Research Article


DOI :10.26650/JEPR1220835   IUP :10.26650/JEPR1220835    Full Text (PDF)

An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020)

Yücel DemirkılıçFazlı YıldızErsin Nail Sağdıç

The aim of this study is to examine the causal relationship between the level of democratization and tax revenues in the period of 2010- 2020 in 33 European Union (EU) member and candidate countries. The causal relationships between the variables were tested with the Emirmahmutoğlu-Köse (2011) panel causality test based on the Toda–Yamamoto (1995) test. According to the results of the analysis, bidirectional causal relationships were determined between the level of democratization and tax revenues based on the relevant countries and period throughout the panel. When evaluating the country-based causality results, one-way causal relationships from democratization level to tax revenues were found in Albania, Greece, Ireland, Moldova and North Macedonia; one-way causality from tax revenues to democratization level was found in Croatia, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania, and Slovenia; and bidirectional causal relationships were found between the level of democratization and tax revenues in Poland and Ukraine. In addition, no causal relationships were found between tax revenues and the level of democratization in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Slovakia, Sweden, Serbia, or Türkiye. The empirical findings of the study indicate the causal relationship between the level of democratization and tax revenues to differ due to such things as the political, economic, social, and institutional characteristics of the countries.

JEL Classification : H20 , H70 , C33
DOI :10.26650/JEPR1220835   IUP :10.26650/JEPR1220835    Full Text (PDF)

Vergilendirme ve Demokrasi İlişkisinin Analizi: Avrupa Birliğine Üye ve Aday Ülkeler Örneği (2010-2020)

Yücel DemirkılıçFazlı YıldızErsin Nail Sağdıç

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Avrupa Birliğine (AB) üye ve aday 33 ülkede 2010-2020 döneminde demokratikleşme düzeyi ile vergi gelirleri arasındaki nedensel ilişkiyi incelemektir. Değişkenler arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisi Toda–Yamamoto (1995) testine dayanan Emirmahmutoğlu-Köse (2011) panel nedensellik testi ile sınanmıştır. Analiz sonuçlarına göre, panel genelinde ilgili ülke ve dönem temelinde demokratikleşme düzeyi ve vergi gelirleri arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. Ülke bazlı nedensellik sonuçları değerlendirildiğinde, Arnavutluk, Yunanistan, İrlanda, Moldova ve Kuzey Makedonya’da demokratikleşme düzeyinden vergi gelirlerine doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi, tam aksine Hırvatistan, Kıbrıs, Litvanya, Lüksemburg, Malta, Romanya ve Slovenya’da ise vergi gelirlerinden demokratikleşme düzeyine doğru tek yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi, Polonya ve Ukrayna’da ise demokratikleşme düzeyi ve vergi gelirleri arasında çift yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi tespit edilmiştir. Ayrıca, Avusturya, Belçika, Bulgaristan, Çekya, Danimarka, Estonya, Finlandiya, Fransa, Almanya, Macaristan, İtalya, Letonya, Hollanda, Portekiz, İspanya, Slovakya, İsveç, Sırbistan ve Türkiye’de ise vergi gelirleri ile demokratikleşme düzeyi arasında herhangi bir nedensellik ilişkisi bulunmamıştır. Araştırmanın ampirik bulguları ülkelerin siyasal, ekonomik, sosyal, kurumsal vb. özelliklerinden kaynaklı olarak demokratikleşme düzeyi ile vergi gelirleri arasındaki nedensellik ilişkisinin farklılaştığına işaret etmektedir.

JEL Classification : H20 , H70 , C33

EXTENDED ABSTRACT


States have the right to sovereignty over the lands within their borders. States collect taxes based on this sovereign right. State sovereignty is related to the taxes a state is able to collect. In today’s democracies, taxation authority is accepted as a legal right of states. In the past, however, no compromise regarding taxation was able to be reached between those with taxation authority and the people bearing the tax burden. While the ruling segment aimed to increase tax revenues, the ruled objected to arbitrary taxation. As a result of these types of revolts, absolute monarchic rule had been overthrown, with taxation authority being gradually taken away from monarchs and kings and passed to parliaments. As a result, these initiatives not only limited taxation authority but also contributed to democracy.

