BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 30 Sayı: 1, 173 - 192, 30.06.2012

Rahmi Yamak Zehra Abdioğlu

Öz

Sürekli bütçe açığı sorunu yaşayan ülkeler açısından kamu gelirleri ile kamu harcamaları arasındaki ilişki önem arz etmektedir. Bu çalışmada Türkiye için 1995–2003 döneminde kamu geliri ile kamu harcamaları arasındaki eşbütünleşme ve nedensellik ilişkileri hem toplam hem de alt kalemler itibariyle incelenmiştir. Elde edilen sonuçlar toplam harcama ile toplam gelir arasında, alt kalemler itibariyle ise vergi dışı normal gelir ile transfer harcamaları arasında uzun dönem ilişki olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Granger nedensellik testi harcama-vergi hipotezinin hem toplam hem de dört alt kalem itibariyle geçerli olduğunu göstermiştir.

 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Harcama-vergi hipotezi vergi-harcama hipotezi mali senkronizasyon hipotezi

Kaynakça

  • Akçoraoğlu, A. (1999) “Kamu Harcamaları, Kamu Gelirleri ve Keynesçi Politikalar: Bir Nedensellik Analizi”, Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 2, 51-65.
  • Anderson, W., M.S. Wallace and J.T. Warner (1986) “Government Spending and Taxation: What Causes What?”, Southern Economic Association, 52(3), 630-639.
  • Aslan, M. ve M. Taşdemir (2009) “Is Fiscal Synchronization Hypothesis Relevant for Turkey? Evidence from Cointegration and Causality Tests with Endogenous Structural Breaks”, Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, 12, 14-25.
  • Barro, R.J. (1974) “Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?”, Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1095-1117.
  • Buchanan, J. and R. Wagner (1977) Democracy in Deficit, New York: Academic Press.
  • Chen, S. (2008) “Untangling the Web of Causalities among Four Disaggregate Government Expenditures, Government Revenue and Output in Taiwan”, Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 6(1), 99-107.
  • Cheng, B.S. (1999) “Causality Between Taxes and Expenditures: Evidence from Latin American Countries”, Journal of Economics and Finance, 23(2), 184-192.
  • Çavuşoğlu, A.T. (2008) “Türkiye’de Kamu Gelirleri ile Kamu Harcamaları Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Ekonometrik Bir Analiz”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20, 143-160.
  • Darrat, A.F. (1998) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax? An Inquiry into the Turkish Budgetary Process”, Southern Economic Journal, 64(4), 940-956.
  • Dickey, D. and W. Fuller (1979) “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  • Engle, R.F. and C.W.J. Granger (1987) “Co-integration and Error Correction: Represantation, Estimation, and Testing”, Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276.
  • Friedman, M. (1978) “The Limitations of Tax Limitation”, Policy Review, 7-14.
  • Furstenberg, G.M., R.J. Green and J. Jeong (1986) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 179-188.
  • Gounder, N., P.K. Narayan. and A. Prasad (2007) “An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Government Revenue and Expenditure: The Case of the Fiji Islands”, International Journal of Social Economics”, 34(3), 147-158.
  • Granger, C.W.J. (1988) “Aggregation of Time Series Variables: A Survey”, Institute for Empirical Macroeconomics Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Discussion Paper, 1, 1-25.
