SEEU Review vol. 6 Nr. 2 (pdf) - South East European University

Haderi S., Prof. Dr.; Kola T., Prof. Asocc. Dr.; Liko E., Dr.BUL—C -10.76703CRO—C -11.44496MAC—C -12.37302MON—C -11.67094SER—C -9.012003WeightedStatisticsR-squared 0.990850 Mean dependentvar8.797301Adjusted R-squaredS.E. ofregression0.988130 S.D. dependentvar0.561240 Sum squaredresid5.15130511.65463F-statistic 1001.675 Durbin-Watsonstat2.062671Prob(F-statistic) 0.000000From the date reported on the above table there is a positive and highlysignificant relationship between FDI inflow and GDP per capita. (Nefussi2006, and Susukpaibul 2007), have also found empirical evidence that FDIare stimulated by market size. Positive relationship between these twovariables is found from (Zylfiu 2008) that has analyzed the performance ofFDI in Macedonia. (Kinoshita and Campos 2002), have found that FDI intotransition economies are mainly driven by the host country market size,availability of skills workers and sufficient infrastructure.Statutory corporate income tax has a negative and relatively statisticallysignificant impact on FDI inflow. (Gomes and Pouget 2008) have shown intheir empirical work a significant negative relationship between statutorycorporate tax rate and FDI inflows. There have estimated that on average 10percent points increase in the statutory rate would reduce FDI inflows by 0.3percent point of GDP.146