Introduction: The arguments under neoclassical paradigm defend that minimum wage increases cause higher unemployment by negatively affecting employment. The change in understanding in the minimum wage debate, on the other hand, took place when the findings of observational and empirical studies since the 1990s did not support the neoclassical understanding. In this sense, alternative theoretical explanations have taken their place in the literature, starting with the preliminary study of Card and Krueger (1995). At this point, the views of Keynesian and Post-Keynesian economists have contributed to the theoretical framework, as well as the views arguing that the relationship will differ in the presence of a monopoly market rather than a perfectly competitive market, that is, in conditions of imperfect competition. Aim: In this study, it is aimed to analyze the unemployment and employment effects of minimum wage increases in selected developed and developing countries, on the axis of conflicting views. Method: The effects of minimum wage increases on labor markets are examined by using the panel Fourier Todo-Yamamoto causality test for the annual period of 2002-2021. Findings: The findings reveal that, contrary to the neoclassical understanding, minimum wage increases do not have a significant effect on unemployment and employment in neither developed nor developing countries. Originality and value: This study differs from previous studies in several aspects. First, few studies have examined the causal relationship between minimum wage increases and unemployment. This study attempts to fill this gap. Second, previous studies use classical causal tests such as Granger and Dimitrescu-Hurlin causality tests, which do not account for the structural breaks that occur in the series. However, this study uses the Fourier Todo-Yamamoto test, which takes into account structural breaks in the series. Thus, the study also makes a methodological contribution to the literature in this sense.