Tax hikes are not always contractionary

Samara Gunter, Daniel Riera-Crichton, Carlos Vegh, Guillermo Vuletin 01 May 2019

a

A

Alesina et al. (2015) claimed that “[f]iscal adjustments based upon spending cuts are much less costly, in terms of output losses, than tax-based ones ...”. Research during the past ten years has found large negative tax multipliers. Several individual and multi-country analyses that focus exclusively on industrial economies, mostly European,  have built on Romer and Romer’s (2010) narrative approach and found tax multipliers ranging from about −1.7 to −5.1 

This seemingly robust evidence has led to strong policy prescriptions in industrial European countries, as reflected in the above quote. We asked whether larger sample, including developing countries, shows large negative tax multipliers.

Non-linear effects of tax changes on output

We followed the narrative approach for a new dataset on value-added taxes for 51 countries (21 industrial and 30 developing) between 1970 and 2014 and, for the entire sample, we found a tax multiplier of −1.7 (Gunter et al. 2018). In industrial European economies, the tax multiplier we found is −3.6 (roughly in the mid-point of the range found in previous research) and statistically significant. But for the rest of the sample, the multiplier is −1.2 and not statistically significant.

Why would the tax multiplier vary so much? Theoretical distortionary and disincentive-based arguments (e.g. Jaimovich and Rebelo 2017) imply the effect of tax changes on output would be highly non-linear, and our results support this. As Figure 1 shows, the tax multiplier is essentially zero if the initial tax rate levels are very low, and becomes more negative as the initial tax rate and the size of the tax change increase.2

Figure 1 Non-linear cumulative tax multipliers after two years

Notes: Country fixed-effect panel regression with linear and quadratic trends and bootstrapped Driscoll-Kraay standard errors. The top and bottom 15% of initial tax levels and tax changes (in absolute value) are excluded.

This strongly suggests that the growing consensus pointing to large negative tax multipliers in industrial countries, particularly in Europe (e.g. Alesina et al. 2015), is driven mainly by high initial tax rates. Large negative tax multipliers are not a robust empirical regularity, especially in the developing world. 

In a policy-oriented companion paper, we show that this novel finding has important policy implications related to revenue mobilisation, debt sustainability analysis, and the Laffer curve (Gunter et al. 2019).3

Tax multipliers for individual countries

The initial level of taxes varies greatly across countries, so it is natural that the potential output effect of changing tax rates varies too. Figure 2 shows that, given a country's current VAT rate, the tax multiplier could be statistically zero (light blue), moderate to high (yellow, orange, and red). 

Figure 2 Tax multipliers after two years

Notes: Tax multipliers computed based on a 1.5-percentage-point change in the VAT rate. Light blue indicates statistically zero tax multipliers.

Based on Figure 2, for half the world (88 of 175 countries) the tax multiplier is statistically zero (light blue). For example, tax changes would have virtually no effect on GDP in countries with low tax rates such as Angola, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Guatemala, Nigeria, and Paraguay. In contrast, the same tax increase (or decrease) would cause output to fall (or increase) in countries with relatively high VAT rates, including emerging markets like Argentina and Uruguay and, especially, many industrial European countries.

Revenue mobilisation in countries with low levels of provision of public goods and social and infrastructure gaps

The appropriate role and the size of government has been studied from many perspectives. For example, Wagner’s Law proposes a positive relationship between the size of government spending relative to GDP and real GDP per capita. As national income rises public spending tends to increase, both at extensive (new activities) and intensive (existing activities performed on a larger scale) margins. Figure 3 strongly supports this well-documented empirical regularity. 

Figure 3 Relationship between GDP per capita and size of government spending relative to GDP

Notes: Data correspond to the year 2015. Total number of countries in the sample is 107. Sources: Data for government spending over GDP ratio from WEO-IMF. Data for per capita GDP (GDPpc) from Penn World Tables.

Countries above (or below) the fitted line are countries with a size of government spending larger (or smaller) than that of a typical country with the same level of income per capita.

If we define excess spending as the ratio G/GDP minus the predicted ratio G/GDP from the fitted line in Figure 3, it follows – from individual country examples in Figure 3 and more systematic evidence in Figure 4 – that countries with positive excess spending (like Honduras, Jamaica, Argentina, and Greece) tend to have higher VAT rates than those with negative excess spending (like Guatemala, Costa Rica, New Zealand, and Australia). This evidence suggests that countries such as Guatemala, with low provision of public goods for its degree of development, may be able to provide a typical level of public goods using revenues from an increase in the VAT rate, with little effect on economic activity.4

Figure 4 Relationship between ‘excess”’ spending and the VAT rate

Notes: Data correspond to the year 2015. Total number of countries in the sample is 107. Sources: Data for government spending over GDP ratio from WEO-IMF. Data for per capita GDP (GDPpc) from Penn World Tables.

