Saturday, March 31, 2007
CENTER FOR INTERNATIONAL COMPARISIONS OF PRODUCTION, INCOME AND PRICES
A useful database can be found here.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
THE BOOK OF THE YEAR
Nearly two weeks ago I received an email message from my friend, saying that the new book written by Mićo Mrkaić entitled "To so bile svete krave" (in English: The Holy Cows) was published. I did not hesitate and read the book in a few days starting by the day I got it in the mailbox.
Mićo Mrkaić is a first-class economist. He graduated from Carneige Mellon University and obtained a Master Degree in Physics and Economics and a PhD in Economics. Hence, he was awarded by Alexander Henderson Award for Excellence in Economic Theory - a university award given for the best written PhD thesis in the field of economic theory. When the author came back to Slovenia, he started to write weekly columns in a daily business newspaper Finance where he emphasized an unavoidable need to liberalize the markets, deregulate the economy, privatize the rest of it (in Slovenia private sector composes only 65 percent of the GDP) and to let individual and civil liberties flourish. The author soon realized that newly elected government did not intend to implement very much needed economic and structural reforms. His scientific articles can be found here. The Growth of Total Factor Productivity in Slovenia is also an important contribution to the nature of economic growth where the author came to conclusion that, in Slovenia, TFP is growing too slowly.
In the book, the author sets a question why Slovenia, situated in the heart of Europe, never experienced a spontaneous order, a strong rule of law, individual liberty, entrepreneurial freedom and a limited government which Robert Nozick would call a minimal state. In that sense, the author continues a noble legacy of "Scottish Enlightenment" and a tradition of classical liberalism in Slovenia started by dr. Ljubo Sirc, a Slovenian immigrant and an economist who escaped communism and achieved a tremendous international success in Great Britain as a leader of the Center for Research into Post-Communist Economies. The author also analyzes the brutal continuation legacy of marxism and communism in Slovenia, the ideologies that ruined the productive grounds of Slovenian society and stuck to it for never-ending decades.
The book is also an economic masterpiece. The author explains the basic features of modern economic theory and policy and thereby unmasks the painful outcome of gradualist economic policy that has been intensively exercised by the economic policymakers in the early stage of Slovenian transition to market economy. The author highlights the question of central bank's inflation policy which in turn led to the depreciation of Slovenian tolar in order to stimulate the export sector through exchange rate depreciation and excess money supply which resulted in an unusually high inflation rate. The author reveals the true reason behind the depreciation policy of the central bank through several articles and analytical insights. He shows that the makers of such policy lied to the public as they were repeating that inflation is not (?!?!?!) a monetary phenomena. In normal countries, such insane statements would have a serious consequence. Can we imagine how it would be if FED, Ben Bernanke or Alan Greenspan lied to the public and exercised discretionary features in monetary policy through exchange rate depreciation? Or if they said that inflation is not a monetary phenomena - Well, everyone - I hope that now you see what kind of affairs have been happening in Slovenia.
The book also focuses on several other issues such as health-care, culture, classical liberalism, public finance, and economic policy. The author showed that cultural lobbies exercise a brutal policy of public subsidies for their activities in astronomic amounts. However, the policymakers never questioned the right to outlay such subsidies on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and neighborhood effects. The book also entails a closer analysis of the inefficiency of public health-care providers in Slovenia where the author emphasizes the problem of low efficiency and enormous differences in the rates of productivity in the health-care sector. The analysis is one of the most striking of all.
The next chapter of the book is dedicated to a closer look at economic policy and public finance. The author reveals how he swam into the sea in search of successfully implemented structural reforms and greater market liberalization, surrounded by socialists of all colors and parties, trade unions and corrupted journalists from socialist newspapers, which personally dishonored him. The author describes how journalists made fun of him and how explosively the mainstream media, many opinion leaders, trade unions and Keynesian economists did everything possible to persuade the public that economic and structural reforms were bad though, in reality, the nobility and high quality of the author's economic program Benchmark offered a long-term perspective through which Slovenia, if the program were fully implemented, achieved comparably high rate of economic growth, reformed its pension and social security systems and made them sustainable in the long run, stressed its booming potentials and increase the level of global competitiveness. It could become a global reform superstar and after Ireland, Estonia, Iceland and Slovakia, the next economic success story in a global arena and Europe but thanks to Slovenia's countless socialists of all parties and its exponents, the abovementioned success story has been made impossible.
I warmly recommend the book to everyone because it's a "must-be-read" book with lots of striking facts, thorough analysis, theoretical explanations and detailed views on Slovenian society by an author, a brilliant economist and a noble classical liberal who succeeded abroad and with no fear unmasked the image of the society in which we (in Slovenia) live.
Link to the book.
Mićo Mrkaić is a first-class economist. He graduated from Carneige Mellon University and obtained a Master Degree in Physics and Economics and a PhD in Economics. Hence, he was awarded by Alexander Henderson Award for Excellence in Economic Theory - a university award given for the best written PhD thesis in the field of economic theory. When the author came back to Slovenia, he started to write weekly columns in a daily business newspaper Finance where he emphasized an unavoidable need to liberalize the markets, deregulate the economy, privatize the rest of it (in Slovenia private sector composes only 65 percent of the GDP) and to let individual and civil liberties flourish. The author soon realized that newly elected government did not intend to implement very much needed economic and structural reforms. His scientific articles can be found here. The Growth of Total Factor Productivity in Slovenia is also an important contribution to the nature of economic growth where the author came to conclusion that, in Slovenia, TFP is growing too slowly.
In the book, the author sets a question why Slovenia, situated in the heart of Europe, never experienced a spontaneous order, a strong rule of law, individual liberty, entrepreneurial freedom and a limited government which Robert Nozick would call a minimal state. In that sense, the author continues a noble legacy of "Scottish Enlightenment" and a tradition of classical liberalism in Slovenia started by dr. Ljubo Sirc, a Slovenian immigrant and an economist who escaped communism and achieved a tremendous international success in Great Britain as a leader of the Center for Research into Post-Communist Economies. The author also analyzes the brutal continuation legacy of marxism and communism in Slovenia, the ideologies that ruined the productive grounds of Slovenian society and stuck to it for never-ending decades.
The book is also an economic masterpiece. The author explains the basic features of modern economic theory and policy and thereby unmasks the painful outcome of gradualist economic policy that has been intensively exercised by the economic policymakers in the early stage of Slovenian transition to market economy. The author highlights the question of central bank's inflation policy which in turn led to the depreciation of Slovenian tolar in order to stimulate the export sector through exchange rate depreciation and excess money supply which resulted in an unusually high inflation rate. The author reveals the true reason behind the depreciation policy of the central bank through several articles and analytical insights. He shows that the makers of such policy lied to the public as they were repeating that inflation is not (?!?!?!) a monetary phenomena. In normal countries, such insane statements would have a serious consequence. Can we imagine how it would be if FED, Ben Bernanke or Alan Greenspan lied to the public and exercised discretionary features in monetary policy through exchange rate depreciation? Or if they said that inflation is not a monetary phenomena - Well, everyone - I hope that now you see what kind of affairs have been happening in Slovenia.
The book also focuses on several other issues such as health-care, culture, classical liberalism, public finance, and economic policy. The author showed that cultural lobbies exercise a brutal policy of public subsidies for their activities in astronomic amounts. However, the policymakers never questioned the right to outlay such subsidies on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and neighborhood effects. The book also entails a closer analysis of the inefficiency of public health-care providers in Slovenia where the author emphasizes the problem of low efficiency and enormous differences in the rates of productivity in the health-care sector. The analysis is one of the most striking of all.
The next chapter of the book is dedicated to a closer look at economic policy and public finance. The author reveals how he swam into the sea in search of successfully implemented structural reforms and greater market liberalization, surrounded by socialists of all colors and parties, trade unions and corrupted journalists from socialist newspapers, which personally dishonored him. The author describes how journalists made fun of him and how explosively the mainstream media, many opinion leaders, trade unions and Keynesian economists did everything possible to persuade the public that economic and structural reforms were bad though, in reality, the nobility and high quality of the author's economic program Benchmark offered a long-term perspective through which Slovenia, if the program were fully implemented, achieved comparably high rate of economic growth, reformed its pension and social security systems and made them sustainable in the long run, stressed its booming potentials and increase the level of global competitiveness. It could become a global reform superstar and after Ireland, Estonia, Iceland and Slovakia, the next economic success story in a global arena and Europe but thanks to Slovenia's countless socialists of all parties and its exponents, the abovementioned success story has been made impossible.
I warmly recommend the book to everyone because it's a "must-be-read" book with lots of striking facts, thorough analysis, theoretical explanations and detailed views on Slovenian society by an author, a brilliant economist and a noble classical liberal who succeeded abroad and with no fear unmasked the image of the society in which we (in Slovenia) live.
Link to the book.
HIGH GROWTH SIZZLES INDIA'S ECONOMY
India's economy is headed for slower growth but still high, facing an astonishing 9 percent in the last two years. The state of economy has largely improved as the country gained benefits from an increased volume of international trade and steadily liberalized markets, especially real estate sector.
Asian development banks projects 8 percent economic growth for the fiscal year through March 2008. India's central bank has commited itself to curbing high inflation by reducing the supply of money. Government's share of responsible budget policy to reduce inflation pressures was pinned by the fiscal commitment to move from expansionary to restrictive budget policy coupled with the aim to cut public spending in the percentage share of the GDP. For this fiscal year, the growth is predicted to climb from 9 to 9,2 percent.
Growth optimism reflected the inflow of foreign direct investment and the appreciation of Indian rupee which could in turn led to denting India's competitiveness in the global arena. Rapid inflow of foreign capital flows slightly complicates the efforts by the central bank to rein in prices but inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomena. This year's inflation rate reached 6,7 percent and the central bank had to squeeze the excess money supply in circulation. The government also liberalized the agriculture market by reducing the imposed duties in order to increase the supply in the agricultural market. All those measure will push growth to the level of 8 percent in the next fiscal year. The Reserve Bank of India predicts the inflation rate to lower to 5 percent. In the beginning of 2008 the growth could spur up to 8,3 percent but that also largely depends on the pace of infrastructural boost needed.
Asian development banks projects 8 percent economic growth for the fiscal year through March 2008. India's central bank has commited itself to curbing high inflation by reducing the supply of money. Government's share of responsible budget policy to reduce inflation pressures was pinned by the fiscal commitment to move from expansionary to restrictive budget policy coupled with the aim to cut public spending in the percentage share of the GDP. For this fiscal year, the growth is predicted to climb from 9 to 9,2 percent.
