OECD Ülkelerinde İşgücüne Katılım Oranı ile Vergi Yükü Arasındaki İlişkinin İncelenmesi

İşgücüne katılım oranı zaman içerisinde ülke ekonomileri için çok büyük önem arz etmeye başlamıştır. Özellikle Sanayi Devriminin gerçekleşmesiyle yaygınlaşan kitlesel üretim hammadelere olan talebi arttırmış ve dolayısıyla isgücüne olan ihtiyaç son derece artış göstermiştir. Dolayısıyla işgücüne katılım oranı ve onun belirleyicileri politika yapıcılar için önemle üzerinde durulan bir konu haline gelmiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı OECD ülkelerinde vergi yükünün işgücüne katılım oranı üzerindeki etkisini tespit etmektir. Vergi yükü ve işgücüne katılım oranı arasındaki ilişkiyi tespit edebilmek için çalışma da literatür ile uyumlu 28 OECD ülkesi için 1990–2017 yıllarına ait makro veriler kullanılmıştır ve ülke seçimleri, verilerin ulaşılabilirliğine göre yapılmıştır. Analiz yöntemi olarak panel veri analizi kullanılmış olup, otokorelasyon ve yatay kesit bağımlığı sorunlarının üstesinden gelmek için GLS Period SUR modeli ve PCSE cross-sectional covariance metodu kullanılmıştır. Sonuçlar vergi yükü ile işgücüne katılım oranının ters orantılı olduğunu göstermektedir.

Analysis of the Relationship Between Tax Burden and Labor Force Participation Rates in OECD Countries

The labor force participation rate has become a vital indicator for economies, especially after the industrial revolution. Because of the mass production after the industrial revolution, the necessity of raw materials increased, which also brought a rise in labor demand. Thus, the labor force partici- pation rate and its determinants have become essential subjects for policymakers. The purpose of the study is to find out and evaluate the effect of the tax burden on labor force participation rate in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. The selected countries are determined in accordance with the availability of the data. Panel data estimations were implemented to data set, and due to cross-sectional dependency and autocorrelation prob- lems, the GLS period SURestimation method and cross-sectional covariance methods were used. The findings revealed that tax burden has a negative and significant impact on the labor force participation rate.

