This article examines whether the adoption of deficit targets by subnational governments in India influenced the composition of public spending. Using dynamic panel estimations, this study finds that the adoption of fiscal responsibility laws (FRLs) by Indian states is correlated with improvements in their budget balances, but the same period also witnessed significant cuts in development spending. Furthermore, the states have reduced their capital expenditure and social sector spending after adopting FRLs, while the increases in tax and nontax revenues are insignificant. The subnational governments in developing countries that are adopting numerical deficit and debt targets should explore mechanisms to minimize the distortionary impacts of fiscal targets on the composition of subnational spending since reduced expenditure on development and capital projects may be counterproductive for fiscal sustainability in the long run as these expenditures tend to have significant positive externalities.
AmielLindsayDellerStevenStallmannJudithMaherCraig. 2014. “Does the restrictiveness of state tax and expenditure limitations affect state revenues and expenditures?” International Journal of Public Administration37 (4): 237–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2013.812113
2.
ArellanoManuelBondStephen. 1991. “Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations.” The Review of Economic Studies58 (2): 277–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968
3.
ArellanoManuelOlympiaBover. 1995. “Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models.” Journal of Econometrics68 (1): 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
BahlRoy WBirdRichard M. 2018. Fiscal decentralization and local finance in developing countries. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
6.
BahlRoy WHeredia-OrtizEuniceMartinez-VazquezJorgeRiderMark. 2005. India: Fiscal condition of the states, international experience,and options for reform. Atlanta: International Studies Program, Georgia State University. https://ideas.repec.org/p/ays/ispwps/paper05141.html.
7.
BallalSonaliRubensteinRoss. 2009. “The effect of tax and expenditure limitations on public education resources: A meta-regression analysis.” Public Finance Review37 (6): 665–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142109345265
8.
BanerjeeSayanHanklaCharles R.. 2020. “Party systems and public goods: The dynamics of good governance in the Indian states.” India Review19 (5): 496–522. https://doi.org/10.1080/14736489.2020.1855015
9.
BlundellRichardBondStephen. 1998. “Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models.” Journal of Econometrics87 (1): 115–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8
10.
BukowskaGrażynaSiwińska-GorzelakJoanna. 2019. “Can higher tax autonomy enhance local fiscal discipline? Evidence from tax decentralization in Poland.” Publius: The Journal of Federalism49 (2): 299–324. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjy024
11.
CalderónCésarServénLuis. 2012. “Infrastructure in Latin America.” In In the Oxford handbook of Latin American economics, edited by OcampoJose AntonioRosJaime, 659–88USA: Oxford University Press.
ChakrabortyPinakiDashBharatee Bhusana. 2017. “Fiscal reforms, fiscal rule, and development spending: How Indian states have performed?” Public Budgeting and Finance37 (4): 111–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbaf.12161
DahanM.StrawczyskiM.. 2013. “Fiscal rules and the composition of government expenditures in OECD countries.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management32 (3): 484–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.21694
16.
DeMelloL. R.2000. “Fiscal decentralization and intergovernmental fiscal relations: A cross-country analysis.” World Development28 (2): 365–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(99)00123-0
17.
DeMelloL. R.2001. “Fiscal decentralization and borrowing costs: The case of local governments.” Public Finance Review29 (2): 108–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/109114210102900202
18.
DrukkerDavid M.2003. “Testing for serial correlation in linear panel-data models.” The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata3 (2): 168–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0300300206
19.
EasterlyWilliamIrwinTimothyServénLuis. 2007. “Walking up the down escalator: Public investment and fiscal stability.” The World Bank Research Observer23 (1): 37–56. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-4158
20.
EliasonPaulLutzByron. 2018. “Can fiscal rules constrain the size of government? An analysis of the ‘crown jewel’ of tax and expenditure limitations.” Journal of Public Economics166: 115–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2018.07.008
21.
ForemnyDirk.2014. “Sub-National deficits in European countries: The impact of fiscal rules and tax autonomy.” European Journal of Political Economy34: 86–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2014.01.003
GranadoJavierMartinez-VazquezJorgeMcNabRobert. 2018. “Decentralized governance, expenditure composition, and preferences for public goods.” Public Finance Review46 (3): 359–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/1091142116639127
GrisorioMaria JenniferProtaFrancesco. 2015. “The impact of fiscal decentralization on the composition of public expenditure: Panel data evidence from Italy.” Regional Studies49 (12): 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2013.859665
KousserT.McCubbinsM. D.MouleE.. 2008. “For whom the TEL tolls: Can state tax and expenditure limits effectively reduce spending?” State Politics & Policy Quarterly8 (4): 331–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/153244000800800401
MartellChristine R.2008. “Fiscal institutions of Brazilian municipal borrowing.” Public Administration and Development28 (1): 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.474
35.
Martinez-VazquezJorgeLago-PeñasSantiagoSacchiAgnese. 2017. “The impact of fiscal decentralization: A survey.” Journal of Economic Surveys31 (4): 1095–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12182
36.
Martinez-VazquezJorgeVulovicVioleta. 2016. “How Well Do Subnational Borrowing Regulations Work?” Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Working Paper 16-07.https://ideas.repec.org/p/ays/ispwps/paper1601.html.
37.
McCartenW. J.2003. “The challenge of fiscal discipline in the Indian states.” In In fiscal decentralization and the challenge of hard budget constraint, edited by RoddenJonathanEskelandG. S.LitvackJennie Ilene249–86, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
OatesWallace E.1972. Fiscal federalism. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
40.
OatesWallace E.2005. “Toward a second-generation theory of fiscal federalism.” International Tax and Public Finance12 (4): 349–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10797-005-1619-9
QianYingyiRolandGérard. 1998. “Federalism and the soft budget constraint.” American Economic Review88 (5): 1143–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.149988
43.
RangarajanC.PrasadAbha. 2013. “Managing state debt and ensuring solvency: The Indian experience.” In In until debt do us part: Subnational debt, insolvency, and markets, edited by CanutoOtavianaLiuLili109–44, Washington, DC: The World Bank.
RoddenJonathanEskelandGunnar ALitvackJennie Ilene. 2003. Fiscal decentralization and the challenge of hard budget constraints. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
47.
RoodmanDavid.2009a. “How to do Xtabond2: An Introduction to difference and system GMM in stata.” The Stata Journal: Promoting Communications on Statistics and Stata9 (1): 86–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0900900106
48.
RoodmanDavid.2009b. “Practitioners’ corner: A note on the theme of too many instruments.” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics71 (1): 135–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0084.2008.00542.x
49.
RoyRathinKotiaA.. 2018. “Should states target a 3% fiscal deficit.” Economic and Political Weekly53 (9): 48–53.
ShadbegianRonald J.1998. “Do tax and expenditure limitations affect local government budgets? Evidence from panel data.” Public Finance Review26 (2): 118–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/109114219802600202
Ter-MinassianTeresa. 2007. “Fiscal rules for subnational governments: Can they promote fiscal discipline?” OECD Journal on Budgeting6 (3): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1787/16812336
55.
Ter-MinassianTeresa. 2015. “Promoting responsible and sustainable fiscal decentralization.” In Handbook of multilevel finance, edited by EhtishamAhmadBrosioGiorgio, 437–60. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing.
56.
WildasinDavid E.1997. Externalities and bailouts: Hard and soft budget constraints in intergovernmental fiscal relations.Washington, DC: The World Bank Policy Research Working Paper. http://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/1813-9450-1843.
