion in Real Exchange Rates”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19(2), pp. 147-170.
• Taha, Roshaiza, Loganathan Nanthakumar and Sisira R. Colombage (2011), “The Effect of Economic Growth on Taxation Revenue: The Case of a Newly Industrialized Country”, International Review of Business Research Papers, 7(1), pp. 319-329.
• Terzi, Harun ve Süleyman Yurtkuran, (2016), “Türkiye’de Dolaylı/Dolaysız Vergi Gelirleri ve GSYH İlişkisi”, Maliye Dergisi, Sayı 171 (Temmuz-Aralık), ss. 19-33.
• Topal, M. Hanefi (2017), “Çifte Kazanç Hipotezinin OECD Ekonomileri İçin Testi: Panel Eşbütünleşme ve Nedensellik Analizi”, The Journal of International Scientific Researches, 2(4), ss. 1-20.
• Ünlükaplan, İlter ve İbrahim Arısoy (2011), “Vergi Yükü ve Yapısı İle İktisadi Büyüme Arasındaki Dinamik Etkileşimler Üzerine Uygulamalı Bir Analiz”, ODTÜ İktisadi Gelişme Dergisi, 38(1), ss. 71-100.
• Westerlund, Joakim (2008), “Panel Cointegration Tests of The Fisher Effect”, Journal of Applied Econometrics
• 23(2), pp. 193-233.
• Wet, A. H., N. J. Schoeman and S. F. Koch (2005), “The South African Tax Mix and Economic Growth”, South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 8(2), pp. 201-210.
• Widmalm, Frida (2001), “Tax Structure and Growth: Are Some Taxes Better Than Others?”, Public Choice, 107(3-4), pp. 199-219.
• Xing, Jing (2011), Does Tax Structure Affect Economic Growth? Empirical Evidence From OECD Countries, Centre for Business Taxation, Oxford University, Working Paper, No: 11/20 (October).
• Xing, Jing (2012), “Tax Structure and Growth: How Robust is The Empirical Evidence?”, Economics Letters, 117(1), pp. 379-382.
• Yardımcıoğlu, Fatih (2012), “OECD Ülkelerinde Sağlık ve Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisinin Ekonometrik Bir İncelemesi”, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 13(2), ss. 27-47.
• Yavuz, Hakan ve Furkan Beşel (2015), “Türkiye’de Uluslararası Ticaret ve Muamelelerden Alınan Vergi Gelirleri-Ekonomik Büyüme İlişkisi: Frekans Nedensellik Analizi”, Siyaset, Ekonomi ve Yönetim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 3(1), ss. 45-55.
• Yıldırım, Jülide ve Selami Sezgin (2002), “Defence, Education, and Health Expenditure in Turkey, 1924-96”, Journal of Peace Research, 39(5), pp. 569-580. Ekler
• Ek-1: Analize Dâhil Edilen OECD Ülkeleri Avustralya Avusturya Belçika Kanada Danimarka Finlandiya Fransa Almanya Norveç Portekiz İspanya İsveç Türkiye İngiltere ABD
• Ek-2: OECD Vergi Sınıflandırması
• Toplam Vergi Gelirleri = (1000+2000+3000+4000+5000+6000)
• GELİR VERGİLERİ
• Bireylerin gelir, kar payı ve sermaye kazançları üzerindeki vergiler
• Kurumların gelir, kar payı ve sermaye kazançları üzerindeki vergiler 1300 Diğer
• Sosyal güvenlik katkıları (SSC) 2100 Çalışan SSC 2200 İşveren SSC
• Serbest çalışan ve istihdam edilmeyen SSC 2400 Diğer SSC
• Ücret ve işgücü kazançları üzerindeki vergiler
• SERVET VERGİLERİ
• Taşınmaz mallar üzerindeki sürekli vergiler
• Net servet üzerindeki süreklli vergiler
• Veraset ve intikal vergisi
• Mali işlemler ve sermaye işlemleri vergisi
• Sürekli olmayan diğer servet vergileri
• Diğer servet vergileri
• TÜKETİM VERGİLERİ
• Üretim, satış ve transferler üzerindeki vergiler
• Mal ve hizmetler üzerindeki genel vergiler (KDV, Satış vs.)
• Özel mal ve hizmetler üzerindeki vergiler (Dış ticaret, gümrük vs.)
• 5110 ve 5120’e girmeyen diğer tüketim vergiler
• Mal kullanımı ve performans faaliyetleri üzerindeki vergiler
• 5100 ve 5200’e girmeyen diğer vergiler
• 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 ve 5000 dışındaki diğer vergiler