Assessment of the cyclical nature of fiscal policy in the EAEU countries
https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2025.16.1.153-166
Abstract
Purpose: is to assess the cyclical nature of fiscal policy through the analysis of government debt, budget expenditures and tax rates on individual taxes for a group of countries belonging to the Eurasian Economic Union.
Methods: the methodological basis of the study was the concept of fiscal space, a systematic approach, and dynamic analysis. Regression analysis was performed using the least squares method on panel data. To assess the cyclical nature of fiscal policy, the fiscal variables are the growth rates of government spending and tax rates, the growth rate of real GDP serves as a measure of economic activity. The methods of economic and statistical analysis, scientific abstraction, analogies, scientific generalizations, and expert assessments were used.
Results: in the EAEU countries, a weak influence of the public debt level on economic growth has been revealed. The countercyclical nature of budget expenditures and tax rates has been confirmed over the considered time horizon, although most scientific papers confirm the procyclical nature of fiscal policy in emerging economies. The study showed that countries are fiscally countercyclical in terms of valueadded tax, corporate income tax, and personal income tax. The presented models on value-added tax show a very weak countercyclical nature.
Conclusions and Relevance: the estimates obtained indicate that, in general, the conclusion regarding the countercyclical nature of fiscal policy in the EAEU countries during the period under review, including regarding value added tax, is supported. The latter is primarily characterized by an acyclic pattern. One reason for this may be the nature and specifics of fiscal regulations. The level of public debt has only a minor impact on the dynamics of economic growth in this group of countries, due to its low volume and moderate growth. At the same time, institutional factors play a significant role. The results obtained can be used both in further studies of fiscal policy issues and in making policy decisions, especially in the context of forecasts of a long-term increase in debt and the need to increase government spending.
About the Author
S. E. Demidova
Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Competing Interests:
Russian Federation
Svetlana E. Demidova, Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of the Department of Public Finance, Faculty of Finance
Scopus ID: 5720801
Moscow
Competing Interests:
The author declares that there is no conflict of interest.
References
1. Ibanez Martin M.M., Rojas M.L., Dabus C. Debt, economic growth and threshold effects: evidence from developing countries. EconomiA. 2024; 25(1):92–108. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECON-08-2023-0131(In Eng.)
2. Rexhepi G., Zeqiraj V. The threshold effect of public debt on economic growth: The case of the new European Union member states. Journal of Governance and Regulation. 2023; 12(2):194–199. https://doi.org/10.22495/jgrv12i2art18 (In Eng.)
3. Asteriou D., Pilbeam K., Pratiwi C.E. Public debt and economic growth: panel data evidence for Asian countries. Journal of Economics and Finance. 2021; 45:270–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12197-020-09515-7 (In Eng.)
4. Liu Zh., Lyu J. Public debt and economic growth: threshold effect and its influence factors. Applied Economics Letters. 2021; 28(3):208–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2020.1740157 (In Eng.)
5. Kalu F., Boniface I. Empirical analysis of the effect of public debt on the economic growth of Nigeria. Economics and Business Quarterly Reviews. 2023; 6(1). https://10.31014/aior.1992.06.01.482 (In Eng.)
6. Alsamara M., Mrabet Z., Mimouni K. The threshold effects of public debt on economic growth in MENA countries: do energy endowments matter? International Review of economics and finance. 2024; 89(B):458– 470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iref.2023.10.015 (In Eng.)
7. Onofrei M., Bostan I., Firtescu B.N., Roman A., Rusu V.R. Public debt and economic growth in EU countries. Economies. 2022; 10(10):254. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10100254 (In Eng.)
8. Jacobs J., Ogawa K., Sterken E., Tokutsu I. Public debt, economic growth and the real interest rate: a panel VAR approach to EU and OECD countries. Applied Economics. 2020; 52(12):1377–1394. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1673301 (In Eng.)
9. Limoa W.S., Weku Ch.E.F. Sustaining prosperity: exploring fiscal and financial sustainability in the context of dynamic fiscal policy. Advances in Management and Financial Reporting. 2014; 2(2):85–97. https://doi.org/10.60079/amfr.v2i2.276 (In Eng.)
10. Keita K., Turcu C. Promoting counter-cyclical fiscal policy: fiscal rules versus institutions. Comparative economic studies. 2023; 65:736–781. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41294-022-00197-0 (In Eng.)
11. Eichacker N. A political economy of fiscal space: political structures, bond markets, and monetary accommodation of government spending potential in the core and periphery. Review of political economy. 2023; 36(2):546–564. https://doi.org/10.1080/09538259.2023.2178843(In Eng.)
