development report 2012 - UMAR

More documents

Recommendations

Info

160 Development Report 2012 Indicators of Slovenia’s development Economic structure of taxes and contributions A comparison of the economic structures of taxation systems 1 shows that Slovenia diverges from the EU average in its higher tax burden on consumption and labour and a lower burden of capital. The share of taxes on consumption in total taxes and contributions totalled 37.3% in Slovenia in 2009 and exceeded the EU average (33.4%). In terms of the share of taxes on consumption in total taxes Slovenia is in the top third of EU countries, as in 2009 only eight countries had a higher share. The share of taxes on labour (52.0%) was also above the EU average (48.0%). Slovenia is also ranked in the upper half of the EU on this indicator, with a higher share recorded in only ten Member States. The share of taxes on capital accounted for just 11.0% of all taxes and contributions in Slovenia in 2009, which is a much lower figure than in the EU as a whole (18.8%). With regard to the share of these taxes in total taxes, Slovenia is at the tail-end of the EU, with only Estonia and Latvia trailing behind. In 2009, the gap in the economic structure of taxes between Slovenia and the EU average narrowed relative to 2000. In Slovenia, the otherwise very low share of taxes on capital in total taxes and contributions grew, while the average share in the EU declined. After 2005, Slovenia recorded a more pronounced increase in the tax burden on capital, particularly in 2007 when the conditions for capital gains were favourable and the rate of corporate income tax was still high (25%), with no significant tax relief. In 2007, income tax recorded a ten-year high. Following the tax reform in 2007 the burden on capital started to decline again. The decline was due to a gradual phasedown of the corporate income tax rate (from 25% to 20% in 2010), higher tax relief and changes in the personal income tax. Meanwhile, the macroeconomic situation deteriorated. Although the burden on capital has been declining since 2007, in 2009 it was still higher than in 2000. The tax burden on labour in the overall tax burden decreased in Slovenia, while growing slightly in the EU as a whole. Slovenia has a higher tax burden on labour than other EU countries mainly because of high social security contributions. Slovenia is fifth among EU Member States regarding social security contributions as a share of GDP; only France, Germany, the Czech Republic and Austria have higher shares. After the tax reform in 2007, the burden on labour otherwise declined somewhat due to changes in the personal income tax and a gradual phasing out of the payroll tax, but is still higher than the EU average. The share of taxes on consumption in total taxes and contributions increased slightly both in Slovenia and the EU. It was fairly stable in the entire period. After 2002, it had risen somewhat due to a higher value added tax rate, while in the following years it was mainly impacted by changes in excise duties, which were being adjusted to meet the requirements of the EU directives and to compensate for changes in the prices of excise products and the shortfall of budgetary revenues during the crisis. The calculation and comparison of implicit tax rates 2 also confirm the above-average tax burden on labour in Slovenia in 2009. In Slovenia, the implicit tax rate on consumption in 2009 was 24.2% compared to the EU average of 20.9%. Only seven Member States, Nordic countries in particular, had higher rates than Slovenia. In Slovenia the implicit tax rate on consumption has been dropping since 2003, while increasing on average in the EU. In 2009, the calculated implicit tax rate on labour in Slovenia was 34.9%, higher than the EU average of 32.9% due to the relatively high social security contributions. Twelve Member States had higher rates than Slovenia in 2009. The implicit tax rate on capital for 2009 for Slovenia is estimated at 21.0%, below the EU-25 3 average of 24.6%. Nine countries had lower rates than Slovenia, including the Baltic countries and the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. 