Understanding Malaysian State Governments Fiscal Behavior: The Role of Intergovernmental Transfers

Abdul Jalil, Ahmad Zafarullah and Abdul Karim, Noor Al-Huda (2009): Understanding Malaysian State Governments Fiscal Behavior: The Role of Intergovernmental Transfers. Published in: Chulalongkorn Journal of Economics , Vol. 20, No. 2 (2009): pp. 113-141.

Abstract

As of late, several state governments in Malaysia have been identified as having serious difficulty in meeting their financial needs, to the extent of the government being qualified as on the verge of bankruptcy. One of the explanations put forward is that state governments have been acting irresponsibly in managing finances. Thus, the question that ensues is: why do state governments behave in such irresponsible manner fiscally and financially in the first place? In this paper, we relate the financial difficulties faced by these governments within the confines of the institutional and political environment currently in place within the country. We will examine one of the institutional features of the intergovernmental system in Malaysia – the intergovernmental grants systems. More precisely, there are two hypotheses that will be tested in this research.. First, federal transfers may stimulate more spending by state governments which leads them to increase spending beyond the means available to them. Second, financial problems may be the consequence of a state governments’ incapacity to utilize tax capacities to the fullest, which in turn may be explained by the disincentives effects that are embedded (whether intended or not) within the transfer system.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: State Governments, Fiscal Behavior, Intergovernmental Relations
• Subjects: H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations > H77 - Intergovernmental Relations ; Federalism ; Secession; H - Public Economics > H7 - State and Local Government ; Intergovernmental Relations > H72 - State and Local Budget and Expenditures

References

Ahmad E. (1997). Financing decentralized expenditures: An international comparison of grants. Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar.

Aigner D., C.A. Knox-Lovell & Peter Schmidt. (1977). Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models. Journal of Econometrics, vol. 6, pp. 21-37.

Aragón F.M. & V. J. Gayoso. (2005). Intergovernmental transfers and fiscal effort in Peruvian local governments. Universidad del Pacífico licentiate thesis.

Auditor-General, Malaysia (2004). Federal Public Accounts. Auditor-General Office Malaysia.

Battese G. E. & T. Coelli. (1992). Frontier production functions, technical efficiency and panel data with application to paddy farmers in India. Journal of Productivity Analysis, vol. 3, pp.153-169.

_____________________. (1995). A model for technical inefficiency effects in a stochastic frontier production function for panel data. Empirical Economics, vol. 20, pp. 325-33

Bird R. M. (1994). A comparative perspective on federal finance. The future of fiscal federalism. School of Policy Studies, Queen's University, pp. 293-322.

Boadway, R. & F. Flatters. (1982) Equalization in a Federal State: An economic analysis. Ottawa, Economic Council of Canada.

Boadway R. & P.A.R. Hobson. (1993). Intergovernmental fiscal relations. Toronto, Canadian Tax Foundation.

Borcherding T. E. & R. T. Deacon. (1972). The demand for the services of non-federal governments. The American Economic Review, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 891-901.

Cabrero E. & I. Orihuela. (2000). Expansión financiera y gestión hacendaria en municipios de México (1978-1997). CIDE-Administración Publica, Mexico.

Chaparro J. C., M. Smart & J.G. Zapata (2004). Intergovernmental transfers and municipal finance in Colombia. International Tax Program University of Toronto Paper no. 0403

Correa P. & R. Steiner. (1999). Decentralization in Colombia: Recent changes and main challenges. In Colombia: An opening Economy? eds. C. Callahan and F.R. Gunter. Stamford, Connecticut, JAI Press.

Cuthbertson K., J.S. Foreman-Peck & P. Gripaios. (1981). A model of local authority fiscal behavior. Public Finance, vol. 26, no 2, pp. 229-241.

Garzón H. (1997). Colombia: Structure of municipal finances, fiscal decentralization and credit policy reform 1987-1995. Bogotá, World Bank.

Gramlich E. M. (1987). Subnational fiscal policy. Perspectives on Local Public Finance and Public Policy, vol. 3, pp. 3-27.

Gramlich E. M. & H. Galper. (1973). State and local fiscal behavior and federal grant policy. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, vol. 1, pp.15-58.

Hartwick J.M. (1980). The Henry George rule, optimal population, and interregional equity. Canadian Journal of Economics, vol.13, no. 4, pp. 695-700.

Inman R.P. (1979). The fiscal performance of local governments: An interpretative review. In Current issues in urban economics, eds. Peter Mieszkowski and Mahlon Straszheim. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.

Jha R.a, M. S. Mohanty, S. Chatterjee & P. Chitkara. (2000).Tax effciency in selected Indian states. Empirical Economics, vol. 24, pp.641-654.

Kumbhakar S.C., S. Ghosh & J.T. McGuckin (1991). A generalized production frontier approach for estimating determinants of inefficiency in U.S. dairy farms. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, vol. 9, pp. 279-286.

Kodde D.A. & F. Palm. (1987). A parametric test of the negativity of the substitution matrix. Journal of Applied Econometrics, vol. 2, pp. 227-235.

Logan R. R. (1986). Fiscal illusion and the grantor government. The Journal of Political Economy, vol. 94, no. 6, pp. 1304-1318.

Marshall L. (1991). New evidence on fiscal illusion: The 1986 tax windfalls. American Economic Review, vol. 81, pp. 1336–1345.

McGuire M.C. (1973). Notes on grants-in-aid and economic interactions among governments, Canadian Journal of Economics, vol. 6, pp.207-221.

Meeusen W. & J. van den Broeck. (1977). Efficiency estimation from Cobb-Douglas production function with composed errors. International Economic Review, vol.18, pp. 435-444.

Moffitt R.A. (1984). The effects of grants-in-aid on state and local expenditures: The case of AFDC. Journal of Public Economics, vol. 23, no. 3, pp.279-305.

Oates W. E. (1979). Lump-sum grants have price effects. In Fiscal Federalism and Grants-in-Aid, eds. P. Mieszkowski and W.H. Oakland. Washington, D.C, Coupe Papers in Public Economics, Urban Institute.

Quigley, J.M. & D. L. Rubinfeld. (1986). Budget reform and the theory of fiscal federalism. TheAmerican Economic Review, vol. 76, no.2, pp.132-137.

Rajaraman I. & G. Vasishtha. (2000). Impact of grants on tax effort of local government. Economic and Political Weekly, pp. 2943-2948.

Reifschneider D. & R. Stevenson. (1991). Systematic departures from the frontier: a framework for the analysis of firm inefficiency. International Economic Review, vol. 32, pp. 715-723.

Sanguinetti P. & M. Besfamille. (2004). Exerting local tax effort or lobbying for central transfers?: Evidence from Argentina. Econometric Society 2004 Latin American Meetings 249, Econometric Society.

Schwallie D. P. (1989). Measuring the effects of federal grants-in-aid on total public sector size. Public Finance Quarterly, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 185-203.

Smith P. (1997). Model misspecification in Data Envelopment Analysis. Annals of Operations Research, vol. 73, pp. 233-252.

Stine W.F. (1985). Estimating the responsiveness of local revenue to intergovernmental aid. National Tax Journal, vol. 38, pp. 227-234.

Wilde J.A. (1971). Grants-in-Aid: The analysis of design and response. National Tax Journal, vol. 124, pp. 143-153.