Journals / Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting / 2026 / Volume: 13 Issue: 1

THE EFFECT OF MILITARY SPENDING EXEMPTIONS FROM FISCAL RULES ON PUBLIC DEBT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION

Asmaa El-Naser(Transilvania University of Braşov)0009-0004-7906-5292
Ayat Alshathli(University of Santiago de Compostela)0009-0004-7816-0175
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-06-30
🏛️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)

This study adds a well-timed, methodologically sound study to the current argument about the security necessity versus the fiscal stability of the Eurozone in the long term.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Purpose- The research fills a serious policy gap by quantitative empirically determining the macro-fiscal effect of the exemption of military spending by the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) rules of the European Union on the sustainability of public debt.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study is driven by the political argument of the year 2022 on whether defense expenditure or fiscal prudence should be given priority.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:This study adds a well-timed, methodologically sound study to the current argument about the security necessity versus the fiscal stability of the Eurozone in the long term.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2022 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Military expenditure exemptions · panel data analysis · EY fiscal rules

Abstract

Purpose- The research fills a serious policy gap by quantitative empirically determining the macro-fiscal effect of the exemption of military spending by the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) rules of the European Union on the sustainability of public debt. The study is driven by the political argument of the year 2022 on whether defense expenditure or fiscal prudence should be given priority. Methodology- The study is done using a balanced panel data of 27 EU member countries between the years 2000 and 2023. This methodology is quite stringent with the start of the diagnostic tests, the Pesaran CD test of cross-sectional dependence, and the Westerlund Cointegration Test, which proved the existence of a long-run equilibrium relationship between the variables. The primary model is a Fixed- Effects (FE) estimator to adjust to unobserved heterogeneity that the final results would be based on Driscoll-Kraay (1998) robust standard errors to address the documented cross-sectional dependence and serial correlation. The fundamental component of the model is an interaction term (Military Expenditure times Exemption Dummy) that aims at capturing the impact of the institutional change. Findings- The empirical findings are very convincing in terms of their support to the hypothesis of the study. The interaction term is positive and quite significant (p < 0.01), which indicates that the process of exempting military expenditure on the SGP rules causes its effect on the accumulation of public debt to be significant. Although the baseline FE model proved to be fragile in certain control variables (e.g., GDP growth), the strong Driscoll-Kraay estimates prove that the impact of the institutional change is statistically dependable. Moreover, the control variables are also analyzed, which proves that both the government spending and the role of inflation as a debt-reducing factor have a very strong positive impact. Conclusions: The paper comes to the conclusion that the policy option of bending the rules to spend on defense is not a fiscally neutral option, but has a quantifiable price in the form of sustaining debts. The results send a very strong signal to the SGP, with its credibility under attack, and it urges policymakers in the EU to focus on other methods of financing transparency, including common EU defense funds, rather than exemptions in an ad-hoc fashion. This study adds a well-timed, methodologically sound study to the current argument about the security necessity versus the fiscal stability of the Eurozone in the long term.

🔖

Cite This Article

El-Naser, A., Alshathli, A. (2026). THE EFFECT OF MILITARY SPENDING EXEMPTIONS FROM FISCAL RULES ON PUBLIC DEBT IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. Journal of Economics Finance and Accounting, Volume: 13 Issue: 1. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2026.2040

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (36)

