EFFECT OF FISCAL POLICY ON FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENTS IN NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00007712

No of Pages: 109

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

 

ABSTRACT

The study investigated the effect of fiscal policy on foreign direct investments in Nigeria using annual time series data from 1981 to 2018 sourced from the Central Bank of Nigeria Statistical Bulletin and the National Bureau of Statistics. Specifically, the study estimated the effect of tax rate, government capital expenditures, government recurrent expenditures and deficit financing on foreign direct investment inflows. The data analysis was carried out with the aid of ordinary least squares technique based on Johansen cointegration, vector error correction mechanism and Granger causality test since the variables used for the study were integrated at first difference as revealed by the unit root test. Based on the results of the analysis, it was found that a long-run relationship existed between tax rate, government capital and recurrent expenditures, and government debt. Also, it was found that increased tax rate and government debt had a negative and significant effect on FDI in the long-run, while government capital and recurrent expenditures had a positive and significant effect on FDI in the long-run. The negative and significant effect of government debt which was used to proxy deficit financing could be due to the debt burden arising from huge debt servicing. In the short-run, tax rate and government debt had a negative and significant effect on FDI, while government capital and recurrent expenditures were found to have a positive effect on FDI, but capital expenditure was not significant. The value of ECM given as -0.825584 indicated a feedback of or an adjustment of 31.16% from the previous period disequilibrium of the present level of FDI. The Granger causality test revealed that recurrent expenditures and debt Granger caused FDI, while FDI Granger caused tax rate. Based on these findings, the study concluded that fiscal policy do affect the flow of foreign direct investment into Nigeria. It was recommended, among other things, that government should establish a strong fiscal responsibility and transparency system in the country, adopt tax reforms that would be favourable and encourage increase in FDIs in Nigeria.

 

 

 

 




TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Title Page                                                                                                                    i

Declaration                                                                                                                 ii

Certification                                                                                                               iii

Dedication                                                                                                                  iv

Acknowledgements                                                                                                    v

Table of Contents                                                                                                       vi

List of Tables                                                                                                              viii

List of Figures                                                                                                             ix

Abstract                                                                                                                      x

 

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background to the Study                                                                                1

1.2       Statement of the Problem                                                                               4

1.3       Research Questions                                                                                        6

1.4       Objectives of the Study                                                                                  7

1.5       Hypotheses                                                                                                     8

1.6       Significance of the Study                                                                               8

1.7       Scope of the Study                                                                                          9

1.8       Limitations of the Study                                                                                 10

 

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1     Conceptual Framework                                                                              11

2.1.1    Meaning of fiscal policy                                                                                 13

2.1.2    Concept of foreign direct investments (FDI)                                                  14

2.1.3    Link between fiscal policy and FDI inflows                                                  17

2.1.4    Fiscal policy in Nigeria                                                                                  21

2.1.5    FDI in Nigeria                                                                                                 25

2.2       Theoretical Framework                                                                                  27

2.2.1    Keynesian theory                                                                                            27

2.2.2    Neo-classical theory                                                                                       28

2.2.3    The real option theory                                                                                     29

2.2.4    Eclectic paradigm theory                                                                                30

2.3       Empirical Framework                                                                                     31

2.4       Summary of Empirical Literature                                                                   54

2.5       Research Gap                                                                                                  55

 

CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY

3.1       Research Design                                                                                             57

3.2       Nature and Sources of Data                                                                            57

3.3       Model Specification                                                                                       57

3.4       Classification and Description of Model Variables                                       59

3.5       Techniques of Data Analysis                                                                          60

 

CHAPTER FOUR: PRESENTATION OF DATA, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS

4.1       Presentation of Data                                                                                       62

4.2       Descriptive Statistic                                                                                       68

4.3       Test for Stationarity                                                                                        69

4.4       Cointegration and Error Correction Model                                                    70

4.4.1    Johansen cointegration test                                                                             70

4.4.2    Vector error correction                                                                                   72

4.4.3    Granger causality test                                                                                     74

4.4.4    Hypotheses testing                                                                                          75

4.4.5    Discussion of findings                                                                                    77

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary                                                                                                        79

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                      80

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                          80

5.4       Contribution to Knowledge                                                                            81

 

REFERENCES

APPENDIXES

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

                                                                                                                   

2.1       Summary of empirical literature                                                                    53

4.1       Annual time series data used for the study                                                     62

4.2       Descriptive statistic                                                                                        68