The increases in the level of taxation experienced throughout history increased the costs citizens had to bear. For this reason, citizens started to control how governments spend their

tax revenues by participating in the bargaining process. In line with this, governments have had to make more disclosures to their citizens about expenditures. Thus, governments have

gained a democratic structure by adopting a more transparent structure. Another approach that examines the relationship between taxation and democracy from a similar perspective is rentier state theory. According to this theory, democracy is weak in states that derive most of their income from inefficient fields such as oil and natural gas. As a matter of fact, due to the low level of taxation, bargaining between citizens and governments remains weak, thus weakening democracy as well. The relationship between the level of taxation and democracyis not limited to the existence of a causal relationship from taxation to democracy. In addition, there are opinions that there is a casual relationship from democracy to taxation. According to this view, society can clearly monitor the economic activities in transparent and accountable states. This situation improves the harmony between the state and the individual and increases the taxation capacity.

When examining the empirical literature on the causal relationship between the levels of taxation and democracy, studies are found to have revealed different results. In the literature,

a one-way causal relationship has mainly been determined from the level of democratization to tax revenues. However, a substantial number of studies are also found to have revealed a

one-way causal relationship from tax revenues to the level of democratization. Apart from these results, studies are also found to have detected bidirectional causality between these two variables, as well as studies that revealed no relationship to be present.

This study aims to examine the causal relationship between tax revenues and the level of democratization in a total of 33 countries, including 27 member states of the European

Union (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Cyprus, Czechia, Germany, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Italy, Poland,

Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden) and six candidate countries (Albania, Moldova, North Macedonia, Serbia, Türkiye, and Ukraine) over the 2010-2020 period. This relationship was examined using the panel data analysis method. The study uses the panel causality test developed by Emirmahmutoğlu and Köse (2011) based on the Toda-Yamamoto (1995) test as its method. As for data, the Democracy Index (DI) data, which shows the level of democratization, comes from the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU, 2022), and the data

on tax revenues over gross domestic product, which defines the taxation level (TR) comes from the World Bank’s (2022) World Development Indicators and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD, 2022) Data Tax Revenue databases.

According to the analysis results, bidirectional causal relationships were found between the level of democratization and tax revenues in the context of the relevant period and countries throughout the panel. When analyzing the results in terms of countries, one-way causal relationships from democratization level to tax revenues were identified in Albania, Greece, Ireland, Moldova and North Macedonia. On the other hand, the countries where one-way causal relationships from tax revenues to the level of democratization were found are Croatia, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Romania, and Slovenia. In addition to all these results, bidirectional causal relationships were found between the level of democratization and tax revenues in Poland and Ukraine. No causal relationships were found between taxes and democracy in Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Slovakia, Sweden, Serbia, or Türkiye. The empirical findings of the study show the causal relationship between the level of democratization and tax revenues to differ according to country, and these differences may arise from such things as the social, economic, political, and institutional characteristics of the countries.


