The Effects of changes in Tariff Rates on Imports: Evidence from Kazakhstan

   This paper is the continuation of the research on the impact of Eurasian Customs Union policies on the economy of Kazakhstan.

   The study provides new evidence on the effects of Customs Unions on its members. In particular, this paper investigates the impact of tariff rate changes in Kazakhstan due to the establishment of the Eurasian Economic Union. Kazakhstan joined Eurasian Customs Union in 2010. Then the Eurasian Customs Union became the Eurasian Economic Union in May 2014. Since the establishment of the ECU, Kazakhstan’s trade policy has experienced considerable change. The tariff rates in Kazakhstan with countries outside the ECU almost doubled, with average tariff rates increasing from 6.45 to 12.24 %. This paper uses the dataset on bilateral trade flows between ECU countries and other 195 countries for 20 years from 2000 to 2019. An empirical analysis is performed on a country level, and panel data techniques are used to estimate whether the increase in the tariffs with non-members of CU will lead to trade diversion with suppliers outside the CU. The analysis demonstrated that the increase in tariff rates negatively affected imports to Kazakhstan from non-ECU countries. The effect of tariff increase, using the dynamic gravity model and GMM econometric technique, is estimated to be a 1.8 % decrease in imports if the average external tariff rate of Kazakhstan increases by one percentage point (e. g. from 7 % to 8 %). Due to the increase in tariff rates, the overall estimated reduction of imports of Kazakhstan is 10.66 %.

1. Aituar, A., & Akhmediyarova, А. (2021). The impact of Non-Tariff Barriers on the trade flows of Kazakhstan. Economics: strategy and practice. 16 (2), 62-70. https://doi.org/10.51176/1997-9967-2021-2-62-70

2. Viner, J. (1950). The CU issue. New York: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

3. Kemp, M., & Wan, H. (1976). An Elementary Proposition Concerning the Formation of CUs. Journal of International Economics, 6 (1), 95-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1996(76)90025-8

4. Ohyama, M. (1972). Trade and Welfare in General Equilibrium. Keio Economic Studies, 9, 37-73. https://doi.org/10.5652/internationaleconomy/ie2020.23.13.hk

5. Pomfret, R. (2006). Regional trade agreements. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

6. Krugman, P. (1991). Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of political economy, 99 (3), 483-499. https://doi.org/10.1086/261763

7. Kennan, J., & Riezman, R. (1990). Optimal tariff equilibria with customs unions. Canadian Journal of Economics, 23, 70-83. https://doi.org/10.2307/135520

8. Jandosov, O., & Sabyrova, L. (2011). Indicative tariff protection level in Kazakhstan: Before and after the customs union (part I). Rakurs Discussion Paper 5.3 (March), Almaty, Kazakhstan: Rakurs, Center for Economic Analysis.

9. Mkrtchyan, A., & Gnutzmann, H. (2013). Mutual protectionism? An assessment of the Eurasian customs union. European Trade Study Group (ETSG).

10. De Souza, L. V. (2011). An initial estimation of the economic effects of the creation of the EurASEC Customs Union on its Members.

11. Isakova, A., & Plekhanov, A. (2012). Customs union and Kazakhstan’s imports (No. 442). CASE Network Studies & Analyses. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2119838

12. Gnutzmann-Mkrtchyan, A., & Hugot, J. (2022). Gravity-Based Tools for Assessing the Impact of Tariff Changes. Asian Development Bank Economics Working Paper Series, (649). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4039545

13. Emikönel, M. (2022). The impact of international organizations on Chinese trade as the determiner of trade: the gravity model approach. The Chinese Economy, 55(1), 26-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/10971475.2021.1892920

14. Hsiao, C. (1986). Analysis of Panel Data, Econometric Society monographs No. 11, New York: Cambridge University Press.

15. Nickell, S. (1981). Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 1417-1426. https://doi.org/10.2307/1911408

16. Hansen, L. P. (1982). Large sample properties of generalized method of moments estimators. Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 1029-1054. https://doi.org/10.2307/1912775

17. Holtz-Eakin, D., Newey, W., & Rosen, H. S. (1988). Estimating vector autoregressions with panel data. Econometrica: Journal of the econometric society, 1371-1395. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913103

18. Arellano, M., & Bond, S. (1991). Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The review of economic studies, 58(2), 277-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968

19. Blundell, R., & Bond, S. (1998). Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of econometrics, 87 (1), 115-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(98)00009-8

20. Arellano, M., & Bover, O. (1995). Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models. Journal of econometrics, 68 (1), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D

21. Roodman, D. (2009). How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The stata journal, 9(1), 86-136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X0900900106

22. Wooldridge, J. M. (2015). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach. Cengage learning.

23. Ball, R. J. (1967). An Econometric Study of International Trade Flows. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajibm.2019.94052

24. Rose, A. K. (2004). Do we really know that the WTO increases trade?. American economic review, 94(1), 98-114. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282804322970724

25. World Bank, (2012). Assessment of Costs and Benefits of the CU for Kazakhstan. Report No. 65977-KZ, Poverty Reduction and Economic Management Unit. Europe and Central Asia Region.