Fiscal and Macroeconomic Impact of Privatization

Abstract

The following symbols have been used throughout this paper: ... to indicate that data are not available; n.a. to indicate not applicable;-to indicate that the figure is zero or less than half the final digit shown, or that the item does not exist; between years or months (i.e., 1997-98 or January-June) to indicate the years or months covered, including the beginning and ending years or months; / between years or months (i.e., 1997/98) to indicate a crop or fiscal (financial) year. "Billion" means a thousand million; "trillion" means a thousand billion. Minor discrepancies between constituent figures and totals are due to rounding. The term "country," as used in this paper, does not in all cases refer to a territorial entity that is a state as understood by international law and practice; the term also covers some territorial entities that are not states, but for which statistical data are maintained and provided internationally on a separate and independent basis.

Specific funding of fiscal deficit in Serbia

“…Privatization of state enterprises has long been promoted in developing countries because of the belief that it contributes to improving the efficiency of these enterprises and stimulates growth as the macroeconomic objective (Davis et al, 2000;Katsoulakos & Likoianni, 2002). However, as countries have begun the process of privatization, some governments have clearly defined explicitly that the aim of their privatization program is improving the fiscal deficit (Khan, 2006).…”

“…Privatization revenues represent direct budget inflow and governments have the option of saving this money or to spend it (Ramey, 2009;Blias, 2010). As the government is faced with liquidity constraints, privatization revenues are used to finance an even larger deficit Davis et al 2000). However, the decision to increase spending using the proceeds from privatization should be done carefully, because the revenues from privatization temporary and spending would be moved up to a higher level of revenue collection that the government is able to exercise (Davis et al, 2000).…”

“…As the government is faced with liquidity constraints, privatization revenues are used to finance an even larger deficit Davis et al 2000). However, the decision to increase spending using the proceeds from privatization should be done carefully, because the revenues from privatization temporary and spending would be moved up to a higher level of revenue collection that the government is able to exercise (Davis et al, 2000). In the Republic of Serbia interdependence fiscal deficit and privatization revenues is analyzed in the paper Basic T. (2007) using the OLS method estimates.…”

Rekstur einkavæddra fyrirtækja á Íslandi

“…Boubakri og Cossett (1998) komust að svipaðri niðurstöðu en þó með þeirri undantekningu að hagnaður, skilvirkni og framleiðsla jukust ekki marktaekt. Ríkisfjármál batna hins vegar alls staðar við einkavaeðingu af eðlilegum ástaeðum (Davis, Ossowski, Richardson og Barnett, 2000). Styrkir til ríkisfyrirtaekja stöðvast við einkavaeðingu og fyrirtaeki, sem vegnar vel eftir einkavaeðingu, borga skatta (Sheshinski og Lopez---Calva, 1999).…”

Infrastructure and Public Utilities Privatization in Developing Countries

“…2 Using a panel of 18 developing countries, Davis et al (2000) show that budgetary privatization proceeds have been used to reduce domestic financing on a roughly one-for-one basis. 3 Wallsten (2001) studies the impact of the exclusivity period on the privatization price of twenty telecommunication firms in fifteen developing countries.…”