4.3       ADF unit root test results                                                                               69

4.4       VAR lag order selection criteria                                                        70

4.5       Johansen cointegration test results                                                                 71

4.6       Vector error correction model (VECM)                                                         73

4.7       Granger causality test                                                                                     75

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1       Mechanism of fiscal policy and foreign direct investments                           12

4.1       Trend of foreign direct investments                                                               63

4.2       Trend of tax rate                                                                                             64

4.3       Trend of government capital expenditures                                                     65

4.4       Trend of government recurrent expenditures                                                 66

4.5       Trend of government debt                                                                              67

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


1.1       BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

In recent times, there has been intense competition among nations of the world due to increasing competitive activities arising from the current waves of globalization. As a result, firms are compelled to be more innovative, competitive and dynamic through the development of new Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and by entering into new markets across the globe, but also through trade liberalization based on World Trade Organization (WTO) provisions (Nistor and Gondor, 2012). Coupled with the need for costs reduction and increase in competition, this process of economic liberalization has forced companies to search out new strategies in order to gain competitive advantages. Hence, many businesses are launching out into other countries in search for new locations that are more attractive for several reasons, such as cheap labor, exemption from tax payment, tax secrecy or other taxation benefits, not forgetting geographical benefits to achieve the desired competitive advantage through foreign direct investments (FDI). In most cases, FDI is facilitated by Multinational Corporations (MNCs). Clearly, these MNCs play prominent role in world trade and investment flows following the management skills, technology, financial resources and related advantages they demonstrate (Rafiq, 2013).

FDI connotes investment activities geared towards acquiring management interest in a company operating outside the country of the investor (UNCTAD, 2000). As such, countries now include the potential benefits from FDI inflows in their plans towards ensuring economic advancement. This is because FDI flows consist of external resource inflow including technology, marketing and management transfer among nations (Thuita, 2017). However, notwithstanding the importance of FDI, efforts geared towards attracting FDI has failed despite the cogent need for inflow of foreign resources in developing countries, like Nigeria. One of the factors adduced to be responsible for this is the structural characteristics of the Nigerian economy including ineffective economic policies, lack of technical advancement, socio-political problems, market failures, etc. (Dash, 2016). These aforementioned structural and environmental factors are very critical because they define the mechanisms of public policies, among other things. At the same time, governments of most developing countries have lost fundamental strategies traditionally used to foster domestic competitiveness towards attracting FDI.

Most countries use a variety of incentives, through fiscal policy, to attract FDI irrespective of their developmental stage (Effiok, Tapang and Eton, 2013). Fiscal policy entails government revenue collection through taxation which are expended to influence economic activities of a country. With fiscal policy, government is able to influence economic factors such as aggregate demand, income, and economic activity as a whole (Peters and Kiabel, 2015; Gondor and Nistor, 2012). This implies that market mechanism cannot solely drive economic activities in a country; and as such there is demand for public policy to correct, guide and supplement market forces towards correcting market imperfections and failures (Osuala and Ebieri, 2014). The hub of fiscal policy is to influence and monitor the economy by adjusting taxes and/or public spending by government. In reality, there have been wastages as some public funds meant for economic stabilization has been politicized, leading to high level of misappropriation, mismanagement, corruption, loss of confidence in the Nigerian investment environment. In this light, Ajisafe and Folorunsho (2002), explained that inappropriate government expenditure, tax rates and huge deficits have been responsible for the macroeconomic disequilibrium at varying times in Nigeria, hence making the economy less attractive to foreign investors.

Literature abound that fiscal activities had affected the net return on capital and influenced capital mobility between countries. In support of this assertion, Dash (2016), affirmed that attitude towards inward FDI should be modified especially when most countries have liberalized their policies to attract investment from foreign companies. This yarning became an indispensable priority due to the expectation that investments from multinational companies (MNCs) would create employment, increase exports and tax revenue, or that productive knowledge of MNCs might spill over to domestic firms in the host economy. Consequent upon this, most host governments desiring FDI inflows have provided diverse forms of investment incentives to inspire foreign owned companies to invest within their jurisdiction. These incentives include tax holidays, lower tax rate for MNCs, grants as well as preferential loan extension to MNCs and other foreign investors, alongside market preferences and even monopoly rights (Khalifa, 2016). More substantial argument in favour of public support for FDI has been based on the grounds of knowledge spillover (Bashin, 2016). This was because technology and skill used by foreign firms were to some extent, public goods and they have resulted in benefits for their host countries even if the MNCs carried out their foreign operations in wholly-owned affiliates.

