Home 2017 1(77), 2017
Ludmila L. Tarangul
Doctor of Economics, professor
E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it ;

Myroslav S. Khomyak
PhD in Economics
University of State Fiscal Service of Ukraine
08201, Ukraine, Irpin, 31 Universytetska Str.
E-mail: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Institutional aspects of distribution of state revenue in framework of budget space of regions

Section:
Macroeconomic and regional problems of industrial development
Ekon. promisl. 2017, 77(1): 38-50
Language: Ukrainian
https://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry2017.01.038

Abstract:
The article examines existent theoretical background concerning main institutional aspects of distribution of state revenue in the framework of budget space as a result of fiscal decentralization process. Also we have briefly analyzed the experience of some countries relating to the creation and functioning of institutes, which facilitate the process of distribution of budget revenue across regions in the form of intergovernmental transfers.
The research provided allowed us to conclude that in any system of public finance the sources of external financing of regional development by means of intergovernmental transfers play an important role. The main challenge is to structure them by such a way which does not limit the finan-cial autonomy of local authorities, and at the same time which allows to eliminate fiscal imbalances that appear in the budget space due to specifics of regional development and present system of distribution of both budget and fiscal powers.
The analysis of international experiences proved that the main tasks of such institutes as independent agencies facilitating the process of proving intergovernmental transfers and aimed to ensure the transparency, equity and accountability of intergovernmental financial system are difficult to implement in practice. The evidence shows that such agencies complicate and enhance the inequality of budget system that in turn leads to the increase of transaction costs and undermine the sustainability of political consensus.
Keywords: budget space, institutes, regions, intergovernmental transfers, transaction costs.

|
Full text (PDF)

References:

1.Volokhova, I.S. (2010). Intergovernmental fiscal relations in Ukraine: current state and prospects of development. Odesa: Atlant (in Ukrainian).
2.Zaichykova, V.V. (2013). The institutional foundations of the European model of intergovernmental fiscal relations in Ukraine. Naukovi pratsi NDFI, No. 2, pp. 103-112 (in Ukrainian).
3.Zapatrina, I.I. (2006). Institutional aspects of the concept of "two budgets" on the example of the Russian experience. Finance of Ukraine, No 9, pp. 18-23 (in Ukrainian).
4.Ahmad, S. (2013). Macro, Fiscal and Decentralization Options to Address Marginality and Reach the Extremely Poor. In J. von Braun, & F. Gatzweiler (Eds.), Marginality Addressing the Nexus of Poverty, Exclusion and Ecology (pp. 303-314). New York, London: Springer.
5.Bousquet G., Daude C., & Maisonneuve C. (2015). Fiscal Decentralisation in Colombia. New Evidence Regarding Sustainability, Risk Sharing and "Fiscal Fatigue". OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/5js30tzp18kj-en
6.Commonwealth Grants Commission of Australia. Equality in Diversity: History of the Commonwealth Grants Commission (1995). Australian Government Printing ervice.
7.Dahlby, B., & Ergete, F. (2016). The stimulative effects of intergovernmental grants and the marginal cost of public funds. International Tax and Public Finance, Vol. 23(1), pp. 114–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-015-9352-5
8.Fabbrini, F. (2016). A Principle in Need of Renewal? The Euro-crisis and the Principle of Institutional Balance. Centro Studi sul Federalismo, Vol. 52, issue 1, pp. 285-309.
9.OECD (2013). Fiscal Decentralisation Measuring. Concepts and Policies. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264174849-en
10.Blцchliger, H., & Rabesona, J. (2009). Fiscal Policy Across Levels of Government in Time of Crisis. OECD Network on Fiscal Relations Across Levels of Government. (Working Paper No 12. OECDCOM/CTPA/ECO/GOV/WP(2010)12).
11. Frank, J., & Martinez-Vazquez, J. (2014, January). Decentralization And Infrastructure: From Gaps To Solutions. International Center for Public Policy Working Paper Series, at AYSPS, GSU paper1405. Georgia State University.
12.Hasanov, F., Mikayilov, C., Yusifov, S., & Aliyev, K. (2016). Impact of Fiscal Decentralization on Non-Oil Economic Growth in a Resource-Rich Economy. Eurasian Journal of Business and Economics, No 9 (17), pp. 87-108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17015/ejbe.2016.017.06
13. Kitchen, H. (2007). Grants to Small Urban Governments. Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers. Principles and Practice. In R. Boadway, & A. Shah (Eds), Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series. The World Bank.
14.Kmezi?, S., ?uli?, K., Jocovi?, M., & Kalu?erovi?, J. (2016). Fiscal Decentralisation and Local Government Financing in Serbia and Montenegro. Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations. Institute for Local Self-Government and Public Procurement Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4335/978-961-6842-69-3.
15.Lewis, B. (2016). Is Central Government Intervention Bad for Local Outcomes? Mixed Messages from Indonesia. The Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 52 (2), pp. 300-313 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220388.2015.1068293.
16.Lotz, J. (2006). Local Government Organization and Finance: Nordic Countries. In A. Shah (Ed.), Local Governance in Industrial Countries (pp. 223-264). Washington: DC: World Bank Institute.
17.Lozano, I., & Julio, J. (2015). Fiscal Decentralization and Economic Growth: Evidence from Regional-Level Panel Data for Colombia. Borradores de Economia, No 865I.
18.Miyazaki, T. (2016). Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers and Tax Efforts: Evidence from Japan. MPRA Paper 74337. MPRA.
19.Murray, C., & Simeon, R. (2011). Promises Unmet: Multilevel Government in South Africa. In Rekha Saxena (Ed.), Varieties of Federal Governance (pp. 232-260). Cambridge.
20.Nickson, A. (2011). Where is Local Government Going in Latin America? A Comparative Perspective. International Centre for Local Democracy Iss. Working Paper, No. 6.
21.Opeskin, B. (2002). Mechanisms for Intergovernmental Relations in Federations. International Social Science Journal, No 53 (167), pp. 129-138. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2451.00301
22.World Bank (2016, March). Republic of Iraq Decentralization and subnational service delivery in Iraq: status and way forward. (Report No. AUS17063). Washington, World Bank.
23.Shan, A. (2007). Institutional Arrangements for Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers and a Framework for Evaluation. In R. Boadway, & A. Shah. (Eds.), Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers. Principles and Practice. Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series. The World Bank.
24.Spahn, P.D. (2012). Conditioning Intergovernmental Transfers and Modes of Interagency Cooperation for Greater Effectiveness of Multilevel Government in OECD Countries. OECD.
25.Ter-Minassian, T. (2012). Reform Priorities for Subnational Revenues in Brazil (Policy brief No. IDB-PB-157). Inter-American Development Bank.
26.The Local Public Sector's Role In Achieving Development Goals: Subnational Governance, Finance, and the Post-2015 Global Development Agenda Country Survey Instructions (2013). The Urban Institute.
27.Vigneault, M. (2007). Grants and Soft Budget Constraints. In: Intergovernmental Fiscal Transfers. Principles and Practice. In R. Boadway, A. Shah (Eds.), Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series. The World Bank.
28.Wildasin, D.E. (2009). Intergovernmental Transfers to Local Governments. Institute of Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations Iss. Working Paper, No. 2009-11.

Last Updated (Monday, 17 April 2017 18:28)

 
Лицензия Creative Commons