Fees and User Charges in Public Finance. Evidence from Selected OECD Countries
cytuj
pobierz pliki
RIS BIB ENDNOTEChoose format
RIS BIB ENDNOTEFees and User Charges in Public Finance. Evidence from Selected OECD Countries
Publication date: 12.2019
Public Management, 2019, Issue 4 (48), pp. 299 - 315
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843968ZP.19.021.11941Authors
Fees and User Charges in Public Finance. Evidence from Selected OECD Countries
The aim of this article is to assess the importance of user charges as a source of revenues in state and local government and factors that impact a volume of these revenues. In order to carry out the research it has been assumed that volume of revenues from fees and user charges are dependent on fiscal decentralization, are positively affected public expenditure and depend on the wealth of a society. Two models—for the whole public sector and for state and local government has been designed. Using a panel of 26 selected OECD countries in period 1995–2016 it has been proved that decentralization is a significant factor only in case of fees and user charges in whole public sector but not significant in decentralized model. As expected fees and user charges positively depend on volume of expenditures in both models and additionally negatively depends on tax burden.
Opłaty i opłaty za usługi w finansach publicznych. Doświadczenia wybranych krajów OECD
Celem tego artykułu jest ocena znaczenia opłat i opłat pobieranych od użytkowników jako źródła dochodów dla finansów samorządowych oraz czynników wpływających na wielkość tych dochodów. W celu przeprowadzenia badań przyjęto, że wielkość przychodów z opłat i opłat za usługi od decentralizacji fiskalnej pozytywnie wpływa na wydatki publiczne i zależy od zamożności społeczeństwa. Zaprojektowano dwa modele: dla całego sektora publicznego oraz dla władz regionalnych i lokalnych. Przy użyciu panelu dwudziestu sześciu wybranych krajów OECD w latach 1995–2016 udowodniono, że decentralizacja jest istotnym czynnikiem tylko w przypadku opłat i opłat za użytkowanie w całym sektorze publicznym, ale nie jest znacząca w modelu zdecentralizowanym. Zgodnie z oczekiwaniami opłaty i obciążenia użytkowników pozytywnie zależą od wielkości wydatków w obu modelach i dodatkowo negatywnie zależą od obciążeń podatkowych.
Aaberge R., Langøren A. (2006), Measuring the benefits from public services: The effects of local government spending on the distribution of income in Norway, Review of Income and Wealth Series, 52, 1.
Bartle J., Ebdon C., Krane D. (2003), Beyond the property tax: Local government revenue diversify cation, Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 15, 4.
Będzieszak M. (2013), Fees and user charges in large Polish cities, Studia Regionalne i Lokalne, 4, 54.
Bierhanzl E. J., Downing P. B. (1998), User charges and bureaucratic inefficiency, Atlantic Economic Journal, 26, 2.
Bird R. M., Slack N. E. (1993), Urban Public Finance in Canada, 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, Toronto.
Börge L. E. (1995), Economic and political determinants of fee income in Norwegian local governments, Public Choice, 83.
Börge L. E. (2000), Charging for public services: The case of utilities in Norwegian local governments, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 30.
Bös D. (1984), Income taxation, public sector pricing and redistribution, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 86, 2.
Carroll D. (2009), Diversifying municipal government revenue structures: Fiscal illusion or instability? Public Budgeting & Finance (Spring).
Cremer H., Marchand M., Pestieau P. (1997), Investment in local public services: Nash equilibrium and social optimum, Journal of Public Economics, 65.
Downing P. B. (1992), The revenue potential of user charges in municipal finance, Public Finance Review, 20, 4.
Feld L. P., Kirchgässner G., Schaltegger C. A. (2003), Decentralized taxation and the size of government: Evidence from Swiss state and local governments, CESifo Working Paper No. 1087.
Feldstein S. (1972), Equity and efficiency in public sector pricing: The optimal two-part tariff, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 86, 2.
Fitch L. C. (1957), Metropolitan financial problems, Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 314.
Fuest C., Kolmar M. (2007), A theory of user-fee competition, Journal of Public Economics, 91.
Huber B., Runkel M. (2009), Tax competition, excludable public goods, and user charges, International Tax and Public Finance, 16.
Kitchen H. M., Slack E. (2003), New finance options for municipal governments, Canadian Tax Journal / Revue Fiscale Canadienne, 51, 6.
Nallathiga R. (2009), User charge pricing for municipal services: Principles, fixation, process and guidelines, CGG Working Paper, Centre for Good Governance (CGG), Hyderabad.
Sepehri A., Chernomasa R. (2001), Are user charges efficiency- and equity-enhancing? A critical review of economic literature with particular reference to experience from developing countries, Journal of International Development, 13, 2.
Stigler G. (1957), The tenable range of functions of local government [in:] Federal Expenditure Policy for Economic Growth and Stability, Joint Economic Committee, Subcommittee on Fiscal Policy, U.S. Congress, Washington.
Sun R., Jung C. (2012), Does user-charge financing reduce expenditure levels for the charge-financed services? The American Review of Public Administration, 42, 2.
Swope K. J., Janeba E. (2005), Taxes or fees? The political economy of providing excludable public goods, Journal of Public Economic Theory, 7, 3.
Tiebout C. M. (1956), A pure theory of local expenditures, The Journal of Political Economy, 64, 5.
Wagner R. E. (1976), Revenue structure, fiscal illusion and budgetary choice, Public Choice, 25.
Westerlund J., Mahdavi S., Firoozi F. (2011), The tax-spending nexus: Evidence from a panel of US state–local governments, Economic Modelling, 28.
Information: Public Management, 2019, Issue 4 (48), pp. 299 - 315
Article type: Original article
Titles:
Fees and User Charges in Public Finance. Evidence from Selected OECD Countries
Fees and User Charges in Public Finance. Evidence from Selected OECD Countries
Warsaw School of Economics
Poland
Published at: 12.2019
Article status: Open
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Percentage share of authors:
Article corrections:
-Publication languages:
EnglishView count: 1191
Number of downloads: 1924