Türkiye’de bütçe gelir ve harcamalarının ampirik analizi

Bu çalışma Türkiye’de bütçe gelir ve harcamaları arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi amaçlamıştır. Kullanılan yıllık veriler 1950 ile 2012 tarihleri arasındaki periyodu kapsamaktadır. İlk olarak Payne vd. (2008) ve Paleologou (2013)’nin önerdiği adımlar izlenerek, standart ve kırılmalı birim kök testleriyle değişkenlerin durağanlığı test edilmiştir. Daha sonra Gregory ve Hansen (1996)’in kırılmalı eş bütünleşme testi ve Enders ve Siklos (2001)’ın TAR ve MTAR modelleriyle analize devam edilmiştir. Çalışmanın ampirik bulguları Türkiye’de incelenen dönem için bütçe açığının zayıf sürdürülebilir olduğunu göstermektedir. Ayrıca bütçe gelir ve harcamaları arasında uzun dönemli ilişkinin var olduğu ve uzun dönem dengesine yaklaşma sürecinin simetrik olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ampirik sonuçlar değişkenler arasında kısa dönemde iki yönlü nedensellik ilişkisi olduğunu işaret etmektedir.

The empirical analysis of budget revenues and expenditures in Turkey

This study aims to investigate the relationship between budget revenues and expenditures in Turkey. The annualy data used in the study covers the period from 1950 to 2012. First, the stationarity of the variables is tested with standart unit root tests and unit root tests allowing structural breaks by following Payne et al. (2008) and Paleologou (2013). After that, the analysis continues with Gregory and Hansen (1996)’s cointegration test and Enders and Siklos (2001)’s TAR and MTAR models. The empirical results of the study show that budget deficit is weakly sustainable in investigated period. Furthermore, it is determined that budget revenues and expenditures are significantly related in the long run and convergence process to wards long run equilibrium is symmetric. Empirical results also points bi-directional causality between the variables in the short run.

