IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kyo/wpaper/1123.html

Why Aggregate Indicators Fail in Fiscal Sustainability Evaluation: Tax Base Heterogeneity, Reweighting, and the Limits of GDP Elasticity

Author

Listed:
  • Etsusaku Shimada

    (Faculty of Policy Studies, Iwate Prefectural University)

Abstract

Fiscal sustainability is commonly evaluated using aggregate indicators such as GDP growth and tax revenue elasticity, yet this paper shows that such indicators can be fundamentally insufficient once fiscal capacity depends on the evolving structure of underlying tax bases. When tax revenue is generated by heterogeneous tax bases whose growth rates and revenue weights evolve over time, aggregation induces an intrinsic informational loss that cannot be resolved by refining elasticity estimates. To establish this result, tax revenue is modeled as the aggregation of industry-specific tax bases subject to heterogeneous growth dynamics and institutional features of corporate taxation. Within this framework, we show that tax revenue growth cannot, in general, be characterized by a single, time-invariant elasticity with respect to aggregate output. The analysis clarifies the structural conditions under which conventional benchmarks, including the Domar condition, remain valid. When tax bases evolve proportionally with aggregate output and industrial composition is stable, the Domar condition emerges as a special case of a more general stability condition. Once these restrictive assumptions are relaxed, changes in tax base composition and sectoral profit dynamics can generate systematic divergences between output growth and tax revenue growth. The paper derives a structural fiscal stability condition in which debt sustainability depends on the weighted growth dynamics of underlying tax bases rather than on aggregate output alone. Stylized facts from Japan and the United States illustrate how differences in industrial structure and tax institutions shape revenue dynamics in practice. More fundamentally, the analysis highlights the structural limitations of aggregate-indicator–based fiscal evaluation: fiscal sustainability is a property of how fiscal capacity is generated through the composition and dynamics of underlying tax bases.

Suggested Citation

  • Etsusaku Shimada, 2026. "Why Aggregate Indicators Fail in Fiscal Sustainability Evaluation: Tax Base Heterogeneity, Reweighting, and the Limits of GDP Elasticity," KIER Working Papers 1123, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:kyo:wpaper:1123
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/wp/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/DP1123.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bohn, Henning, 2007. "Are stationarity and cointegration restrictions really necessary for the intertemporal budget constraint?," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(7), pages 1837-1847, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vassilis Monastiriotis & Cigdem Borke Tunali, 2020. "The Sustainability of External Imbalances in the European Periphery," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 273-294, April.
    2. D’Erasmo, P. & Mendoza, E.G. & Zhang, J., 2016. "What is a Sustainable Public Debt?," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & Harald Uhlig (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 2493-2597, Elsevier.
    3. Campos, Eduardo Lima & Cysne, Rubens Penha, 2017. "A time-varying fiscal reaction function for Brazil," FGV EPGE Economics Working Papers (Ensaios Economicos da EPGE) 795, EPGE Brazilian School of Economics and Finance - FGV EPGE (Brazil).
    4. Mark J. Holmes & Theodore Panagiotidis & Jesus Otero, 2008. "Are EU budgets stationary?," Discussion Paper Series 2008_07, Department of Economics, University of Macedonia, revised Sep 2008.
    5. Bajo-Rubio, Oscar & Díaz-Roldán, Carmen & Esteve, Vicente, 2014. "Deficit sustainability, and monetary versus fiscal dominance: The case of Spain, 1850–2000," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 924-937.
    6. Afonso, António & Coelho, José Carlos, 2024. "Drivers of fiscal sustainability: A time-varying analysis for Portugal," International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    7. Eduardo Cavallo & Eduardo Fernández Arias, 2023. "Strong External Balance Sheets for Resilient Economies," IDB Publications (Book Chapters), in: Andrew Powell & Oscar Mauricio Valencia (ed.), Dealing with Debt, edition 1, chapter 2, pages 5-36, Inter-American Development Bank.
    8. João Ayres & Anna Gelpern & Andrew Powell, 2023. "Sovereign Debt Restructuring: In Need of a New Approach," IDB Publications (Book Chapters), in: Andrew Powell & Oscar Mauricio Valencia (ed.), Dealing with Debt, edition 1, chapter 10, pages 223-254, Inter-American Development Bank.
    9. Maureen Were & Lekinyi Mollel, 2020. "Public debt sustainability and debt dynamics: The case of Tanzania," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2020-112, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    10. Anton Velinov, 2014. "Assessing the Sustainability of Government Debt: On the Different States of the Debt/GDP Process," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1359, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    11. Sahoo, Manoranjan & babu, M. Suresh & Dash, Umakant, 2016. "Current account sustainability in SAARC economies: Evidence from combined cointegration approach," MPRA Paper 79014, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2016.
    12. Reischmann, Markus, 2016. "Creative accounting and electoral motives: Evidence from OECD countries," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2), pages 243-257.
    13. Coleman, Simeon & Cuestas, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Panel cointegration, quantile regressions, asymmetric adjustments and crises: The case of EU current accounts," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 45(4).
    14. Maria Cornachione Kula, 2019. "The behavior of U.S. States’ debts and deficits," Public Sector Economics, Institute of Public Finance, vol. 43(3), pages 267-289.
    15. Pablo D'Erasmo & Enrique G. Mendoza, 2016. "Distributional Incentives In An Equilibrium Model Of Domestic Sovereign Default," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 7-44, February.
    16. Leandro Andrián & Oscar Mauricio Valencia, 2023. "Past the Tipping Point? Assessing Debt Overhang in Latin America and the Caribbean," IDB Publications (Book Chapters), in: Andrew Powell & Oscar Mauricio Valencia (ed.), Dealing with Debt, edition 1, chapter 8, pages 183-196, Inter-American Development Bank.
    17. Christian Schoder, 2014. "The fundamentals of sovereign debt sustainability: evidence from 15 OECD countries," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 41(2), pages 247-271, May.
    18. Hua Chai & Mr. Jun I Kim, 2018. "Demographics, Pension Systems and the Saving-Investment Balance," IMF Working Papers 2018/265, International Monetary Fund.
    19. Sahoo, Manoranjan & Babu, M. Suresh & Dash, Umakant, 2016. "Long run sustainability of current account balance of China and India: New evidence from combined cointegration test," MPRA Paper 79013, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2016.
    20. Mauro, Paolo & Romeu, Rafael & Binder, Ariel & Zaman, Asad, 2015. "A modern history of fiscal prudence and profligacy," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 55-70.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H63 - Public Economics - - National Budget, Deficit, and Debt - - - Debt; Debt Management; Sovereign Debt
    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy; Modern Monetary Theory
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kyo:wpaper:1123. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Makoto Watanabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iekyojp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.