ALLOCATION OF PERSONAL INCOME TAX REVENUE TO DISTRICT AND CITY BUDGETS: A REGIONAL PANEL-DATA ECONOMETRIC STUDY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20792933Abstract
This article empirically evaluates, using panel-data econometric methods, the effectiveness of the
mechanism introduced by Presidential Law No. LRQ-1011 of 24 December 2024 of the Republic of Uzbekistan,
which mandates that at least 50 percent of personal income tax (PIT) revenue be channeled to district and city
budgets.
A balanced panel comprising 84 districts and 711 observations was constructed from district-level State
Tax Committee data spanning 2017–2025. Three estimators were employed: Pooled OLS, Random Effects
(RE) and Fixed Effects (FE). The identification strategy relies on first-difference (FD) analysis and pre/post
comparisons using the Welch t-test and Mann–Whitney U-test.
The FE model estimates a stable annual log-growth of 32.5 percent over 2017–2025 (β = 0.325; p <
0.001). The first-difference analysis for 2024–2025 places the mean log-change at +0.394 (approximately
+48.2 percent; t = 4.60; p < 0.001). The 2025 growth rate exceeded the pre-policy period average by +23.8
percentage points, a difference confirmed by both the Welch t-test (p = 0.011) and the Mann–Whitney U-test (p
< 0.001). Positive revenue dynamics were recorded in 81.9 percent of districts.
The empirical evidence confirms that the 2025 regulatory-budgetary reform produced a statistically
significant and geographically widespread positive effect on district-level PIT revenues. These findings validate
the practical soundness of the 50-percent allocation mechanism advanced within the dissertation
Keywords
fiscal decentralization; personal income tax; panel data; fixed effects; local budget; intergovernmental fiscal relationsReferences
Akai, N., & Sakata, M. (2002). Fiscal decentralization contributes to economic growth: Evidence from
state-level cross-section data for the United States. Journal of Urban Economics, 52(1), 93–108.
Bahl, R., & Linn, J. (1992). Urban Public Finance in Developing Countries. Oxford University Press.
Bird, R., & Vaillancourt, F. (Eds.). (1998). Fiscal Decentralization in Developing Countries. Cambridge
University Press.
Davoodi, H., & Zou, H. (1998). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth: A cross-country study.
Journal of Urban Economics, 43(2), 244–257.
Faguet, J.-P. (2014). Decentralization and governance. World Development, 53, 2–13.
Iimi, A. (2005). Decentralization and economic growth revisited: An empirical note. Journal of Urban
Economics, 57(3), 449–461.
Martinez-Vazquez, J., & McNab, R. M. (2003). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth. World
Development, 31(9), 1597–1616.
Musgrave, R. A. (1959). The Theory of Public Finance. McGraw-Hill.
Oates, W. E. (1972). Fiscal Federalism. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Republic of Uzbekistan. (2024). Law No. ORQ-1011 on Amendments to the Budget Code (24 December
. National Database of Legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan.
Rodríguez-Pose, A., & Ezcurra, R. (2010). Does decentralization matter for regional disparities? A
cross-country analysis. Journal of Economic Geography, 10(5), 619–644.
Stansel, D. (2005). Local decentralization and local economic growth: A cross-sectional examination of
US metropolitan areas. Journal of Urban Economics, 57(1), 55–72.
Thiessen, U. (2003). Fiscal decentralisation and economic growth in high-income OECD countries.
Fiscal Studies, 24(3), 237–274.
Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), 416–424.
Vahobov, A. V. (2020). Public Finance [Davlat moliyasi]. Tashkent: Iqtisodiyot nashriyoti.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (2nd ed.). MIT Press.
Yilmaz, S. (2000). The impact of fiscal decentralization on macroeconomic performance. In Proceedings
of the 92nd Annual Conference on Taxation. National Tax Association.
Zhang, T., & Zou, H. (1998). Fiscal decentralization, public spending, and economic growth in China.
Journal of Public Economics, 67(2), 221–240.