  1. Abbasov, R. (2025). The impact of military spending on government budgets: A comprehensive analysis. International Journal of Financial Management and Economics, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.33545/26179210.2025.v8.i1.462
  2. Ahmed, H. A., Mahmood, S., & Shadmani, H. (2022). Defence and non-defence vs debt: How does defence and non-defence government spending impact the dynamics of federal government debt in the United States? Journal of Government and Economics, 7, 100050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jge.2022.100050
  3. Alexander, W. R. J. (2013). The defence-debt nexus: Evidence from the high-income members of NATO. Defence and Peace Economics, 24(2), 133–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2012.673839
  4. Aschalew, N., & Alemu, M. (2025). Dynamic panel and nonlinear causality analytics of defence and debt in fragile Africa. Journal of Decision Analytics and Intelligent Computing, 5(1), 122–147. https://doi.org/10.31181/jdaic10009072025a
  5. Azam, M., & Yi, F. (2017). Does military expenditure increase external debt? Evidence from Asia. Defence and Peace Economics, 28(5), 550– 567. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2015.1072371
  6. Bardakas, I., Doulos, D., & Zombanakis, G. A. (2023). Defence expenditure and public debt in Greece: A non-linear relationship. Security and Defence Quarterly, 41(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.35467/sdq/155960
  7. Blanchard, O., Leandro, Á., & Zettelmeyer, J. (2021). Redesigning EU fiscal rules: From rules to standards. Economic Policy, 36(106), 297– 358. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiab003
  8. Brzoska, M. (1983). The military related external debt of third world countries. Journal of Peace Research, 20(3), 271–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/002234338302000308
  9. Darvas, Z., Martin, P., & Ragot, X. (2018). European fiscal rules require a major overhaul (Bruegel Policy Contribution No. 18/2018). Bruegel. https://www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/european-fiscal-rules-require-major-overhaul
  10. Driscoll, J. C., & Kraay, A. C. (1998). Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data. Review of Economics and Statistics, 80(4), 549–560. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465398557825
  11. Dudzevičiūtė, G., Česnuitytė, V., & Prakapienė, D. (2021). Defence expenditure–government debt nexus in the context of sustainability in selected small European Union countries. Sustainability, 13(12), 6669. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126669
  12. Dunne, J. P., Perlo-Freeman, S., & Soydan, A. (2004). Military expenditure and debt in small industrialized economies: A panel analysis. Defence and Peace Economics, 15(2), 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/1024269032000110504
  13. Dunne, J. P., Perlo-Freeman, S., & Soydan, A. (2004). Military expenditure and debt in South America. Defence and Peace Economics, 15(2), 173–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/1024269032000110540
  14. Durucan, A., & Yeşil, E. (2022). The impact of defence expenditures on government debt, budget deficit, and current account deficit: Evidence from developed and developing countries. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 17(3), 686–701. https://doi.org/10.17153/oguiibf.1086651
  15. El-Naser, A., Dincă, G., & Dincă, M. S. (2025). Investigating the determinants of public debt sustainability for European Union countries. Scientific Annals of Economics and Business, 72(1), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.47743/saeb-2025-0001
  16. Esener, S., & İpek, E. (2015). Expanding effects of military expenditures on external debt in developing countries. Journal of Business Economics and Finance, 4(4), 617–627. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2015414532
  17. Georgantopoulos, A. G. (2011). The interrelationship between military expenditure and external debt: Patterns of causation in Northern Africa countries. Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, 3(4), 264–273. https://doi.org/10.22610/jebs.v3i4.279
  18. Ghulam, Y., & Saunby, B. (2023). Does increase in defence spending lead to more risk of sovereign debt defaults? Defence and Peace Economics, 35, 846–864. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2023.2188386
  19. Hakkio, C. S., & Rush, M. (1991). Is the budget deficit “too large”? Economic Inquiry, 29, 429–445. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465- 7295.1991.tb00837.x
  20. Harutyunyan, G. (2023). The impact of military expenditure on external debt in Armenia. Journal of International Studies, 16(2), 140–150. https://doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2023/16-2/9
  21. Im, K. S., Pesaran, M. H., & Shin, Y. (2003). Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. Journal of Econometrics, 115(1), 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
  22. Imran, M. (2016). The determinants of public debt in Pakistan: An ARDL approach (Master’s thesis). KDI School of Public Policy and Management. https://archives.kdischool.ac.kr/handle/11125/31817
  23. Kollias, C., Manolas, G., & Paleologou, S. M. (2004). Military expenditure and government debt in Greece: Some preliminary empirical findings. Defence and Peace Economics, 15(2), 189–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1024269032000110559
  24. Looney, R. (1987). Impact of military expenditures on third world debt. Canadian Journal of Development Studies, 8(1), 7–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/02255189.1987.9670173
  25. Maddala, G. S., & Wu, S. (1999). A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61, 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.61.s1.13
  26. Makun, K. (2025). An asymmetric analysis of public debt and defence expenditure in Fiji. Journal of Knowledge Economy, 16, 9161–9176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02238-8
  27. Nikolaidou, E. (2016). The role of military expenditure and arms imports in the Greek debt crisis. Economics of Peace and Security Journal, 11(1), 18–27. https://doi.org/10.15355/epsj.11.1.18
  28. Okwoche, P., & Nikolaidou, E. (2024). Determinants of external, domestic, and total public debt in Nigeria: The role of conflict, arms imports, and military expenditure. Defence and Peace Economics, 35(2), 227–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2022.2145709
  29. Olejnik, Ł. W., & Kuna, J. (2025). Military expenditures as a part of endogenous fiscal policy in 21 EU-NATO countries: The fiscal consequences of rising defence budgets. Defence and Peace Economics, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2025.2553245
  30. Ondráčková, P., Odehnal, J., & Neubauer, J. (2024). The impact of military expenditures on the indebtedness of the Czech Republic and Lithuania. In Proceedings of the Challenges to National Defence in Contemporary Geopolitical Situation (Brno, Czech Republic). https://doi.org/10.3849/cndcgs.2024.448
  31. Paleologou, S. M. (2013). A dynamic panel data model for analyzing the relationship between military expenditure and government debt in the EU. Defence and Peace Economics, 24(5), 419–428. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2012.717204
  32. Pesaran, M. H. (2004). General diagnostic tests for cross section dependence in panels. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.5113
  33. Pesaran, M. H. (2007). A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 22(2), 265–312. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.457280
  34. Sadiq, S., Nosheen, M., & Naz, S. (2023). An empirical investigation of external debt–military expenditure nexus in Pakistan. Journal of Contemporary Macroeconomic Issues, 4(1), 43–56. https://ojs.scekr.org/index.php/jcmi/article/view/97
  35. Tian, N., Lopes da Silva, D., Béraud-Sudreau, L., Liang, X., Scarazzato, L., & Assis, A. (2023). Developments in military expenditure and the effects of the war in Ukraine. Defence and Peace Economics, 34(5), 547–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/10242694.2023.2221877
  36. Uguru, C. L. (2016). The link between public debt and government expenditure pattern: The Nigeria experience. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 18(1), 37–41. https://doi.org/10.9790/487X-18113741