Comparing Public Finance Management in Turkey and the United States - A Comprehensive Analysis

This paper provides a detailed examination of the public finance management (PFM) systems in Turkiye and the United States. It offers a comparative analysis of their fiscal governance models, focusing on the structural, operational, and strategic differences between the two systems.

Key Aspects Covered in the Paper:

1. Fiscal Structure and Governance
- Turkiye’s centralized system is shaped by the Presidential Strategy and Budget Directorate and emphasizes fiscal discipline and medium-term planning.
- The U.S. follows a decentralized approach, allowing states significant fiscal autonomy, resulting in regional flexibility but disparities in service delivery.

2. Transparency and Accountability
- Turkiye has improved its fiscal transparency through digital tax collection systems but faces challenges in public participation and procurement transparency.
- The U.S. leads globally in transparency, supported by platforms like USAspending.gov and oversight institutions like the GAO and CBO.

3. Debt Management and Fiscal Health
- Turkiy emaintains a relatively low debt-to-GDP ratio of 40% (2024) but faces external vulnerabilities due to foreign debt reliance.
- The U.S. struggles with a growing national debt of $33 trillion (2025) and fiscal deficits driven by entitlement programs.

4. Strategic Planning
- Turkiye employs the Medium-Term Program (MTP) to establish structured fiscal targets, focusing on inflation control and debt reduction.
- The U.S. lacks a similar medium-term fiscal framework, relying instead on long-term projections by the CBO.

5. Public Participation
- Public engagement in Turkiye is minimal, with limited avenues for citizen input in budgetary decisions.
- The U.S. encourages citizen participation through public hearings and open budget platforms, fostering accountability.

Methodology
The study adopts a comparative analysis framework, utilizing publicly available data from sources like the Open Budget Survey, OECD, World Bank, and government portals such as USAspending.gov and the Presidential Strategy and Budget Directorate.

Key Findings and Recommendations
- For Turkiye: Enhancing transparency, decentralizing fiscal authority, and fostering public participation can strengthen its PFM system.
- For the U.S.: Introducing medium-term fiscal planning frameworks and addressing regional inequities in fiscal performance are critical areas for improvement.
- Both countries can benefit from mutual learning by adopting each other's strengths.

The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for balanced fiscal discipline, transparency, and public participation to ensure efficient and equitable governance.

本文对土耳其（Turkiye）与美国的公共财政管理（Public Finance Management，简称PFM）体系展开了详尽剖析，针对二者的财政治理模式开展比较研究，重点聚焦两大体系在结构、运行与战略层面的差异。

本文涵盖的核心议题如下：

1. 财政结构与治理
- 土耳其实行集权式财政体系，由总统战略与预算总局（Presidential Strategy and Budget Directorate）主导构建，核心强调财政纪律与中期规划。
- 美国则采用分权式治理模式，各州拥有高度财政自主权，这虽赋予区域财政灵活性，但也导致公共服务供给出现区域失衡。

2. 透明度与问责机制
- 土耳其已通过数字化税收征管体系提升财政透明度，但在公众参与及采购透明度方面仍存在短板。
- 美国在财政透明度方面位居全球前列，依托USAspending.gov等公开平台以及美国问责局（Government Accountability Office，简称GAO）、国会预算办公室（Congressional Budget Office，简称CBO）等监督机构提供支撑。

3. 债务管理与财政健康状况
- 土耳其2024年债务与GDP之比维持在40%的相对低位，但因依赖外债而面临外部风险隐患。
- 美国则面临33万亿美元（2025年）的不断膨胀的联邦国债，且财政赤字受福利项目拖累持续扩大。

4. 战略规划
- 土耳其通过中期规划方案（Medium-Term Program，简称MTP）设定结构化财政目标，重点聚焦通胀管控与债务削减。
- 美国并未设立类似的中期财政框架，仅依赖国会预算办公室（CBO）发布的长期预测数据。

5. 公众参与
- 土耳其的公众参与度较低，公民在预算决策中表达意见的渠道十分有限。
- 美国则通过公众听证会、公开预算平台等形式鼓励公民参与，以此强化问责机制。

研究方法
本研究采用比较分析框架，依托公开可得数据开展研究，数据来源包括《开放预算调查》（Open Budget Survey）、经济合作与发展组织（Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development，简称OECD）、世界银行，以及USAspending.gov、总统战略与预算总局等政府官方平台。

核心发现与政策建议
- 针对土耳其：提升财政透明度、下放财政权限并强化公众参与，可有效完善其公共财政管理体系。
- 针对美国：建立中期财政规划框架、解决财政绩效层面的区域失衡问题，是其优化公共财政管理体系的关键方向。
- 两国可通过互鉴彼此优势实现共同获益。

本文最后强调，需兼顾财政纪律、透明度与公众参与，以实现高效且公平的财政治理。