Growth optimism reflected the inflow of foreign direct investment and the appreciation of Indian rupee which could in turn led to denting India's competitiveness in the global arena. Rapid inflow of foreign capital flows slightly complicates the efforts by the central bank to rein in prices but inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomena. This year's inflation rate reached 6,7 percent and the central bank had to squeeze the excess money supply in circulation. The government also liberalized the agriculture market by reducing the imposed duties in order to increase the supply in the agricultural market. All those measure will push growth to the level of 8 percent in the next fiscal year. The Reserve Bank of India predicts the inflation rate to lower to 5 percent. In the beginning of 2008 the growth could spur up to 8,3 percent but that also largely depends on the pace of infrastructural boost needed.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
TAX BURDEN IS RISING IN EUROPE
Eurostat has issued a report showing the tax burden in each European country from 1995 to 2005 measured as a percentage of the GDP. In 2005, the greatest levels of tax burden were noted in Sweden (52,1%), Denmark (51,2%) and Belgium (47,7%). Tax rates on individual and corporate income in those countries are very high and so is the public consumption. Sweden, for example, runs a budget surplus policy but as we may see, public consumption rate measured as the percentage of the GDP is among the highest in the world. In the report, there are substantial differences among the member states. The lowest tax-to-GDP ratios were noted in Slovakia (29,5%), Latvia (29,6%) Estonia (31,0%) and Ireland (32,2%). In those country, the economic growth between 1995 and 2005 was the highest in the EU. Ireland, for instance, slashed the marginal individual income tax rate from 60 percent to 42 percent while 12,5 percent tax rate on corporate income is still one of the lowest rock-bottom rates in the EU.
Figure: Total taxes as the percentage of the GDP between 1995 and 2005, comparision between countries
Public consumption and taxation size in Slovenia are very high. Not surprisingly, total taxes comprised 40,7 percent of the GDP in 2005. Though the government recently modified the marginal income tax from 50 percent to 41 percent, tax burden is still very high compared to the rest of Europe as the income earned on the margin has not been unburdened from heavily progressive taxation. There is also a unique payroll tax that could be immediately dismissed but the Ministry of Finance decided to erase it gradually. An important part of the tax burden in Slovenia is comprised of high social security and health care contribution rates. Unfortunately, Slovenian policymakers wasted another opportunity to implement a fundamental tax reform, to unburden the economy and productive behavior of the individuals.
Figure: Total taxes as the percentage of the GDP between 1995 and 2005, comparision between countriesPublic consumption and taxation size in Slovenia are very high. Not surprisingly, total taxes comprised 40,7 percent of the GDP in 2005. Though the government recently modified the marginal income tax from 50 percent to 41 percent, tax burden is still very high compared to the rest of Europe as the income earned on the margin has not been unburdened from heavily progressive taxation. There is also a unique payroll tax that could be immediately dismissed but the Ministry of Finance decided to erase it gradually. An important part of the tax burden in Slovenia is comprised of high social security and health care contribution rates. Unfortunately, Slovenian policymakers wasted another opportunity to implement a fundamental tax reform, to unburden the economy and productive behavior of the individuals.
PROPERTY RIGHTS INDEX
Property Rights Alliance has published the first index measuring the level of protection of private property rights.
Click here.
Click here.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
THE ARTICLES
In Slovakia, Martin Rojko runs a great blog called Súkromné vlastníctvo, worth regular visit. I have written several articles as a guest writer:
- Silent promises, shining performance; Why tiger economies roar louder;
- The Paradox of the most competitive economy until 2010;
- Cool sights from the north;
- On Swedish model;
- Personal liberty, voluntary exchange and self-ownership;
- Silent promises, shining performance; Why tiger economies roar louder;
- The Paradox of the most competitive economy until 2010;
- Cool sights from the north;
- On Swedish model;
- Personal liberty, voluntary exchange and self-ownership;
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
THE IRISH MIRACLE
Chris Edwards of the CATO Institute wrote an article on Irish emerald economic success in the past decade. He says:
"And Ireland has steadily reduced its tax rates. The top individual income tax rate was cut from 65 percent in 1985 to 42 percent today. The capital-gains tax rate was cut from 40 to 20 percent in 1999. However, the key to Ireland’s success has been its excellent tax climate for business. In 1980, Ireland established a corporate tax rate for manufacturing of just ten percent. That low rate was subsequently extended to high-technology, financial services, and other industries. More recently, Ireland established a flat 12.5 percent tax rate on all corporations — one of the lowest rates in the world, and just one-third of the U.S. rate."
I posted a piece on Irish economic success story last year.
Sunset over Shannon river
"And Ireland has steadily reduced its tax rates. The top individual income tax rate was cut from 65 percent in 1985 to 42 percent today. The capital-gains tax rate was cut from 40 to 20 percent in 1999. However, the key to Ireland’s success has been its excellent tax climate for business. In 1980, Ireland established a corporate tax rate for manufacturing of just ten percent. That low rate was subsequently extended to high-technology, financial services, and other industries. More recently, Ireland established a flat 12.5 percent tax rate on all corporations — one of the lowest rates in the world, and just one-third of the U.S. rate."
I posted a piece on Irish economic success story last year.
Sunset over Shannon riverThe father of the German economic miracle once hit the essence of economic miracle and economic policy: "Es gibt aber kein Wirtschaftswunder, aber richtige Wirtschafstpolitik."
"Irish miracle" is on a good way to become a global hard-hitting trademark.
When dr. Paul Walsh visited Ljubljana where he gave a lecture on Irish path towards economic prosperity, it was quite clear that in Slovenia hardly anyone is actually even thinking about the macroeconomic and structural policy that could pursue global economic success of this small country in the heart of Europe. Approximately 10 individuals listened to dr. Paul Walsh of Dublin's Trinity college. It was quite clear why Slovenia will probably never imported the spirit of Irish success story.
Last time, I heared:
"Perhaps Ireland could be a global sightspot but the standard of living is much better in Slovenia than in many other countries, including Ireland."
Contrary to this popular belief, the Economist composed "A quality-of-live" index, measuring several factors that determine the quality of live such as material well-being and the level of freedom. On a scale of one to 10, Ireland achieved 8.33 points, with Switzerland coming in at 8.07. Despite being flattered by its inhabitants, Slovenia achieved 6,98 points resulted in 27th place.
The driving force behind the Irish economic miracle is a double layer that consists of right set of solutions and decisions in economic policy focused on attracting foreign direct investment, cutting marginal tax rates on productive behavior and creating a favorable atmosphere for business environment. On the other hand, multinational and domestic business and entrepreneurial sector played a crucial role in the transition of the economy. Consequently, Irish export sector is known for its competitiveness, diversified entrepreneurial market strategies, high tech, and knowledge-intensive industry.
Some comparative statistics can be seen here.
Last Satuday, we celebrated Irish National holiday, St. Patrick's day, when we wear green, drink our faihful, loyal and always beloved Guinness and enjoy talking to our friends and loved ones. After taking a closer look at entrepreneurial dynamics, stock market performance, healthy macroeconomic policy and ambitious structural agenda, it is not difficult to find out that Ireland has a reason to celebrate.Friday, March 16, 2007
ICELAND - THE FIRST TAX HAVEN ON EARTH
Mrs. Veronique de Rugy of the American Enterprise Institute wrote a thorough article describing how Iceland absorbed the lessons of its tax history and took it into account when the economy was at turmoil. Sagas and stories tell that Iceland was the very first place on earth that could be described as tax haven. This label is characterized in the historical case when king Harold unified Norway in 870 and tried to punish the Norwegians by imposing a vast tax. Vikings refused to pay the tax and moved to Iceland where (as they said) "men are free from assaults of kings and criminals."Northern lights in Iceland
Mr. David Friedman writes:
"...medieval Icelandic institutions have several peculiar and interesting characteristics; they might almost have been invented by a mad economist to test the lengths to which market systems could supplant government in its most fundamental functions. Killing was a civil offense resulting in a fine paid to the survivors of the victim. Laws were made by a "parliament," seats in which were a marketable commodity. Enforcement of law was entirely a private affair. And yet these extraordinary institutions survived for over three hundred years, and the society in which they survived appears to have been in many ways an attractive one . Its citizens were, by medieval standards, free."
David Oddsson, the man who led Iceland through the period of rapid transformation has indeed very much in common with vikings. It seems that he has learned the lesson that king Harald couldn't: "overtax your people and they will fly away. Implement low tax rates and your country will become rich and prosperous."
Many economic policymakers would probably feel embarrased if someone told them that the wisdom of Iceland's Vikings was far ahead of their ideas full of high-tax schemes and high spending habits. Slovenia, the country where I live, is no exception. The outcome of Oddsson's economic and structural reforms was astonishing. After slashing the corporate tax rate from 48 percent in early 90s to 18 percent in 2002, the unemployment almost disappeared. After introducing the fiscal discipline, the spending was harshly reduced and consequently, the tax revenue skyrocketed. As the flat tax was recently implemented, Iceland's economy is on a good way to benefit from tax competition as an international financial hub. In 1990, the 48 percent corporate tax rate collected 0,97 percent of GDP. When the rate was dropped to 18 percent, the tax collection reached 1,25 percent of the GDP. The economic growth averaged 5 percent on a 10-year basis. The efforts of entrepreneurial sector resulted in a growing number of Icelandic multinational companies such as Actavis, Kaupthing and Atlantic Petroleum.
Further readings
David FRIEDMAN; Private Creation and Enforcement of Law, A Historical Case
Daniel MITCHELL: Iceland Joins the Flat-Tax Club, CATO Tax&Budget Bulletin, February 2007
Veronique DE RUGY: Putting Taxes on Ice, TCS Daily, June 24, 2004
Rok SPRUK; Laffer Curve Works Incredibly Well - The Case of Iceland, Capitalism & Freedom, March 11, 2007
Rok SPRUK; Iceland Joins the Flat-tax Revolution, Capitalism & Freedom, February 10, 2007
Rok SPRUK; Silent Promises, Shining Performance - Why Tiger Economies Roar Louder, Súkromné vlastníctvo, February 5, 2007
Rok SPRUK; Cool Sights from the North, Súkromné vlastníctvo, February 19, 2007
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
WILL MONTENEGRO BE THE MEDITERRANEAN TIGER?
I recently noted an article discussing the challanges of Montenegro.
From the economic point of view, in real terms, the GDP growth between 2002 and 2005 reached almost 15 percent. The economic growth has been supported by the infusion of foreign direct investment. Montenegro maintains an open policy towards foreign investment. The total cost of starting a business is estimated at $242,41 (USD).
In the field of investors' protection, Montenegro is among the top 20 countries in the world. In terms of general observation, Montenegro has set a modestly good grounding for further economic growth and structural convergence but a bulk of challenges still remain (privatization, price liberalization, contract enforcement and property rights protection, labor market reform, tax reform ...), including the reform of the judiciary and cutting the red-tape.
Credit risk should be minimized in order to diffuse the investment easier and less risky which, coupled with sound investment and tax environment, may galvanize the economy's transformation. In terms of the speed of convergence, the business sector is ought to stream towards the competitive business policy and innovative models because in a global world, competitiveness depends on the ability of the business sector (not government ownership and intervention) to accomplish ambitious objectives on an international as well as on domestic basis.
The policy of openness to foreign direct investment and rapid privatization is a direction that may accelerate the pace of convergence. The latter is a crucial challenge depending on the ability and innovation (human capital approach, R&D, value-added ...) of the business sector to sustain, innovate and grow domestically and internati0nally.
