Impact of Intraregional Tax Decentralization on a Region’s Tax Base
https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2021-2-8-33
Abstract
The article examines the impact of intraregional tax decentralization in Russia on the growth of the tax bases in regard to simplified taxation system, personal income tax, corporate property tax and corporate income tax. The main hypothesis is that tax decentralization to local budgets has a positive effect on the growth of the revenue base of the corresponding tax, and the more local authorities can influence taxpayers, the stronger this effect. The paper also tests the hypothesis that tax decentralization to the local level can have different effects in poor versus rich regions. Hypotheses are tested using the pooled panel data model, the between-estimator model, the fixed effects model (or the withinestimator model), and the hybrid model. Marginal effects are estimated in order to take into account the level of regional wealth. Based on the results of the calculations, it is concluded that there is a positive effect from decentralizing the simplified taxation system, personal income tax, corporate income tax and corporate property tax, but only in certain groups of regions. In particular, with respect to simplified taxation system and corporate property tax, this turned out to be true for the less well-off regions, and with respect to personal income tax—for the poorest. At the same time, the dynamics of decentralization rates (decentralization of additional percentage points of the rate) do not have a significant positive effect on the tax base. The article was written on the basis of the RANEPA state assignment research program.
About the Authors
A. N. DERYUGINRussian Federation
Aleksandr N. DERYUGIN
82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571
3–2, Nastas’inskiy per., Moscow, 127006
I. N. FILIPPOVA
Russian Federation
Irina N. FILIPPOVA
3–5, Gazetnyy per., Moscow, 125009
1–46, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119234
I. Yu. ARLASHKIN
Russian Federation
Igor Yu. ARLASHKIN
82, Vernadskogo pr., Moscow, 119571
3–2, Nastas’inskiy per., Moscow, 127006
References
1. Yushkov A. Byudzhetnaya detsentralizatsiya i regional’nyy ekonomicheskiy rost: teoriya, empirika, rossiyskiy opyt [Fiscal Decentralization and Regional Economic Growth: Theory, Empirical Studies, and Russian Experience]. Voprosy ekonomiki, 2016, no. 2, pp. 94-110.
2. Allison P. D. Fixed Effects Regression Models. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, 2009.
3. Amagoh F., Amin A. A. An Examination of the Impacts of Fiscal Decentralization on Economic Growth. International Journal of Business Administration, 2012, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 72-81.
4. Brueckner J. Fiscal Federalism and Economic Growth. CESifo Working Paper Series, no. 1601, 2005.
5. Burret H. T., Feld L., Schaltegger C. Fiscal Federalism and Economic Performance - New Evidence from Switzerland. CESifo Working Paper Series, no. 7250, 2018.
6. Freinkman L., Kholodilin K., Thiessen U. Incentive Effects of Fiscal Equalization: Has Russian Style Improved? DIW Berlin Discussion Papers, no. 912, 2009.
7. Giesselmann M., Schmidt-Catran A. W. Interactions in Fixed Effects Regression Models. Sociological Methods & Research, 2020, pp. 1-28.
8. Göcen S., Bayhanay A., Göktaş N. Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: Theory and Application. University Library of Munich, MPRA Paper, no. 84523, 2017.
9. Gong L., Zou H.-F. Public Expenditures, Taxes, Federal Transfers, and Endogenous Growth. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 2011, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 973-991.
10. Martinez-Vazquez J., McNab R. Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth. World Development, 2003, vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1597-1616.
11. Martinez-Vazquez J., McNab R. Fiscal Decentralization, Macrostability, and Growth. Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, 2006, vol. 179, no. 4, pp. 25-49.
12. Oates W. Fiscal Federalism. N. Y., NY, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972.
13. Rodríguez-Pose A., Ezcurra R. Is Fiscal Decentralization Harmful for Economic Growth? Evidence from the OECD Countries. Journal of Economic Geography, 2011, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 619-643.
14. Schunck R. Within and Between Estimates in Random-Effects Models: Advantages and Drawbacks of Correlated Random Effects and Hybrid Models. The Stata Journal, 2013, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 65-76.
15. Siliverstovs B., Thiessen U., Elliott C. Incentive Effects of Fiscal Federalism: Evidence for France. Cogent Economics & Finance, 2015, vol. 3, no. 1.
16. Tiebout Ch. A Pure Theory of Local Expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 1956, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 416-424.
17. Wooldridge J. M. Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data. Cambridge, MA, The MIT Press, 2010.
Review
For citations:
DERYUGIN A.N., FILIPPOVA I.N., ARLASHKIN I.Yu. Impact of Intraregional Tax Decentralization on a Region’s Tax Base. Economic Policy. 2021;16(2):8–33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2021-2-8-33