In which countries election spending or contributions are strictly regulated?

Several general information can be found in Wikipedia, and it is clear that election funding affects elections:

Proper handling of political finance affects the country's ability to effectively maintain free and fair elections, effective governance, democratic government and corruption regulation.

Money is a necessary condition for democratic politics and political parties must have funds to play a role in the political process. The director must not restrain sound competition

When developing a strategy for managing political funds, it is necessary to consider career and political culture.

Effective regulation and disclosure are sufficiently taken into consideration and will help limit the negative impact of money in politics only if implemented.

Effective monitoring is based on transparency, which depends on the interaction of multiple stakeholders (regulators, civil society, media, etc.).

In some election schemes, candidates who are allowed to vote or vote for the minimum number of votes can apply for tax refund to the government. Candidates submit audit reports on election costs The government issues refunds to candidates, but there are several limits to consider, such as the number of votes cast and candidate restrictions on candidates.

Illustrative: Romania has fairly strict legal requirements for financing political parties and campaigns

[...] All sources of party income are registered and highlighted in political party accounting records, according to party contributions, donations, financing and legal records and formats of income and expenditure, accounting and dissemination [. ..]

A total of more than 10 wages can only be donated through a bank account. This limit is the annual limit.

Candidates are no longer able to use promotional materials such as brand pens, hats, mugs, buckets, etc. In particular, in rural areas, these advertising materials have been passed to potential voters.

In the previous general election (December 2016) candidates for parliamentary candidates can pay up to 24,000 euros (Source, Romanian)

This is the influence the individual observed. I can not find a reliable source for discussing this issue, but I have tracked the overall activities and results.

More online promotion through social media accounts, advertisements, etc.

So, it will soon be said: the smaller the noise the better the result. There are several advantages to regulating fundraising of elections, but I think that there are many other factors that will affect election results.

Parliament deliberately threw these people on the bus several times, not once and twice, to promote party power in future elections. People hurt by reducing regulations that may prevent the economic collapse of 2008 will be completely ignored. The house collapsed, the town was destroyed, and the economy broke down; no one was responsible. why? They are money so they have money. That's pretty easy. These same Republicans hoped to do their utmost to hurt the Democratic president from hindering the president's position by interfering with the full closure of the federal government and to prevent other blacks from considering it again I will. Work, that would be so ridiculous

After the Watergate scandal, the modern movement of seeking financial regulation began. The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) has developed a set of rules on the use of political funds, including donation to activities and expenditure restrictions. However, this regulatory framework was ultimately included in the Supreme Court 's 1976 Barkley v. Valeo case (424 US 1 (1976)). The Barkley Court believes that using politically money is a form of speech and therefore subject to strict scrutiny. While acknowledging the government's strong interest in regulating political funds to prevent government corruption or corruption, the court explicitly refused to promote political equality as a reason for implementing financial rules .