DOCSLIB.ORG

Deloitte Legal Perspectives: International Dismissal Survey

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deloitte Legal Perspectives: International Dismissal Survey Deloitte Legal Perspectives International Dismissal Survey February 2018 Brochure / report title goes here | Section title goes here Contents Introduction 5 Cost projection 6 Main conclusions 13 Dismissal Calculator 20 Country reports 25 This is a survey conducted in December 2017 and consequently reflects the legislation of the different countries at that particular time. The figures used in the cost projection date from December 2017 and therefore do not take into account any changes in legislation of a later date. Although this survey has been performed with the greatest care, the material in this guide is only for information purposes on general practices. The authors may not be held responsible in any way for any possible error that might occur or for any use or interpretation that could be made of this information. It is not intended to be used as advice in any event. 3 International Dismissal Survey Countries across all Introduction regions (America, This 4th edition of the International Dismissal Survey is more than a refresh. Firstly, the number of participating countries has increased by 15. In addition to more European countries (Cyprus, Servia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, etc.), the survey for the first Europe and APAC) time also includes countries from Latin America (e.g. Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador) and the Asia- Pacific region (e.g. China, Singapore, Japan etc.). In total, this survey comprises the legislation of 46 countries: share many similar Austria, Albania, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, China, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Montenegro, Myanmar, employment termination Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Vietnam. As in the previous edition, the survey begins with six cost comparisons, reflecting the concepts. dismissal cost for the employers in all participating countries based on three cases with a different seniority and remuneration package, as well as the difference between a dismissal with or without reason. The cost projections are drafted from an employer’s perspective, which means that only dismissals by employer (and not by the employee) are taken into account and include social security costs as well as other costs (e.g. outplacement where relevant). Supplementary to the cost projections, the survey contains two new comparative tables bringing more insights into the division of the overall employer cost. Such as, the reference income that is used to calculate the dismissal indemnities and whether or not these indemnities are subject to social security charges, with or without the application of a cap. In addition, there is a third new table which illustrates the ‘balance of power’ in each country, indicating the countries where upfront approval is required from the court to dismiss a person, or where a court appeal can result in a reinstatement or an increased indemnity. Finally, each of the 46 countries has its own country report, summarising its individual dismissal rules, the formalities that need to be complied with, and any upcoming legislative changes. New to these country reports is that they contain more information regarding the determination of the notice period in relation to seniority (if applicable) and a translation in the official country language of the most important terms. 5 International Dismissal Survey International Dismissal Survey Cost projection Comparison of the dismissal cost In order to compare the employer’s dismissal cost in the various In all practical examples, the participating countries were countries, three practical examples were used which were requested to provide the dismissal cost, always considered from an approached equally by all participating countries, taking into employer’s perspective, in view of both a dismissal due to objective account the respective local dismissal regulations. individual or economic reason as well as a dismissal without an objective individual or economic reason. The case examples have been selected to provide relevant information on the differences in the regulations in the In general, there is no or little difference in cost for employers participating countries. Amongst other, the impact of the following between a dismissal for individual reasons and a dismissal for elements on the dismissal cost was determined: contracts of economic reasons. Only a very limited number of countries, such indefinite term, age (younger vs. older employee), level of salary as the Czech Republic, Ireland, Romania and the United Kingdom (lower vs. higher salary), composition of the salary (elements taken may show a difference. For these countries, the cost projections into account) and seniority (medium vs. higher). In