Efficiency of Inter-Budgetary Regulation of Heavily Subsidized Budgets at the Subnational Level

The subject of this article is the set of economic and financial relations that develop in the process of inter-budgetary regulation and equalization of budgetary provision and balance of heavily subsidized budgets at the subnational level. The purpose of the study is to identify the degree of influence and effectiveness of the existing system of inter-budgetary regulation and fiscal decentralization in Russia in relation to heavily subsidized budgets at the subnational level in the context of their socio-economic, budgetary and financial condition and development. The methodological basis of the study is based on the Russian budgetary legislation, as well as domestic and foreign scientific studies devoted to the theory of fiscal decentralization (federalism), mechanisms for equalizing budgetary provision at the subnational level, approaches to assessing the degree of influence of fiscal decentralization on stimulating economic growth in regions and states. In the course of the study, the author applies a systematic approach, as well as general scientific and special methods: coefficient method, comparative, structural dynamic retrospective analysis. The analysis of the relationship and dispersion of the financial parameters of subnational budgets using the Pearson pair correlation coefficient, as well as the coefficients of variation and oscillation. The study reveals the problematic aspects of the effectiveness of the existing system of inter-budgetary regulation and the convergence of the socio-economic state of heavily subsidized regions in recent years. This result contradicts most budgetary practices and the theory of fiscal decentralization, which justifies the need for a qualitative change in the existing system of inter-budgetary regulation. The main conclusion of the study is that the existing mechanism of inter-budgetary regulation and the existing instruments for equalizing budgetary provision do not contribute to a significant change in the fiscal and socio-economic parameters of the development of heavily subsidized budgets at the subnational level. The nature of the use of the gratuitous aid received for this category of subjects of the country is reduced to short-term coverage of the gap in financing expenditure obligations but does not change the model of either the organization of budget regulation or the regional economy. Soft budget constraints create weak incentives and lead to financial and economic problems — increased dependency and subsidies.

1. Tashtamirov M.R. The local budget subsidy dependence: Identification and classification. Finansy i kredit = Finance and Credit. 2020;26(5):1099–1117. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24891/fc.26.5.1099

2. Shah A. Balance, accountability, and responsiveness: Lessons about decentralization. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 1999. 41 p. DOI: 10.1596/1813–9450–2021

3. Watts R.L. Comparing federal systems. Montréal: McGill-Queen’s University Press; 1999. 138 p. (Queen’s Policy Studies Series. Vol. 50).

4. Litvack J., Ahmad J., Bird R. Rethinking decentralization in developing countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 1998. 48 p. (The World Bank Sector Studies Series). DOI: 10.1596/0–8213–4350–5

5. Musgrave R.A., Musgrave P.B. Public finance in theory and practice. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.; 1976. 778 p.

6. Rubinfeld D.L. The economics of the local public sector. In: Auerbach A.J., Feldstein M., eds. Handbook of public economics. vol. 2. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers; 1987:571–645.

7. Boex J., Martinez-Vazquez J. Designing intergovernmental equalization transfers with imperfect data: Concepts, practices, and lessons. In: Martinez-Vazquez J., Searle B., eds. Fiscal equalization. Boston, MA: Springer-Verlag; 2007:291–343. DOI: 10.1007/978–0–387–48988–9_12

8. Boadway R.W., Shah A. Fiscal federalism: Principles and practice of multiorder governance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2009. 620 p. DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511626883

9. Singh N.K., Srinivasan T.N. Federalism and economic development in India: An assessment. In: Hope N.C., Kochar A, Noll R, Srinivasan T.N., eds. Economic reform in India: Challenges, prospects, and lessons. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2013:33–95.

