The Asymmetric Effects of Tax Revenues on Government Expenditures in Iran

Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

Department of Economics, SemnanUniversity,Semnan-Iran

Abstract

The tax-expenditure hypothesis posed by Milton Friedman emphasizes a positive causal relationship between government tax revenues and government expenditures. If citizens do not have a correct perception of the real tax burden and under-estimate the price of public goods and services, there is a negative causal relationship between tax revenues and government expenditures, which indicates existence of fiscal illusion. Using quarterly data. for the period 2001-2012, this paper investigates fiscal illusion in Iran. In order to achieve this goal, two symmetric and asymmetric error correction models, are estimated. According to results from Wald test in symmetric model, there is a negative causal relationship between real tax revenues, and real government expenditures. This result hence, confirms the presence of fiscal illusion in Iranian economy. Moreover, the results obtained from the asymmetric model show that there is merely fiscal illusion in the case of tax revenues reduction and there is no Granger causal relationship for the positive changes of tax revenues. Therefore, by a decline in tax revenues, government expenditures increase after a year due to fiscal illusion. Thus, it seems that in the state of government's budget deficit, raising the taxes is an efficient instrument.

Keywords


Baghestani, H., &McNown, R. (1994). Do revenues or expenditures respond to budgetary disequilibria? Southern Economic Journal, 60 (2), 311-22.

Bohn, H. (1991). Budget balance through revenue or spending adjustments. Journal of Monetary Economics, 27(3), 333-59.

Buchanan, J., & Wagner, R. E. (1977). Democracy in deficit: The political legacy of Lord Keynes. New York: Academic Press.

Carroll, R. J., &Yinger, J. (1994). Is the property tax a benefit tax? The case of rental housing. National Tax Journal, 47, 295-316.

Chang, T., Liu, W. R., & Caudill, S. B. (2002). Tax-and-spend, spend-and-tax, or fiscal synchronization. Applied Economics, 34(12), 1553-61.

Cullis, J. G., & Jones, P. R. (1987). Fiscal illusion and excessive budgets: Some indirect evidence. Public Finance Quarterly, 15, 219-28.

Dalamagas, B. A. (1992). How rival are the Ricardian equivalence proposition and the fiscal Policy potency view? Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 39, 457-76.

Dalamagas, B. A. (1993). Fiscal illusion and the level of indebtedness: An international comparison. South African Journal of Economics, 61, 45-58.

Darrat, A. (1998). Tax and spend, or spend and tax? An inquiry into the Turkish budgetary process. Southern Economic Journal, 64(4), 940-56.

Darrat, A. (2002). Budget balance through spending cuts or tax adjustments. Contemporary Economic Policy, 20(3), 221-33.

Dollery, B. E., Worthington, A. C. (1996). The empirical analysis of fiscal illusion. Journal of Economic Surveys, 10, 261-297.

Dollery, B. E., & Worthington, A. C. (1999a). Tax complexity and fiscal illusion: An empirical evaluation of the Heyndels and Smolders approach. Public Finance/Finances Publiques, 51, 522-33.

Dollery, B. E., & Worthington, A. C. (1999b). Fiscal illusion at the local level: An empirical test using Australian municipal data. The Economic Record, 75, 37-48.

Engle, R. F., & Granger, W. J. (1987). Cointegration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica, 55, 251-276.

Engle, R. F., Granger, C.W. J., Hylleberg, S., & Lee, H. S. (1993). Seasonal cointegration: The Japanese consumption function. Journal of Econometrics, 55, 275-303.

Engle, R. F., &Yoo, B. S. (1987). Forecasting and testing in cointegrated systems. Journal of Econometrics, 35, 143-159.

Epple, D., &Schipper, K. (1981). Municipal pension funding: A theory and some evidence. Public Choice, 37, 141-72.

Ewing, B. T., Payne, J. E., Thompson, M. A., & Al-Zoubi, O. M. (2006). Government expenditures and revenues: Evidence from asymmetric modeling. Southern Economic Journal, 73(1), 190-200.

Fasiani, M. (1941). Principii di scienzafellefinanze. Vol. 1, Torino, Italy: GiappichelliEditore.