order to obtain a are based on a dismissal for economic reasons. correct comparison, the use of similar salary packages was needed, although we are fully aware that such packages are not in line with For completeness sake, it should be noted that the case examples market practice in a number of countries. have been calculated by the various countries while taking into account the worst-case scenario, especially for the examples The following sets of parameters were used: related to dismissals without objective reason, in order to show the maximum possible employer cost. In principle, the difference Case 1 between the scenarios with and without reason show the • Employee, age 30 maximum span in which an agreement with the employee can • Legal counsel in an IT company normally be reached. • 4 years seniority • Gross annual base salary: €30,000 The figures date from December 2017 and do not take into account • Gross variable salary per year: €2,500 any legislative updates from a later date. Please note however that • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €4,000 such legislative changes have been covered as much as possible in the descriptive part of this survey (i.e. the report on country Case 2 regulations). • Employee, age 35 • Legal counsel in an IT company The survey focuses on dismissal costs in the framework of • 7 years seniority individual dismissals and excludes the rules and best practices • Gross annual base salary: €60,000 in view of collective dismissals. However, the underlying data • Gross variable salary per year: €5,000 collected in the framework of this survey clearly shows that nearly • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €8,000 all the countries have different rules specific to multiple and/or collective dismissals. Case 3 • Employee, age 49 A limited number of countries were not in a position to provide a • Legal counsel in an IT company cost assessment in case of dismissal without a reason, because • 11 years seniority the cost for the employer varies depending on the court’s decision • Gross annual base salary: €120,000 (Malta) or dismissal without reasons is not possible according to • Gross variable salary per year: €10,000 the legislation (the Czech Republic, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Croatia, • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €16,000 Slovenia and the Netherlands). 6 7 International Dismissal Survey International Dismissal Survey Case 1 Case 1 • Employee, age 30 • Employee, age 30 • Legal counsel in an IT company • Legal counsel in an IT company • 4 years seniority • 4 years seniority • Gross annual base salary: €30,000 • Gross annual base salary: €30,000 • Gross variable salary per year: €2,500 • Gross variable salary per year: €2,500 • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €4,000 • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €4,000 ase ismissal ue to oetive iniviual or eonomi reasons ase ismissal itout oetive iniviual or eonomi reasons Italy Italy elium France Seden ussia Slovakia Thailand unary Cech epublic uembour Denmark oray rail ustria elium China France oray Ireland Seden Siterland Slovakia Denmark ithuania Spain ithuania Croatia China Portual lbania The etherlands rail lbania Finland Greece Finland Thailand unary Germany uembour Portual Ireland ustria Siterland Ecuador ularia Sinapore Spain Slovenia ularia omania Colombia ietnam Cyprus osnia and ereovina omania Cyprus Greece atvia UK Germany Sinapore Malta ietnam Colombia osnia and ereovina 0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 Indemnity in lieu o notice Severance indemnity Other leal indemnities Social chares Indemnity in lieu o notice Severance indemnity Other leal indemnities Social chares ssumptions not considered unair dismissal 8 9 International Dismissal Survey International Dismissal Survey Case 2 Case 2 • Employee, age 35 • Employee, age 35 • Legal counsel in an IT company • Legal counsel in an IT company • 7 years seniority • 7 years seniority • Gross annual base salary: €60,000 • Gross annual base salary: €60,000 • Gross variable salary per year: €5,000 • Gross variable salary per year: €5,000 • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €8,000 • Benefits in kind per year (gross): €8,000 ase ismissal ue to oetive iniviual or eonomi reasons ase ismissal itout oetive iniviual or eonomi reasons Italy Italy Slovakia Slovakia elium Seden rail Thailand uembour France unary ussia France Portual elium uembour Ireland Cech epublic Seden Finland Denmark oray Spain rail Croatia Germany ustria lbania The etherlands oray Spain unary Denmark China Portual ithuania Siterland lbania ithuania Greece ietnam Ecuador Slovenia
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Insights Vol 7 No 1
