Local Taxation and Fiscal Autonomy in Romania: Visible Public Services and Fiscal Trust in a Central and Eastern European Context

Local taxation is not only a revenue instrument, but also a visible component of the relationship between citizens and local public authorities. This study examines Romania as a Central and Eastern European (CEE) case of local fiscal governance, focusing on the relationship between local fiscal autonomy, visible local public services and fiscal trust. The article adopts a comparative conceptual-empirical design based on a harmonized dataset covering eleven CEE countries over the period 2014–2024. The empirical analysis uses annual fiscal and budgetary indicators derived from Eurostat and European Commission data, while Eurobarometer and WVS/QoG indicators are employed contextually to interpret trust and tax morale. The results indicate that Romania is broadly close to the CEE average in terms of local government revenue and expenditure, but substantially below the regional average in the tax component of local finance. Local government tax revenue averaged 0.85% of GDP in Romania, compared with 1.89% in the CEE sample, while local tax revenue represented 9.34% of local government revenue, compared with a regional average of 18.03%. At the same time, Romania recorded visible local expenditure functions and slightly above-average recurrent taxes on immovable property, although the latter declined over the analysed period. Trust in local or regional public authorities increased from 39% in 2014 to 54% in 2024. The findings identify a structural tension between visible local expenditure responsibilities and limited local fiscal autonomy. The article therefore argues that local taxation in Romania should be interpreted as a governance relationship shaped by fiscal capacity, service visibility and trust, without claiming a direct causal effect on voluntary tax compliance.

local taxation; local fiscal autonomy; fiscal trust; visible public services; property taxation; local fiscal governance; Romania; Central and Eastern Europe