Revenue mobilisation in commodity-dependent countries

Commodity prices plunged in 2014, and the price fall is increasingly perceived as permanent. So, most commodity-rich countries (especially those whose fiscal revenue structure depends excessively on commodity revenues) face a growing fiscal challenge. Figure 5, unsurprisingly, shows a strong association between an economy’s dependency on commodities (proxied by commodity GDP as a percentage of total GDP) and commodity revenue dependency (proxied by commodity revenues as a percentage of total revenues). 

Figure 5 Relationship between commodity GDP (as percentage of GDP) and commodity revenues (as percentage of total revenues)

Notes: Data correspond to the period 2010-2013. Total number of countries in the sample is 55. Sources: Data for commodity revenues (as percentage of total revenues) and commodity GDP (as percentage of GDP) based on authors’ computations, using IMF and IDB data.

If we define excess commodity revenue dependency as commodity revenue minus the predicted commodity revenue from the fitted line of Figure 5, it follows – from country examples in Figure 5 and more systematic evidence from Figure 6 – that countries with positive excess commodity revenue dependency (like Malaysia, Yemen, and Nigeria) tend to have lower VAT rates (or no VAT at all, as in the cases of Bahrain, Brunei, and Iraq) than those with negative excess commodity revenue dependency (like Chile, Papua New Guinea, Trinidad and Tobago, and Republic of Congo). 

Figure 6 Relationship between ‘excess’ commodity revenue dependency and the VAT rate

Notes: Data correspond to the period 2010-2013. Total number of countries in the sample is 55. Sources: Data for commodity revenues (as percentage of total revenues) and commodity GDP (as percentage of GDP) based on authors’ computations, using IMF and IDB data.

This evidence suggests that countries such as Nigeria could quickly mobilise revenues from non-commodity related activities by increasing their VAT rates with relatively little effect on economic activity.

References

Alesina, A, C Favero, and F Giavazzi (2015), “The output effect of fiscal consolidation plans”, Journal of International Economics 96: S19-S42.

Cloyne, J (2013), “Discretionary tax changes and the macroeconomy: New narrative evidence from the United Kingdom”, American Economic Review 103: 1507-1528.

Gil, P, F Marti, R Morris, J Perez, and R Ramos (2017), “The output effects of tax changes: Narrative evidence from Spain”, Bank of Spain working paper 1721.

Gunter, S, D Riera-Crichton, C Vegh, and G Vuletin (2018), “Non-linear effects of tax changes on output: The role of the initial level of taxation”, World Bank working paper 8668.

Gunter, S, D Riera-Crichton, C Vegh, and G Vuletin (2019), “Policy implications of non-linear distortion-based effects of tax changes on output”, World Bank working paper 8720.

Hayo, B, and M Uhl (2013), “The macroeconomic effects of legislated tax changes in Germany”, Oxford Economic Papers 66: 397-418.

Jaimovich, N, and S Rebelo, (2017), “Non-linear effects of taxation on growth”, Journal of Political Economy 125: 265-291.

Lagarde, C (2016), "Revenue mobilization and international taxation: Key ingredients for 21st century economies", speech delivered in Abu Dhabi, 22 February. 

Pereira, M, and L Wemans (2013), “Output effects of a measure of tax shocks based on changes in legislation for Portugal”, Central Bank of Portugal working paper 15.

Riera-Crichton, D, C Vegh, and G Vuletin (2016), “Tax multipliers: Pitfalls in measurement and identification”, Journal of Monetary Economics 79: 30-48.

Romer, C, and D Romer (2010), “The macroeconomic effects of tax changes: Estimates based on a new measure of fiscal shocks”, American Economic Review 100: 763-801.

Endnotes

[1] See, among others, Cloyne (2013), Hayo and Uhl (2013), Pereira and Wemans (2013), Alesina et al. (2015), Riera-Crichton et al. (2016), and Gilet et al. (2017). 

[2] We also show the relevance of non-linear arguments for Romer and Romer’s (2010) US dataset.

[3] For the sake of brevity and given its critical importance for developing countries, as emphasised, for example, by the head of the IMF, Christine Lagarde (2016), we focus here on revenue mobilisation.

[4] Note that this analysis is quite conservative regarding the positive effect of these fiscal changes since it does not include the potential output effect of higher government spending (associated with larger fiscal revenues).

a

A

Topics:  Macroeconomic policy Taxation

Tags:  Tax rises, tax hikes, fiscal adjustments, Tax multiplier, tax, VAT, government, commodities

Associate Professor of Economics, Colby College

Research Economist, Office of the Chief Economist for Latin America and the Caribbean, World Bank

Chief Economist for Latin America and the Caribbean, World Bank

Senior Economist, Office of the Chief Economist for Latin America and the Caribbean, World Bank

Events

CEPR Policy Research