Cited by 8Local Government Finance and DecentralizationEconomic Growth and Fiscal PoliciesFiscal Policies and Political Economy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fiscal Federalism: The Interaction between Own Revenues and Intergovernmental Transfers in Local Governments—The Case of Municipalities in Buenos Aires

Porto, Alberto, Puig, Jorge·2023·Publius: The Journal of Federalism

Abstract

We study the interaction between intergovernmental transfers on the level and the structure of local own revenues. Based on a sample for Argentina’s local governments, specifically the 135 municipalities of the province of Buenos Aires, we find that transfers facilitate local revenues collection. This effect is more pronounced in urban local governments, with higher population density, poverty levels, and demand for public services. In addition, transfers bias own revenues composition. That is, higher transfers lead to higher local tax collection, which is obtained through less distortionary taxation (i.e., property tax). Interestingly, this bias is stronger for local governments with a higher share of divisible public goods (that are likely to be financed according to the “benefit principle”). The results are robust to a battery of different estimation methods and can be rationalized with existing theory from public finance and political economy as well. The findings might have important policy implications for local governments’ public finance.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/publius/pjad005

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 85

  1. Ahmad, 1997, Financing decentralized expenditures, 10.4337/9781035303403 · DOI
  2. Alm, 1992, Why do people pay taxes?, Journal of Public Economics, 48, 21, 10.1016/0047-2727(92)90040-M · DOI
  3. Aragon, 2005, Intergovernmental transfers and fiscal effort in Peruvian local governments, 10.2139/ssrn.773666 · DOI
  4. Arellano, 1991, Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations, Review of Economic Studies, 58, 277, 10.2307/2297968 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Artana, 2012, Sub-national revenue mobilization in Latin American and Caribbean countries: The case of Argentina, 10.18235/0011362 · DOI
  6. Bailey, 1998, The flypaper effect: Identifying areas for further research, Public Choice, 95, 335, 10.1023/A:1005053921709 · DOI
  7. Bellemare, 2017, Lagged explanatory variables and the estimation of causal effect, The Journal of Politics, 79, 949, 10.1086/690946 · DOI
  8. Bennett, 1979, Federal tax burdens and grant benefits to states: The impact of imperfect representation, Public Choice, 34, 255
  9. Bird, 1999, Fiscal decentralization in developing countries, 10.1017/CBO9780511559815 · DOI
  10. Blöchliger, 2008, Fiscal equalisation, OECD Journal: Economic Studies, 2008, 1
  11. Blundell, 1998, Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models, Journal of Econometrics, 87, 115, 10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Bonvecchi, 2011, The dual logic of intergovernmental transfers: Presidents, governors, and the politics of coalition-building in Argentina, Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 41, 179, 10.1093/publius/pjq024 · DOI
  13. Borck, 2003, Tax competition and the choice of tax structure in a majority voting model, Journal of Urban Economics, 54, 173, 10.1016/S0094-1190(03)00037-8 · DOI
  14. Bradford, 1971, The analysis of revenue sharing in a new approach to collective fiscal decisions, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 85, 416, 10.2307/1885931 · DOI
  15. Bravo, 2013, The incentive effect of equalization grants on tax collection, The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 13, 173, 10.1515/bejeap-2012-0059 · DOI
  16. Breunig, 2008, Per-capita public expenditures and population size: A non-parametric analysis using French data, Public Choice, 136, 429, 10.1007/s11127-008-9304-z · DOI
  17. Brosio, 2012, Decentralization and reform in Latin America: Improving intergovernmental relations, 10.4337/9781781006269 · DOI
  18. Buettner, 2021, Fiscal equalization as a driver of tax increases: Empirical evidence from Germany, International Tax and Public Finance, 28, 90, 10.1007/s10797-020-09610-9 · DOI
  19. Buettner, 2006, The dynamics of municipal fiscal adjustment, Journal of Public Economics, 90, 1115, 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2005.09.002 · DOI
  20. Caldeira, 2014, The crowding-in effect of simple unconditional central grants on local own-source revenue: The Case of Benin, Journal of African Economies, 23, 361, 10.1093/jae/eju003 · DOI
  21. Carrion-i-Silvestre, 2008, Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in Spain, Public Finance Review, 36, 194, 10.1177/1091142107304649 · DOI
  22. Dahlberg, 2008, Using a discontinuous grant rule to identify the effect of grants on local taxes and spending, Journal of Public Economics, 92, 2320, 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2007.05.004 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Dash, 2013, Intergovernmental transfers and tax collection in India: Does the composition of transfers matter?, Public Budgeting & Finance, 33, 93, 10.1111/j.1540-5850.2013.12010.x · DOI · Paper page