1. Alm, J., & Torgler, B. (2006). Culture differences and tax morale in the United States and in Europe. Journal of Economic Psychology, 27(2), 224-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2005.09.002 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Appiah, T., Domeher, D., & Agana, J. A. (2024). Tax knowledge, trust in government, and voluntary tax compliance: Insights from an emerging economy. SAGE Open, 14(2). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440241234757 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bahl, R. W., & Bird, R. M. (2008). Subnational taxes in developing countries: The way forward. Institute for International Business Working Paper No. 16. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1273753 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2005). Trust in government: The relative importance of service satisfaction, political factors, and demography. Public Performance & Management Review, 28(4), 487-511. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2005.11051848 (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15309576.2005.11051848 ) [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cifuentes-Faura, J., Benito, B., & Guillamón, M.-D. (2024). The influence of transparency on municipal taxation: An empirical analysis. Administration & Society, 56(5), 653–682. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. https://doi.org/10.1177/00953997241239024 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Costea, I. M., & Ilucă, D.-M. (2024). Central and local fiscal jurisdiction in Romania: A taxonomy of property taxation. Financial Law Review, 34(2), 1-22. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. https://doi.org/10.4467/22996834FLR.24.010.20615 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. European Commission. (2017). Eurobarometer 81.2: Europeans in 2014, financial and economic crisis, European citizenship, and European values, March 2014. GESIS & ICPSR. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36659.v1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. European Commission. (2019). Standard Eurobarometer 91: Public opinion in the European Union, Spring 2019. Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2775/718901 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. European Commission. (2024). Standard Eurobarometer 101: Spring 2024. Available online: https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3216 (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. European Commission. (2026). Data on taxation trends. Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union. Available online: https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/taxation/economic-analysis/data-taxation-trends_en (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Eurostat. (2025). Government revenue, expenditure and main aggregates (gov_10a_main) [Data set]. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/gov_10a_main/default/table (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Eurostat. (2026a). Main national accounts tax aggregates (gov_10a_taxag) [Data set]. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/gov_10a_taxag/default/table (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Eurostat. (2026b). General government expenditure by function (COFOG) (gov_10a_exp) [Data set]. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/gov_10a_exp/default/table (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Frey, B. S., & Torgler, B. (2007). Tax morale and conditional cooperation. Journal of Comparative Economics, 35(1), 136-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2006.10.006 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Gherghina, S., & Volintiru, C. (2023). Budgetary clientelism and decentralization in Hungary and Romania. Journal of Developing Societies, 39(1), 40-62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0169796X221148509 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Giaccobasso, M., Nathan, B. C., Perez-Truglia, R., & Zentner, A. (2025). Where do my tax dollars go? Tax morale effects of perceived government spending. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 17(4), 223-259. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.20240029 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Grimmelikhuijsen, S., Porumbescu, G., Hong, B., & Im, T. (2013). The effect of transparency on trust in government: A cross-national comparative experiment. Public Administration Review, 73(4), 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12047 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Grote, M., & Wen, J.-F. (2024). How to design and implement property tax reforms. IMF How-To Notes, 2024(006). International Monetary Fund. https://doi.org/10.5089/9798400288753.061 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Hsu, H.-Y. (2024). Fiscal transparency and tax morale: Is the relationship shaped by perceptions of government performance and corruption? International Review of Administrative Sciences, 90(3), 563-580. https://doi.org/10.1177/00208523231220599 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kirchler, E., Hoelzl, E., & Wahl, I. (2008). Enforced versus voluntary tax compliance: The slippery slope framework. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(2), 210-225. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.05.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Luttmer, E. F. P., & Singhal, M. (2014). Tax morale. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.4.149 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Mebratu, A. A. (2024). Theoretical foundations of voluntary tax compliance: Evidence from a developing country. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11, Article 443. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02903-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Mitu, N. E., & Mitu, G. T. (2022). Reforming the property tax system in Romania: A necessity. Revista de Științe Politice. Revue des Sciences Politiques, 73, 99-113. Available online: https://cis01.ucv.ro/revistadestiintepolitice/files/numarul73_2022/10.pdf (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Mitu, N. E., Mitu, G. T., & Zglavoci, M. (2026). Stakeholders in tax literacy and tax education in the European Union: Schools, communities, and public institutions in relation to tax morale and voluntary tax compliance: A systematic review. Social Sciences, 15(4), Article 256. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci15040256 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Mitu, N. E., & Stanciu, C. (2018). Tax principles between theory, practice and social responsibility. In S. O. Idowu, C. Sitnikov, D. Simion, & C. G. Bocean (Eds.), Current issues in corporate social responsibility (pp. 11–24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70449-4_2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Oates, W. E. (1999). An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(3), 1120-1149. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.37.3.1120 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. OECD. (2019). Tax morale: What drives people and businesses to pay tax? OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/f3d8ea10-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. OECD. (2021). Fiscal federalism 2022: Making decentralisation work. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/201c75b6-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. OECD. (2022). 2022 Synthesis Report World Observatory on Subnational Government Finance and Investment. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/b80a8cdb-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Olimid, A. P., Georgescu, C. M., Olimid, D. A., Georgescu, S. D., & Gherghe, C. L. (2025). Applied digital analysis of UN legal content on humanitarian assistance, security and climate change policy: Tracking social narratives, public engagement and posting behavior. Revista de Științe Politice. Revue des Sciences Politiques, (86), 45–57. Available online: [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. https://cis01.ucv.ro/revistadestiintepolitice/files/numarul86_2025/4.pdf (accessed on 22 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Plaček, M., Ochrana, F., Půček, M. J., & Nemec, J. (2020). Fiscal decentralization reforms: The impact on the efficiency of local governments in Central and Eastern Europe. Springer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46758-6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Porumbescu, G. A. (2015). Using transparency to enhance responsiveness and trust in local government: Can it work? State and Local Government Review, 47(3), 205-213. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X15599427 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Slack, E., & Bird, R. M. (2014). The political economy of property tax reform. OECD Working Papers on Fiscal Federalism, No. 18. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/5jz5pzvzv6r7-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. The Quality of Government Institute. (2026). QoG Data: wvs_jacot, Justifiable: Cheating on taxes. University of Gothenburg. Available online: https://datafinder.qog.gu.se/variable/wvs_jacot (accessed on 21 May 2026). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Tiebout, C. M. (1956). A pure theory of local expenditures. Journal of Political Economy, 64(5), 416-424. https://doi.org/10.1086/257839 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Van Ryzin, G. G. (2007). Pieces of a puzzle: Linking government performance, citizen satisfaction, and trust. Public Performance & Management Review, 30(4), 521-535. https://doi.org/10.2753/PMR1530-9576300403 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. World Values Survey Association. (2022). World Values Survey Wave 7 (2017-2022) cross-national data-set. https://doi.org/10.14281/18241.24 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• A Decadal Overview of Welfare Schemes in Telangana (2014–2024)
• Ubuntu and the Missed Development Goals in the Global South: Rethinking MDGs and SDGs through an African Philosophical Lens
• Exploring the Factors of Obesity: Insights from Johor State Civil Servants
• Navigating the Nexus: Challenges Faced by Part-Time Postgraduate Government Employees in Malaysia
• The Lived Experiences of Skilled Filipino Women Immigrants in Denmark