10. Careaga M., Weingast B.R. Fiscal federalism, good governance, and economic growth in Mexico. In: Rodrik D., ed. In search of prosperity: Analytic narratives on economic growth. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2003:399–435. DOI: 10.1515/9781400845897–015

11. Hatfield J.W. Federalism, taxation, and economic growth. Journal of Urban Economics. 2015;87:114–125. DOI: 10.1016/j.jue.2015.01.003

12. Oates W.E. Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism. International Tax and Public Finance. 2005;12(4):349–373. DOI: 10.1007/s10797–005–1619–9

13. Garzarelli G., Keeton L. Laboratory federalism and intergovernmental grants. Journal of Institutional Economics. 2018;14(5):949–974. DOI: 10.1017/S1744137417000595

14. Bahl R.W., Linn J.F. Urban public finance in developing countries. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press; 1992. 574 p. URL: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/963911468739534803/pdf/multi-page.pdf

15. Singh N., Srinivasan T.N. Federalism and economic development in India: An assessment. Munich Personal RePEc Archive. MPRA Paper. 2006;(12452). URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/12452/1/MPRA_paper_12452.pdf

16. Glennerster H. Geoffrey Brennan and James M. Buchanan, The power to tax: Analytical foundations of a fiscal constitution, Cambridge University Press, 1980. Journal of Social Policy. 1982;11(3):395–397. DOI: 10.1017/S0047279400011971

17. Qian Y., Weingast B.R. Federalism as a commitment to reserving market incentives. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 1997;11(4):83–92. DOI: 10.1257/jep.11.4.83

18. Blöchliger H., Akgun O. Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth. In: Kim J., Dougherty S., eds. Fiscal decentralisation and inclusive growth. Paris: OECD; 2018:25–47. (OECD Fiscal Federalism Studies). DOI: 10.1787/9789264302488–4-en

19. Wang F. The infl uences of fi scal decentralization on economic performance: Empirical evidence from OECD countries. Prague Economic Papers. 2018;27(5):606–618. DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.674

20. Martinez-Vazquez J., McNab R. Fiscal decentralization and economic growth. World Development. 2003;31(9):1597–1616. DOI: 10.1016/S0305–750X(03)00109–8

21. Baskaran T., Feld L. P., Schnellenbach J. Fiscal federalism, decentralization, and economic growth: A metaanalysis. Economic Inquiry. 2016;54(3):1445–1463. DOI: 10.1111/ecin.12331

22. Wooldridge J. M. Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. Cambridge, MA, London: The MIT Press; 2010; 1064 p.

23. Alexeev M., Mamedov A. Factors determining intra-regional fi scal decentralization in Russia and the US. Russian Journal of Economics. 2017;3(4):425–444. DOI: 10.1016/j.ruje.2017.12.007

24. Freinkman L., Plekhanov A. Fiscal decentralization in rentier regions: Evidence from Russia. World Development. 2009;37(2):503–512. DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2008.05.010

25. Timushev E. N. Intraregional fi scal decentralization: Indicators and dynamics. Finansy = Finance. 2019;(8):19–26. (In Russ.).

26. Timushev E. N. Debt burden, local fi scal decentralization and fi scal incentives for regional authorities. Finance: Theory and Practice. 2020;24(1):58–75. DOI: 10.26794/2587–5671–2020–24–1–58–75

27. Fedosov V. A. Decentralization of fi scal relations in Russia in the context of global trends. Finansy i kredit = Finance and Credit. 2020;26(9):2151–2166. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.24891/fc.26.9.2151

28. Yushkov A. Fiscal decentralization and regional economic growth: Theory, empirical studies, and Russian experience. Voprosy ekonomiki. 2016;(2):94–110. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.32609/0042–8736–2016–2–94–110

29. Alekhin B. I. Vertical fi scal imbalance and regional economic growth. Finansovyi zhurnal = Financial Journal. 2020;12(6):39–53. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.31107/2075–1990–2020–6–39–53

30. Isaev A. G. Distribution of fi nancial resources within the budget system of the Russian Federation and regions’ economic growth. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika = Spatial Economics. 2016;(4):61–74. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.14530/se.2016.4.061–074

31. Tashtamirov M. R., Baysaeva M. U., Batashev R. V. Systematization of factors and conditions of high subsidization of regional budgets. Fundamental’nye issledovaniya = Fundamental Research. 2020;(11):185–192. (In Russ.). DOI: 10.17513/fr.42896

32. Prokofi ev V. A., Tolmachev M. N., Golovko M. V. Questions of estimation and normalization of the variation coeffi cient. Voprosy ekonomiki i prava = Economic and Law Issues. 2017;(112):34–37. (In Russ.).

33. Klimanov V. V., Mihailova A. A. Improving the regulation of budgets of highly subsidized regions. Finansy = Finance. 2015;(7):11–17. (In Russ.).