  24. Deller, 2006, A model of asymmetries in the flypaper effect, Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 36, 213, 10.1093/publius/pjj005 · DOI
  25. Driscoll, 1998, Consistent covariance matrix estimation with spatially dependent panel data, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 80, 549, 10.1162/003465398557825 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Eguino, 2010, Estudio de las características estructurales del sector municipal en América Latina
  27. Ferede, 2017, The incentive effects of equalization grants on tax policy: Evidence from Canadian provinces, Public Finance Review, 45, 723, 10.1177/1091142116666316 · DOI
  28. Gervasoni, 2010, A rentier theory of subnational regimes: Fiscal federalism, democracy, and authoritarianism in the Argentine provinces, World Politics, 62, 302, 10.1017/S0043887110000067 · DOI
  29. Gisselquist, 2016, Ethnic heterogeneity and public goods provision in Zambia: Evidence of a subnational “diversity dividend”, World Development, 78, 308, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.10.018 · DOI
  30. Giuliano, 2020, Distributional effects of reducing energy subsidies: Evidence from recent policy reform in Argentina, Energy Economics, 92, 1
  31. González, 2018, Oil rents and patronage: The fiscal effects of oil booms in the Argentine provinces, Comparative Politics, 51, 101, 10.5129/001041518824414629 · DOI
  32. Goodspeed, 2002, Bailouts in a federation, International Tax and Public Finance, 9, 409, 10.1023/A:1016563902580 · DOI
  33. Gramlich, 1969, State and local governments and their budget constraint, International Economic Review, 10, 163, 10.2307/2525551 · DOI
  34. Hettich, 1984, A positive model of tax structure, Journal of Public Economics, 24, 67, 10.1016/0047-2727(84)90005-7 · DOI
  35. Hettich, 1999, Democratic choice and taxation, 10.1017/CBO9780511572197 · DOI
  36. Hines, 1995, The flypaper effect, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9, 217, 10.1257/jep.9.4.217 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Holcombe, 1981, The determinants of federal grants, Southern Economic Journal, 48, 393, 10.2307/1057939 · DOI
  38. Holm-Hadulla, 2020, Fiscal equalization and the tax structure, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 81, 1
  39. Hortas-Rico, 2010, Does urban sprawl increase the costs of providing local public services? Evidence from Spanish municipalities, Urban Studies, 47, 1513, 10.1177/0042098009353620 · DOI
  40. Huber, 2016, Calculate travel time and distance with OpenStreetMap data using the open source routing machine (OSRM), Stata Journal, 16, 416, 10.1177/1536867X1601600209 · DOI
  41. Hwang, 2018, Should we go one step further? An accurate comparison of one-step and two-step procedures in a generalized method of moments framework, Journal of Econometrics, 207, 381, 10.1016/j.jeconom.2018.07.006 · DOI · Paper page
  42. Jimenez, 2015, The fiscal performance of overlapping local governments, Public Finance Review, 43, 606, 10.1177/1091142114535836 · DOI
  43. Jiménez, 2012, Decentralization and reform in Latin America: Improving intergovernmental relations, 321
  44. Jones, 2000, Politics, institutions, and fiscal performance in a federal system: An analysis of the Argentine provinces, Journal of Development Economics, 61, 305, 10.1016/S0304-3878(00)00059-6 · DOI
  45. Karnik, 2005, Urban local governments and the flypaper effect: Evidence from Maharashtra, India, Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 35, 273, 10.1093/publius/pji013 · DOI
  46. Kornai, 1986, The soft budget constraint, Kyklos, 39, 3, 10.1111/j.1467-6435.1986.tb01252.x · DOI
  47. Ladd, 1994, Fiscal impacts of local population growth: A conceptual and empirical analysis, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 24, 661, 10.1016/0166-0462(94)90006-X · DOI
  48. Lago-Peñas, 2017, Spanish fiscal decentralization: A successful (but still unfinished) process, Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 35, 1509
  49. Lewis, 2017, Intergovernmental fiscal transfers and local incentives and responses: The case of Indonesia, Fiscal Studies, 38, 111, 10.1111/1475-5890.12080 · DOI
  50. Litvack, 1970, Group size and the output of public goods: Theory and application to state-local finance in the United States, Public Finance = Finances Publiques, 25, 42
  51. Mankiw, 2009, Optimal taxation in theory and practice, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23, 147, 10.1257/jep.23.4.147 · DOI
  52. Martinez-Vazquez, 2007, Fiscal equalization, 10.1007/978-0-387-48988-9 · DOI
  53. Masaki, 2018, The impact of intergovernmental transfers on local revenue generation in sub-Saharan Africa: Evidence from Tanzania, World Development, 106, 173, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.01.026 · DOI · Paper page
  54. Mogues, 2012, Do external grants to district governments discourage own revenue generation? A look at local public finance dynamics in Ghana, World Development, 40, 1054, 10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.12.001 · DOI
  55. Muñoz Miranda, 2017, Descentralización fiscal y disparidades regionales en América Latina: El potencial de las transferencias de igualación, 10.18235/0000941 · DOI
