Vergi yükünün istihdam üzerine etkisi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
VERGİ YÜKÜNÜN İSTİHDAM ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ\n\n Vergi yükünün istihdam üzerine olan etkisinin doğru analiz edilmesi, gerek akademik çalışmalarda gerekse politika yapıcıları için büyük önem taşımaktadır. Özellikle 2008 yılı son çeyreğinde Lehman Brothers’ın iflasıyla başlayan küresel ekonomik krizin dünya ekonomisi ve Türkiye’de istihdam üzerine olumsuz etkisi, vergi yükünün istihdam üzerine etkisini daha önemli hale getirmiştir. Çalışmada Türkiye’de vergi yükü istihdam ilişkisi 1988-2010 dönemi için eşbütünleşme analiziyle incelenmiştir. İstihdam, vergi yükü ile beraber literatüre uygun olarak GSYH ve nüfus değişkenleriyle modellenmiş olup, çalışma sonucunda GSYH artışının istihdamı pozitif etkilediği, nüfus ve vergi yükünün ise istihdamı negatif etkilediği bulunmuştur. Son olarak etki tepki analiziyle uygulamalı analiz tamamlanmıştır. Etki tepki analizinde vergi yüküne bir standart sapmalık şok verilmiş, bunun istihdam üzerine 3 yıllık negatif etkisi olduğu daha sonraki yıllarda ise bu negatif etkinin söndüğü gözlenmiştir. Sonuç olarak vergi yükünde meydana gelecek artışların istihdamı azaltacağı ortaya çıkarılmıştır.\nABSTRACT\n\n\nEFFECTS OF TAX BURDEN ON EMPLOYMENT\n\n Accurate analysis of the impact of tax burden on employment is crucial for both academic studies and policy making. Especially, the global economic crisis which began with the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in the last quarter of 2008 and affected both the global employment and employment in Turkey adversely has increased the importance of analyzing the impact of tax burden on employment. In this study, the relationship between tax burden and employment for Turkish economy during the 1988-2010 period is investigated by using the co-integration analysis. Employment and tax burden is modelled in parallel with the literature using the GDP and population variables and it is found that the GDP growth affects employment positively while increases in tax burden and population affect employment negatively. Finally, empirical analysis has been completed by using the impulse response analysis. In impulse response model, it is observed that a shock amounting to a standard deviation on tax burden had a negative effect on employment for 3 years, but after this period the level of the negative effect reduces gradually. It is concluded that increases in tax burden have a negative effect on employment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".