Tax buoyancy of the EU-28 countries – a comparative analysis
Abstract
Empirical evidence of tax buoyancy is presented as an assessment of the effectiveness of the tax system. The buoyancy analysis aims to track whether tax revenues follow economic growth and at what rate. The survey includes the EU-28 countries, with data divided into three panels: consumer, hybrid and income tax systems. The time period from 1999 to 2015 is covered. An autoregressive distributed lag model is used in order to establish that in the hybrid tax system the short-term and long-term tax buoyancy is the highest, meaning that this type of tax system is the most effective and marks the highest increase in economic growth.
Keywords
JEL Classification
References
Николов, Ч., Д. Стоилова, Е. Ставрова (2010). Публични финанси. Благоевград: Изд. „Бон“.
Якова, М. (2018). Анализ на данъчните системи в страните от ЕС. Икономическа мисъл, N 3.
Ahmed, Q., S. Mohammed (2010). Determinant of Tax Buoyancy: Empirical evidence from developing countries. European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol 13, N 3. Akar, S. and O. Sahin (2015). An analysis of tax buoyancy in Turkey. Journal of Economics, Finance and Accounting, Vol. 2, Issue1.
Bauman, C. C., D. Luna, & L. Peracchio (2005). Improving tax compliance of bilingual taxpayers with effective consumer communication. The IRS Research Bulletin, (1), р. 247-273.
Belinga, V., D. Benedek, R. de Mooij and J. Norregaard (2014). Tax Buoyancy in OECD Countries. IMF Working Paper, WP/14/110, June.
Dudine, P. and T. Jalles (2017). How buoyant is the tax system? New evidence from a large heterogeneous panel. IMF Working Paper/17/4.
Gill, J. (2000). A diagnostic framework for revenue administration. The Tax Policy and Administration Thematic Group. The World Bank Technical Paper 472.
Haughton, J. (1998). Estimating tax buoyancy, elasticity and stability. EAGER/ PSGE – Excise project, Methodological note 1.
McNulty, J. K. (1973).Tax policy and tuition credit legislation: federal income tax allowances for the personal costs of higher education. California Law Review 1(61), р. 1-80.
Naito, T. (2006). Growth, revenue, and welfare effects of tariff and tax reform: Win-win-win strategies. Journal of Public Economics 90 (6-7), р. 1263-1280.
Omondi, Ochieng V., Nelson H. W. Wawire, Emmanuel O. Manyasa and Gideon Kiguru Thuku (2014). Effects of Tax Reforms on Buoyancy and Elasticity of the Tax System in Kenya: 1963-2010. International Journal of Economics and Finance; Vol. 6, N 10, http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v6n10p97
Tanchev, S., M. Yakova, (2018). The choice of tax structure and economic growth. Икономика и управление, Vol. XV, N 2, p. 54-71.
Tanzi, V. (1978). Inflation, real tax revenue, and the case for inflationary finance: theory with an application to Argentina. IMF Staff Papers 25, р. 417-451
Tanzi, V. (1983). A tax system and policy objectives in developing countries: general principles and diagnostic tests. Unpublished IMF paper. Approach through the Internet.
Tanzi, V. (2005). Fiscal policy and fiscal rules in the European Union. Center for Social and Economic Research, Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), p. 301.
Timsina, N.(2010). Tax Elasticity and Buoyancy in Nepal: A Revisit. Economic Review,19.
Twerefon, D., A. Fumey, E. Assibey, E. Asmah (2005). Buoyancy and elasticity of tax: evidence from Ghana. Journal of Monetary and Economic Itegration, Vol. 10, N 2.
Upender, M. (2008). Degree of tax buoyancy in India: An empirical study. International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, Vol. 5-2.