Heterogeneous Effects of Fiscal Equalization Grants on Local Expenditures: Evidence from Two Formula-Based Variations

Author(s):  
Michihito Ando
2019 ◽  
pp. 21-38
Author(s):  
Alexander N. Deryugin ◽  
Ilya A. Sokolov

The paper analyzes the impact of the “model budget” on the problems of intergovernmental relations in the Russian Federation: a high proportion of expenditure obligations of regional and local budgets and a high degree of interregional inequality in fiscal capacity and socio-economic development. It was concluded that the planned broader use of the “model budget” will not solve the problem of unfunded mandates and will lead first to a significant reduction in incentives for regional authorities to develop the territorial revenue base, and then to economic slowdown in the country. As an alternative approach to improving intergovernmental relations, options are being considered for adjusting the parameters of the equalization transfers distribution formula, the procedure for determining their total volume and calculating the budget expenditure index. In solving the problem of unfunded mandates, an equally important role is given to the procedure for preparing a financial and economic rationale for draft laws.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Olarreaga ◽  
Stefan Sperlich ◽  
Virginie Trachsel

Author(s):  
Darwin Ugarte Ontiveros

Recent evidence suggests that formality improves micro-firms profits in Bolivia. This gain is only for firms with 2 to 5 workers, while smaller and larger firms would lose out by formalizing (McKenzie and Sakho, 2010). However, as much of the empirical literature on this topic, the estimations are based on strong assumptions about unobservables. If the returns to formality vary among firms and these variations influence selection into formality, traditional estimators are biased (Heckman and Vytlacil, 2007). In this paper we considerthese elements to estimate the heterogeneous effects of formality on firm profits in Bolivia. We find remarkable heterogeneity in the returns to formality, from -3% to 6%. The group of firms with positive marginal effects from formality corresponds to those which are most likely to register. We also characterize the firms that likely benefit from having a formal status. These would correspond to large firms which work at big scales.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document