  56. Oates, 1972, Fiscal federalism
  57. Oates, 1988, On the measurement of congestion in the provision of local public goods, Journal of Urban Economics, 24, 85, 10.1016/0094-1190(88)90048-4 · DOI
  58. Oates, 1994, Federalism and government finance
  59. Oates, 2005, Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism, International Tax and Public Finance, 12, 349, 10.1007/s10797-005-1619-9 · DOI
  60. Oates, 1988, Economic competition among jurisdictions: Efficiency enhancing or distortion inducing?, Journal of Public Economics, 35, 333, 10.1016/0047-2727(88)90036-9 · DOI
  61. Oyarzo, 2019, Revisiting the link between resource windfalls and subnational crowding out for local mining economies in Chile, Resources Policy, 64, 1
  62. Picard, 2010, GEODIST: Stata module to compute geographical distances
  63. Porto, 2004, Disparidades Regionales y Federalismo Fiscal
  64. Porto, 2016, Transferencias intergubernamentales y disparidades fiscales a nivel subnacional en Argentina, 10.18235/0000573 · DOI
  65. Porto, 2019, Cambio institucional en el modelo de municipalidades. Teoría y Aplicaciones
  66. Porto, 2021, Evolución del Sector Público Argentino en el largo plazo 1900-2018 – Gastos, recaudación y descentralización
  67. Porto, 2001, Political determinants of intergovernmental grants: Evidence from Argentina, Economics & Politics, 13, 237, 10.1111/1468-0343.00092 · DOI
  68. Porto, 2012, La calidad de la administración tributaria como insumo de la función de producción recaudatoria
  69. Prud’homme, 1995, The dangers of decentralization, The World Bank Research Observer, 10, 201, 10.1093/wbro/10.2.201 · DOI
  70. Qian, 1998, Federalism and the soft budget constraint, The American Economic Review, 88, 1143
  71. Qian, 1997, Federalism as a commitment to reserving market incentives, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11, 83, 10.1257/jep.11.4.83 · DOI
  72. Radics, 2022, Panorama de las relaciones fiscales entre niveles de gobierno de países de América Latina y el Caribe, 10.18235/0004201 · DOI
  73. Rezk, 1999, Argentina: Fiscal federalism and decentralization, 206
  74. Rezk, 2014, Are national transfers crowding out provincial tax revenues in Argentina?
  75. Riera-Crichton, 2016, Tax multipliers: Pitfalls in measurement and identification, Journal of Monetary Economics, 79, 30, 10.1016/j.jmoneco.2016.03.003 · DOI
  76. Schroeder, 2007, Unconditional intergovernmental transfers to finance decentralization in Albania, Public Budgeting & Finance, 27, 50, 10.1111/j.1540-5850.2007.00874.x · DOI
  77. Skidmore, 1999, Tax and expenditure limitations and the fiscal relationships between state and local governments, Public Choice, 99, 77, 10.1023/A:1018311425276 · DOI
  78. Smart, 1998, Taxation and deadweight loss in a system of intergovernmental transfers, The Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue Canadienne D’Economique, 31, 189, 10.2307/136384 · DOI
  79. Vegh, 2015, Unsticking the flypaper effect in an uncertain world, Journal of Public Economics, 131, 142, 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2015.09.001 · DOI
  80. Wallis, 2000, American government finance in the long run: 1790 to 1990, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 61, 10.1257/jep.14.1.61 · DOI
  81. Weingast, 1995, The economic role of political institutions: Market-preserving federalism and economic development, Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 11, 1
  82. Weingast, 2009, Second generation fiscal federalism: The implications of fiscal incentives, Journal of Urban Economics, 65, 279, 10.1016/j.jue.2008.12.005 · DOI
  83. Wildasin, 1989, Interjurisdictional capital mobility: Fiscal externality and a corrective subsidy, Journal of Urban Economics, 25, 193, 10.1016/0094-1190(89)90034-X · DOI
  84. Zhuravskaya, 2000, Incentives to provide local public goods: Fiscal federalism, Russian style, Journal of Public Economics, 76, 337, 10.1016/S0047-2727(99)00090-0 · DOI
  85. Zodrow, 1986, Pigou, Tiebout, property taxation, and the underprovision of local public goods, Journal of Urban Economics, 19, 356, 10.1016/0094-1190(86)90048-3 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Porto, A., & Puig, J.
Affiliations
Universidad Nacional de La Plata (AR)
Corresponding author
Puig, Jorge
Venue
Publius: The Journal of Federalism
Published
2023-03-14
Volume
53
Issue
4
Pages
642-678
ISSN
  • 0048-5950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1747-7107
OpenAlex
W4324138024
Cited by
8
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1
FWCI
7.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Publius The Journal of Federalism (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Local Government Finance and Decentralization
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Growth and Fiscal Policies
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Fiscal Policies and Political Economy
Keywords
fiscal federalism, intergovernmental transfers, local own-source revenue, municipal taxation, property tax, tax distortions, revenue composition, benefit principle, urban local government, Buenos Aires Province, local government finance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review