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.

本文针对土耳其与美国的公共财政管理（Public Finance Management, PFM）体系展开详尽剖析，对两国的财政治理模式开展比较分析，重点聚焦二者在结构、运行与战略层面的差异。

本文涵盖的核心研究方向如下：
1. 财政结构与治理
- 土耳其采用中央集权式财政体系，由总统战略与预算局主导构建，核心强调财政纪律与中期规划。
- 美国则实行分权式财政体制，赋予各州高度财政自主权，虽提升了区域财政灵活性，但也引发公共服务供给的区域不均衡问题。
2. 财政透明度与问责机制
- 土耳其通过数字化税收征管系统提升了财政透明度，但在公众参与度与采购透明度领域仍存在明显短板。
- 美国的财政透明度位居全球前列，依托USAspending.gov等公开平台以及政府问责局（Government Accountability Office, GAO）、国会预算办公室（Congressional Budget Office, CBO）等监管机构提供坚实支撑。
3. 债务管理与财政健康状况
- 土耳其2024年的债务与GDP比率为40%，处于相对较低水平，但因过度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）的持续攀升的国债规模，同时因福利性支出项目导致财政赤字不断扩大。
4. 战略规划
- 土耳其通过中期规划方案（Medium-Term Program, MTP）制定结构化财政目标，重点聚焦通胀管控与债务压降。
- 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）出具的长期预测数据开展相关工作。
5. 公众参与
- 土耳其的公众财政参与度极低，公民参与预算决策的渠道十分有限。
- 美国则通过公开听证会与开放预算平台鼓励公民参与财政事务，以此强化财政问责机制。

研究方法
本研究采用比较分析框架，整合公开预算调查（Open Budget Survey）、经济合作与发展组织（Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD）、世界银行以及USAspending.gov、总统战略与预算局等政府门户的公开数据开展研究。

核心发现与政策建议
- 针对土耳其：提升财政透明度、下放财政权限以及强化公众参与，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，解决财政绩效的区域不均衡问题，是其优化财政治理体系的关键方向。
- 两国均可通过互相借鉴对方的优势实现共赢发展。

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