Kedinamikan Komponen Hasil dan Belanja Kerajaan Negeri: Kajian Empirikal di Perak, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka dan Johor

Authors

  • Norain Mod Asri Pusat Pengajian Ekonomi Fakulti Ekonomi dan Pengurusan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
  • Md Zyadi Md Tahir Pusat Pengajian Ekonomi Fakulti Ekonomi dan Pengurusan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
  • Wook Endut Pusat Pengajian Ekonomi Fakulti Ekonomi dan Pengurusan Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

Abstract

The financial crisis episode has previously shown fiscal policy importance as a major instrument for national economic stabilization policy, especially through innovation revenue and government expenditure by total or components. Next, the behavior of the directions of government revenue and expenditures within the period, regardless of federal, states or local authorities has also reflected the budget and the fiscal deficit/surplus for the futures. In line with this condition, this study analysis 3 hypotheses which related to the dynamic relation between government revenue and expenditure; taxation-consumption hypothesis, consumption-taxation hypothesis and fiscal adjustments. Overall, the findings show that, most of the state governments are more practicing the fiscal adjustment strategy in the total revenue and expenditure stages, compare with its components. 

Episod krisis kewangan sebelum ini memperlihatkan peri penting dasar fiskal sebagai instrumen utama dalam dasar penstabilan ekonomi negara terutama sekali menerusi inovasi hasil dan belanja kerajaan secara total mahupun komponen. Seterusnya, gelagat serta arah hubungan hasil dan belanja kerajaan tersebut antara tempoh, tidak kira sama ada kerajaan persekutuan, negeri mahupun tempatan, turut mempengaruhi saiz belanjawan dan defisit (surplus) fiskal semasa dan masa hadapan. Rentetan itu, kajian ini menganalisis 3 hipotesis berkaitan kedinamikan hubungan antara hasil dan belanja awam; hipotesis cukai-belanja, belanja-cukai dan penyelarasan fiskal. Secara keseluruhannya, dapatan membuktikan kebanyakan kerajaan negeri lebih mempraktiskan strategi penyelarasan fiskal di peringkat jumlah hasil dan belanja berbanding dengan komponen.

 

References

Anderson, W., Wallace, M.S., dan Warner, J.T. (1986). Government spending and taxation:what cause what? Southern Economic Journal. January: 630-639.

Buchanan, J. dan Wagner, R. (1978). Dialogues concerning fiscal religion. Journal of Monetary Economics. 4: 627-636.

Friedman, M. (1978). The limitations of tax limitations. Policy Review. Summer: 7-14.

Gao, P.Y. (1996). On the economic mechanism of issuing treasury bonds. Jingji Yanjiu(Economic Research Journal). 9: 24-31.

Granger, C.W.J. (1969). Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods. Econometrica. July: 424-438.

Johansen, S. (1988). Statistical analysis of cointegrating vectors. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control. 12: 231-254.

Kia, A. (2008). Fiscal sustainability in emerging countries: Evidence from Iran and Turkey. Journal of Policy Modeling. 30: 957-972.

Kollias, C. dan Paleologou, S.M. (2006). Fiscal policy in the European Union: Tax and spend, spend and tax, fiscal synchronization or institutional separation? Journal of Economic Studies. 33(2): 108-120.

Koren, S. dan Stiassny, A. (1998). Tax and spend, or spend and tax? An international study. Journal of Policy Modeling. 20(2): 163-191.

Manage, N. dan Marlow, M.L. (1986). The causal relation between federal expenditures and receipts. Southern Economic Journal. January: 617-629.

Meltzer, A.H. dan Richard, S.F. (1981). A rational theory of the size of the government. Journal of Political Economy. 89: 914-927.

Miller, S.M. dan Russek, F.S. (1990). Cointegration and error-correction models: the temporal causality between government taxes and spending. Southern Economic Journal. 221-229.

Musgrave, R.A. (1966). Principle of budget determination. Public Finance: Selected Readings (Eds), Cameron A.H. dan Henderson W., Random House, New York. 15-27.

Narayan, P.K. (2005). The government revenue and government expenditure nexus: empirical evidence from nine Asian countries. Journal of Asian Economics. 15: 1203-1216.

Narayan, P.K. dan Narayan, S. (2006). Government revenue and government expenditure nexus: evidence from developing countries. Applied Economics. 38: 285-291.

Owoye, O. (1995). The causal relationship between taxes and expenditures in the G7 countries: cointegration and error-correction models. Applied Economics Letters. 2: 19-22.

Peacock, A.T. dan Wiseman, J. (1961). The growth of public expenditure in the United Kingdom. Princeton University Press for the National Bureau of Economic Research, Princeton, NJ.

Peacock, A.T. dan Wiseman, J. (1979). Approaches to the analysis of government expenditure growth. Public Finance Quarterly. 7: 3-23.

Ram, R. (1988). Additional evidence on causality between government revenue and government expenditure. Southern Economic Journal. January: 763-769.

Tsangyao, C., Wen, R. dan Caudill, S.B. (2002). Tax and spend, spend and tax, or fiscal synchronization: new evidence for ten countries. Applied Economics. 34: 1553-1561.

Von Furstenberg, G.M., Green, R.J. dan Jeong, J. (1986). Tax and spend, or spend and tax?. The Review of Economics and Statistics. 2: 179-188.

Downloads

Published

2017-04-06

Issue

Section

Articles