Journals / Bogazici Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies / 2016 / Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 1

OECD Üyesi Ülkelerde Kayıtdışı Ekonomi: Dinamik Genel Denge ve MIMIC Yöntemleri

Shadow Economies in OECD Countries: DGE vs. MIMIC Approaches

Pages
51–75
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our analysis generally shows that even though the two datasets are similar in levels and both illustrate a declining trend of shadow economy size over the period of the analysis, they indicate certain differences with respect to the effects of causal variables on shadow economies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this paper we compare the levels and driving forces of shadow economies in 38 OECD countries using two different methodologies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The other one is based on a two-sector dynamic general equilibrium (DGE) model developed by Elgin and Oztunali (2012).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our analysis generally shows that even though the two datasets are similar in levels and both illustrate a declining trend of shadow economy size over the period of the analysis, they indicate certain differences with respect to the effects of causal variables on shadow economies.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this paper we compare the levels and driving forces of shadow economies in 38 OECD countries using two different methodologies. One of these methods is the multipleindicators-multiple-causes (MIMIC) approach based on an estimation of a structural equation model. The other one is based on a two-sector dynamic general equilibrium (DGE) model developed by Elgin and Oztunali (2012). According to our results, the average driving forces of the shadow economy of the 38 OECD countries obtained using the MIMIC model show that personal income tax (13.8%), indirect taxes (14.1%), tax morale (14.5%), unemployment (14.7%), self-employment (14.5%), growth of GDP (14.3%) and business freedom index (14.2%) contribute more or less evenly to shadow economies. However, according to the estimates constructed using the DGE model, the growth of GDP per-capita has by far the largest effect (24.7%) followed by indirect taxes (18.5%), unemployment (18.3%), tax morale (17.1%), personal income tax (11.2%), self-employment (5.8%), and business freedom (4.3%). Our analysis generally shows that even though the two datasets are similar in levels and both illustrate a declining trend of shadow economy size over the period of the analysis, they indicate certain differences with respect to the effects of causal variables on shadow economies.

Özet

Bu makalede OECD üyesi 38 ülke için iki farklı yöntemle kayıtdışı ekonomi tahmin seviyeleri ve kayıtdışı ekonominin belirleyicileri karşılaştırılmaktadır. Yöntemlerden biri MIMIC yöntemine diğeri ise Elgin ve Öztunalı (2012) çalışmasında geliştirilen iki sektörlü dinamik genel denge modeline dayanmaktadır. Sonuçlarımız, MIMIC yönteminin kayıtdışı ekonominin temel belirleyicileri olarak, gelir vergisi (%13.8) dolaylı vergiler (%14.1), vergi ahlakı (%14.5), işsizlik (%14.7), serbest-meslek oranı (%14.5), GSYİH büyümesi (%14.3) ve işletme özgürlüğü endeksi (%14.2)'ı işaret etmektedir. Ancak, dinamik genel denge yöntemine dayanan tahminler için ise temel belirleyiciler olarak GSYİH büyümesi (%24.7%) dolaylı vergiler (%18.5), işsizlik (%18.3), vergi ahlakı (%17.1),gelir vergisi (%11.2), serbest meslek oranı (%5.8), ve işletme özgürlüğü endeksini (%4.3) göstermektedir. Sonuçlarımız genel olarak iki yöntemin benzer büyüklük seviyeleri tahminlemesine karşın, kayıtdışı ekonominin belirleyicilerinin etkileri yönünden farklılaştığını ortaya koymaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ELGİN, C., SCHNEİDER, F. (2016). OECD Üyesi Ülkelerde Kayıtdışı Ekonomi: Dinamik Genel Denge ve MIMIC Yöntemleri. Bogazici Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Cilt: 30 - Sayı: 1, 51–75. https://ajindex.com/articles/142677

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Bajada, C. and Schneider F. (2005).
  2. Size, Causes and Consequences of the Underground Economy: An International Perspective. Aldershot (GB): Ashgate Publishing Company. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Wiley. Breusch, T. (2005a). The Canadian Underground Economy: An Examination of Giles and Tedds. Canadian Tax Journal, 53(2): 367-391. ------, (2005b). "Estimating the Underground Economy, Using MIMIC Models." Working Paper. National University of Australia, Canberra, Australia. Buehn, A. and Schneider, F. (2012). "Shadow Economies around the World: Novel Insights, Accepted Knowledge, and New Estimates," International Tax and Public Finance, 19: 139-171. ------, (2013). "Size and Development of Tax Evasion in 38 OECD Countries: What Do We (not) Know," Johannes Kepler University Working Paper. Buehn, A., Karmann, A., and Schneider, F. (2009). Shadow Economy and Do-it-yourself Activities: The German Case," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 164(4): 701-722.
  3. Busato, F. and Chiarini, B. (2004). "Market and Underground Activities in a Two-sector Dynamic Equilibrium Model," Economic Theory, 23(4): 863-861.
  4. Byrne, B.M. (1998). Structural Equation Modelling with LISREL, PRELIS and SIMPLIS: Basic Concepts, Applications and Programming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Chatterjee, S., Chaudhury K., and Schneider, F. (2006). "The Size and Development of the Indian Shadow Economy and a Comparison with 18 other Asian Countries: An Empirical Investigation,"Forthcoming in the Journal of Development Economics. Cziraky, D. (2004). "LISREL 8.54: A Program for Structural Equation Modelling with Latent Variables,"Journal of Applied Econometrics, 19: 135-141. ------, (2005). "A Unifying Statistical Framework for Dynamic Structural Equation Models with Latent Variables." Available [online at]: http://stats.lse.ac.uk/ciraki/framework.pdf.
  5. Dell'Anno, R. (2003). "Estimating the Shadow Economy in Italy: A Structural Equation Approach,"Discussion Paper, Department of Economics and Statistics, University of Salerno. Dell'Anno, R. and Schneider, F. (2009). "A Complex Approach to Estimate the Shadow Economy: The Structural Equation Modelling," in M. Faggini and T. Lux (eds.), Coping with the Complexity of Economics: 110-130. Heidelberg: Springer Publishing Company. Elgin, C. (2012). "Cyclicality of Shadow Economy," Economic Papers, 31 (4): 478-490.
  6. Elgin, C. and Oztunali, O. (2012). "Shadow Economies around the World: Mode