PDF

___

1. Akçay, O. C, Alper, C. E. ve Özmucur, S.. (2001). Budget Deficit, Inflation and Debt Sustainability. Boğaziçi University Working Papers, No:12. 2. Araoz, F. M., CerroA. M., Meloni O., ve VeGenta, T.S.. (2007). Testing The Sustainability of Argentina Fiscal Policy 1865-2002.XXII Journadas Anvales de Economia del Banco del Uruguay. 3. Arestis, P., Cippolini, A. Ve Fattouh B.. (2004). Threshold Effects in the U.S. Budget Deficit. Economic Inquiry, 42(2): 214-222. 4. Aslan, A.. (2009). Bütçe Açığı Sürdürülebilirliğinin Dinamik Analizi: Türkiye Örneği.Maliye Dergisi, Sayı: 157 s. 227-234 5. Azgün, S. ve Taşdemir, M.. (2006). Bütçe Açıklarının Sürdürülebilirliği: Zamanlararası Borçlanma Kısıtının Testi (1980–2004). Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, 20 (2): 35–47. 6. Baghestani, H., ve McNown, R.. (1994). Do Revenues or Expenditures Respond to Budgetary Disequilibria?.Southern Economic Journal,60, 311– 322. 7. Bai, J. ve Perron, P.. (1998). Estimating and Testing Linear Models with Multiple Structural Changes. Econometrica, 66, ss. 47–78. 8. Chan, K. (1993) Consistency and Limiting Distribution of the Least Squares Sstimator of a Threshold Autoregressive Model, Annals of Statistics, 21, 520–33. 9. Crowder, W.J.. (1997). The US Federal Intertemporal Budget Constraint: Restoring Equilibrium Through Increased Revenues or Decreased Spending?. Macroeconomics 9702002, EconWPA, February. 10. Cunado, J.,Gil-Alana, L.A., ve Gracia, F.P..(2004). Is the US Fiscal Deficit Sustainable? A Fractionally Integrated Approach. Journal of Economicsand Business, 56, 501–526. 11. Çavuşoğlu, T.. (2008). Türkiye’de Kamu Gelirleri ve Harcamaları Arasındaki İlişki Üzerine Ekonometrik Bir Analiz. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı 20, ss. 143–160 12. De Haan J.,ve Siermann, C.. (1993). The Intertemporal Government Budget Constraint: An Application for The Netherlands. Public Finance, 48(2), 24– 249. 13. Dickey, D. ve Fuller, W. A.. (1979). Distribution of The Estimates For Autoregressive Time Series With a Unit Root. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74: 427-431. 14. Dökmen, G..(2012).Kamu Harcamaları ve Kamu Gelirleri Arasındaki İlişki: Panel Nedensellik Analizi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi,Cilt:27, Sayı:2, , ss.115-143 15. Enders, W.,ve Siklos, P..(2001). Cointegration and Threshold Adjustment. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 19, 166–176. 16. Engle, R.F., Granger, C.W.J., (1987). Cointegration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation, and Testing. Econometrica 55, 251–276. 17. Friedman, M.. (1978). The Limitations of Tax Limitation. Policy Review 5, 7–14. 18. Galli, E., ve Padovano, F.. (2005). Sustainability and Determinants of Italian Public Deficits Before and After Maastricht.CESifp Working Paper, No:1391, January. 19. Göktaş Ö.. (2008). Türkiye Ekonomisinde Bütçe Açığının Sürdürülebilirliğinin Analizi. İstanbul Üniversitesi İktisat Fakültesi Ekonometri ve İstatistik Dergisi, Sayı:8, 45-64. 20. Gregory, A.W., Hansen, B.E..(1996). Residual-Based Tests of Cointegration in Models with Regime Shifts. Journal of Econometrics 70, 99–126. 21. Günaydın, E.. (2003).Analysing The Sustainability of Fiscal Deficits in Turkey. Hazine Dergisi, Sayı 16, 1-14. 22. Gürbüz, Y,., Jobert, T., ve Tuncer, R.. (2007). Public Debt in Turkey: Evaluation and Perspectives. Applied Economic Letters, 39, 343–359 23. Hakkio, C.S., ve Rush, M..(1991). Is the Budget Deficit “Too Large”?.Economic Inquiry 29, 429–445. 24. Hamilton, J.D., ve Flavin, M.A.. (1986). On The Limitations of Government Borrowing: A Framework for Empiricial Testing.The American Economic Review, Vol 76, No 4, September., 808-819. 25. Jha, R. ve Sharma, A.. (2004). Structural Breaks and Unit Roots: A Further Test of the Sustainability of the Indian Fiscal Deficit. Public Finance Review, 2(2): 196-219. 26. Kalyoncu, H.. (2005). Fiscal Policy Sustainability: Test of Intertemporal Borrowing Constraints. Applied Economic Letters, 12, 957-962 27. Kashala-Tsihiswaka, G.,. (2006). Is Fiscal Policy Sustainable in South Africa? An Application of The Econometric Approach. University of Pretoria Department of Economcs Working Paper Series, Working Paper:2006–14. 