RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    OECD 20개국 재산세의 성장억제효과 분석 = Negative Effect of Property Tax on Economic Growth in 20 OECD Countries

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A107983780

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This study analyzes property tax effects on economic growth in 20 OECD countries. Using panel data regression technique I examined both primary and secondary tax effects from the property tax to GDP ratio on economic growth rate in these 20 OECD countries for the recent 29 sample years. The primary direct effect is shown to be significantly negative, -0.18 with the additional three nominal control variables composed of annual consumer price index based inflation, CPI unincluded annual housing price return, and annual tax burden ratio and the four real GDP component control variables of consumption, investment, government spending, and exports. The secondary indirect effect was estimated from the reduced-form equation, the 2 stage panel data regression after substituting fitted values of property taxes from the primary estimation results of panel data regression by those above three control variables and this is shown to be significant -3.01 far greater in negative values than the direct effect. Meanwhile, in the primary first stage panel data regression results, impacts of both tax burden ratio and housing price return on property taxes are significantly positive, respectively whereas that of inflation on property taxes turns out to be significantly negative. These results are confrontational with the previous studies arguing that negative effect from property tax to economic growth is quite slightly small or even counterfactual compared to that of income tax The reason can be deduced from the fact that property tax is treated as a policy variable affected by such market variables as housing price return and inflation and another policy variable, tax burden ratio in this study. Considering these results, the recent rapid hike of real estate taxes by Korean government is needed to readjust in line with the economic growth potential.
    번역하기

    This study analyzes property tax effects on economic growth in 20 OECD countries. Using panel data regression technique I examined both primary and secondary tax effects from the property tax to GDP ratio on economic growth rate in these 20 OECD count...

    This study analyzes property tax effects on economic growth in 20 OECD countries. Using panel data regression technique I examined both primary and secondary tax effects from the property tax to GDP ratio on economic growth rate in these 20 OECD countries for the recent 29 sample years. The primary direct effect is shown to be significantly negative, -0.18 with the additional three nominal control variables composed of annual consumer price index based inflation, CPI unincluded annual housing price return, and annual tax burden ratio and the four real GDP component control variables of consumption, investment, government spending, and exports. The secondary indirect effect was estimated from the reduced-form equation, the 2 stage panel data regression after substituting fitted values of property taxes from the primary estimation results of panel data regression by those above three control variables and this is shown to be significant -3.01 far greater in negative values than the direct effect. Meanwhile, in the primary first stage panel data regression results, impacts of both tax burden ratio and housing price return on property taxes are significantly positive, respectively whereas that of inflation on property taxes turns out to be significantly negative. These results are confrontational with the previous studies arguing that negative effect from property tax to economic growth is quite slightly small or even counterfactual compared to that of income tax The reason can be deduced from the fact that property tax is treated as a policy variable affected by such market variables as housing price return and inflation and another policy variable, tax burden ratio in this study. Considering these results, the recent rapid hike of real estate taxes by Korean government is needed to readjust in line with the economic growth potential.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 김병준, "세계 6대 연금기금의 운용수익률 분석" 국제지역학회 24 (24): 3-26, 2020

    2 Poterba, J. M., "The Effect of Property-Tax Limits on Wages and Employment in the Local Public Sector" 85 (85): 384-389, 1995

    3 Neog, Y., "Tax Structure and Economic Growth: A Study of Selected Indian States" 9 (9): 1-12, 2020

    4 Hausman, J. A, "Specification Tests in Econometrics" 46 (46): 1251-1271, 1978

    5 김병준, "OECD 사적연금의 장기적 성과분석" 한국기업경영학회 28 (28): 91-112, 2021

    6 Leung, C. K. Y, "Income Tax, Property Tax, and Tariff in a Small Open Economy" 7 (7): 541-554, 1999

    7 Stallmann, J. I., "Impacts of Local and State Tax and Expenditure Limits on Economic Growth" 17 (17): 645-648, 2010

    8 Tosun, M. S., "Economic Growth and Tax Components: An Analysis of Tax Changes in OECD" 37 (37): 2251-2263, 2005

    9 Greene, W. H., "Econometric Analysis" Pearson Education Ltd 2012

    10 Breusch, T. S., "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation" 47 (47): 1287-1294, 1979

    1 김병준, "세계 6대 연금기금의 운용수익률 분석" 국제지역학회 24 (24): 3-26, 2020

    2 Poterba, J. M., "The Effect of Property-Tax Limits on Wages and Employment in the Local Public Sector" 85 (85): 384-389, 1995

    3 Neog, Y., "Tax Structure and Economic Growth: A Study of Selected Indian States" 9 (9): 1-12, 2020

    4 Hausman, J. A, "Specification Tests in Econometrics" 46 (46): 1251-1271, 1978

    5 김병준, "OECD 사적연금의 장기적 성과분석" 한국기업경영학회 28 (28): 91-112, 2021

    6 Leung, C. K. Y, "Income Tax, Property Tax, and Tariff in a Small Open Economy" 7 (7): 541-554, 1999

    7 Stallmann, J. I., "Impacts of Local and State Tax and Expenditure Limits on Economic Growth" 17 (17): 645-648, 2010

    8 Tosun, M. S., "Economic Growth and Tax Components: An Analysis of Tax Changes in OECD" 37 (37): 2251-2263, 2005

    9 Greene, W. H., "Econometric Analysis" Pearson Education Ltd 2012

    10 Breusch, T. S., "A Simple Test for Heteroscedasticity and Random Coefficient Variation" 47 (47): 1287-1294, 1979

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2022 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2019-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2016-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2015-12-01 등재 등재후보로 하락 (기타) KCI등재후보
    2011-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2007-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2001-07-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.59 0.59 0.66
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.61 0.57 0.894 0.2
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