As a matter of fact, the long strive among governments to lure foreign investors has been because foreign capital augmented the productive capacity of a country, promoted transfer of technology and skills to the host country, provided employment, tax revenues and hence has helped to alleviate poverty, among other benefits (Obeng, 2014). As such, governments have used, extensively, both non-tax and tax incentives to appease foreign investors to locate in their economies. For instance, the non-tax incentives used to encourage FDIs were loans, grants, rebates and investment subsidies (Anichebe, 2019). Conversely, the tax incentives could take the form of corporate income tax reduction, elimination of import duties and tax holiday in Export Processing Zones (EPZ). The idea was that MNCs have been profit oriented and therefore, would be sited in locations or economies where their profits would be maximized.

Nigeria, like other developing countries across the globe had prospect for favourable investment inflows at the time of independence. FDI inflows into the region have been marred by gross economic mismanagement and inefficient fiscal policies. Comparing Nigeria with other developing countries in Southeast Asian countries, it was glaring that foreign investment inflows into Nigeria has been paltry (Peters and Kiabel, 2015). In recent years, most Southeast Asian countries had far higher inflows and income levels, while the Nigerian economy had been plagued with several challenges (Olaleye, Riro and Memba, 2016). In spite of diverse, and frequent changing of fiscal policy, Nigeria is yet to tap her economic potentials for increased FDI inflows. Notably, fiscal policy has been central to the health of any economy, as government has power to raise revenue (tax) and expend revenue to ensure economic stability and increased inflows of foreign investments. Based on this premise, the study analyzed effect of fiscal policy on FDI in Nigeria.


1.2       STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

A major idea in literature concerning the effectiveness of fiscal policy in fostering FDI is that the host country’s government support for knowledge spillover, research and development (R&D), productive investments, the maintenance of law and order as well as the provision of other public goods could stimulate investments in both the short-run and the long-run (Okoh, Onyekwelu and Iyidiobi, 2016; Ogbole, Amadi and Essi, 2011). This, notwithstanding, the extent to which fiscal policy engender FDI inflows has continued to attract empirical debate especially in developing countries. For instance, globalization and the resulting increase in capital mobility have created opportunities for tax competition among countries eager to attract FDI. In the process, tax incentives have assumed new and increasing importance. Use of fiscal incentives like tax holidays and tax reduction to attract FDIs is usually justified by the expected additional beneficial effects of the foreign investment on the host economy. It needs to be noted, however, that while tax incentives (like, tax holidays and tax reduction) might lead to incremental foreign investment, such incentives might also lead to weakening of public finances through decreased tax revenues. As shown by prior literature, numerous studies such as, Gondor and Nistor (2012); Effiok, Tapang and Eton (2013); Peters and Kiabel, (2015); Thuita (2017) had focused on the influences of taxation on foreign direct investments.

Fundamental to the problem statement is the representation of fiscal policy. Theoretically, four standard fiscal policy measures; government expenditure, tax rate, tax revenue and deficit financing exist. Out of these four variables, literature did not single out any as the most representative of fiscal policy. While scholars such as (Okorie, Sylvester and Simon-Peter, 2017; Rafiq, 2013; Engen and Skiner, 1996), have made use of tax rates as a proxy for fiscal policy others such as Edame and Okoi (2015); Umaru and Gattawa (2014); Maji and Achegbulu (2012), had used deficit financing to measure fiscal policy in their studies. Yet, scholars including Ogbole, Amadi and Essi (2011), used government expenditure to indicate the stance of fiscal policy. When government expenditure was considered as a fiscal policy measure certain studies such as, Osuala and Ebieri (2014), had considered total government expenditure as one variable, while others, such as, Gondor and Nistor (2013), holds the view that the variable should be categorized as recurrent and capital expenditure.  This is what the present study has done.

The effectiveness of taxation (a dimension of fiscal policy) in FDI attraction has been documented in diverse literature. The second perspective of fiscal policy which is government spending (expenditure) have not received adequate attention regarding its influence on FDI. While tax incentives (revenue side of the fiscal policy) might be used to improve inbound FDI, the expenditure of government on production of public expenditures which might be of productive use to both foreign and domestic investors that could also play a significant role in attracting foreign investors. Countries competing for FDI might want to offer a better tax environment, improve investments in infrastructure, enhance human capital formation, and promote economic stability of the country (Effiok, Tapang and Eton, 2013). This, in turn, could be achieved if the expenditure policy of the government is welfare-oriented. Such policies could be a successful way of attracting FDI as well as promoting economic development since such measures result in benefits that accrue to domestic producers as well (Osuala and Ebieri, 2014).

