Reconnoitering the Sustainable Relationship between Revenue Income and GDP: A Comparative Study of Asymmetric Countries in the World


  • Aoulad Hosen Department of Economics (Social Science Group), Academic Building, National University Bangladesh,Gazipur,1704, Bangladesh



This paper applies panel unit root test, country Pedroni cointegration test (PCT), Phillips-Peron cross section test (PPCST), vector error correction test and Johansen normalized cointegrating test (JNCT) for estimates the coefficients in the short-run and in the long-run to examine the inter-temporal relationship between the government revenues income and GDP. The paper took into account fifteen asymmetric countries with three income groups over the period from 2001 to 2016. The study justified the long run relationship between the articulated variables in the country PCT and the test results unearthed that four statistics out of seven on different indexes exhibited one percent level of significance. In the upper middle income country category, other than Brazil and Sri Lanka, rest of three countries showed a long run relationship, i.e. the study outcome reconnoitered the existence of a long run relationship between the two articulated variables. Decisively, the outcome of JNCT suggests that in the long run if the government revenue upsurge one percentage point then GDP growth rate will rise 0.037 and 0.28 percentage point for the countries that belong to high income and the upper middle income respectively. Meanwhile, the test find a negative result that allied to lower middle income nations, GDP growth rate will plummet 0.039 percent point due to one percent rise in revenue income.


Government revenues, GDP growth, Panel data, Fiscal hypothesis, Panel cointegration


[1] Afonso, A. Fiscal sustainability: The unpleasant European case [C]. Lisbon and Athens, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal (Conferences and seminars Paper), 2004.

[2] Aslan, M., Tasdemir, M. Is fiscal synchronization hypothesis relevant for Turkey? Evidence from cointegration and causality tests with endogenous structural breaks [J]. Eskisehir, Turkey, 2009, 517-528, Elsevier, (EconAnadolu: Anadolu International Conference in Economics).

[3] Birhanu, B., Mulugeta, W., Yaekob, T. Relationship between government revenue growth and economic growth in Ethiopia [J]. International Journal of Research in Computer Application & Management, 2016, 6(08): 47-54.

[4] Brady, G. L., Magazzino, C. Fiscal sustainability in the EU [J]. Atlantic Economic Journal, 2018a, 46: 297-311, Springer. 018-9588-4.

[5] Chang, T., Chiang, G. Revisiting the government revenue-expenditure nexus: evidence from 15 OECD countries based on the panel data approach [J]. Finance a úver-Czech Journal of Economics and Finance, 2009, 59(2): 168-171.

[6] Chang, T., Ho, Y. A note on testing “tax-and-spend, spend-and –tax”: The case of China [J]. Journal of Economic Development, 2002, 27(1): 151-160.

[7] Choi, I. Unit root tests for panel data [J]. Journal of International Money and Finance, 2001, 20:249-272.

[8] Choong, C., Lau, E., Liew, V. K., Puah, C. Does a debt foster economic growth? The experience of Malaysia [J]. African Journal of Business Management, 2010, 4(8): 1565-1575. AJBM.

[9] Engle, R. F., Granger, C. W. J. Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing [J]. Econometrica, 1987, 55: 251-276.

[10] Fisher, R. A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers [M]. 4th ed, Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd, 1932.

[11] Hosen, A. GDP growth and indirect taxation in Bangladesh: related issues, consequences and expectation [J]. International Journal of Business and Economics Research, 2019, 8(5): 286-296. DOI:10.11648/j.ijber.20190805.15.

[12] Hosen, A., Asad. Reconciliation between taxation and GDP growth in Bangladesh: Issues and arguments for social justice. International Journal of Research in Commerce, Economics & Management, 2018, 8(10): 1-11. id=8755.

[13] Johansen, S. Statistical analysis of cointegration vectors [J]. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 1988, 12: 231-254.

[14] Johansen, S., Juselius, K. Maximum likelihood estimation and inferences on cointegration with applications to the demand for money [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1990, 52: 169-210.

[15] Kao, C. D. Spurious regression and residual-based tests for cointegration in panel data [J]. Journal of Econometrics, 1999, 90: 1-44.

[16] Levin, A., Lin, C. F. Unit root test in panel data: Asymptotic and finite- sample properties [D]. University of California at San Diego, 1992, Discussion Paper: 92-93.

[17] Levin, A., Lin, C. F. Unit root test in panel data: New results [D]. University of California at San Diego 1993, Discussion paper: 93-56.

[18] Levin, A., Lin, C. F., Chu, C. S. J. Unit root tests in panel data: asymptotic and finite-sample Properties [J]. Journal of Econometrics, 2002, 108: 1-24.

[19] MacKinnon, James, G., Alfred, A., Haug, Michelis. Numerical distribution functions of likelihood ratio tests for cointegration [J]. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 1999, 14: 563-577.

[20] Maddala, G. S., Wu, S. A comparative study of unit root tests and a new simple test [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1999, 61:631-652.

[21] Magazzino, C. Wagner versus Keynes: Public spending and national income in Italy [J]. Journal of Policy Modeling, 2012, 34: 890-905. locate/jpm.

[22] Mehrara, M., Pahlavani, M., Elyasi, Y. Government revenue and government expenditure nexus in Asian countries: panel cointegration and causality [J]. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2011, 2(7): 199-207.

[23] Okwori, J., Sule, A. Revenue sources and economic growth in Nigeria: An appraisal [J]. Journal of Economics and Sustainable Development, 2016, 7(8): 113-123.

[24] Pedroni, P. Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors [J]. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 1999, 61: 653-670.

[25] Pedroni, P. Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis [J]. Econometric Theory, 2004, 20: 597-625.



Article Type