  • Granger, C.W.J. and P.L. Siklos (1995) “Systematic Sampling, Temporal Aggregation, Seasonal Adjustment, and Cointegration Theory and Evidence”, Journal of Econometrics, 66, 357-369.
  • Li, X. (2001) “Government Revenue, Government Expenditure, and Temporal Causality: Evidence from China”, Applied Economics, 33, 485-497.
  • Katrakilidis, C.P. (1997) “Spending and Revenues in Greece: New Evidence from Error Correction Modelling”, Applied Economics, 4, 387-391.
  • MacKinnon, J.G. (1991) “Critical Values for Cointegration Tests”, in R. F. Engle and C. W.J. Granger (eds.), Long-Run Economic Relationships-Readings in Cointegration, Oxford University Press., 267-276.
  • Mahvadi, S. and J. Westerlund (2008) “The Tax Spending Nexus: Evidence from a Panel of US State-Local Governments”, The University of Texas at San Antonio College of Business Working Paper Series, 0045, 1-28.
  • Manage, N. and M.L. Marlow (1986) “The Causal Relation between Federal Expenditures and Receipts”, Southern Economic Journal, 52(3), 617-629.
  • Meltzer, A.H. and S.F. Richard (1981) “A Rational Theory of the Size of Government”, Journal of Political Economy, 89(5), 914-927.
  • Miller, S.M. and F.S. Russek (1990) “Co-integration and Error-Correction Models: The Temporal Causality between Government Taxes and Spending”, Southern Economic Journal, 57(1), 221-229.
  • Musgrave, R. (1966) “Principles of Budget Determination.” in H. Cameron and W. Henderson (eds.), Public Finance: Selected Readings, New York: Random House, 15-27.
  • Narayan, P.K. and S. Narayan (2006) “Government Revenue and Government Expenditure Nexus: Evidence from Developing Countries”, Applied Economics, 38(3), 285-291.
  • Narayan, P. K. (2005) “The Government Revenue and Government Expenditure Nexus: Empirical Evidence from Nine Asian Countries”, Journal of Asian Economics, 15, 1203-1216.
  • Newey, W.K. and K.D. West (1987) “A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix”, Econometrica, 55(3), 703-708.
  • Owoye, O. (1995) “The Causal Relationship between Taxes and Expenditures in the G7 Countries: Cointegration and Error-Correction Models”, Applied Economics Letters, 2, 19-22.
  • Payne, J. (1998) “The Tax-Spend Debate: Time Series Evidence from State Budgets”, Public Choice, 95, 307-320.
  • Peacock, A. and J. Wiseman (1979) “Approaches to the Analysis of Government Expenditure Growth”, Public Finance Review, 7, 3-23.
  • Pesaran, M.H., R.G. Pierse and M.S. Kumar (1989) “Econometric Analysis of Aggregation in the Context of Linear Prediction Models”, Econometrica, 57, 861-888.
  • Phillips, P. and P. Peron (1988) “Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regressions”, Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
  • Provopoulos, G. and A. Zambaras (1989) “Testing for Causality between Government Spending and Taxation”, Public Choice, 68, 277-282.
  • Terzi, H. ve S. Oltulular (2006) “Harcama-Vergi Geliri Hipotezi: Türkiye Örneği”, Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 20(2), 1-18.
  • Von Furstenberg, G.M., R.J. Green and J. Jeong (1986) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 179-188.
  • Wahid, N.M. (2008) “An Empirical Investigation on the Nexus between Tax Revenue and Government Spending: The Case of Turkey”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 16, 46-51.
  • Zivot, E. and D.W.K. Andrews (1992) “Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis”, Journal of Business and Economics Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.