___

  • Allison, P. D. (2001). Missing data. The SAGE handbook of quantitative methods in psychology (pp. 72–89). Sage Publications.
  • Ari, Y. O., & Yıldız, Ü. (2018). Causality relationship between transfer expenditures and labor force participation rate in Turkey. Eastern European Journal of Regional Studies, 4(2), 58–72.
  • Aydın, F. F., & Levent, C. (2022). The effect of tax wedge and industrialization on female labor force participation. International Journal of Contemporary Economics and Administrative Sciences, 12(1), 93–116.
  • Beck, N., & Katz, J. N. (1995). What to do (and not to do) with time-series cross-section data. American Political Science Review, 89(3), 634–647. [CrossRef]
  • Bloom, D. E., Canning, D., Fink, G., & Finlay, J. E. (2009). Fertility, female labor force participation, and the demographic dividend. Journal of Economic Growth, 14(2), 79–101. [CrossRef]
  • Blundell, R. (1995). The Impact of Taxation on Labour Force Participation and Labour Supply. OECD Jobs Study Working Papers, No. 8. OECD Publishing.
  • Duval, R., Eris, M., & Furceri, D. (2010). Labour force participation hysteresis in industrial countries: Evidence and causes. OECD Economics Department.
  • Favreault, M., Ratcliffe, C., & Toder, E. (1999). Labor force participation of older workers: Prospective changes and potential policy responses. National Tax Journal, 52(3), 483–503. [CrossRef]
  • Gillman, M. (2011). Advanced modern macroeconomics: Analysis and application. Financial Times Press.
  • Giovanis, Ö. Ö. , Gündüz, S. , Akılotu, E. , Giovanis, E., & Uyar, N. (2018). Artan Katılım Birikim Getiriyor mu? Kadının İşgücüne Katılımı ve Yurtiçi tasarruf üzerine bir Panel veri analizi. Aydın İktisat Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 30–49.
  • Grigoli, F., Koczan, Z., & Topalova, P. (2018). A cohort-based analysis of labor force participation for advanced economies. Global labor organization paper discussion paper, 264, 1–23 Gujarati, D. N. (2004). Basic econometrics (4th ed). The McGraw-Hill Companies.
  • Hausman, J. A. (1981). Labor supply. In B. R. Bartlett & T. P. Roth (Eds.). The supplyside solution (pp. 224–256). Macmillan Publishers LTD.
  • Kızılgöl, Ö. A. (2012). Kadınların İşgücüne Katılımının Belirleyicileri: Ekonometrik bir Analiz. Doğuş Üniversitesi Dergisi, 13(1), 88–101.
  • Kleven, H. J., & Kreiner, C. T. (2006). The Marginal Cost of Public Funds: Hours of Work versus Labor Force Participation. Journal of Public Economics, 90(10–11), 1955–1973. [CrossRef]
  • Laun, L. (2017). The effect of age-targeted tax credits on labor force par- ticipation of older workers. Journal of Public Economics, 152, 102–118. [CrossRef]
  • Levin, A., Lin, C. F., & James Chu, C. S. J. (2002). Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample properties. Journal of Econometrics, 108(1), 1–24. [CrossRef]
  • Macurdy, T. E. (1983). A simple scheme for estimating an intertemporal model of labor supply and consumption in the presence of taxes and uncertainty. International Economic Review, 24(2), 265–289. [CrossRef]
  • Messner, S. F. (1992). Exploring the Consequences of Erratic Data Reporting for Cross-national Research on homicide. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 8(2), 155–173. [CrossRef]
  • Mocan, N. (2019). Taxes and culture of leisure: Impact on labor supply in Europe. Journal of Comparative Economics, 47(3), 618–639. [CrossRef]
  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (2018). Real minimum wages. Retrieved from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.a spx?DataSetCode=RMW.
  • Perez-Arce, F., & Prados, M. J. (2021). The Decline in the U. S. Labor Force participation Rate: A Literature Review. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(2), 615–652. [CrossRef]
  • Sarsılmaz, B. (2018). Explaining the causal relationship between FLFP and its determinants in Turkey [Master’s Thesis].
  • Scott, L. C., Smith, L. H., & Rungeling, B. (1977). Labor force participation in southern rural labor markets. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 59(2), 266–274. [CrossRef]
  • Shahid, M. (2014). Impact of labour force participation on economic growth in Pakistan. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 5(11), 89–93.
  • The World Bank (2020). Consumer price index. Retrieved from https://da ta.worldbank.org/indicator/FP.CPI.TOTL.
  • The World Bank (2020). Fertility Rate, Total (births per woman). Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN.
  • The World Bank (2020). GDP (current US $). Retrieved from https://da ta.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD.
  • The World Bank (2020). Labor force participation Rate. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZS.
  • The World Bank (2020). Tax revenue (% of GDP). Retrieved from https://da ta.worldbank.org/indicator/GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS.
  • United Nations Development Programme Human Development Reports (2019). Human development data (1990–2018). Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/data.
  • Van Zandweghe, W. (2017). The changing cyclicality of labor force participation. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City Economic Review, 102(3), 5–35. [CrossRef]
  • Yamak, R., Abdioğlu, Z., & Mert, N. (2012). Türkiye’de İşgücüne Katılımı Belirleyen faktörler: Mikro ekonomik analiz. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 12(2), 41–58.
  • Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. (2012). İleri Panel veri analizi: Stata Uygulamalı. Beta Yayınları.
  • Yerdelen Tatoğlu, F. (2017). Panel zaman Serileri analizi. Beta Yayınları.
  • Yuldashev, O. , & Khakimov, O. (2011). Income taxation and labor force participation in transition economies: Evidence from Bulgaria, Russian Federation and Serbia. Anadolu University Journal of Social Sciences, 11(3), 177–198.
  • Zellner, A., & Huang, D. S. (1962). Further properties of efficient estimators for seemingly unrelated regression equations. International Economic Review, 3(3), 300–313. [CrossRef]