1 The tax classification is based on the classification of taxes according to ESA-95 and the common rules for their classification. Taxes on consumption are defined as taxes on transactions between consumers and producers and as taxes on final consumption. Taxes on labour are directly tied to wages and paid by employees and employers. Taxes on capital relate to taxes on capital, corporate income, income from household capital (annuities, dividends, interests, other income from property), capital gains, on property, etc. 2 The implicit tax rate on consumption is defined as the ratio between taxes on consumption and final household consumption expenditure on the territory of a country according to the methodology of national accounts. The implicit tax rate on labour is calculated as the ratio between taxes on labour and the compensation of employees according to the methodology of national accounts, increased by taxes on wage bill and payroll. 3 EU-27 data not available.
Development Report 2012 Indicators of Slovenia’s development 161 Table: Economic structure of taxes and social security contributions, 2005 and 2009, as a % of GDP Total Taxes on consumption Taxes on labour Taxes on capital 2005 2009 2005 2009 2005 2009 2005 2009 EU-27 39.1 38.4 11.1 10.6 19.6 20.0 8.6 7.9 Austria 42.3 42.7 12.2 12.0 23.4 24.2 6.8 6.5 Belgium 44.9 43.5 11.1 10.6 23.8 23.7 9.9 9.0 Bulgaria 31.3 28.9 15.8 14.7 11.8 9.9 3.6 4.3 Cyprus 35.5 35.1 15.2 13.4 11.3 12.2 9.0 9.5 Czech Republic 37.1 34.5 11.3 11.2 19.1 17.5 6.8 5.8 Denmark 50.8 48.1 16.2 15.2 24.8 27.1 10.0 5.9 Estonia 30.6 35.9 12.8 14.6 15.4 18.7 2.4 2.6 Finland 43.9 43.1 13.7 13.4 23.2 23.8 7.1 5.9 France 43.5 41.6 11.2 10.6 23.0 22.8 9.5 8.4 Greece 31.9 30.3 11.2 10.8 12.9 12.5 7.8 7.1 Ireland 30.7 28.2 11.4 10.0 10.4 11.8 8.9 6.5 Italy 40.4 43.1 10.0 9.8 20.4 22.1 10.0 11.2 Latvia 29.0 26.6 12.1 10.2 14.0 13.8 2.8 2.5 Lithuania 28.5 29.3 10.8 11.2 14.5 15.1 3.3 3.3 Luxembourg 37.6 37.1 10.9 10.2 15.4 16.4 11.3 10.5 Hungary 37.5 39.5 14.5 15.0 18.3 19.7 4.6 4.7 Malta 33.7 34.2 14.4 13.5 10.2 9.8 9.1 10.9 Germany 38.8 39.7 10.1 11.1 22.6 22.7 6.0 5.9 Netherlands 37.6 38.2 12.0 11.8 18.2 20.9 7.4 5.5 Poland 32.8 31.8 12.3 11.5 12.8 12.1 8.0 8.2 Portugal 31.5 31.0 12.9 10.9 12.2 13.0 6.5 7.1 Romania 27.8 27.0 12.3 10.3 11.0 11.9 4.5 4.8 Slovakia 31.3 28.8 12.3 10.3 12.5 12.5 6.5 5.9 Slovenia 38.6 37.6 13.4 14.0 20.6 19.6 4.7 4.1 Spain 35.6 30.4 9.8 7.2 16.2 16.7 10.1 7.4 Sweden 48.9 46.9 12.6 13.3 29.1 27.4 7.2 6.1 United Kingdom 36.0 34.9 11.2 10.4 14.3 14.0 10.7 10.5 Source: Taxation trends in the European Union (Eurostat, European Commission), 2011. Figure: Implicit tax rate on consumption, labour and capital (as a % of the base), 1995–2009 Implicit tax rate, in % 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Source: Taxation trends in the European Union (Eurostat, European Commission), 2011. 40 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 Implicit tax rate, in % SLO consumption (left axis) EU-27 consumption (left axis) SLO capital (left axis) EU-25 capital (left axis) SLO labour (right axis) EU-27 labour (right axis)
Page 1:
development report 2012
Page 5 and 6:
Development Report 2012 Contents 3
Page 7:
Development Report 2012 Contents 5
Page 10 and 11:
8 Development Report 2012 Main find
Page 12 and 13:
10 Development Report 2012 Summary
Page 15:
Part I Development by the prioritie
Page 18 and 19:
16 Development Report 2012 Developm
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 93:
Part II Indicators of Slovenia’s
Page 96 and 97:
94 Development Report 2012 Indicato
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
100 Development Report 2012 Indicat
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113: 110 Development Report 2012 Indicat
Page 133 and 134: THE SECOND PRIORITY Efficient use o
Page 135 and 136: Development Report 2012 Indicators
Page 157: Development Report 2012 Indicators
Page 171 and 172: THE FOURTH PRIORITY: A modern welfa
Page 203: Development Report 2012 Indicators
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
234 Development Report 2012 Bibliog
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 247 and 248:
Development Report 2012 Appendix 24
Page 249 and 250:
Development Report 2012 Appendix 24
Page 251:
development report 2012
show all

development report 2012 - UMAR

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?