IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/khe/scajes/v2y2016i1p121-128.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indirect Taxes in Romania – an Econometric Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Penu

Abstract

Indirect taxes have a significant weight in the GDP. Statistical data reveals that the new states that joined the EU in its funding sources to the greatest extent through indirect taxes. They reveal, on the one hand, reducing the tax burden on the producer, and on the other hand, the difficulty faced by the country in direct tax collection, but also some problems of social nature. This article proposes an econometric analysis of the relationship between indirect taxes and household final consumption expenditure.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Penu, 2016. "Indirect Taxes in Romania – an Econometric Analysis," Academic Journal of Economic Studies, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 2(1), pages 121-128, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:khe:scajes:v:2:y:2016:i:1:p:121-128
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ajes.ro/wp-content/uploads/AJES_article_1_50.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.ajes.ro/wp-content/uploads/AJES_article_1_50.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cremer, Helmuth & Pestieau, Pierre & Rochet, Jean-Charles, 2001. "Direct versus Indirect Taxation: The Design of the Tax Structure Revisted," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 42(3), pages 781-799, August.
    2. Oya Pinar Ardic & Burcay Erus & Gurcan Soydan, 2010. "An evaluation of indirect taxes in Turkey," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(4), pages 2787-2801.
    3. European Commission, 2015. "Taxation trends in the European Union: 2015 edition," Taxation trends 2015, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    4. Richard W. Lindholm, 1968. "Some Value‐Added Tax Impacts On The International Competitiveness Of Producers," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 23(4), pages 659-665, September.
    5. European Commission, 2017. "Taxation trends in the European Union: 2017 edition," Taxation trends 2017, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    6. European Commission, 2008. "Taxation trends in the European Union: 2008 edition," Taxation trends 2008, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    7. Constantin Anghelache & Ligia Prodan, 2013. "The Use of Simple Regression in Macroeconomic Analysis," Knowledge Horizons - Economics, Faculty of Finance, Banking and Accountancy Bucharest,"Dimitrie Cantemir" Christian University Bucharest, vol. 5(4), pages 168-172, December.
    8. David Madden, 1995. "An analysis of indirect tax reform in Ireland in the 1980s," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 16(1), pages 18-37, May.
    9. Agha, Ali & Haughton, Jonathan, 1996. "Designing VAT Systems: Some Efficiency Considerations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 78(2), pages 303-308, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. TODOR Silvia Paula & GHIUR Rodica & BREZEANU Petre, 2017. "The Degree Of Compliance Based On Vat In Romania Between 1995 And 2015," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 69(2), pages 154-169, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Agnieszka Szczypińska, 2019. "What drives the VAT gap in the European Union?," Collegium of Economic Analysis Annals, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of Economic Analysis, issue 55, pages 69-82.
    2. Cole, Alexandre Lucas & Guerello, Chiara & Traficante, Guido, 2023. "Government debt deleveraging in the EMU," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 296-324.
    3. Liliana Anamaria Draghici, 2016. "The Fiscal Policy in the EU States from Central and Eastern Europe," Finante - provocarile viitorului (Finance - Challenges of the Future), University of Craiova, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, vol. 1(18), pages 150-158, November.
    4. European Commission, 2016. "Taxation trends in the European Union: 2016 edition," Taxation trends 2016, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    5. Marie-Louise Leroux & Pierre Pestieau & Grégory Ponthière, 2008. "Should we subsidize longevity?," Working Papers halshs-00586236, HAL.
    6. Helmuth Cremer & Philippe De Donder & Dario Maldonado & Pierre Pestieau, 2009. "Forced Saving, Redistribution, and Nonlinear Social Security Schemes," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(1), pages 86-98, July.
    7. Johann Brunner & Susanne Pech, 2013. "Taxing bequests and consumption in the steady state," Economics working papers 2013-15, Department of Economics, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Austria.
    8. Louis Kaplow, 2010. "Optimal Control of Externalities in the Presence of Income Taxation," STICERD - Public Economics Programme Discussion Papers 02, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
    9. Markus Haavio & Kaisa Kotakorpi, 2012. "Sin Licenses Revisited," CESifo Working Paper Series 4010, CESifo.
    10. Sanz Labrador, Ismael & Sanz-Sanz, José Félix, 2013. "Política fiscal y crecimiento económico: consideraciones microeconómicas y relaciones macroeconómicas," Macroeconomía del Desarrollo 5367, Naciones Unidas Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
    11. Kaplanoglou, Georgia & Newbery, David Michael, 2003. "Indirect Taxation in Greece: Evaluation and Possible Reform," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(5), pages 511-533, September.
    12. Pierre Pestieau & Maria Racionero, 2015. "Tagging with leisure needs," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 45(4), pages 687-706, December.
    13. Kodjo Adandohoin & Vigninou Gammadigbe, 2022. "The revenue efficiency consequences of the announcement of a tax transition reform: The case of WAEMU countries," African Development Review, African Development Bank, vol. 34(S1), pages 195-218, July.
    14. Xi Wei & Nie Yingqin & Cheng Xiran, 2019. "Indirect Tax Burden of Regional Residents: Study on Long Term MRIO Model," Journal of Systems Science and Information, De Gruyter, vol. 7(6), pages 568-583, December.
    15. World Bank, 2014. "Turkey Public Finance Review : Turkey in Transition--Time for a Fiscal Policy Pivot?," World Bank Publications - Reports 19321, The World Bank Group.
    16. Chen, Shawn Xiaoguang, 2017. "The effect of a fiscal squeeze on tax enforcement: Evidence from a natural experiment in China," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 62-76.
    17. Alessandro Balestrino & Alessandro Cigno & Anna Pettini, 2002. "Endogenous Fertility and the Design of Family Taxation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 9(2), pages 175-193, March.
    18. Hakki HakanYilmaz & Mehmet Ali Ozyer & Serap Inci Ozyer, 2019. "Redistribution Effects of Taxes on Expenditure: The Case of Turkey (2002-2013)," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 230(3), pages 11-40, September.
    19. Henrik Jordahl & Luca Micheletto, 2005. "Optimal Utilitarian Taxation and Horizontal Equity," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 7(4), pages 681-708, October.
    20. Ulrike Vogelgesang, 2001. "Optimal Capital Income Taxation and Redistribution," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 57(4), pages 412-434, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Indirect taxes; household final consumption expenditure; fiscal pressure; simple regression;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:khe:scajes:v:2:y:2016:i:1:p:121-128. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Adi Sava (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ffucdro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.