    A GRETT-ABLE SITUATION: NEW TRENDS IN GERMAN REAL ESTATE TRANSFER TAX ON SHARE DEALS PORTUGUESE TAXATION OF DISTRIBUTIONS FROM TRUST CAPITAL: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT O.E.C.D. UNIFIED APPROACH GARNERS LESS UNIFIED COMMENTS FROM EUROPE’S TECH PRODUCERS AND USERS AND MORE Insights Vol. 7 No. 1 TABLE OF EDITORS’ NOTE CONTENTS In this month’s edition of Insights, our articles address the following: Editors’ Note • A gRETT-able Situation: New Trends in German Real Estate Transfer A gRett-able Situation: New Tax on Share Deals. For decades, the German Real Estate Transfer Tax Trends in German Real Estate Act (“gRETT Act”) has imposed a transaction tax on the sale of real estate Transfer Tax on Share Deals ..... 4 in Germany. In recent years, the tax has applied to the sale of shares that indirectly transfer real estate located in Germany. When initially enacted, a Portuguese Taxation of sale of all shares was taxable under the gRETT Act. In the year 2000, the Distributions from Trust Capital: triggering percentage was reduced to 95%. Last year, proposed legislation A Critical Assessment .............. 11 would have reduced the triggering percentage to 90%, but the draft bill was never enacted. In 2020, the triggering percentage may be reduced to as O.E.C.D. Unified Approach low as 75% or some other percentage whenever new legislation is adopted. Garners Less Unified Comments Exactly what constitutes an indirect sale of German real estate is surprisingly from Europe’s Tech Producers broad, and unlike comparable taxes in other countries, the sales need not be and Users ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro's Tribal Legacy
    WARNING! The views expressed in FMSO publications and reports are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government. Montenegro's Tribal Legacy by Major Steven C. Calhoun, US Army Foreign Military Studies Office, Fort Leavenworth, KS. This article appeared in Military Review July-August 2000 The mentality of our people is still very patriarchal. Here the knife, revenge and a tribal (plemenski) system exist as nowhere else.1 The whole country is interconnected and almost everyone knows everyone else. Montenegro is nothing but a large family—all of this augurs nothing good. —Mihajlo Dedejic2 When the military receives an order to deploy into a particular area, planners focus on the terrain so the military can use the ground to its advantage. Montenegro provides an abundance of terrain to study, and it is apparent from the rugged karst topography how this tiny republic received its moniker—the Black Mountain. The territory of Montenegro borders Croatia, Bosnia- Herzegovina, Serbia and Albania and is about the size of Connecticut. Together with the much larger republic of Serbia, Montenegro makes up the current Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). But the jagged terrain of Montenegro is only part of the military equation. Montenegro has a complex, multilayered society in which tribe and clan can still influence attitudes and loyalties. Misunderstanding tribal dynamics can lead a mission to failure. Russian misunderstanding of tribal and clan influence led to unsuccessful interventions in Afghanistan and Chechnya.3 In Afghanistan, the rural population's tribal organization facilitated their initial resistance to the Soviets.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Years After Bucharest Why NATO Should Double-Down on Georgian
    C - 0; M - 95; Y - 100; K - 2; PANTONE 485 CP C - 0; M - 98; Y - 91; K - 30; PANTONE 7621 CP C - 0; M - 97; Y - 87; K - 60; PANTONE 7624 CP POLICY BRIEF EUROPE IN THE WORLD PROGRAMME 3 JULY 2018 10 years after Bucharest Why NATO should Amanda Paul Senior Policy Analyst, EPC double-down on Ana Andguladze Georgian membership Policy Researcher, ISPED 2018 is a momentous year for Georgia: it marks the interest to strengthen ties with Tbilisi. As a reliable 100th anniversary of the first Democratic Republic of partner that shares common interests and values, the Georgia. It is also the 10th anniversary of the war with country offers the West a strategic foothold in the South Russia (August 2008) and of the Bucharest Summit, Caucasus. The Alliance must reaffirm its membership when Tbilisi was promised a seat at NATO’s table. commitment and reiterate that no third country has a veto on its enlargement. It should further deepen A decade on, NATO-Georgia cooperation has practical cooperation and bolster Georgia’s ability substantially deepened. The country now meets to defend itself. Reaffirming NATO’s support would NATO standards in many areas: it has modernised its reassure Georgian society, boost reform efforts and move armed forces and interoperability between Georgian the country ever closer to the Alliance. troops and the armies of NATO countries has increased. Georgia has contributed more to international NATO missions than many existing members and also meets the Alliance’s defence spending target. Tbilisi has also undertaken reforms to strengthen democracy, eradicate Georgia has contributed more to corruption and ensure civilian control of the military.