PDF View

References

  • Acemoğlu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2000). Inequality, growth and development democratization or repression? European Economic Review, (44), 683-693. google scholar
  • Acemoğlu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2005). Four reviews of “economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. Oxford University Press, 117(517), 162-183. google scholar
  • Acemoğlu, D., & Robinson, J. A. (2006). Economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press, 7(1), 1-5. google scholar
  • Akdoğan, A. (2014). Kamu maliyesi (16. bs). Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi. google scholar
  • Aktan, C. C. (2019). Anayasal vergi hukuku (1. bs). Ankara: Seçkin Akademik ve Mesleki Yayınlar. google scholar
  • Andersson, P. F. (2018). Democracy, urbanization and tax revenue. (53), 111-150. google scholar
  • Balamatsias, P. (2018). Democracy and taxation. Journal Economics, 12(1), 1-28. google scholar
  • Baskaran, T. (2014). Taxation and democratization. World Development, 56, 287-301. google scholar
  • Baskaran, T., & Bigsten, A. (2013). Fiscal capacity and the quality of government in Sub-Saharan Africa. World Development, (45), 92-107. google scholar
  • Bird, R. M., Martinez-Vazquez, J., & Torgler, B. (2008). Tax effort in developing countries and high ıncome countries: the ımpact of corruption, voice and accountability. Economic Analysis and Policy, 38(1), 55-71. google scholar
  • Büyükdüvenci, S. (1990). Demokrasi, eğitim ve Türkiye. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 583-597. google scholar
  • Castro, G. Â., & Camarillo, D. B. R. (2014). Determinants of tax revenue in OECD countries over the period 20012011. Contaduria y Administracion, 59(3), 35-59. google scholar
  • Cheibub, J. A. (1998). Political regimes and the extractive capacity of governments: taxation in democracies and dictatorships. World Politics, 50(3), 349-376. google scholar
  • Cummings, R. G., Martinez-Vazquez, J., Mckee, M., & Torgler, B. (2006). Effects of tax morale on tax compliance: experimental and survey evidence. Berkeley Program in Law and Economics, 1-36. google scholar
  • Çağan, N. (1980). Demokratik sosyal hukuk devletinde vergilendirme. Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(1), 129-151. google scholar
  • Dioda, L. (2012). Structural determinants of tax revenue in Latin America and The Caribbean, 1990-2009 (ss. 1-44). Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean: ECLAC. google scholar
  • Downs, A. (1960). Why the government budget is too small in a democracy. Cambridge University Press, 12(4), 541-563. google scholar
  • Dönmez, R., & Mutlu Kaya, Ö. (2014). Vergi devleti kavramı ve tarihsel temelleri. Uluslararası Antalya Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(4), 99-108. google scholar
  • Ehrhart, H. (2009). Assessing the relationship between democracy and domestic taxes in developing countries. Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches sur le DeveloppementInternational, 1-17. google scholar
  • EIU (2022). The Economist Intelligence Unit Limited 2022, Democracy Index 2021 The China challenge. https:// www.stockwatch.com.cy/sites/default/files/news-downloads/feb11_2022_eiu-democracy-index-2021.pdf, Erişim Tarihi: 20.07.2022. google scholar
  • Emirmahmutoğlu, F., & Köse, N. (2011). “Testing for granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels”, Economic Modelling, 28(3), 870-876. google scholar
  • Fauvelle-Aymar, C. (1999). The Political and tax capacity of government in developing countries. Kyklos, 52(3),391-413. google scholar
  • Feld, L. P., & Frey, B. S. (2002). Trust breeds trust: how taxpayers are treated. economics of governance, 3, 87-99. google scholar
  • Fisher, R.A. (1932). Statistical methods for research workers. 4th Edition, Oliver And Boyd, Edinburgh. google scholar
  • Fjeldstad, O.H. (2004). What’s trust got to do with ıt? Non-payment of service charges in local authorities in south africa. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 42(4), 539-562. google scholar
  • Garcia, M. M., & Haldenwang, C. V. (2016). Do democracies tax more? Political regime type and taxation. Journal of International Development, 28(4), 485-506. google scholar
  • Gray, M. (2011). A Theory of “late rentierism” in the arab states of the gulf. Georgetown University School of Foreign Service in Qatar, 1. google scholar
  • Gur, N. (2014). Taxation and democracy: an ınstrumental variable approach. Applied Economics Letters, 21(11), 763-766. google scholar
  • Huntington, S. P. (1991). The Third wave: democratization in the late twentieth century. ABD: University of Oklahoma Press. google scholar
  • Kılıçer, E., Ay, F. C., & Ataer, S. (2016). Katalaksi kavramı çerçevesinde vergileme demokrasi ilişkisi: Türkiye-OECD karşılaştırmalı analizi. Finans Politik ve Ekonomik Yorumla, 53(612), 35-50. google scholar
  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1999). The Quality of government. Journal of Law Economics and Organization, 15(1), 222-279. google scholar
  • Meltzer, A. H., & Richard, S. F. (1981). A Rational theory of the size of government. The University of Chicago Press, 89(5), 914-927. google scholar
  • Montesquieu, C.-L. de S. (1989). The Spirit Of laws (1748). New York: Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought. google scholar
  • Mutascu, M. (2011). Taxation and democracy. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 4(14), 343-348. google scholar
  • Niskanen, W. (2003). Autocratic, democratic, and optimal government. Birleşik Krallık: Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar. google scholar
  • OECD (2022). OECD Data Tax Revenue, https://data.oecd.org/tax/tax-revenue.htm, Erişim Tarihi: 20.07.2022. google scholar
  • Özmen, İ. (2016). Vergi gelirlerinin belirleyicileri üzerine karşılaştırmalı bir analiz: BRIC-T. Selçuk Üniversitesi iktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 16(32), 232-252. google scholar
  • Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. IZA Discussion Paper, 1240. google scholar
  • Pesaran, M. H., & Yamagata, T. (2008). Testing slope homogeneity in large panels. Journal of Econometrics, 142(1), 50-93. google scholar
  • Pesaran, M. H., Ullah, A., & Yamagata, T. (2008). A bias-adjusted LM test of error cross-section independence. The Econometrics Journal, 11(1), 105-127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368423X.2007.00227. google scholar
  • Profeta, P., Puglisi, R., & Scabrosetti, S. (2013). Does democracy affect taxation and government spending? evidence from developing countries. Journal of Comparative Economics, 41(3), 684-718. google scholar
  • Ross, M. L. (2004). Does taxation lead to representation? British Journal of Political Science, 34(2), 229-249. google scholar
  • Smith, L. V., Leybourne, S., Kim, Tae-Hwan, & Newbold, P. (2004). “More powerful panel data unit root tests with an application to mean reversion in real exchange rates”, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19, 147-170. google scholar
  • Şahin, M., & Hatırlı, S. A. (2016). Türkiye’de vergi uygulamaları ve vergi ahlakı ilişkisi: Trabzon, Giresun ve Gümüşhane illeri örneği. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Elektronik Dergisi, 7(18), 254-272. google scholar
  • Şaşmaz, M. Ü. (2019). OECD ülkelerinde demokratikleşme ve vergi gelirleri ilişkisi: Bootstrap panel nedensellik analizi. İzmir İktisat Dergisi, 34(2), 265-277. google scholar
  • Tabar, Ç., & Karaş, G. (2021). The effect of taxes democracy: the case of OECD countries. International Journal of Social Inquiry, 14(1), 255-2755. google scholar
  • The World Bank (2022). World Development Indicators, https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL. GD.ZS, Erişim Tarihi: 20.07.2022. google scholar
  • Timmons, J. F. (2010). Taxation and representation in recent history. The Journal of Politics, 72(1), 191-208. google scholar
  • Toda, H.Y., & Yamamoto, T. (1995). Statistical ınference in vector autoregressions with possibly ıntegrated processes. Journal Of Econometrics, 66, 225-250. google scholar
  • Tonizzo, M. (2008). Political ınstitutions, size of government and redistribution: An empirical investigation. Working Paper Series, 8(89), 1-34. google scholar
  • Torgler, B. (2005). Tax morale and direct democracy. European Journal of Political Economy, 21(2), 525-531. google scholar
  • Türedi, S., & Topal, M. H. (2016). Vergilendirme ve demokrasi arasındaki ilişki: gelişmekte olan ülkeler için panel nedensellik analizi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 11(1), 63-86. google scholar
  • Yayla, A. (2012). Anayasacılık, anayasal demokrasi ve ideolojiler. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, (66), 13-22. google scholar
  • Yi, D. J. (2012). No taxation, no democracy? Taxation, income inequality, and democracy. Journal of Economic Policy Reform, 15(2), 71-92. google scholar
  • Ziari, R., & Rahemi, H. (2013). The Relationship between democracy and revenue of budget. International Journal of Management Sciences and Business Research, 2(7), 17-21. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Demirkılıç, Y., Yıldız, F., & Sağdıç, E.N. (2023). An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020). Journal of Economic Policy Researches, 10(2), 457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