Friedman, M. (1978). The limitations of tax limitation. Policy Review (summer), 7-14.

Garcia, S., &Henin, P. Y. (1999). Balancing budget through tax increases or expenditure cuts: Is It Neutral? Economic Modeling, 16(4), 591-612.

Gemmell, N., Morrissey, O., & Pinar, A. (2002). Fiscal illusion and political accountability: Theory and evidence from two local tax regimes in Britain. Public Choice, 110, 199-224.

Greene, K. V., & Hawley, B. (1991). Personal income taxes, elasticities and fiscal illusion. Public choice, 72, 101-109.

Heyndels, B. & Smolders, C. (1994). Fiscal illusion at the local level: Empirical evidence from the Flemish municipalities. Public Choice, 80, 325-38.

Heyndels, B. & Smolders, C. (1995). Tax complexity and fiscal illusion. Public Choice, 85, 127-41.

Hines, J. R., &Thaler, R. H. (1995). Anomalies: The flypaper effect. TheJournal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 217-226.

Hylleberg, S., Engle, R. F., Granger, C.W. J., &Yoo, B. S. (1990). Seasonal integration and cointegration. Journal of Econometrics, 44, 215-238.

Inman, R, P. (2008). The flypaper effect. NBER Working Paper 14579 (December). Cambridge, MA.

KaregarHajeAbadi, M. H. (2003). Analyzing the Relationship between Tax Revenues and Government Expenditures in Iran. Master’s Thesis, Imam Sadegh University.

Koren, S., &Stiassny, A. (1998). Tax and spend or spend and tax? An international study. Journal of Policy Modeling, 20(2), 163-191.

Maddah, M., Jeyhoontabar, F., &Rezapour, Z. (2014a). Fiscal illusion and the demand for government expenditures on the Iranian economy. Journal of Economic Research, 49, 729-750.

Maddah, M., Jeyhoontabar, F., &Rezapour, Z. (2014b). Empirical analysis of dynamic of government xpenditures in Iranian economy using framwork on Standard Median Voter Model and in the presence of fiscal illusion. Quarterly Journal of Economic Research and Policies, 22(72), 197-216.

Mounts, W., & Sowell, C. (1997). Taxing, Spending, and the Budget Process: The Role of Budget Regime in the Intertemporal Budget Constraint. Swiss Journal of Economics and Statistics, 133(3), 421–439.

Negin, V. (2002). Investigation on the causal relation between government expenditures and tax in Iran. Master’s Thesis, Shiraz University.

Niskanen, W. A. (1978). Deficits, government spending, and inflation: What is the evidence? Journal of Monetary Economics, 4(3), 591–602.

Niskanen, W. A. (2002). Comments. In J. A. Frankel and P. R. Orszag (eds.) American economic policies in the 1990s. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Niskanen, W. A. (2006). Limiting government: The failure of Starve the Beast. Cato Journal, 26(3), 553-58.

Oates, W, E. (1969). The effects of property taxes and local public spending on property values: An empirical study of tax capitalization and the Tiebout Hypothesis. Journal of Political Economy, 77, 957-71.

Pinar, A. (1998). A model of government spendings in Turkey. YapıKredi Economic Review, 9(2), 55-71.

Puviani, A. (1903). Teoriadell’illusionefinanziaria. Milan: Remo Sandon.

Ross, K. L., & Payne, J. E. (1998). A reexamination of budgetary disequilibria. Public Finance Review, 26(1), 67-79.

Samadi, A. H., &Zare' Haghighi, N. (2013). Further examination of the relationship between government's revenue and expenditures in Iran: Symmetrical or symmetrical? Economic Bulletin Quarterly (Islamic- Iranian approach), 12(47), 123-152.

Wagner, R. E. (1976). Revenue structure, fiscal illusion, and budgetary choice. Public Choice, 25 (Spring), 30–61.

Worthington, A.C. (1994). The Nature and Extent of Fiscal Illusion in Australia. M. Ec. Dissertation, University of New England.

Wycoff, P. (1991). The elusive flypaper effect. Journal of Urban Economics, 30, 310–28.

Young, A. T. (2009). Tax-spend or fiscal illusion? Cato Journal, 29(3), 469-485.