OECD Ülkelerinde Vergi Takozu ve İşsizlik İlişkisi

Öz

Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, 36 OECD ülkesinde vergi takozunun toplam, kadın ve erkek işsizlik oranları üzerindeki etkisini 2000-2019 dönemi için Sistem GMM yöntemi ile araştırmaktır. Çalışmada bağımsız değişken olarak vergi takozunun yanı sıra iktisadi büyüme enflasyon ve ticari açıklık da kullanılmıştır. Sistem GMM yöntemi ile elde edilen bulgular şöyle sıralanabilir: i) Vergi takozundaki bir artış toplam, erkek ve kadın işsizlik oranlarını artırmaktadır. ii) Ekonomik büyüme, enflasyon ve ticari açıklıktaki bir artış, toplam, erkek ve kadın işsizlik oranlarını azaltmaktadır. iii) Vergi takozunun işsizliği arttırıcı etkisi kadınlara kıyasla erkeklerde daha fazladır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Vergi Takozu
• İşsizlik
• OECD
• Sistem GMM

Tax Wedge and Unemployment Nexus in OECD Countries

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the tax wedge on the total, female, and male unemployment rates in 36 OECD countries for the period 2000-2019 by using the System GMM method. Besides the tax wedge, economic growth, inflation, and trade openness were also used as independent variables in the study. The findings obtained with the System GMM method can be listed as follows: i) An increase in the tax wedge increases the total, male, and female unemployment rates. ii) An increase in economic growth, inflation, and trade openness reduce the total, male, and female unemployment rates. iii) Unemployment increasing effect of the tax wedge is higher for males compared to females.

Keywords

• Tax Wedge
• Unemployment
• OECD
• System GMM

Kaynakça

1. Akalin, G. ve Uzgören, E. (2019). Kurumsal Kalitenin Gelir Dağılımı Üzerindeki Etkisi: Gelişmiş Ve Gelişmekte Olan Ülkeler İçin Ampirik Bir Analiz. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 14(1), 201-224.
2. Altay, B., Tuğcu, C. T. ve Topçu, M. (2011). İşsizlik Ve Enflasyon Oranları Arasındaki Nedensellik İlişkisi: G8 Ülkeleri Örneği. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 1-26.
3. Anderson, T. W. ve Hsiao, C. (1981). Estimation of Dynamic Models with Error Components. Journal of the American statistical Association, 76(375), 598-606.
4. Anichebe, A. S. ve Aca, A. (2019). Effect of Tax Policy on Unemployment in Nigeria. Research Journal of Finance and Accounting, 10(12), 103-111.
5. Arellano, M. ve Bond, S. (1991). Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and An Application to Employment Equations. The Review Of Economic Studies, 58(2), 277-297.
6. Arellano, M. ve Bover, O. (1995). Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models. Journal of Econometrics, 68(1), 29-51.
7. Atoyan, M. R. V., & Rahman, J. (2017). Western Balkans: Increasing Women's Role in the Economy. International Monetary Fund.
8. Attinasi, M. G., Berardini, F., De Stefani, R., & Osterloh, S. (2016). The Effects of Labor Income Taxes on Labor Market Performance: An Empirical Analysis. Working Paper.