    [Show full text]
  • CROATIA, MONTENEGRO and SERBIA Early Childhood
    CROATIA, MONTENEGRO AND SERBIA Early childhood education for children with disabilities; system strengthening and innovation; – Harnessing technology to promote communication, education and social inclusion for young children with developmental delays and disabilities in Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia. Every child has the right to learn – In the case of Croatia, Montenegro and Serbia, affordable Assistive Technology for Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) is being introduced to support young children with complex communication needs who may otherwise may be left out of early childhood education services. This innovation promotes interaction and helps vulnerable children to develop language, steering them towards an education and active social life right from the early years. Problem Initiative Many young children with communication-related In Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia, preschool teachers, speech and disabilities are not identified or referred for necessary language therapists, psychologists, and special educators are being attention in a timely fashion, resulting in their exclusion trained to identify and support young children with speech, language, from critical early learning opportunities. This is due to a and communication-related difficulties who could benefit from assistive lack of: 1) capacity among professionals to identify technology. An open license AAC tablet-based communicator – developmental delays early on; 2) familiarity with using Cboard, which has been customized for languages in the pilot assistive technology with young children; and 3) access countries – is being tested for effectiveness. UNICEF’s Innovation to affordable and appropriate assistive technological Fund supported the development of Cboard to improve the availability solutions that can be operated in local languages. of affordable AAC solutions that can be scaled up sustainably.
    [Show full text]
  • Portuguese Investment Funds – New Tax Regime
    Portuguese Investment Funds – new tax regime Ana Paula Basílio Head of the Tax Department at Gómez-Acebo & Pombo in Portugal Decree-Act 7/2015, of 13 January, has approved a In addition to the limitations on CIT-deductible new tax regime for Portuguese Securities Investment expenses, the former tax regime does not allow for Funds and Real Estate Funds, covering both tax losses computed in a certain year in respect of investment funds with a contractual and corporate a specific category of income to be offset against tax nature (“Funds”), as well as the corresponding profits computed in respect of another category of unitholders/shareholders (“Investors”). income; on the other hand, tax losses computed in a certain year cannot be carried forward and deducted To summarize, under the new regime, most of the against future tax profits (even if computed within income obtained by Funds will become exempt the same category of income). from Corporate Income Tax (CIT). Non-resident Investors without a local permanent establishment Although income distributed by Portuguese Funds (provided they do not have their residence in to non-resident Investors was already exempt from a ‘tax haven’ and no more than 25% of its taxation in Portugal, non-resident Investors could not share capital is held by Portuguese-residents) obtain, in their countries of residence, a tax credit on will remain exempt from Portuguese taxation the CIT paid by the Portuguese Funds themselves. in respect of income derived from Securities Investment Funds and, in respect of income The new tax regime will not trigger such downsides, derived from Real Estate Funds, they will become because results obtained by the Funds related to taxed in Portugal at a 10% rate.
    [Show full text]
  • The Covid-19 Crisis in Montenegro
    THE COVID-19 CRISIS IN MONTENEGRO 31 January 2021 COVID-19 health situation – December 2020/January 2021 • After having successfully achieved zero cases at the end of May, Montenegro began experiencing a second wave of infections throughout the summer and autumn, reaching new peak levels in November. The number of daily new cases decreased and stabilised in December and January, however, 10 048 total cases per 100 000 inhabitants, Montenegro continues to record one of the highest number of cases in Europe. On 28 January, the total number of cases reached 60 288, with 790 deaths since the outbreak. Evolution of active cases in Montenegro Source: Worldometers.info • Wearing protective masks indoors and outdoors remains mandatory, including for children older than five years. Strict controls will continue to check whether people wear masks, while private business owners are in charge of assuring that on-site customers respect sanitary measures. Policy reactions – December 2020/January 2021 Measures to slow the spread of the virus and support the health system • Mobility and event restrictions: The National Coordination Body introduced uniform economy-wide measures on 14 November, which will remain in place until at least 10 February. A countrywide curfew THE COVID-19 CRISIS IN MONTENEGRO © OECD 2021 | 2 remains in place until at least 10 February, whereby leaving the place of residence is prohibited from 22:00 to 5:00. Walking in groups larger than four remains prohibited and only registered cultural events of up to 25 people and lasting no longer than 60 minutes are allowed. Religious and private gatherings are forbidden, while religious ceremonies can be performed without visitors.