Yıl 2012, Cilt: 30 Sayı: 1, 173 - 192, 30.06.2012

Rahmi Yamak Zehra Abdioğlu

Öz

Kaynakça

  • Akçoraoğlu, A. (1999) “Kamu Harcamaları, Kamu Gelirleri ve Keynesçi Politikalar: Bir Nedensellik Analizi”, Gazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 2, 51-65.
  • Anderson, W., M.S. Wallace and J.T. Warner (1986) “Government Spending and Taxation: What Causes What?”, Southern Economic Association, 52(3), 630-639.
  • Aslan, M. ve M. Taşdemir (2009) “Is Fiscal Synchronization Hypothesis Relevant for Turkey? Evidence from Cointegration and Causality Tests with Endogenous Structural Breaks”, Journal of Money, Investment and Banking, 12, 14-25.
  • Barro, R.J. (1974) “Are Government Bonds Net Wealth?”, Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1095-1117.
  • Buchanan, J. and R. Wagner (1977) Democracy in Deficit, New York: Academic Press.
  • Chen, S. (2008) “Untangling the Web of Causalities among Four Disaggregate Government Expenditures, Government Revenue and Output in Taiwan”, Journal of Chinese Economic and Business Studies, 6(1), 99-107.
  • Cheng, B.S. (1999) “Causality Between Taxes and Expenditures: Evidence from Latin American Countries”, Journal of Economics and Finance, 23(2), 184-192.
  • Çavuşoğlu, A.T. (2008) “Türkiye’de Kamu Gelirleri ile Kamu Harcamaları Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Ekonometrik Bir Analiz”, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20, 143-160.
  • Darrat, A.F. (1998) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax? An Inquiry into the Turkish Budgetary Process”, Southern Economic Journal, 64(4), 940-956.
  • Dickey, D. and W. Fuller (1979) “Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root”, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 427-431.
  • Engle, R.F. and C.W.J. Granger (1987) “Co-integration and Error Correction: Represantation, Estimation, and Testing”, Econometrica, 55(2), 251-276.
  • Friedman, M. (1978) “The Limitations of Tax Limitation”, Policy Review, 7-14.
  • Furstenberg, G.M., R.J. Green and J. Jeong (1986) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 179-188.
  • Gounder, N., P.K. Narayan. and A. Prasad (2007) “An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship between Government Revenue and Expenditure: The Case of the Fiji Islands”, International Journal of Social Economics”, 34(3), 147-158.
  • Granger, C.W.J. (1988) “Aggregation of Time Series Variables: A Survey”, Institute for Empirical Macroeconomics Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis Discussion Paper, 1, 1-25.
  • Granger, C.W.J. and P.L. Siklos (1995) “Systematic Sampling, Temporal Aggregation, Seasonal Adjustment, and Cointegration Theory and Evidence”, Journal of Econometrics, 66, 357-369.
  • Li, X. (2001) “Government Revenue, Government Expenditure, and Temporal Causality: Evidence from China”, Applied Economics, 33, 485-497.
  • Katrakilidis, C.P. (1997) “Spending and Revenues in Greece: New Evidence from Error Correction Modelling”, Applied Economics, 4, 387-391.
  • MacKinnon, J.G. (1991) “Critical Values for Cointegration Tests”, in R. F. Engle and C. W.J. Granger (eds.), Long-Run Economic Relationships-Readings in Cointegration, Oxford University Press., 267-276.
  • Mahvadi, S. and J. Westerlund (2008) “The Tax Spending Nexus: Evidence from a Panel of US State-Local Governments”, The University of Texas at San Antonio College of Business Working Paper Series, 0045, 1-28.
  • Manage, N. and M.L. Marlow (1986) “The Causal Relation between Federal Expenditures and Receipts”, Southern Economic Journal, 52(3), 617-629.
  • Meltzer, A.H. and S.F. Richard (1981) “A Rational Theory of the Size of Government”, Journal of Political Economy, 89(5), 914-927.
  • Miller, S.M. and F.S. Russek (1990) “Co-integration and Error-Correction Models: The Temporal Causality between Government Taxes and Spending”, Southern Economic Journal, 57(1), 221-229.
  • Musgrave, R. (1966) “Principles of Budget Determination.” in H. Cameron and W. Henderson (eds.), Public Finance: Selected Readings, New York: Random House, 15-27.
  • Narayan, P.K. and S. Narayan (2006) “Government Revenue and Government Expenditure Nexus: Evidence from Developing Countries”, Applied Economics, 38(3), 285-291.
  • Narayan, P. K. (2005) “The Government Revenue and Government Expenditure Nexus: Empirical Evidence from Nine Asian Countries”, Journal of Asian Economics, 15, 1203-1216.
  • Newey, W.K. and K.D. West (1987) “A Simple, Positive Semi-Definite, Heteroskedasticity and Autocorrelation Consistent Covariance Matrix”, Econometrica, 55(3), 703-708.
  • Owoye, O. (1995) “The Causal Relationship between Taxes and Expenditures in the G7 Countries: Cointegration and Error-Correction Models”, Applied Economics Letters, 2, 19-22.
  • Payne, J. (1998) “The Tax-Spend Debate: Time Series Evidence from State Budgets”, Public Choice, 95, 307-320.
  • Peacock, A. and J. Wiseman (1979) “Approaches to the Analysis of Government Expenditure Growth”, Public Finance Review, 7, 3-23.
  • Pesaran, M.H., R.G. Pierse and M.S. Kumar (1989) “Econometric Analysis of Aggregation in the Context of Linear Prediction Models”, Econometrica, 57, 861-888.
  • Phillips, P. and P. Peron (1988) “Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regressions”, Biometrika, 75(2), 335-346.
  • Provopoulos, G. and A. Zambaras (1989) “Testing for Causality between Government Spending and Taxation”, Public Choice, 68, 277-282.
  • Terzi, H. ve S. Oltulular (2006) “Harcama-Vergi Geliri Hipotezi: Türkiye Örneği”, Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 20(2), 1-18.
  • Von Furstenberg, G.M., R.J. Green and J. Jeong (1986) “Tax and Spend, or Spend and Tax?”, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 68(2), 179-188.
  • Wahid, N.M. (2008) “An Empirical Investigation on the Nexus between Tax Revenue and Government Spending: The Case of Turkey”, International Research Journal of Finance and Economics, 16, 46-51.
  • Zivot, E. and D.W.K. Andrews (1992) “Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit-Root Hypothesis”, Journal of Business and Economics Statistics, 10(3), 251-270.
Toplam 37 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi
Yazarlar