9. Baltagi, B. H. ve Pirotte, A. (2010). Panel Data Inference Under Spatial Dependence. Economic Modelling, 27(6), 1368-1381.
10. Bassanini, A. ve Duval, R. (2006). Employment Patterns in OECD Countries: Reassessing the Role of Policies and Institutions. OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 486. OECD Publishing (NJ1).
11. Baum, C. F. (2006). An Introduction to Modern Econometrics Using Stata: Stata press.
12. Bayrak, M., ve Kanca, O. C. (2013). Türkiye’de Phillips Eğrisi Üzerine Bir Uygulama. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 8(3), 97-116.
13. Behar, A. (2009). Tax Wedges, Unemployment Benefits and Labour Market Outcomes in the New EU Members. Czech Economic Review, 3(01), 69-92.
14. Blundell, R. ve Bond, S. (1998). Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models. Journal of Econometrics, 87(1), 115-143.
15. Blundell, R., Bond, S. ve Windmeijer, F. (2001). Estimation in Dynamic Panel Data Models: Improving on The Performance of the Standard GMM Estimator. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
16. Bond, S. (2002). Dynamic Panel Models: A Guide to Micro Data Methods and Practice (Working Paper No. CWPO9/02). London, UK: Institute for Fiscal Studies.
17. Choi, I. (2001). Unit Root Tests for Panel Data. Journal of International Money and Finance, 20(2), 249-272.
18. Daveri, F. Ve Tabellini, G. (2000). Unemployment, Growth and Taxation in Industrial Countries. Economic Policy, 15(30), 48-104.
19. Dolenc, P. Ve Laporšek, S. (2010). Tax Wedge on Labour And Its Effect on Employment Growth in the European Union. Prague Economic Papers, 4(2010), 344-358.
20. Dünya Bankası (2020), Dünya Gelişme Göstergeleri (Word Development Indicators) Veri Tabanı. http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development-indicators. (Erişim: 15.05.2020)
21. Ederveen, S. ve Thissen, L. (2004). Can Labour Market Institutions Explain Unemployment Rates in New EU Member States?. European Network of Economic Policy Research Institutes (No. 27, p. 47). Working Paper.
22. Góra, M., Radziwill, A., Sowa, A. ve Walewski, M. (2006). Tax Wedge and Skills: Case of Poland in International Perspective. CASE Network Reports, (64).
23. Gunnarsson, Å. ve Spangenberg, U. (2019). Gender Equality and Taxation Policies in the EU. Intereconomics, 54(3), 141-146.
24. Han, C. Ve Phillips, P. C. (2010). GMM Estimation for Dynamic Panels with Fixed Effects and Strong Instruments at Unity. Econometric theory, 119-151.
25. Hodge, S. A. ve Hickman, B. (2018). The Importance of the Tax Wedge on Labor in Evaluating Tax Systems. https://files.taxfoundation.org/20180913095728/Global-Primer_tax_wedge.pdf. (Erişim: 04.01.2020).
26. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H. ve Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53-74.
27. İlalan, İ. (2017). OECD Ülkelerinde Kadın İşgücüne Katılımın Ekonomik Kalkınma Ve Vergi Yükü Açısından Analizi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
28. Kutbay, H., Gerede, C. ve Aksoy, E. (2018). Asgari Ücret Üzerindeki Vergi Takozunun İşsizliğe Etkisi. Vergi Raporu, Mayıs, 224, 96-114.
29. Lee, G. H. ve Azali, M. (2010). The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria in East Asia. Economic Modelling, 27(1), 165-170.
30. Levin, A., Lin, C.-F. Ve Chu, C.-S. J. (2002). Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-Sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1-24.
31. Maddala, G. S. ve Wu, S. (1999). A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and A New Simple Test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61(S1), 631-652.
32. Nickell, S. ve Layard, R. (1999). Labor Market Institutions and Economic Performance. Handbook of Labor economics, 3, 3029-3084.
33. OECD (2006), Society at a Glance: OECD Social Indicators. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/society-at-a-glance-2006_soc_glance-2006-en. (Erişim: 04.09.2020).
34. OECD (2020), OECD veri tabanı, https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-wedge.htm. (Erişim: 10.05.2020).
35. Pohwani, P., Khoso, J. R. ve Kumar, V. (2019). Impact of Taxes on Unemployment of Pakistan. Journal of Public Value and Administrative Insights, 2(4), 14-16.
36. Roodman, D. (2009). How to do Xtabond2: An Introduction to Difference and System GMM in Stata. The Stata journal, 9(1), 86-136.
37. Šeparović, A. (2009). The Influence of the Tax Wedge on Unemployment in OECD Countries in Comparison with Croatia. Financial Theory and Practice, 33(4), 449-463.
38. Soto, M. (2009). System GMM Estimation with a Small Sample. UFAE and IAE Working Papers,780.09.
39. Tatoğlu, F. Y. (2013). İleri Panel Veri Analizi-Stata Uygulamalı, İstanbul: Beta Basım Yayın Dağıtım AŞ.
40. Trpeski, P. ve Tashevska, B. (2012). Labour Tax Wedge in the Republic of Macedonia-Trends and International Comparison. Annales Universitatis Apulensis Series Oeconomica.
41. Thomas, A. (1998), The Effects of Tax Wedges on Hours Worked and Unemployment in Sweden, IMF Working Paper, October, WP/98/152.
42. Todorović, J. Đ., Đorđević, M. ve Ristić, M. (2018). The Tax Wedge As The Determınant Of Unemployment: A Comparatıve Overvıew Of Oecd Countrıes And Serbıa. 49TH International Scientific Conference Quantıtatıve And Qualıtatıve Analysıs In Economıcs.
43. Yılancı, V., Yavuz, H. ve İnce, T. (2019). Seçilmiş OECD Ülkelerinde Vergi Takozu-İşsizlik İlişkisi. Maliye Dergisi, Ocak-Haziran; 176:286-297.