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro Guidebook
    MONTENEGRO PREFACE Podgorica, the capital of Montenegro, lies in a broad plain crossed by five rivers and surrounded by mountains, just 20 kilometers from the Albanian border. The city has a population of around 180,000 people. Bombed into rubble during World War II, Podgorica was rebuilt into a modern urban center, with high-rise apartment buildings and new office and shopping developments. While the latest Balkan war had a low impact on the physical structures, the economic sanctions had a devastating effect on employment and infrastructure. With the help of foreign investment, urban renewal is evident throughout the city, but much of it may still appear run down. Podgorica has a European-style town center with a pedestrian- only walking street (mall) and an assortment of restaurants, cafes, and boutiques. To many, its principal attraction is as a base for the exploration of Montenegro’s natural beauty, with mountains and wild countryside all around and the stunning Adriatic coastline less than an hour away. This is a mountainous region with barren moorlands and virgin forests, with fast-flowing rivers and picturesque lakes; Skadar Lake in particular is of ecological significance. The coastline is known for its sandy beaches and dramatic coves: for example, Kotor – the city that is protected by UNESCO and the wonderful Cathedral of Saint Typhoon; the unique baroque Perast; Saint George and Our Lady of the Rock islands – all locations that tell a story of a lasting civilization and the wealth of the most wonderful bay in the world. The area around the city of Kotor is a UNESCO World Heritage site for its natural beauty and historic significance.
    [Show full text]
  • Montenegro Media Sector Inquiry with Recommendations for Harmonisation with the Council of Europe and European Union Standards
    Montenegro Media Sector Inquiry with Recommendations for Harmonisation with the Council of Europe and European Union standards Report by Tanja Kerševan Smokvina (ed.) Jean-François Furnémont Marc Janssen Dunja Mijatović Jelena Surčulija Milojević Snežana Trpevska 29 December 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................5 PROJECT BACKGROUND 5 FINDINGS AND PROPOSALS 6 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 13 PURPOSE 13 SCOPE 13 ORGANISATION 14 STRUCTURE 14 METHODOLOGY 16 CH. I: MARKET OVERVIEW AND ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 17 CONTEXT AND ENVIRONMENT 17 ACCESS AND OFFER 18 ECONOMIC HEALTH AND DYNAMICS 20 LEGAL AND REGULATORY INTERVENTIONS 22 IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PUBLIC 23 POLICY BRIEF 24 CH. II: LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK .............................................................................. 26 HARMONISATION: A STEP FORWARD, TWO BACK 26 LEGISLATION: OVERVIEW AND SUGGESTIONS 26 INSTITUTIONS: GAPS, OVERLAPS AND CAPTURE 35 THE NATIONAL REGULATORY AUTHORITY 40 POLICY BRIEF 42 CH. III: PUBLIC SERVICE MEDIA ......................................................................................................... 44 PUBLICLY FUNDED MEDIA IN MONTENEGRO 44 ORGANISATION AND GOVERNANCE 44 FUNDING 46 AUTONOMY AND INDEPENDENCE 47 CONTENT: UNIVERSALITY AND
    [Show full text]
  • WESTERN BALKANS REGULAR ECONOMIC REPORT No.19 | Spring 2021
    WESTERN BALKANS REGULAR ECONOMIC REPORT No.19 | Spring 2021 Public Disclosure Authorized Subdued Recovery Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Public Disclosure Authorized Western Balkans Regular Economic Report No.19 Subdued Recovery Spring 2021 Acknowledgements This Regular Economic Report (RER) covers economic developments, prospects, and economic policies in the Western Balkans’ region: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Serbia. The report is produced twice a year by a team led by Edith Kikoni and Enrique Blanco Armas (Task Team Leaders). This issue’s core team included World Bank staff working on the Western Balkan countries (with additional contributions to specific sections): Christoph Ungerer, Nicolo Dalvit (Growth section), Sanja Madžarević-Šujster, Filip Jolevski (Labor section), Trang Nguyen, Ana Maria Oviedo, Leonardo Lucchetti (Poverty section), Milan Lakićević, Besart Myderrizi (Fiscal section), Hilda Shijaku (Monetary section), Johanna Jaeger (Financial sector section), Sandra Hlivnjak (External section), Lazar Šestović (Outlook section) and Tania Ghossein, Sylvia Solf and Ahmed Nauraiz Rana (Spotlight). Additional contributions were made by: Stefanie Koettl- Brodmann (Spotlight); Collette Wheeler (Outlook Section); Carlos Gustavo Ospino Hernandez (Poverty section); Alena Kantarovich, Alper Oguz, Gunhild Berg, Keler Gjika and Qianye Zhang (Financial sector section) and Marc Schiffbauer and Asli Senkal. Research assistance was provided by Suzana Jukić. Anne Grant provided assistance in editing, and Budy Wirasmo assistance in designing. The cover image was created by Sanja Tanić. The dissemination of the report and external and media relations are managed by an External Communications team comprised of John Mackedon, Artem Kolesnikov, Paul A. Clare, Lundrim Aliu, Anita Božinovska, Ana Gjokutaj, Jasmina Hadžić, Gordana Filipovic, Mirjana Popović, Sanja Tanić and Carl P.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia (Srbija), Montenegro (Crna Gora) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosna I Hercegovina)