28. Kirchgaessner, G., ve Prohl, S.. (2006). Sustainability of Swiss Fiscal Policy. CESifo Working Paper, No:1689. 29. Koo, C. M.. (2002). Fiscal Sustainability in The Wake of The Economic Crisis in Korea. Journal of Asian Economics, Volume:13, 659-669. 30. Kustepeli, Y.,ve Onel, G.. (2004). Fiscal Deficit Sustainability with a Structural Break: An Application toTurkey. Review of Social, Economicand Business Studies, 5(6), 189–208. 31. Kwiatkowski, D.,Phillips, P.C.B., Schmidt, P., ve Shin, Y..(1992). Testing the Null Hypothesis of Stationary Against the Alternative of a Unit Root. Journal of Econometrics 54, 159–178. 32. Lee, J.,ve Strazicich, M.C..(2003). Minimum LM Unit Root Test with Two Structural Breaks. The Review of Economics and Statistics 63, 1082–1089. 33. Lee, J., ve Strazicich, M.C..(2004). Minimum LM Unit Root Test with One Structural Break. Working Paper. Department of Economics, Appalachian State University. 34. Makrydakis, S.,Tzavalis, E., ve Balfoussias, A.. (1999). Policy Regime Changes and The Long-Run Sustainability of Fiscal Policy: An Applicaton to Greece. Economic Modelling, 16,71-86. 35. Marinheiro, C.F.. (2005). Sustainability of Portuguese Fiscal Policy in Historical Perspective. CESifo Working Paper, No: 1399. 36. Martin, G.M..(2000). US Deficit Sustainability: a New Approach Based on Multiple Endogenous Breaks. Journal of Applied Econometrics 15, 83–105. 37. Meltzer, A.H., Richard, S.F..(1981). A Rational Theory of the Size of Government. Journal of Political Economy 89, 914–927. 38. Neaime,S., (2004). Sustainability of Budget Deficits and Public Debt in Lebanon: A Stationary and Co-Integration Analysis. Review of Middle East Economicsand Finance, Vol:2, No:1, 43–61. 39. Özatay, F., (1997). Sustainability of Fiscal Deficits, Monetary Policy, and Inflation Stabilization: The Case of Turkey. Journal of Policy Modelling, 19 (6), 661-681. 40. Özdemir, K. A.. (2004). Public Debt in Turkey.TCMB, Research Department, WP, 11. 41. Özmen, E.,ve Koğar, Ç. İ..(1998). Sustainability of Budget Deficits in Turkey with a Structural Shift. METU Studies in Development, Vol. 25(1), 107–127. 42. Paleologou, S-M..(2013). Asymmetries in the Revenue–Expenditure Nexus: A Tale of Three Countries. Economic Modelling 30, 52–60 43. Payne, J.E., Mohammadi, H., ve Cak, M.. (2008). Turkish Budget Deficit Sustainability and the Revenue-Expenditure Nexus, Applied Economics, 40:7, 823–830 44. Peacock, A.T., Wiseman, J..(1979). Approaches to the Analysis of Government Expenditure Growth. Public Finance Quarterly 7, 3–23. 45. Peker, O., ve Göçer,İ.. (2012). Bütçe Açıklarının Ampirik Analizi, Celal Bayar Üniversitesi İİBF, Yönetim ve Ekonomi Dergisi, Cilt 19 sayı 1 ss. 163–178 46. Perron, P..(1997). Further Evidence on Breaking Trend Functions in Macroeconomic Variables. Journal of Econometrics 80, 355–385. 47. Phillips, P.C.B. ve Perron, P..(1988). Testing for a Unit Root in Time Series Regression, Biometrica, Vol. 75, 335–346. 48. Quintos, C.E..(1995). Sustainability of the Deficit Process with Structural Shifts, Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, Vol. 13(4), 409–417. 49. Roberts, P.C..(1978). Idealism in Public Choice Theory. Journal of Monetary Economics 4, 603–615. 50. Rubio, O. B., Roldan, C.D., ve Esteve, V.. (2006). Is The Budget Defict Sustainable When Fiscal Policyis Nonlinear? The case of Spain. Journal of Macroeconomics, 28: 596–608. 51. Şen, H., Sağbaş, İ. ve Keskin, A.. (2010). Türkiye’de Mali Sürdürülebilirliğin Analizi: 1975–2007. Maliye Dergisi, 158. 52. Tanner E.,ve Liu, P.. (1994). Is The Budget Deficit “Too Large?”: Some Further Evidence. Economic Inquiry, Volume:32, Issue 3, 511-518. 53. Terzi, H. ve Oltulular, S..(2006). Harcama-Vergi Geliri Hipotezi: Türkiye Örneği. Atatürk Üniversitesi İİBF Dergisi, Cilt:20, Sayı:2 54. Wildavsky, A..(1988). The New Politics of the Budgetary Process. Scott, Foresman, Glenview, IL. 55. Wu, J-L.. (1998). Are Budget Deficits “Too Large”?:The Evidence fromTaiwan. Journal of Asian Economics,9: 3. ss. 519–528. 56. Yıldırım, K ve Özcan,S.E..(2011). Bütçe Açıklarının Sürdürülebilirliği 1970– 2005 Türkiye Örneği. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı 30,ss 39–50 57. Zivot, E. Ve Andrews, D.W.K..(1992). Further Evidence on the Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics Vol. 10, 251–270.