|Country/Region|Authors|**Table A1**<br>Data|**:Experience of 2**<br>Time Coverage|**009 Stimulus Around the World**<br>Stimulus|<br>Findings|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|Australia|Li & Spencer (2016)|Output growth rate,<br>inflation, domestic interest<br>rate, growth rate of<br>government transfer<br>payments (quarterly)|March 1993-<br>December 2013|More active spending measures- transfers<br>to households and expenditures on public<br>works|Stimulus transfers were almost equally important as the<br>concurrent monetary easing actions in helping the economy to<br>avoid recession|
|Australia|Leight (2012)|<br>Household survey data|December 2008 -<br>May 2009|US$ 21 billion household payments<br>between December 2008 and May 2009|40% of households who received a payment spent it indicating<br>individuals are more likely to spend “bonuses” than “rebates”<br>as in the US|
|Australia|Buddelmeyer&Peyton<br>(2014)|Expenditure data for 62<br>local government area and<br>electronic gaming<br>machine data|July 2004 - June<br>2012|Lump-sum cheques sent to households as<br>compensation for the introduction of<br>Carbon Tax|Increased spending in electronic gaming machine in<br>December 2008 amounted to 1% of total stimulus for that<br>period.<br>Individuals are more likely to spend “bonuses”|
|China|Xiang_et al._(2019)|Sample of 143 banks<br>(including the big five,<br>joint stock, city, rural and<br>foreign)|2006-2013||the effect of the 2007 Global Financial crisis and the 2009<br>stimulus package on various overall and segment efficiencies<br>is inconsistent & inconclusive|
|New Zealand|Giesecke & Schilling<br>(2010)|<br>Real consumption,<br>investment, public<br>consumption, export &<br>import volumes,<br>employment real wage<br>terms of trade|October 2008-<br>March 2009<br>(with predictions till<br>2017)|Cutting to personal income & business<br>taxes and infrastructure spending (0.3%<br>of GDP for 3 years; 2009-2011)|Small positive impact on short-run employment with a gain<br>around 10,000 jobs but at a cost to long-run consumption|
|Thailand|Muthiacharoen_et al._<br>(2019)|Account-level loan data<br>(loan composition and<br>history, demographic<br>information)|December 2009-<br>March 2016|Car-buyer tax rebate during 2011-2012|The design of durable goods stimulus policy should focus<br>more on productive business durables than on consumer<br>durables since it may lead to excessive debt burden and create<br>an adverse consequence in the longer term|
|The Caucasus,<br>Central Asia and<br>Mongolia|Mitra (2010)|<br>Macroeconomic indicators<br>(GDP growth, current<br>account balance, terms of<br>trade, loan to deposit<br>ratio...)|2000-2009 (main<br>focus)||<br>Need for more concessional financing to moderate the<br>tradeoff between stimulus and sustainable debt levels.<br>Importance of distressing in the banking sectors through<br>liquidity support and deposit guarantees|
|Turkey|Misch & Seymen<br>(2019)|<br>Financial Crisis Surveys<br>Data, change of sales of<br>firms, additional firm<br>specific controls (number<br>ofemployees, share of|2009-2010|Cutting the value added tax and special<br>consumption tax in the first quarter of<br>2009|Positive and robust effects of consumption tax cuts on the<br>change of firm sales|

38