See:
Frederic Sautet and Kyle McKenzie; A Mediterranean Tiger? - TCS Daily, 12 March 2007
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=030907A
Frederic Sautet, Kyle McKenzie, Maja Drakic; Montenegro: The Challenges of A Newborn State, Mercatus GMU, 2007
http://www.mercatus.org/Publications/pubID.3651/pub_detail.asp
Doing Business in Montenegro, WB
http://www.doingbusiness.org/ExploreEconomies/?economyid=210
From the economic point of view, in real terms, the GDP growth between 2002 and 2005 reached almost 15 percent. The economic growth has been supported by the infusion of foreign direct investment. Montenegro maintains an open policy towards foreign investment. The total cost of starting a business is estimated at $242,41 (USD).
In the field of investors' protection, Montenegro is among the top 20 countries in the world. In terms of general observation, Montenegro has set a modestly good grounding for further economic growth and structural convergence but a bulk of challenges still remain (privatization, price liberalization, contract enforcement and property rights protection, labor market reform, tax reform ...), including the reform of the judiciary and cutting the red-tape.
Credit risk should be minimized in order to diffuse the investment easier and less risky which, coupled with sound investment and tax environment, may galvanize the economy's transformation. In terms of the speed of convergence, the business sector is ought to stream towards the competitive business policy and innovative models because in a global world, competitiveness depends on the ability of the business sector (not government ownership and intervention) to accomplish ambitious objectives on an international as well as on domestic basis.
The policy of openness to foreign direct investment and rapid privatization is a direction that may accelerate the pace of convergence. The latter is a crucial challenge depending on the ability and innovation (human capital approach, R&D, value-added ...) of the business sector to sustain, innovate and grow domestically and internati0nally.
See:
Frederic Sautet and Kyle McKenzie; A Mediterranean Tiger? - TCS Daily, 12 March 2007
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=030907A
Frederic Sautet, Kyle McKenzie, Maja Drakic; Montenegro: The Challenges of A Newborn State, Mercatus GMU, 2007
http://www.mercatus.org/Publications/pubID.3651/pub_detail.asp
Doing Business in Montenegro, WB
http://www.doingbusiness.org/ExploreEconomies/?economyid=210
Sunday, March 11, 2007
LAFFER CURVE WORKS INCREDIBLY WELL - THE CASE OF ICELAND
The Nordic island surrounded by water is an incredible example of a country that went from being one the poorest and most devastated to one of the richest in Europe. 18 percent flat tax on corporate income recently conquered the island in the North of Atlantic ocean. Since the reforms were launched in the early 90s, Icelandic economy transformed itself into dynamic and fast-growing international hub admired by many companies coming in Iceland and establishing their holdings and headquarters.
The Wall Street Journal reports how incredible the Laffer Curve works in Iceland.
The Iceland's story of galvanized economic success started when a group of enthusiastic, fiscally conservative and socially liberal reformers under the leadership of David Oddsson and Geir Haarde launched an ambitious set of features, including the trade liberalization, monetary stabilization, tax cuts and the privatization of state companies.
Marginal income tax rates were slashed to rock-bottom level. Individual income tax rate fell from 33 percent in 1995 to 22,75 percent in the recent tax cut implementation. Corporate tax rate, for example, was cut from 45 percent in 1991 to 18 percent in 2001. The benefits of tax competition are fully displayed and the results are flattering. Iceland is a perfect example of Laffer Curve demonstration. As the corporate tax rate gradually fell to one of the lowest levels in Europe, tax revenues trippled. When high tax rate on corporate income led companies to hide their revenue to avoid paying such a high tax, the amount of collected tax revenue was 3 billion kronas. When the rate fell far below the confiscatory level, the amount of tax revenue hit 9,1 billion kronas. Since 2001, when the competitive tax regime further led to higher tax revenue, the amount of revenue reached 33 billion kronas, estimated for the last year. The economy's transformation was characterized by a 10-year averaged 4 percent economic growth.
In the peripheral parts of Europe, the tax competiton is flourishing. Now there is a healthy tax competition between Eastern Europe (Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia), Iceland and Switzerland where cantons are allowed to set the corporate tax rates independently from the federal government. There's a huge opposition to tax competition in the EU. Policymakers in high tax jurisdictions such as France and Germany, have reverently attacked Switzerland, saying that cantonal tax cuts are a kind of illegal subsidy (???). But it seems that the wheel is turning since Germany announced a corporate tax cut from current 38 percent to 30 percent next year.
Iceland is an isolated example where economic policymakers are ambitious after having implemented pro-growth reforms. The committee of the Iceland's biggest bank (Kaupthing) leaded by the chairman Mr. Sigurdur Einarsson, recommended that corporate tax rate be reduced from current 18 percent to 10 percent, in order to make Iceland (Reykjavik) an international financial hub. If this particular tax cut is implemented, it will be the lowest one in Western Europe, overcoming Ireland's 12,5 percent rate.
If some political circles see the proposed rate as controversional, they should learn from the tax-cut history of Iceland that made the Arctic island, both rich and prosperous. If Reykjavik truly wants to become an international financial hub then it should immediately offer investors the foremost advantageous financial and investment environment that will led investors to choose Iceland as their operation destination.
The Wall Street Journal reports how incredible the Laffer Curve works in Iceland.
The Iceland's story of galvanized economic success started when a group of enthusiastic, fiscally conservative and socially liberal reformers under the leadership of David Oddsson and Geir Haarde launched an ambitious set of features, including the trade liberalization, monetary stabilization, tax cuts and the privatization of state companies.
Marginal income tax rates were slashed to rock-bottom level. Individual income tax rate fell from 33 percent in 1995 to 22,75 percent in the recent tax cut implementation. Corporate tax rate, for example, was cut from 45 percent in 1991 to 18 percent in 2001. The benefits of tax competition are fully displayed and the results are flattering. Iceland is a perfect example of Laffer Curve demonstration. As the corporate tax rate gradually fell to one of the lowest levels in Europe, tax revenues trippled. When high tax rate on corporate income led companies to hide their revenue to avoid paying such a high tax, the amount of collected tax revenue was 3 billion kronas. When the rate fell far below the confiscatory level, the amount of tax revenue hit 9,1 billion kronas. Since 2001, when the competitive tax regime further led to higher tax revenue, the amount of revenue reached 33 billion kronas, estimated for the last year. The economy's transformation was characterized by a 10-year averaged 4 percent economic growth.
In the peripheral parts of Europe, the tax competiton is flourishing. Now there is a healthy tax competition between Eastern Europe (Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia), Iceland and Switzerland where cantons are allowed to set the corporate tax rates independently from the federal government. There's a huge opposition to tax competition in the EU. Policymakers in high tax jurisdictions such as France and Germany, have reverently attacked Switzerland, saying that cantonal tax cuts are a kind of illegal subsidy (???). But it seems that the wheel is turning since Germany announced a corporate tax cut from current 38 percent to 30 percent next year.
Iceland is an isolated example where economic policymakers are ambitious after having implemented pro-growth reforms. The committee of the Iceland's biggest bank (Kaupthing) leaded by the chairman Mr. Sigurdur Einarsson, recommended that corporate tax rate be reduced from current 18 percent to 10 percent, in order to make Iceland (Reykjavik) an international financial hub. If this particular tax cut is implemented, it will be the lowest one in Western Europe, overcoming Ireland's 12,5 percent rate.
If some political circles see the proposed rate as controversional, they should learn from the tax-cut history of Iceland that made the Arctic island, both rich and prosperous. If Reykjavik truly wants to become an international financial hub then it should immediately offer investors the foremost advantageous financial and investment environment that will led investors to choose Iceland as their operation destination.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
LABOR MARKET IN SLOVENIA
When an economist in Slovenia speaks about the problems in the field of the labor market, he/she often faces harsh attack on behalf of those who have never read a book on economics, nevertheless an elementary textbook on economics.
I still remember how student and trade union activists last year invited us to join them in protesting against economic reforms, from labor market to tax system and education. It shameful to see how student organization (SOS) receives a vast amount of budget money and is still kept on giving an explicit support to socialist structural policies which deny taxpayers from enjoying the output they create. In Slovenia, we have a very high employee social security contribution rate which equals 22,1 percent of the gross salary. Thus, one fifth of the average labor cost means a social security burden.
In the field of labor market, the role of trade unions is crucial. First, trade unions are nothing else but an interest group who protects its members at the expense of future employees. Thus, trade unions create a sort odevice which prevents the non-members of the unions from enjoying the potential benefits of the union memebership which they could gain if they were the members of the union. The reaction behavior of the unions is carefully designed and streams toward the implication of rigid rules of employment. The aim of the latter is to prevent new employees from getting a job fast, so that current employees would receive greater benefits and payments as the equilibria supply curve is shaped and the price of labor is thus higher than it would be in the competitive equilibrium conditions. Trade union also shape the horizon of the labor market with minimum wage claims. Higher minimum wage is nothing else but a paycheck insurance for existing employees, while higher minimum wage level creates a cost burden for employers who are thus prevented from faster hiring of low-cost workers. Minimum wage is a rigid experiment which cannot respond to the competitive labor market shifts which results in a rigid establishment of employment conditions. Due to these conditions, the employment probability for targeted worker groups is much lower. It's thus not surprising that strict minimum wage policy reflects higher unemployment among low-income population groups. That's why the aim of minimum wage is to protect current low-paid employees and detect potential future employees from competing and cooperating with existing employees. This kind of particular behavior is negative from several aspects. It implies a reduction of choice in the labor market because higher non-salary costs (tax report, payroll tax, social security contribution, meal subsidies, full fuel compensation, meal time subsidies...) and steeply progressive tax rates increase the price of productive labor force which often determines the growth of productivity and the use human capital in the productive process. As being faced with higher regular non-salary costs, employers shift towards looking for loopholes to reduce the cost burden. That's why many productive workplaces are moving toward the south-east where the labor cost burden is much smaller than in Slovenia. Therefore, hiring students is a practical example which explains why student employment is so spread in Slovenia. The worst of the worst is that those who lost the employment hardly find the job again due to rigid employment rules setup by the unions. The most frequent result of this spiral chase is applying for state unemployment subsidies and the creation of "moonlight" (underground) economy is very often the gateway for the unemployed.
Second, the implication of the rigid labor market rules negatively affects future university graduates. As employers would probably seek to minimize the labor costs, fresh graduates were then not able to find the employment regularily but through the framework of student hiring because they would too expensive to be employed in other case. Graduates are deprived from running a work age and consequently from investing in private pension funds. Third, student workers are a huge cost for the government because (a) they don't contribute to social security, and (b) don't fill in the tax return but the labor legislation allows them getting funded from unemployment and social subsidy funds. Fourth, student work and hiring students, by and large, forces students to postpone the graduation and this means a growing cost for the government who funds the education system. Hiring students stimulates them to prolong the status of the student and consequently, they graduate much later than the official length of the study is supposed to be.
