Regional Economics: Theory and Practice
 

Assessing the tax systems' risk and efficiency in Russian regions at different levels of the budget system

Vol. 15, Iss. 11, NOVEMBER 2017

Received: 25 August 2016

Received in revised form: 8 September 2016

Accepted: 21 September 2016

Available online: 15 November 2017

Subject Heading: REGION IN NATIONAL ECONOMY

JEL Classification: H21, H71

Pages: 2033–2051

https://doi.org/10.24891/re.15.11.2033

Malkina M.Yu. National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation mmuri@yandex.ru

Balakin R.V. National Research Lobachevsky State University of Nizhny Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Russian Federation rodion-balakin@yandex.ru

Subject The article addresses tax revenues of the Russian Federation at different levels of its budget system. The paper provides a comparative analysis of risks and efficiency of tax systems of subjects of the Russian Federation for different levels of the budget system.
Objectives Our purpose is to assess risk and efficiency of tax revenues at different levels of budget formation, i.e. federal, regional, local, and for the consolidated budget.
Methods The study applies the portfolio approach by G. Markowitz to assess the risk of tax systems of Russian regions at the stage of consolidated budget formation. We used the W. Sharpe ratio to compare the efficiency of regional tax systems at different levels of the budget system.
Results Our analysis reveals that the highest risks and the highest yield of the tax system are at the stage of the federal budget formation; while the risks and tax returns of regional and local budgets are lower. At the same time, the efficiency of tax systems estimated with the W. Sharpe ratio in average is higher at the regional level as compared with federal and local levels.
Conclusions The inter-regional differentiation of tax systems' efficiency decreases from upper to lower levels of the budget system; this is a result of smoothing the inter-regional differences through applying the tax distribution rules.

Keywords: tax system, fiscal system, risk, rate of return, Sharpe ratio

References:

  1. Mankiw G.N., Weinzierl M., Yagan D. Optimal Taxation in Theory and Practice. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2009, vol. 23, iss. 4, pp. 147–174. URL: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.23.4.147
  2. Mahdavi S. The Level and Composition of Tax Revenue in Developing Countries: Evidence from unbalanced panel data. International Review of Economics & Finance, October 2008, vol. 17, iss. 4, pp. 607–617. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2008.01.001
  3. Bikas E., Andruskaite E. Factors Affecting Value Added Tax Revenue. Proceedings of 1st Annual International Interdisciplinary Conference, AIIC 2013, 24–26 April, Azores, Portugal.
  4. Maličká L., Harčariková M., Gazda V. Determinants of Local Tax Revenues in EU Countries. European Journal of Economics Finance and Administrative Sciences, 2012, iss. 52, pp. 120–126.
  5. Fricke H., Süssmuth B. Growth and Volatility of Tax Revenues in Latin America. World Development, February 2014, vol. 54, pp. 114–138. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2013.07.007
  6. Cornia G.C., Nelson R.D. State Tax Revenue Growth and Volatility. Regional Economic Development, 2010, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 23–58.
  7. Study on the Vulnerability and Resilience Factors of Tax Revenues in Developing Countries. Final Report. European Commission, November 2013. URL: http://www.die-gdi.de/uploads/media/Vulnerability_of_tax_revenue_Final_Report.pdf
  8. Kodrzycki Y.K. Smoothing State Tax Revenues over the Business Cycle: Gauging Fiscal Needs and Opportunities. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Working Paper, 2014, no. 14-11. URL: http://bostonfed.org/economic/wp/wp2014/wp1411.pdf
  9. Haughton J. Estimating Tax Buoyancy, Elasticity and Stability. African Economic Policy Paper, Discussion Paper, 1998, no. 11. URL: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACE024.pdf
  10. Moldogaziev T. Fiscal Decentralization and Revenue Stability in the Kyrgyz Republic, 1993–2010. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, 2012, no. 5(9), pp. 1–20.
  11. Harmon O., Mallick R. The Optimal State Tax Portfolio Model: An Extension. National Tax Journal, 1994, vol. 47(2), pp. 395–402.
  12. Markowitz H. Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance, 1952, no. 7(1), pp. 77–91.
  13. Seegert N. Optimal Tax Portfolios: An Estimation of Government Tax Revenue Minimum-Variance Frontiers. URL: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~seegert/papers/OptimalTaxPortfolios_Seegert.pdf
  14. Seegert N. Rebalancing State Tax Portfolios for the Future. URL: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2604309.
  15. Albrecht W.G. Managing Tax Revenue Volatility. Conference Proceedings of the International Academy of Business and Public Administration Disciplines, 2013, vol. 27, no. 1.
  16. Keen M., Konrad K.A. The Theory of International Tax Competition and Coordination. In: A.J. Auerbach, R. Chetty, M. Feldstein, & E. Saez (Eds). Handbook of Public Economics, vol. 5, pp. 257–328. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53759-1.00005-4
  17. Apergis N., Cooray A. Tax Revenues Convergence across ASEAN, Pacific and Oceania Countries: Evidence from Club Convergence. Journal of Multinational Financial Management, 2014, vol. 27, pp. 11–21. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mulfin.2014.06.007
  18. Tax Aspects of Fiscal Federalism: A Comparative Analysis. Ed. by G. Bizioli, C. Sacchetto. IBFD, The Netherlands, 2011, 770 p.
  19. Malkina M.Yu., Balakin R.V. [Assessing the correlation of risk and return of the tax system in Russian regions]. Economika regiona = Economy of Region, 2015, no. 3, pp. 241–255. (In Russ.) URL: https://doi.org/10.17059/2015-3-20
  20. Malkina M.Yu., Balakin R.V. Comparing Risk Components of Taxation Systems of Italy and the Russian Federation. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 2016, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 45–53. URL: https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2016.v7n1p45

View all articles of issue

 

ISSN 2311-8733 (Online)
ISSN 2073-1477 (Print)

Journal current issue

Vol. 15, Iss. 12
December 2017

Archive