This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Fiscal federalism in big developing countries: China and India

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Fraschini, Angela ()

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

In South and East Asian countries a highly centralized government prevails, although recently some trends are moving toward a greater degree of decentralization. Also the two giants China and India, which cannot rely on a merely centralized Government, have experienced a greater or lesser degree of fiscal unionism. As to China the local government system provides four levels: provincial level; city level; county level; township level. Intergovernmental fiscal relations were revamped by the 1994 reform that established a new tax sharing system and gave local governments more control over the administration of local taxes but no significant degree of tax autonomy and no substantial expenditure assignments. The local financial revenue mainly derives from local taxes, shared taxes, and nontax revenue. As to India, the federal system is quite complex. The center-states relations are envisaged in the Constitution also for the financial aspects: two constitutional amendments adopted in 1992 made India one of the most politically decentralized countries among developing ones. However, the implementation of the decentralization program is still lagging: till now India seems to have considered decentralization mainly in terms of the local election system, without the transfer of all functions provided for devolution to local bodies. Only India set up a different system of local bodies in rural and urban areas with different expenditure responsibilities and financing powers. On the contrary, China has a unitary fiscal system. In India it is necessary to redesign the transfer system to improve accountability, incentives and equity, whereas in China, the fiscal revenue sharing schemes limit intergovernmental budget transfers. Finally, the rule of hard budget constraint in China is faced by all levels of government, while in India sub-national governments face soft budget constraint.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://polis.unipmn.it/pubbl/RePEc/uca/ucapdv/fraschini66.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Department of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS in its series P.O.L.I.S. department's Working Papers with number 60.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 37 pages
Date of creation: Jan 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:uca:ucapdv:60

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://polis.unipmn.it/index.html

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Lucia Padovani).

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Catriona M. Purfield, 2004. "The Decentralization Dilemma in India," IMF Working Papers 04/32, International Monetary Fund.
  2. Olivier Blanchard & Andrei Shleifer, 2000. "Federalism With and Without Political Centralization. China versus Russia," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 1889, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    Other versions:
  3. Ghosh, Buddhadeb & De, Prabir, 2005. "Investigating the linkage between infrastructure and regional development in India: era of planning to globalisation," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 1023-1050, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Li Keping & Ehtisham Ahmad & Thomas J. Richardson & Raju Singh, 2002. "Recentralization in China?," IMF Working Papers 02/168, International Monetary Fund. [Downloadable!]
  5. Ben Lockwood & Ehtisham Ahmad & Raju Singh, 2004. "Taxation Reforms and Changes in Revenue Assignments in China," IMF Working Papers 04/125, International Monetary Fund. [Downloadable!]
  6. Vivek B. Arora & John Norregaard, 1997. "Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations: The Chinese System in Perspective," IMF Working Papers 97/129, International Monetary Fund.
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? You can use IDEAS to provide links to papers and articles in your course syllabus.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-11.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.