Dr. Joze P. Damijan suggests the following solution for the labor market:
"...copy the Austrian system in which there is almost no non-salary costs [except for tax return and social security contribution] and then switch to the Danish system of flexibility within 3 to 4 years. For the beginning, we could lump-sum the non-salary costs in the hour figure regardless of the income level. Employer's labor cost would double formally, but not actually. All employees would be situated in an equal position and the costs of older employees were not grow exponentially anymore. In effect, contract transparency and the legal equality of employees would be increased. In addition, collective bargaining would become much more simplified. They would negotiate only about the extracting salary growth and not anymore about the formalities invented in socialism..."
In the situation in which trade unions determine the labor legislation and vis-a-vis the economic policy as well, the future opportunities in the labor market are harshly reduced. Will trade unions hold the responsibility for future brain-drain which seems to be inevitable as the trade unions are actually a "state within the state"?
I still remember how student and trade union activists last year invited us to join them in protesting against economic reforms, from labor market to tax system and education. It shameful to see how student organization (SOS) receives a vast amount of budget money and is still kept on giving an explicit support to socialist structural policies which deny taxpayers from enjoying the output they create. In Slovenia, we have a very high employee social security contribution rate which equals 22,1 percent of the gross salary. Thus, one fifth of the average labor cost means a social security burden.
In the field of labor market, the role of trade unions is crucial. First, trade unions are nothing else but an interest group who protects its members at the expense of future employees. Thus, trade unions create a sort odevice which prevents the non-members of the unions from enjoying the potential benefits of the union memebership which they could gain if they were the members of the union. The reaction behavior of the unions is carefully designed and streams toward the implication of rigid rules of employment. The aim of the latter is to prevent new employees from getting a job fast, so that current employees would receive greater benefits and payments as the equilibria supply curve is shaped and the price of labor is thus higher than it would be in the competitive equilibrium conditions. Trade union also shape the horizon of the labor market with minimum wage claims. Higher minimum wage is nothing else but a paycheck insurance for existing employees, while higher minimum wage level creates a cost burden for employers who are thus prevented from faster hiring of low-cost workers. Minimum wage is a rigid experiment which cannot respond to the competitive labor market shifts which results in a rigid establishment of employment conditions. Due to these conditions, the employment probability for targeted worker groups is much lower. It's thus not surprising that strict minimum wage policy reflects higher unemployment among low-income population groups. That's why the aim of minimum wage is to protect current low-paid employees and detect potential future employees from competing and cooperating with existing employees. This kind of particular behavior is negative from several aspects. It implies a reduction of choice in the labor market because higher non-salary costs (tax report, payroll tax, social security contribution, meal subsidies, full fuel compensation, meal time subsidies...) and steeply progressive tax rates increase the price of productive labor force which often determines the growth of productivity and the use human capital in the productive process. As being faced with higher regular non-salary costs, employers shift towards looking for loopholes to reduce the cost burden. That's why many productive workplaces are moving toward the south-east where the labor cost burden is much smaller than in Slovenia. Therefore, hiring students is a practical example which explains why student employment is so spread in Slovenia. The worst of the worst is that those who lost the employment hardly find the job again due to rigid employment rules setup by the unions. The most frequent result of this spiral chase is applying for state unemployment subsidies and the creation of "moonlight" (underground) economy is very often the gateway for the unemployed.
Second, the implication of the rigid labor market rules negatively affects future university graduates. As employers would probably seek to minimize the labor costs, fresh graduates were then not able to find the employment regularily but through the framework of student hiring because they would too expensive to be employed in other case. Graduates are deprived from running a work age and consequently from investing in private pension funds. Third, student workers are a huge cost for the government because (a) they don't contribute to social security, and (b) don't fill in the tax return but the labor legislation allows them getting funded from unemployment and social subsidy funds. Fourth, student work and hiring students, by and large, forces students to postpone the graduation and this means a growing cost for the government who funds the education system. Hiring students stimulates them to prolong the status of the student and consequently, they graduate much later than the official length of the study is supposed to be.
Dr. Joze P. Damijan suggests the following solution for the labor market:
"...copy the Austrian system in which there is almost no non-salary costs [except for tax return and social security contribution] and then switch to the Danish system of flexibility within 3 to 4 years. For the beginning, we could lump-sum the non-salary costs in the hour figure regardless of the income level. Employer's labor cost would double formally, but not actually. All employees would be situated in an equal position and the costs of older employees were not grow exponentially anymore. In effect, contract transparency and the legal equality of employees would be increased. In addition, collective bargaining would become much more simplified. They would negotiate only about the extracting salary growth and not anymore about the formalities invented in socialism..."
In the situation in which trade unions determine the labor legislation and vis-a-vis the economic policy as well, the future opportunities in the labor market are harshly reduced. Will trade unions hold the responsibility for future brain-drain which seems to be inevitable as the trade unions are actually a "state within the state"?
ON SWEDISH MODEL
Sunset over Lake Vänern, Southwestern SwedenLeft leaning newspapers such as British Guardian often stress that Sweden has been the most successful society the world has ever known. This largely mystified statement is spread all across European field of academics, politics and even in the field of economic policy. There have been rare experts and skilled economic analysts who truly understand recent macroeconomic trends and economic situation in Sweden, not least the economic history of Sweden. From the public choice viewpoint, it is highly appropriate for politicians to interpret Sweden as the role model in economic, social and tax policy. Political support given to politicians can largely be exercised through the introduction of rent-seeking which is very costly to economic growth. Giving power to special interest groups such as trade unions entails the status quo as well as widespread government spending. Sweden is known for high and steeply progressive tax rates on individual income and productive behavior coupled with massive welfare spending and high level of social security and other kinds of government protection.
Sweden is a country that went from rags to riches. It went from a poor agrarian economy to 4th the richest nation in the world in 1970. Between 1850 and 1970, Sweden had had, after Japan, the highest economic growth rate in the world. It began in 1846 when a group of liberal reformers imposed boosting features which gave Sweden free trade laws, religious liberty and a low level of government intervention. For decades, the government spending had never exceeded 10 percent of the GDP. This period was equipped with dynamic entrepreneurial development based on human capital creation and substantial benefits from industrial revolution. Swedish economy boomed as well as investment and standards of living quickly grew. Large corporations were established and the business environment absorbed the innovation capacity. The industrial development was aided by Sweden's rich natural resources. The development of infrastructure yielded significant results. Railroad development was, for example, financed largely through foreign investment. One of the reasons why Swedish economy boomed is also that Sweden was not engaged in neither of both World Wars in the 20th century. The period of peace and strongly dynamic export activity additionally contributed to economic growth and structural advancement. Following the periods after the WW2, the government intervention grew significantly. Between 1960 and 1970, the economic growth rate was above 5 percent and so was the growth of productivity. After that, the government involvement skyrocketed as the taxation of individual and corporate income reached astronomic rates. 65 years of Social Democratic rule left behind a meaningful experience for the 3rd largest country in Europe. Trade unions gained discretionary power over the labor market. Consequently, wage formation was getting more and more dysfunctional and rigid. Increased incentives to demand resulted in ever greater public debt which reached its peak in 1998 when it stopped at 80 percent of the GDP. Following the oil price crisis in 1973-74, the international business activity of Swedish export companies turned down drastically. Between 1983 and 1990 several strategic deregulations were conducted in the financial sector. It boosted extensive lending, largely focusing on the real estate sector. The regulations of the financial market were one of the foremost reasons for risky credit lending. Due to the currency devaluation, the export sector was given a monetary surplus but there was the problem of liquidity still ahead. Its problem was solved by the stock market and real estate investment which contributed to a rapid growth in overall asset prices. The bubble bursts geared banking and financial crisis in the early 1990s. Both sectors nearly collapsed, resulting from the overall crisis and liquidity absence. An international economic slowdown affected the Swedish economy too. The currency crisis was solved by the abandonment of fixed exchange rate regime and tax reductions. Abandoning the fixed exchange rate regime subsequently boosted the export sector as the currency devaluated. High export growth was still not enough to cover the GDP losses. The situation of the black hole resulted in accelerating unemployment. Falling GDP and rising unemployment resulted in a sharp deterioration of public finances. The national debt sparked. In 1994, the budget deficit was above 15 percent of the GDP. The stabilization policies were exercised through inflation targeting framework set by the central bank, namely Riksbank. Public expenditures were cut and budget policy turned toward the golden surplus rule which reduced the risk pressure on public finances. A commitment of the central bank to inflation targeting searched a nominal anchor which greatly supported the stabilization policy and the immediate recovery of the financial and banking sector.
If Sweden were integrated in the United States it would be one of the poorest countries. Using fixed prices and purchasing power parities adjusted data, median income per capita of Sweden is $26,800 USD compared to $39,400 USD in the United States. Recent economic trends in Sweden are favorable. Export companies such as Volvo, SAAB and Ericsson are breaking export records. Thanks to decreased regulation of the business sector, the economic growth streamed temporarily higher though the recovery of the economy was converged at the average of 2,2 percent of economic growth in 10 years. Tax burden, measured in the percentage of the GDP is still the highest in the OECD group. Official statistics show the unemployment rate surprisingly low while there are many methodologically misguided definitions through which the real unemployment rate is shadowed. In Sweden, there are extensive labor training programs whose participants are not actually working but they're somehow educated how to find a job in the market. Then there are still numerous government support programs given to unemployed. Economically, the greater the size of public entitlement programs, the smaller the incentives for job searching in the labor market. Public sector is widespread and largely inefficient according to sterilized adjusted recent data. Input efficiency is low as well as the quality of serviced performed by the public sector. If the public sector in Sweden were as efficient as in Ireland and Great Britain, then roughly one third of total expenditures could have been cut to have the same service.
Sweden achieved tremendous success when free trade and economic liberty were introduced. In 1970, Sweden's GDP per capita (in current prices) was only behind the United States, Luxembourg and Switzerland. The Swedish model of free-market economy combined with strong socialist planning was an official trademark and a good promotion stamp for Sweden. High tax rates on productive behavior resulted in a subsequent economic crisis of the 1980s and early 1990. In addition, many successful companies were forced to leave Sweden due to punitive tax rates on corporate income. Brain drain flow increased as incentives to educate, work, save and invest were minimized. The minimization of those incentives correlated with high taxation levels. It is a matter of empirical evidence that high tax rates and strong regulation rules reduce the incentives of market stakeholders to pursue greater benefits and value-added profile. The latter is of course, a basis for productivity growth. In Sweden, strong government employment regulation has gone hand in hand with a dominant position of trade unions in terms of collective bargaining. Its effect is obvious as the unionization rate is one of the highest in the world. When the economic policy was wheeling further towards Keynesian orthodox economic practice, the unionization rate reached 83 percent of the entire labor force. It could be hardly claimed that Swedish model of strong government intervention, rigid labor market and high taxes on work, savings and investment is a successful one since the obstacles to productivity growth; job creation and capital formation deprive economic performance and put an emphasis on welfare spending and unemployment benefits.