Rahmi Yamak

Zehra Abdioğlu

Yayımlanma Tarihi 30 Haziran 2012
Gönderilme Tarihi 14 Nisan 2015
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2012 Cilt: 30 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Yamak, R., & Abdioğlu, Z. (2012). AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 30(1), 173-192.
AMA Yamak R, Abdioğlu Z. AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. Haziran 2012;30(1):173-192.
Chicago Yamak, Rahmi, ve Zehra Abdioğlu. “AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 30, sy. 1 (Haziran 2012): 173-92.
EndNote Yamak R, Abdioğlu Z (01 Haziran 2012) AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 30 1 173–192.
IEEE R. Yamak ve Z. Abdioğlu, “AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”, Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 30, sy. 1, ss. 173–192, 2012.
ISNAD Yamak, Rahmi - Abdioğlu, Zehra. “AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi 30/1 (Haziran 2012), 173-192.
JAMA Yamak R, Abdioğlu Z. AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012;30:173–192.
MLA Yamak, Rahmi ve Zehra Abdioğlu. “AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ”. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, c. 30, sy. 1, 2012, ss. 173-92.
Vancouver Yamak R, Abdioğlu Z. AMPİRİK BAĞLAMDA TOPLAM VE ALT KALEMLER BAZINDA KAMU HARCAMALARI VE KAMU GELİRLERİ ARASINDAKİ İLİŞKİ: TÜRKİYE ÖRNEĞİ. Hacettepe Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 2012;30(1):173-92.

Dergiye yayımlanmak üzere gönderilecek yazılar Dergi'nin son sayfasında ve Dergi web sistesinde yer alan Yazar Rehberi'ndeki kurallara uygun olmalıdır.


Gizlilik Beyanı

Bu dergi sitesindeki isimler ve e-posta adresleri sadece bu derginin belirtilen amaçları doğrultusunda kullanılacaktır; farklı herhangi bir amaç için veya diğer kişilerin kullanımına açılmayacaktır.