AMA

Demirkılıç Y, Yıldız F, Sağdıç E N. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020). Journal of Economic Policy Researches. 2023;10(2):457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


ABNT

Demirkılıç, Y.; Yıldız, F.; Sağdıç, E.N. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020). Journal of Economic Policy Researches, [Publisher Location], v. 10, n. 2, p. 457-483, 2023.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Demirkılıç, Yücel, and Fazlı Yıldız and Ersin Nail Sağdıç. 2023. “An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020).” Journal of Economic Policy Researches 10, no. 2: 457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


Chicago: Humanities Style

Demirkılıç, Yücel, and Fazlı Yıldız and Ersin Nail Sağdıç. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020).” Journal of Economic Policy Researches 10, no. 2 (Jul. 2024): 457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


Harvard: Australian Style

Demirkılıç, Y & Yıldız, F & Sağdıç, EN 2023, 'An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020)', Journal of Economic Policy Researches, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 457-483, viewed 17 Jul. 2024, https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Demirkılıç, Y. and Yıldız, F. and Sağdıç, E.N. (2023) ‘An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020)’, Journal of Economic Policy Researches, 10(2), pp. 457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835 (17 Jul. 2024).


MLA

Demirkılıç, Yücel, and Fazlı Yıldız and Ersin Nail Sağdıç. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020).” Journal of Economic Policy Researches, vol. 10, no. 2, 2023, pp. 457-483. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835


Vancouver

Demirkılıç Y, Yıldız F, Sağdıç EN. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020). Journal of Economic Policy Researches [Internet]. 17 Jul. 2024 [cited 17 Jul. 2024];10(2):457-483. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835 doi: 10.26650/JEPR1220835


ISNAD

Demirkılıç, Yücel - Yıldız, Fazlı - Sağdıç, ErsinNail. An Analysis of the Relationship Between Taxation and Democracy: The Example of European Union Member and Candidate Countries (2010-2020)”. Journal of Economic Policy Researches 10/2 (Jul. 2024): 457-483. https://doi.org/10.26650/JEPR1220835



TIMELINE


Submitted18.12.2022
Accepted20.04.2023
Published Online02.08.2023

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.