In Slovenia, left and right leaning politicians seem to be economically falsified and completely illiterate as they aim to pursue the policies that embody copying of the problems. In this respect, Sweden is often exposed as a welfare miracle that combines economic efficiency and social justice. Friedrich August von Hayek caught the meaning of the mirage of social justice and security when he said that social justice is a Trojan horse undertaken by totalitarian governments. Numerous empirical studies and research on the components of the “Swedish model” have been conducted as they showed the very opposite facts from what political elites interpret as successful. Unemployment benefits deeply hamper the growth of jobs. Among OECD group of countries, only two have had jobless growth –Sweden and Finland. In Sweden, not a single job in the private economy has been created since 1950. On the other side, employment in the public sector grew significantly. Despite the negatively turbulent welfare spending and government intervention, there’s still much to admire in Sweden. But those admirations are not very popular among the experts and policymakers in the Continental Europe. When coming out of economic crisis and severely slumped depression, Sweden steadily liberalized the business environment and the government allowed private health care schemes and the introduction o vouchers in education. Numerous sectors were liberalized and the stock market conditions gave boost to company growth and venture capital formation. The latter grew largely but in terms of the GDP share; it is still very low compared to dynamically growing economies such as the U.S., Switzerland and Ireland.
A Nobel Laureate and the most prominent economist of the 20th century, Milton Friedman, once wrote that governments never learn; only people do. Structural pro-growth reforms in Slovenia have become a necessity while the center-right government postponed the economic reforms and got away from the ambitious reform agenda under the pressure of interest groups, mostly trade unions. First, there is no such thing as Scandinavian model. Iceland has recently adopted the flat tax on individual income and as one of the lowest corporate tax rates in Europe. It is also one of the wealthiest countries in the world. The Icelandic stock exchange ICEX shows high index growth rates. In pharmaceutical sector, Actavis achieved a tremendous success with innovative product market strategy and international market targeting. In the case of Sweden, business sector is known for a world-class “high quality” management of big companies such as Ericsson, ABB and Teila Sonera. The process of company registration is quick and it takes very little time to setup a business. According to the World Bank (http://www.doingbusiness.org/), investor protection has improved significantly. As Sweden is largely export oriented economy, access to international trade is free from government regulation and costly restrictive import and export procedures which have a very burdensome effect on international trade flows and reduce the economy’s ability to pursue propulsive export service and thus focusing on creating the value-added is postponed. The impact that follows is that international competitiveness in terms of price and product quality competition is undermined.
The reason for Swedish economic miracle was not explosive full-fledged government welfare spending. Free-trade and competitive entrepreneurial dynamism boosted Swedish economy towards the high-hitting economic growth rates. The middle way introduced at the end of 1970s shrank into such a severe economic slump that only the return to the supply-side approach was a credible insurance against further instability of the business cycles. In fact, mostly politicians, intellectuals, some academics and self-proclaimed experts don’t understand that international competitiveness is undermined as the interventionism, spending explosion and punitive tax rates are in effect.
Progressive taxation is actually the idea of Karl Marx and his ideology of Marxism. The latter went from delusion to destruction unmasked. If you are born in a society without economic liberty, private property protection and free choice, it is impossible to believe in Marxist fallacies when you see what is happening around you.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
RUSSIA IS CONSIDERING A CORPORATE TAX CUT
Tax-news.com reports that Russian policymakers may cut the current corporate tax rate from 24 percent to 20 percent on behalf of a three-year tax policy plan. While the the Ministry of Finance intended to cut the value-added tax as well (from 18% to 13%), it still decided to further reduce the corporate tax burden in the GDP. Corporate tax cuts will supposedly leave a positively stimulating impact on the increase of economic growth. Greater capital formation, which is one of the foremostly essential ingredients which boosts investment level and thus stimulates economic growth, may attract larger volume of foreign investors. Greater investment participation and the growth of returns significantly stimulate job creation, higher profit rate as well as wage growth.
Policymakers in Russia have announced the launch of gas market liberalization where prices are now fixed and held temporarily low by the government. According to the abovementioned source, the introduction of some new taxes has been addressed to balance the budget deficit. This view is of course very much static. Balancing the budget to ensure the vitality of public finances can be achieved through the curb of GDP spending.
Since 2002, Russia has sustained tremendous economic growth stimulated by the abolishment of many taxes and by the introduction of the 13 percent flat tax on the individual income. The lowering of the corporate tax rate resulted in business-friendlier investment environment. Years after the introduction of the flat tax, total individual tax receipts have more than doubled and the number is still growing. After adjusting for inflation, individual income tax revenues increased 25,2 percent in 2001, 24.6 percent in 2002, 15,2 percent in 2003 and more than 16 percent in 2004. The revenue expansion has resulted from less-discriminatory tax system, reduced tax evasion and sheltering, and increased incentives to work, save and invest.
The real GDP growth was constance since the flat tax reform in 2001; 5,1 percent in 2001, 4,7 percent in 2002 and 7,3 (!) percent in 2003. The average annual real growth rate in Russia over the last three years averaged 5,5 percent which more than the average real growth rate in many developing countries.
Revenue-neutral and supply-side tax policy cannot, of course, solve all the problems which Russia is now facing, but it's a progress in the productive direction.
Policymakers in Russia have announced the launch of gas market liberalization where prices are now fixed and held temporarily low by the government. According to the abovementioned source, the introduction of some new taxes has been addressed to balance the budget deficit. This view is of course very much static. Balancing the budget to ensure the vitality of public finances can be achieved through the curb of GDP spending.
Since 2002, Russia has sustained tremendous economic growth stimulated by the abolishment of many taxes and by the introduction of the 13 percent flat tax on the individual income. The lowering of the corporate tax rate resulted in business-friendlier investment environment. Years after the introduction of the flat tax, total individual tax receipts have more than doubled and the number is still growing. After adjusting for inflation, individual income tax revenues increased 25,2 percent in 2001, 24.6 percent in 2002, 15,2 percent in 2003 and more than 16 percent in 2004. The revenue expansion has resulted from less-discriminatory tax system, reduced tax evasion and sheltering, and increased incentives to work, save and invest.
The real GDP growth was constance since the flat tax reform in 2001; 5,1 percent in 2001, 4,7 percent in 2002 and 7,3 (!) percent in 2003. The average annual real growth rate in Russia over the last three years averaged 5,5 percent which more than the average real growth rate in many developing countries.
Revenue-neutral and supply-side tax policy cannot, of course, solve all the problems which Russia is now facing, but it's a progress in the productive direction.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
KARL MARX WOULD HAVE LOVED KYOTO
It's sometimes amazing how politically paid scientists raise voice against global warming and thus telling how Kyoto accord needs to be fully implemented. Aside from the ideological point of view, there is a question if current Kyoto efforts mimic the environmental experiment of Karl Marx.
Kyoto accord would have had a damaging on the economy. In a matter of decades, the average income would be 30 percent less than today. On the other side, Kyoto accord ignores the potentials of job growth and its creators don't actually quite understand the economics and other cost-benefit methods of how to cure global warming. In the last year, environmental crusaders have offered very poor track on global warming. If we take a closer look at the nature of the Kyoto, then we quickly see that it was based on contradictory and selective scientific evidence, underpinning one side of global warming and tentatively neglecting the other side of climate trends. If you were in Sweden a month ago, then you'd see that there were hardly any signs of global warming as the temperature got below -20°C.
Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural cause. A decade ago, if we knew what we know about global climate then Kyoto would be completely unnecessary. Activists, Marxists, socialists of all parties and anti-globalists fanatically tell public that humanity driving on the path towards destruction as the catastrophe is looming. Neither of these arguments of fear is justified which means that they're based on a purely ideological level.
In the global field, the EU has pledged to cut the emissions of greenhouse gases and has failed to do so. Canada pledged to cut the emissions by 6 percent from 1990 to 2012. According to the statistics, the emissions are currently 35 percent above the forward target. Luckily without Kyoto accord, in the U.S. has emissions per capita have been reduced and there's a forward trend of a diminishing curve. The index value of greenhouse gas emissions per dollar in 2003 was less than 80, taking into account that the index emission level in 1990 was 100. There is, however, empirical evidence, that no nation can achieve or sustain the economic growth without the growth of emissions. According to the figures of the UN, the loss of the U.S. GDP would be as high as 1,96 percent which means that today's 1,3 trillion economy were hit by 260 billion USD every year, totaling more than 11 trillion by 2050.
What is then the passion for such features as environmental alarmists propose?
Nothing else but the redistribution of wealth and income which is equal to the re-invigoration of Karl Marx's Communist manifesto.
The Kyoto accord is similar to LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty) which would establish an international UN-corrupted agency regulating 70 percent of the earth's surface, placing seabed mining, fishing rights and deep-sea oil exploration under the control of a global bureaucracy such UN. Thanks to his wisdom, President Reagan was smart enough not to sign the treaty which would inevitably streamline the redistribution of wealth and income, the main goal of Karl Marx.
One of the greatest politicians of all time - Vaclav Klaus - recently perfectly told the truth of UN global warming report when he said that "it was the result of a group of "politicized scientists" who decided the results of the report before they began their investigation."
Global warming is an inclined full-blown myth and every serious scientist knows that very well. The leftists have popularized the question of environmentalism and blinded the scientific evidence and research about the question. Environmental change is due to naturally given causes of change. Saying that human impact has devastated the environmental diversity is either a politically supported question or the quotation marred by ideology. In fact, the greatest polluters of all times were communist plans and actions thanks to the ideas of Karl Marx.
As abovementioned, Kyoto accord would punish the advanced economies that foster innovation and growth with all various sorts of taxes and regulations. Would poor countries, mostly socialist (Marxist) dictatorships, really benefit from Kyoto? The answer is no. Kyoto accord would let them soak-up the foreign aid in the name of "development incentives". Such foolish UN efforts would inevitably lead to more corruption in those countries and would make them even poorer and structurally less reformed as their economies remained closed. What's actually the aim of foreign aid? It's the re-introduction of planning as the resources received from foreign aid are not determined on the basis of market capacity but rather on the basis of political preference.
Karl Marx once wrote that the goal of communism is to enforce a system that extracted from each according to his ability to each according to his need. Today, the nations in transit are still paying the price of Karl Marx and Communist manifesto. Now think about it. Kyoto accord says the same thing and it is thus a modern version of Marx's Communist manifesto.
Kyoto accord would have had a damaging on the economy. In a matter of decades, the average income would be 30 percent less than today. On the other side, Kyoto accord ignores the potentials of job growth and its creators don't actually quite understand the economics and other cost-benefit methods of how to cure global warming. In the last year, environmental crusaders have offered very poor track on global warming. If we take a closer look at the nature of the Kyoto, then we quickly see that it was based on contradictory and selective scientific evidence, underpinning one side of global warming and tentatively neglecting the other side of climate trends. If you were in Sweden a month ago, then you'd see that there were hardly any signs of global warming as the temperature got below -20°C.
Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural cause. A decade ago, if we knew what we know about global climate then Kyoto would be completely unnecessary. Activists, Marxists, socialists of all parties and anti-globalists fanatically tell public that humanity driving on the path towards destruction as the catastrophe is looming. Neither of these arguments of fear is justified which means that they're based on a purely ideological level.
In the global field, the EU has pledged to cut the emissions of greenhouse gases and has failed to do so. Canada pledged to cut the emissions by 6 percent from 1990 to 2012. According to the statistics, the emissions are currently 35 percent above the forward target. Luckily without Kyoto accord, in the U.S. has emissions per capita have been reduced and there's a forward trend of a diminishing curve. The index value of greenhouse gas emissions per dollar in 2003 was less than 80, taking into account that the index emission level in 1990 was 100. There is, however, empirical evidence, that no nation can achieve or sustain the economic growth without the growth of emissions. According to the figures of the UN, the loss of the U.S. GDP would be as high as 1,96 percent which means that today's 1,3 trillion economy were hit by 260 billion USD every year, totaling more than 11 trillion by 2050.
What is then the passion for such features as environmental alarmists propose?
Nothing else but the redistribution of wealth and income which is equal to the re-invigoration of Karl Marx's Communist manifesto.
The Kyoto accord is similar to LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty) which would establish an international UN-corrupted agency regulating 70 percent of the earth's surface, placing seabed mining, fishing rights and deep-sea oil exploration under the control of a global bureaucracy such UN. Thanks to his wisdom, President Reagan was smart enough not to sign the treaty which would inevitably streamline the redistribution of wealth and income, the main goal of Karl Marx.
One of the greatest politicians of all time - Vaclav Klaus - recently perfectly told the truth of UN global warming report when he said that "it was the result of a group of "politicized scientists" who decided the results of the report before they began their investigation."
Global warming is an inclined full-blown myth and every serious scientist knows that very well. The leftists have popularized the question of environmentalism and blinded the scientific evidence and research about the question. Environmental change is due to naturally given causes of change. Saying that human impact has devastated the environmental diversity is either a politically supported question or the quotation marred by ideology. In fact, the greatest polluters of all times were communist plans and actions thanks to the ideas of Karl Marx.
As abovementioned, Kyoto accord would punish the advanced economies that foster innovation and growth with all various sorts of taxes and regulations. Would poor countries, mostly socialist (Marxist) dictatorships, really benefit from Kyoto? The answer is no. Kyoto accord would let them soak-up the foreign aid in the name of "development incentives". Such foolish UN efforts would inevitably lead to more corruption in those countries and would make them even poorer and structurally less reformed as their economies remained closed. What's actually the aim of foreign aid? It's the re-introduction of planning as the resources received from foreign aid are not determined on the basis of market capacity but rather on the basis of political preference.
Karl Marx once wrote that the goal of communism is to enforce a system that extracted from each according to his ability to each according to his need. Today, the nations in transit are still paying the price of Karl Marx and Communist manifesto. Now think about it. Kyoto accord says the same thing and it is thus a modern version of Marx's Communist manifesto.
ARE YOU AN AUSTRIAN
Mises Institute offers a brief test examination after which are identified as an economist of certain economic school (Chicago, Austrian, Keynesian/Neoclassical, Socialist). If you want you can go through 25 question regarding economics and basic aspects of private property, economic growth, interest rates, international trade etc.
The result depends on the number of points in response to each answer chosen. Here is the link to the test.
The result depends on the number of points in response to each answer chosen. Here is the link to the test.
Monday, February 26, 2007
TAX CUT APPROACH PRINCIPLED FOR 2007 CANADIAN BUDGET
Tax-news.com reports that in this year's budget Canada's conservative administration under the leadership of Stephen Harper intends to take a fair and principled approach to fiscal balance as proposed in a discussion document called 'Restoring fiscal balance in Canada'. In 2006, Canadian government claimed to have reduced taxes by almost $20 billion over the next two years. Key reduction measures include a very long promised 1 percent cut in Goods and Services tax to 6 percent and a 2 percent cut on all corporation companies by 2010. In addition, corporation surtax on all corporations is said to be eliminated by 2008. There are some changes in the structure of taxation for small businesses. By 2009, the bottom corporate tax rate for small business is intended to be slashed by 1 percent to 11 percent.
Fiscal balance has improved significantly over the last decade. Prior to the late 1990s, both orders of government went through a sustained period of running fiscal deficits, resulting in rising debt-to-GDP ratios. The deficits were clearly unsustainable, and both orders of government significantly reduced program spending in order to bring their respective finances under control.
Reference;
Tax Cuts Slated for 2007 Canadian Budget, Tax News
Budget 2006; Focusing on Priorities; Restoring Fiscal Balance in Canada, Department of Finance, Canada
Sunday, February 25, 2007
SLOVENIA IS NOT SCANDINAVIA
In Slovenia, the myths about Scandinavia are widespread and largely exist in various fields of academics, politics and social life. The essence of the myths is carefully hidden behind the rethorics of politicians who repeatedly try to adjust the economic and structural policy to the course of the features of Scandinavian countries; Sweden, Denmark and Finland are the most frequently cited countries in this particular case.
What Slovenian politicians imagine under the term of Scandinavia is an exploding full-fledged welfare spending and high tax rates on corporate and individual income. There upon, Scandinavia is used to be given as an example of "social justice" exercised through the vast redistribution of wealth and income.
In our high school textbook on economics, Sweden's image is described in the following way:
"In our country the social security is high. That gives people a good sense of safety. As well as child-care, education and health care are free of charge. Scholars, pupils and students get scholarship and free textbooks. Unemployed receive unemployment support and the government integrates them into public work. On the other side, salaries and wages are relatively low and luxury goods are very expensive."
What works in Scandinavia may not actually work somewhere else. Scandinavian societies are largely homogenous while in Slovenia homogeneous society is non-existable respectively. Trying to copy the Swedish model in a way that copying imposes the most turbulent and economically illogical features, may result in the loss of economic growth and in the increase of spending. In supply-side approach, there're seven killers of economic growth and job creation; excessive government spending and high tax rates are the foremost dangerous features which undermine the economic performance and especially growth potentials of the economy itself.
Slovenian politicians, poisoned with the socialistic influx, have oriented their policy proposal in exactly the same way that involves copying Nordic problems instead of solutions. In the field of labor market, Slovenian dominantly left-leaning politicians have instituted rigid rules that hamper the growth of employment. Tax rates on individual income is still strongly progressive despite being recently reduced from top 50 percent tax rate on individual income to 41 percent. Unemployment benefits schemes have been copied from Sweden. Thus, trade unions and collective bargaining coupled with commonly high tax rates present a major obstacle for a dynamic labor market. Therefore, additional unemployment benefits further instituted a preference of not looking for a job and rather remain unemployed meanwhile receiving a substantial unemployment support and similar benefits.
As trade unions limit the supply of labor, employers are forced to adjust the employment dynamics to an evenly lower level. Consequently, this means that the accumulation of human capital becomes less attractive as high tax rates prevent employers from employing the most productive and prosperous individuals who can rapidly improve the level of competitiveness, innovation and productivity in the business sector as well as they in every way largely contribute to the improvement of welfare standards. It is said that minimum wage is a kind of necessary subsidy for the individuals with low incomes. As empirical evidence and some applied research show, minimum wage means that there is an instituted wage below which employers are not allowed to hire workers.
If there is a perspective field of work where wages usually start at a lower level and where the growth potentials are skyrocketing, then a minimum wage causes quite the opposite effect from its intention. It prevents employers from hiring workers and destimulates individuals from looking for a job they want and thus being unemployed and receiving unemployment subsidy again become more attractive. Minimum wage is thus a gateway to unemployment as it makes hiring and firing very costly. Sweden has no minimum wage but collective bargaining is so strong that the effect of its impact is nearly similar to minimum wage laws. In comparision with Denmark, Slovenian labor market is marred by unflexible employment regulation and government involvement. In Slovenia, the rate of employers' contribution for the financing of the insurance and health care system is very high. Non-salary costs of employment are among the highest in Europe.
The question that matters is how Nordic countries became rich and what kind of sets of solutions the policies of Nordic policymakers include.
Transparency International reports that cases of corruption in Scandinavia are hardly ever seen. In Slovenia, corruption is widespread among the judiciary and in the legal system while in business sector where the government ownership of bigger companies is substantial, the level of corruption is lower than in the legal system, despite still being high. In every Nordic country, freedom of doing business and the business framework are of the high quality. According to Index of Economic Freedom, the level of business freedom in Scandinavia varies between 90 and 95 percent. In Slovenia, the level of business freedom is 74,2 percent.
Financial markets in Scandinavia are highly liquid and flexible as they offer numerous incentives and high quality products to growth companies. Icelandic stock exchange is due to the size quite similar to Slovenian stock market but contrary to Slovenian stock market, ICEX is highly active and dynamic and greatly supported by an international participation which boosts growth potential and substantially contributes to the growth of returns on investment. The result of liquid and dynamic financial market, the creation of Icelandic multinationals such as Actavis, grew significantly. In Slovenia, the financial market is highly concentrated and pillared as the government owns a majority share in Slovenia's three largest banks. According to the abovementioned index, Slovenia's rate of financial freedom is only 50 percent, slightly beyond the world average.
When Swedish economy was recovering from economic depression in the very late 80s and in the beginning of early 90s, the government successfully deregulated several sector of economy. Private health-care scheme were allowed and tax rates on individual and corporate income dropped. Swedish policymakers successfully reformed the pension system as well, reducing ageing risk and supporting the creation of private retirement funds completely independent from public schemes of government-supported retirement funds. In the business sector, Swedish business environment is known for a high quality management of big companies with good strategic grounding, flexibly adjusted models of decision making, not least with global strategies and innovation product market.
Denmark enjoys a worldwide reputation for a flexible labor market. Employment regulations do not hamper the productivity growth and index of difficult of hiring and firing is relatively easy with a minimal tax burden compared to labor markets in other countries. Finland opened itself to globalization and its students are ranked 1st on the scale of PISA. Iceland is known for an incredible entrepreneurial miracle since the economy achieved tremendous economic growth rates in the world. Three largest Icelandic banks are among 15 largest Nordic banks. Actavis, Iceland's biggest pharmaceutical company succeeded in Southern Europe with an innovative product and marketing strategy despite not being chosen to acquire Croatia's largest pharmaceutical company Pliva.
If Slovenian policymakers really want to copy the Nordic model then they should focus on finding the right set of solutions and features that made Nordic countries rich. In concrete terms, the Ministry of Education could abolish the licencing of textbooks and thus enable parents and students greater choice. Current system is vastly favorable to bureaucrats who seek rents away from the market. Denmark is known for a great degree of tolerance and personal liberty.