12. Ahmad A., McManus R., Ozkan F.G. Fiscal space and the procyclicality of fiscal policy: the case for making hay while the sun shines. Economic Inquiry. 2021; 59(4):1687–1701. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.13008 (In Eng.)
13. Augustin P., Sokolovski V., Subrahmanyam M.G., Tomio D. In sickness and in debt: The COVID-19 impact on sovereign credit risk. Journal of Financial Economics. 2022; 143(3):1251–1274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2021.05.009 (In Eng.)
14. Aizenman J., Hutchison M., Jinjarak Y. What is the risk of European sovereign debt defaults? Fiscal space, CDS spreads and market pricing of risk. Journal of International Money and Finance. 2013; 34:37–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2012.11.011 (In Eng.)
15. Bernardini M., Forni L. Private and public debt interlinkages in bad times. Journal of International Money and Finance. 2020; 109:102239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jimonfin.2020.102239 (In Eng.)
16. Anzoategui D. Sovereign spreads and the effects of fiscal austerity. Journal of International Economics. 2022; 139:103658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2022.103658 (In Eng.)
17. Végh C.A., Vuletin G. How is tax policy conducted over the business cycle? American Economic Journal: Economic Policy. 2015; 7(3):327–370. https://doi.org/10.1257/pol.20120218 (In Eng.)
18. Talvi E., Végh C.A. Tax base variability and procyclical fiscal policy in developing countries. Journal of Development Economics. 2005; 78(1):156–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2004.07.002 (In Eng.)
19. Cicekci C., Gaygısız E. Procyclicality of fiscal policy in oil-rich countries: roles of resource funds and institutional quality. Resources Policy. 2023; 85(B):103675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.103675 (In Eng.)
20. Mackiewicz M. The cyclical behavior of fiscal policy: are developing countries different, and do institutions matter? Technological and Economic Development of Economy. 2023; 29(3):796–813. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2023.18709 (In Eng.)
21. Aizenman J., Jinjarak Y., Nguyen H.Th.K, Park D. Fiscal space and government-spending and tax-rate cyclicality patterns: a cross-country comparison, 1960–2016. Journal of Macroeconomics. 2019; 60:229–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmacro.2019.02.006 (In Eng.)
22. Siluanov A.G. Enhancing the potential of the Russian economy in the context of global post-crisis changes. Finance. 2021; (6):3–13. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/tocgme (In Russ.)
23. Kookueva V.V. The role of state budget expenditures in the socio-economic development of Russia. Financial Life. 2020; (2):88–93. EDN https://elibrary.ru/cvnqss (In Russ.)
24. Alandarov R.A. The role of the federal budgetary investments in ensuring the socio-economic development of Russia in 2019–2021. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo. 2019; 12(3):48–58. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/qnypxv. https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X2019-12-3-48-58 (In Russ.)
25. Sokolov I.A., Matveev E.O. Assessing the impact of fiscal policy on economic growth rates. The world of new economy. 2023; 17(4):65–78. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/pcqjef. https://doi.org/10.26794/2220-6469-2023-17-4-65-78 (In Russ.)
26. Hakobyan E.N., Karapetyan N.N. How to ensure debt sustainability and react to economic cycles? The upgrade of fiscal rules in Armenia. Financial Journal. 2018; (4(44)):10–20. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/xweutr. https://doi.org/10.31107/2075-1990-2018-4-10-20 (In Russ.)
27. Chrysanthakopoulos Ch., Tagkalakis A. Fiscal rules and tax policy cyclicality. Economics Letters. 2023; 225:111035. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2023.111035 (In Eng.)
28. Kiseleva E.G. Debt sustainability assessment of regional budgets. Finance: Theory and Practice. 2022; 26(3):110–128. EDN: https://elibrary.ru/jszqay. https://doi.org/10.26794/2587-5671-2022-26-3-110-128 (In Russ.)
29. Hilton S.K. Public debt and economic growth: contemporary evidence from a developing economy. Asian Journal of Economics and Banking. 2021; 5(2):173–193. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJEB-11-2020-0096 (In Eng.)
30. Herndon Th., Ash M., Pollin R. Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 2013; 38(2):257–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bet075 (In Eng.)
Review
For citations:
Demidova S.E. Assessment of the cyclical nature of fiscal policy in the EAEU countries. MIR (Modernization. Innovation. Research). 2025;16(1):153-166. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.18184/2079-4665.2025.16.1.153-166
Views:
471
Email this article 