In view of the aforementioned potential gains from a well-conceived fiscal policy, it becomes necessary to gauge influence of the fiscal policy on inflows of FDI into Nigeria. There is very sparse literature examining influence of fiscal policy on FDI inflows with respect to Nigeria. The present study attempted to bridge the gap in literature through incorporating both revenue and expenditure sides in its model to examine effects of fiscal policy on FDI inflows into the Nigerian economy. By the time it is completed, the researcher would be in a position to propose recommendations that would facilitate the free flow of FDIs into Nigeria in the years ahead.


1.3       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The major objective of this study is to empirically analyze effects of fiscal policy on FDI in Nigeria. The specific objectives are to:

1.         Evaluate effect of tax rate (proxied by total tax revenue to GDP ratio) on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

2.         Analyze effect of government capital expenditure on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

3.         Ascertain effect of government recurrent expenditure on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

4.         Investigate effect of deficit financing (measured by public debt) on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

5.         Examine causal relationship between fiscal policy variables and foreign direct investments in Nigeria.


1.4       RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The following questions emanated from the research problem:

1.         To what extent does tax rate (proxied by total tax revenue to GDP ratio) affect foreign direct investments in Nigeria?

2.         In what ways do government capital expenditure affect foreign direct investments in Nigeria?

3.         What is the nature and magnitude of effects of government recurrent expenditures on foreign direct investments in Nigeria?

4.         How does deficit financing (measured by public debt) affect foreign direct investments in Nigeria?

5.         What is the direction of causality between fiscal policy variables and foreign direct investments in Nigeria?


1.5       HYPOTHESES

The following hypotheses have been formulated and tested during the conduct of this study to include the followings:

Ho1: Tax rate (proxied by total tax revenue to GDP ratio) does not have significant effect on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

Ho2: Government capital expenditure does not have any significant effect on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

Ho3: Government recurrent expenditure does not have any significant effect on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

Ho4: Deficit financing (measured by public debt) does not have any significant effect on foreign direct investments in Nigeria.

Ho5: There is no significant causal relationship between fiscal policy variables and foreign direct investments in Nigeria.


1.6       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The empirical findings of this study would be of immense significance to the following:

1)         Government of Nigeria:

The Nigerian government is grappling seriously with the bureaucratic management of fiscal policy especially in the aspect of taxes which may have the incentive of negating peoples’ attitude towards working and paying higher taxes while affecting both foreign and domestic investments within the economy. This study will therefore assist the government of Nigeria in ensuring proper management of fiscal policy measures to encourage both foreign and domestic investors. This will certainly led to favourable investment climate that would attract FDIs to Nigeria.

2)         Investors:

A well-managed fiscal process attracts foreign investments. This investment could be local as well foreign. An effective management of fiscal policies can spur the informal sector activities which include economic activities that are done outside the purview of government surveillance. Informal activities in agriculture, mining, small scale production of goods and services, retail trade, transport, financial intermediation, personal services etc. gets a boost when fiscal policies are effectively managed. Therefore, outcomes of this study will assist policy makers in fashioning out policies that will crowd-in investment in the informal sectors which will result in more FDI.

3)         Academic:

This study will contribute significantly to the volume of literature available in the area of impact of fiscal policy on FDI flows. In academics, debates are unending and studies will continue to support or disprove theories. Therefore, the outcome of this study will contribute immensely in determining impact of fiscal policy variables on FDI from a structural perspective.


1.7       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The focus of this study is to determine effects of fiscal policy on FDI in Nigeria. Fiscal policy variables such as government tax rate, government capital and recurrent expenditures, and deficit financing (debt) was considered to ascertain if they have an effect on FDI in Nigeria.  The study covered the period from 1981 to 2018 for two reasons. First, the period covered the era of regulated (1981-1985) and deregulated (186-2018) financial system. Also, it covers years of military rule and democratic government which is seen to have affected fiscal policy mechanism in Nigeria. Above all, time series data were available for the period of time.


1.8       LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY                                   

The constraints that was encountered during the course of this study were time factor and lack of funds. These two factors are economic resources and it is a clear fact that economic resources are limited and scarce. However, the researcher applied the principle of opportunity cost, scale of preference and prudent utilization of available resources to accomplish the study.

 

 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.


To Review


To Comment