In Slovenia, sexual freedom is legally codified far away from having a respect for an individual self-ownership. Marihuana is still criminalized as well as euthanasia is prohibited. Slovenian policymakers have still not legalized the prostitution. Therefore, they prevent individuals from being free to choose the occupation they desire. Higher degree of economic freedom, the pursuit of privazitation and labor market liberalization, deregulation, healthy public finances, opening to globalization and foreign investment, the fundamental reform of the judiciary, elimination of corruption in various fields, greater personal liberty, highly respectful approach to private property rights are just a few among numerous required features that will help Slovenian economy achieve higher economic growth rates and structural advancement.
Thus, without free choice in every aspect, Slovenian society will hardly ever be able to compete with Nordic counterparts.
What Slovenian politicians imagine under the term of Scandinavia is an exploding full-fledged welfare spending and high tax rates on corporate and individual income. There upon, Scandinavia is used to be given as an example of "social justice" exercised through the vast redistribution of wealth and income.
In our high school textbook on economics, Sweden's image is described in the following way:
"In our country the social security is high. That gives people a good sense of safety. As well as child-care, education and health care are free of charge. Scholars, pupils and students get scholarship and free textbooks. Unemployed receive unemployment support and the government integrates them into public work. On the other side, salaries and wages are relatively low and luxury goods are very expensive."
What works in Scandinavia may not actually work somewhere else. Scandinavian societies are largely homogenous while in Slovenia homogeneous society is non-existable respectively. Trying to copy the Swedish model in a way that copying imposes the most turbulent and economically illogical features, may result in the loss of economic growth and in the increase of spending. In supply-side approach, there're seven killers of economic growth and job creation; excessive government spending and high tax rates are the foremost dangerous features which undermine the economic performance and especially growth potentials of the economy itself.
Slovenian politicians, poisoned with the socialistic influx, have oriented their policy proposal in exactly the same way that involves copying Nordic problems instead of solutions. In the field of labor market, Slovenian dominantly left-leaning politicians have instituted rigid rules that hamper the growth of employment. Tax rates on individual income is still strongly progressive despite being recently reduced from top 50 percent tax rate on individual income to 41 percent. Unemployment benefits schemes have been copied from Sweden. Thus, trade unions and collective bargaining coupled with commonly high tax rates present a major obstacle for a dynamic labor market. Therefore, additional unemployment benefits further instituted a preference of not looking for a job and rather remain unemployed meanwhile receiving a substantial unemployment support and similar benefits.
As trade unions limit the supply of labor, employers are forced to adjust the employment dynamics to an evenly lower level. Consequently, this means that the accumulation of human capital becomes less attractive as high tax rates prevent employers from employing the most productive and prosperous individuals who can rapidly improve the level of competitiveness, innovation and productivity in the business sector as well as they in every way largely contribute to the improvement of welfare standards. It is said that minimum wage is a kind of necessary subsidy for the individuals with low incomes. As empirical evidence and some applied research show, minimum wage means that there is an instituted wage below which employers are not allowed to hire workers.
If there is a perspective field of work where wages usually start at a lower level and where the growth potentials are skyrocketing, then a minimum wage causes quite the opposite effect from its intention. It prevents employers from hiring workers and destimulates individuals from looking for a job they want and thus being unemployed and receiving unemployment subsidy again become more attractive. Minimum wage is thus a gateway to unemployment as it makes hiring and firing very costly. Sweden has no minimum wage but collective bargaining is so strong that the effect of its impact is nearly similar to minimum wage laws. In comparision with Denmark, Slovenian labor market is marred by unflexible employment regulation and government involvement. In Slovenia, the rate of employers' contribution for the financing of the insurance and health care system is very high. Non-salary costs of employment are among the highest in Europe.
The question that matters is how Nordic countries became rich and what kind of sets of solutions the policies of Nordic policymakers include.
Transparency International reports that cases of corruption in Scandinavia are hardly ever seen. In Slovenia, corruption is widespread among the judiciary and in the legal system while in business sector where the government ownership of bigger companies is substantial, the level of corruption is lower than in the legal system, despite still being high. In every Nordic country, freedom of doing business and the business framework are of the high quality. According to Index of Economic Freedom, the level of business freedom in Scandinavia varies between 90 and 95 percent. In Slovenia, the level of business freedom is 74,2 percent.
Financial markets in Scandinavia are highly liquid and flexible as they offer numerous incentives and high quality products to growth companies. Icelandic stock exchange is due to the size quite similar to Slovenian stock market but contrary to Slovenian stock market, ICEX is highly active and dynamic and greatly supported by an international participation which boosts growth potential and substantially contributes to the growth of returns on investment. The result of liquid and dynamic financial market, the creation of Icelandic multinationals such as Actavis, grew significantly. In Slovenia, the financial market is highly concentrated and pillared as the government owns a majority share in Slovenia's three largest banks. According to the abovementioned index, Slovenia's rate of financial freedom is only 50 percent, slightly beyond the world average.
When Swedish economy was recovering from economic depression in the very late 80s and in the beginning of early 90s, the government successfully deregulated several sector of economy. Private health-care scheme were allowed and tax rates on individual and corporate income dropped. Swedish policymakers successfully reformed the pension system as well, reducing ageing risk and supporting the creation of private retirement funds completely independent from public schemes of government-supported retirement funds. In the business sector, Swedish business environment is known for a high quality management of big companies with good strategic grounding, flexibly adjusted models of decision making, not least with global strategies and innovation product market.
Denmark enjoys a worldwide reputation for a flexible labor market. Employment regulations do not hamper the productivity growth and index of difficult of hiring and firing is relatively easy with a minimal tax burden compared to labor markets in other countries. Finland opened itself to globalization and its students are ranked 1st on the scale of PISA. Iceland is known for an incredible entrepreneurial miracle since the economy achieved tremendous economic growth rates in the world. Three largest Icelandic banks are among 15 largest Nordic banks. Actavis, Iceland's biggest pharmaceutical company succeeded in Southern Europe with an innovative product and marketing strategy despite not being chosen to acquire Croatia's largest pharmaceutical company Pliva.
If Slovenian policymakers really want to copy the Nordic model then they should focus on finding the right set of solutions and features that made Nordic countries rich. In concrete terms, the Ministry of Education could abolish the licencing of textbooks and thus enable parents and students greater choice. Current system is vastly favorable to bureaucrats who seek rents away from the market. Denmark is known for a great degree of tolerance and personal liberty.
In Slovenia, sexual freedom is legally codified far away from having a respect for an individual self-ownership. Marihuana is still criminalized as well as euthanasia is prohibited. Slovenian policymakers have still not legalized the prostitution. Therefore, they prevent individuals from being free to choose the occupation they desire. Higher degree of economic freedom, the pursuit of privazitation and labor market liberalization, deregulation, healthy public finances, opening to globalization and foreign investment, the fundamental reform of the judiciary, elimination of corruption in various fields, greater personal liberty, highly respectful approach to private property rights are just a few among numerous required features that will help Slovenian economy achieve higher economic growth rates and structural advancement.
Thus, without free choice in every aspect, Slovenian society will hardly ever be able to compete with Nordic counterparts.
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
CHARLIE MCGREEVY - THE LONELY VOICE IN BRUSSELS - AGAINST HIGHER SPENDING AND RAISING TAXES
EU's deteriorated view on tax competition has already been deeply rooted in the minds of the EU policymakers in Brussels. But there is an exception - a commissioner that is being aware of high tax jurisdiction and its negative impact on economic growth, productive behavior, job creation and international competitiveness. Most of his colleagues prefer higher tax rates to low tax jurisdiction. Recent agressive attack on Swiss cantons and some companies headquartered there, is an example how the EU attempts to enforce seriously damaging features through which the doing business, competitive business frameworks and open international markets would suffer from lower market capital formation which is, essentially, one of the foremost indicators of investors' confidence, dynamic markets and growth potentials. Higher taxes boost government spending while it has been empirically proven that greater spending leads to lower growth as the curve, depicting the ratio relationship between spending and economic growth, yields downward. When it does so, it leads to incentive traps, demotivation of households and enterprises, increasing inefficiency and significantly higher corruption rate.
Charlie McGreevy, Internal Market Commissioner, outlined his position on taxation within the European Union at the Irish Institute of Taxation, suggesting that higher taxes feed fatter government:
"Some see taxation as a means of making society more equal. Of levelling down. Of limiting the upside rewards that go with taking risk or working hard. I don’t. I see it as necessary to help those who can’t help themselves and to provide services or infrastructure that is necessary for economic development but that the market alone can’t economically provide. I don’t see taxation as meritorious in its own right. I believe taxes – of all kinds - should be kept as low as possible and that the pressure to get them down should be relentless. I believe also, where there is a choice on how to levy taxes, preference should be given to levying them on spending. Taxes on income are taxes on effort, work and entrepreneurship. Taxes on capital are taxes on investment and risk taking. But it is effort, work, entrepreneurship, investment and risk taking that we need to continue to grow our economic base."
Link: Charlie McGreevy: Higher Taxes Feed Fatter Government, Irish Institute of Taxation, 2007
Charlie McGreevy, Internal Market Commissioner, outlined his position on taxation within the European Union at the Irish Institute of Taxation, suggesting that higher taxes feed fatter government:
"Some see taxation as a means of making society more equal. Of levelling down. Of limiting the upside rewards that go with taking risk or working hard. I don’t. I see it as necessary to help those who can’t help themselves and to provide services or infrastructure that is necessary for economic development but that the market alone can’t economically provide. I don’t see taxation as meritorious in its own right. I believe taxes – of all kinds - should be kept as low as possible and that the pressure to get them down should be relentless. I believe also, where there is a choice on how to levy taxes, preference should be given to levying them on spending. Taxes on income are taxes on effort, work and entrepreneurship. Taxes on capital are taxes on investment and risk taking. But it is effort, work, entrepreneurship, investment and risk taking that we need to continue to grow our economic base."
Link: Charlie McGreevy: Higher Taxes Feed Fatter Government, Irish Institute of Taxation, 2007
Saturday, February 17, 2007
SINGAPORE CUTS CORPORATE TAX RATE TO 18%
In his Budget Statement for the Financial Year (FY) 2007, Second Minister for Finance, Tharman Shanmugaratnam announced a two percentage point reduction in the corporate income tax rate to 18% to sharpen Singapore’s competitive edge.
Corporate tax rate will be balanced against a number of revenue raising provisions such as 1,4 percent increase in employer contribution to Central Provident Fund, to 14,5 percent and a GST rate increase from 5 percent to 7 percent. Economic prospects for Singapore in the next 10 years seem to be excellent. The economic growth is solid, job creation rate is growing, venture capital funds are rising as well. Inflation targeting policy has been successful as inflation rate has been kept steadily below the critical rate. The financial sector is flourishing as Singapore has become a global financial oasis. When taxes on profits were slashed, the foreign direct investment has poured in. Singapore still remains an attractive location for foreign investors.
Tax news reports that;
"...the injection of an additional S$500 million into the R&D Trust Fund administered by the National Research Foundation (NRF), and a significant increase in the partial tax exemption threshold from S$100,000 to S$300,000, which would be especially helpful to SMEs. As a result of the latter measure, almost 80% of SMEs will pay tax at effective rates of less than 10%, making Singapore one of the most competitive locations internationally for SMEs."
The budget has provided numerous incentives for the growth of service sector. The government aims to make Singapore a hub for global philantropic organizations and says it will remove a rule that currently required charities to spend at least 80% of their annual receipts in Singapore within two years to qualify for income tax exemption.
Employment regulation has been reduced. In order to help low-wage workers, the government did thankfully not rely on minimum wage increase but on cutting contribution rates in order to make employment growth faster and employment easier;
"The principal target group of the WIS Scheme are full-time workers above the age of 45 and who earn S$1,000 or less. A worker earning S$1,000 a month will get S$100 of WIS, which is a 10% supplement. The WIS will also be extended to those above the age of 35 who earn S$1,500 or less, but at a lower rate."
It is expected to see the Singaporean economic growing extending from 4,5 percent in 2006 to 6,5 percent in 2007. Fiscal deficits has been reduced from S$2,9 billion to S$1,3 billion. The Finance Minister expects a S$1,1 billion budget surplus in 2007. excluding Special Transfers and tax changes. After taking these into account, the Budget is expected to be in deficit by S$0.7 billion. Shanmugaratnam, the Finance Minister assured Members of Parliament that the deficit could be fully financed by funds accumulated within the current term of government.
Corporate tax rate will be balanced against a number of revenue raising provisions such as 1,4 percent increase in employer contribution to Central Provident Fund, to 14,5 percent and a GST rate increase from 5 percent to 7 percent. Economic prospects for Singapore in the next 10 years seem to be excellent. The economic growth is solid, job creation rate is growing, venture capital funds are rising as well. Inflation targeting policy has been successful as inflation rate has been kept steadily below the critical rate. The financial sector is flourishing as Singapore has become a global financial oasis. When taxes on profits were slashed, the foreign direct investment has poured in. Singapore still remains an attractive location for foreign investors.
Tax news reports that;
"...the injection of an additional S$500 million into the R&D Trust Fund administered by the National Research Foundation (NRF), and a significant increase in the partial tax exemption threshold from S$100,000 to S$300,000, which would be especially helpful to SMEs. As a result of the latter measure, almost 80% of SMEs will pay tax at effective rates of less than 10%, making Singapore one of the most competitive locations internationally for SMEs."
The budget has provided numerous incentives for the growth of service sector. The government aims to make Singapore a hub for global philantropic organizations and says it will remove a rule that currently required charities to spend at least 80% of their annual receipts in Singapore within two years to qualify for income tax exemption.
Employment regulation has been reduced. In order to help low-wage workers, the government did thankfully not rely on minimum wage increase but on cutting contribution rates in order to make employment growth faster and employment easier;
"The principal target group of the WIS Scheme are full-time workers above the age of 45 and who earn S$1,000 or less. A worker earning S$1,000 a month will get S$100 of WIS, which is a 10% supplement. The WIS will also be extended to those above the age of 35 who earn S$1,500 or less, but at a lower rate."
It is expected to see the Singaporean economic growing extending from 4,5 percent in 2006 to 6,5 percent in 2007. Fiscal deficits has been reduced from S$2,9 billion to S$1,3 billion. The Finance Minister expects a S$1,1 billion budget surplus in 2007. excluding Special Transfers and tax changes. After taking these into account, the Budget is expected to be in deficit by S$0.7 billion. Shanmugaratnam, the Finance Minister assured Members of Parliament that the deficit could be fully financed by funds accumulated within the current term of government.
A+ FOR SWITZERLAND
Switzerland has rejected criticism from the European Commission of corporate tax rates in some cantons, saying it will not yield its sovereignty over this issue. EU's fanatical opposition to tax competition seems unlimited. Instead, the EU is calling for tax harmonization via the savings tax directive. It is quite strange that a collectivist political body tries to enforce its own rules on competition by saying that tax competition framework is a kind of state aid. Switzerland is not a part of the interiror market of the EU while it's somehow unacceptable to claim that low corporate tax rates in cantons such as Zug, Obwalden and Schwyz violate the 1972 Free Trade Agreement. What the EU is trying to impose, applies only to certain goods as codified in 1972 Free Trade Agreement. Procedures for taxing management companies, mixed companies and holding companies do not fall within the scope of 1972 Free Trade Agreement.
The European Commission claims that there are unfair advantages for companies operating in Switzerland. Further, it argues that low corporate tax rates are a state subsidy. It is somehow easy to understand why bureaucrats in Brussels are exposing a fierce anger against Switzerland. Low corporate tax rates have attracted numerous international holding companies. In the EU, this effect has been seen as "capital-flight" which has been caused by harmfully high corporate tax rates, causing large cost burdens to companies operating in high tax jursidictions in the EU. EU claims seem to be focused on companies leaving the union for Switzerland's far more friendly tax and business environment. If the bureaucrats in Brussels aim to stop companies that leave the EU, then imposing restrictions and penalizing them will result in the worst possible scenario. Cutting harmful corporate tax rates, deregulation and labor market liberalization are far more appropriate measures to boost competitiveness and create a friendly business environment.
Anykind of government intervention against tax competition and low tax jurisdiction is a serious threat to the stability and growth of business sector. It is the EU that seriously violates the free trade rules by giving the commission more discretionary authority to penalize countries with low tax jurisdiction, not Switzerland.
Competitive tax federalism is a fact. As many countries aim to do so, Switzerland endeavours to be an attractive global business destination. Company taxation is decisively crucial factor in setting the business framework. Laffer's New Curve rule coherently explains the parameters of tax-investment relationship - invest only in low tax countries.
On 13 February 2007 the European Commission informed Switzerland that it considers certain tax schemes applied by the cantons to certain types of company (holding companies, management companies and joint enterprises) on the basis of parameters set under federal law (Tax Harmonisation Act), to be state aid. In the view of the Commission, these tax schemes at the cantonal and communal level distort competition and impair trade in a manner not compatible with the 1972 Free Trade Agreement.
What impairs trade in the EU are massive government subsidies set under the common agricultural policy. The pursuit of protectionism harms the competition and there have rarely been more serious violations of free trade and competition rules as common agricultural policy. First, there is a price effect. High quotas, tariffs and import restrictions harms the consumers by setting restrictions not to choose imported agricultural goods on the market. If you set an equilibrium as an engine of price determination via the forces of supply and demand, import quoats move the supply curve left from the point of equilibrium and thus an implicit grant is given to existing enterprises. They respond to import quotas by raising prices as the quantity supplied on the market is reduced. In addition, the government intervention in the EU is widespread and so is the tax burden in high-tax welfare countries such as Germany, Italy and France.
EU attacks on Swiss tax sovereignity is likely to be political rather than economic. When you go through options and economic analysis, you see that it is hardly justified on any particular basis that tax schemes are an appropriate instrument. Saying that competitive corporate tax system violates the free trade is a little bit overreacting. From this particular aspect, the European Commission acts like a socialist enterprise and a tax cop. It should reconsider its legal arguments whereas the claims for the interference into Swiss internal affairs and corporate tax structure. In fact, Switzerland is the most competitive economy in the world according to World Economic Forum, the degree of economic freedom is far above the European average, tax burden is one of the lowest among OECD countries and the business environment is far more flexible, more opened, less restrictive and far more friendly than in the majority of the EU countries. Free trade agreement does not require the harmonization of tax policies. Imposing tax schemes on certain type of companies, which are equally treated under cantonal corporate tax laws, could be a sign of having special preferences for taxing those companies. This would violate the principle of fair and transparent corporate tax code. If Switzerland said "yes" to EU claims, it would have a damaging impact on economic growth and company stock index.
The European Commission claims that there are unfair advantages for companies operating in Switzerland. Further, it argues that low corporate tax rates are a state subsidy. It is somehow easy to understand why bureaucrats in Brussels are exposing a fierce anger against Switzerland. Low corporate tax rates have attracted numerous international holding companies. In the EU, this effect has been seen as "capital-flight" which has been caused by harmfully high corporate tax rates, causing large cost burdens to companies operating in high tax jursidictions in the EU. EU claims seem to be focused on companies leaving the union for Switzerland's far more friendly tax and business environment. If the bureaucrats in Brussels aim to stop companies that leave the EU, then imposing restrictions and penalizing them will result in the worst possible scenario. Cutting harmful corporate tax rates, deregulation and labor market liberalization are far more appropriate measures to boost competitiveness and create a friendly business environment.
Anykind of government intervention against tax competition and low tax jurisdiction is a serious threat to the stability and growth of business sector. It is the EU that seriously violates the free trade rules by giving the commission more discretionary authority to penalize countries with low tax jurisdiction, not Switzerland.
Competitive tax federalism is a fact. As many countries aim to do so, Switzerland endeavours to be an attractive global business destination. Company taxation is decisively crucial factor in setting the business framework. Laffer's New Curve rule coherently explains the parameters of tax-investment relationship - invest only in low tax countries.
On 13 February 2007 the European Commission informed Switzerland that it considers certain tax schemes applied by the cantons to certain types of company (holding companies, management companies and joint enterprises) on the basis of parameters set under federal law (Tax Harmonisation Act), to be state aid. In the view of the Commission, these tax schemes at the cantonal and communal level distort competition and impair trade in a manner not compatible with the 1972 Free Trade Agreement.
What impairs trade in the EU are massive government subsidies set under the common agricultural policy. The pursuit of protectionism harms the competition and there have rarely been more serious violations of free trade and competition rules as common agricultural policy. First, there is a price effect. High quotas, tariffs and import restrictions harms the consumers by setting restrictions not to choose imported agricultural goods on the market. If you set an equilibrium as an engine of price determination via the forces of supply and demand, import quoats move the supply curve left from the point of equilibrium and thus an implicit grant is given to existing enterprises. They respond to import quotas by raising prices as the quantity supplied on the market is reduced. In addition, the government intervention in the EU is widespread and so is the tax burden in high-tax welfare countries such as Germany, Italy and France.
EU attacks on Swiss tax sovereignity is likely to be political rather than economic. When you go through options and economic analysis, you see that it is hardly justified on any particular basis that tax schemes are an appropriate instrument. Saying that competitive corporate tax system violates the free trade is a little bit overreacting. From this particular aspect, the European Commission acts like a socialist enterprise and a tax cop. It should reconsider its legal arguments whereas the claims for the interference into Swiss internal affairs and corporate tax structure. In fact, Switzerland is the most competitive economy in the world according to World Economic Forum, the degree of economic freedom is far above the European average, tax burden is one of the lowest among OECD countries and the business environment is far more flexible, more opened, less restrictive and far more friendly than in the majority of the EU countries. Free trade agreement does not require the harmonization of tax policies. Imposing tax schemes on certain type of companies, which are equally treated under cantonal corporate tax laws, could be a sign of having special preferences for taxing those companies. This would violate the principle of fair and transparent corporate tax code. If Switzerland said "yes" to EU claims, it would have a damaging impact on economic growth and company stock index.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)