    Serbia (Srbija), Montenegro (Crna Gora) and Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosna i Hercegovina) Recent history Serbia, Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BIH) were all (along with Croatia and FYR Macedonia) formed as a result of the break-up of Yugoslavia in the 1990s. BIH declared its independence from Yugoslavia in 1992, following a referendum. This break-up sparked conflict among the three large ethnic groups within the federation. Bosniaks and Croats generally favoured independence, whereas Bosnian Serbs, supported by the Serbian government, wished for a union with Serbia. Further conflict later erupted between the Croat statelet of Herzog-Bosnia and the Bosniaks. The wars lasted until the intervention of NATO and the signing of the Dayton Accords in 1995, by which time an estimated 100,000 people had been killed, many in acts of ethnic cleansing. Under the Dayton Accords, BIH was administratively decentralised and divided into two entities, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska. Central government is consociational, with three rotating Presidents and set numbers of seats in both Houses of the Parliamentary Assembly for Croats, Bosniaks and Serbs. After the dissolution of Yugoslavia,How Serbia does did maintaina General a federation Election with Montenegro. actually However, work? this gradually evolved into a looser relationship, and Montenegrins narrowly voted for independence from Serbia in May 2006. Montenegro The UK is a liberal democracy. This means that we democratically elect politicians, who is now recognised as a separate nation by both Serbia and the EU. represent our interests. It also involves that individual rights are protected. Much more problematic has been Serbia’s relationship with Kosovo, which has a majority (90%) ethnic Albanian population.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxing the Informal Sector in Developing Countries: the Case of Ghana
    TAXING THE INFORMAL SECTOR IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: THE CASE OF GHANA By ALEXANDER AMPAABENG A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Accounting and Finance Birmingham Business School The University of Birmingham September 2018 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT Taxing the informal sector poses a significant challenge to every tax authority. The task of designing a system to encourage voluntary tax compliance in the informal sectors of developing economies is a particularly important task given the relative sizes of these sectors in their domestic economies. Due to lack of reliable data about the operators of the informal economy it is difficult to comprehensively understand what produces tax non-compliance, and even less what motivates compliance, however, this information is critical to the design of effective policy. Most tax authorities resort to using blunt and often punitive measures designed to deter evasion rather than promoting long term voluntary compliance. Existing literature on informal sector taxation in developing countries is limited, and what does exist emphasises development of the tax system rather than understanding the taxpayer.
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia and Montenegro
    Serbia and Montenegro Main objectives Serbia and Montenegro • Provide legal assistance and encourage Serbia and Montenegro (SCG) to adopt a law on refugees, and create a national asylum system, including fair and effi cient Refugee Status Determination (RSD) procedures; • Phase out assistance to post-Dayton refugees by ensuring their inclusion in bilateral and government- sponsored development programmes, with continued assistance only for the most vulnerable; and • Facilitate the return of internally displaced persons (IDPs) to Kosovo where possible and continue to as- sist the most vulnerable in their situation of displace- ment. Kosovo • Contribute towards the creation of conditions which will prevent further displacement of minorities in Kosovo; facilitate the voluntary return of minority IDPs and refu- gees to their places of origin and help to promote their subsequent long-term reintegration; • Identify and facilitate the attainment of durable solu- to refugees and IDPs. Furthermore, refugees and IDPs tions for refugees from Croatia and Bosnia and Her- are now included in the World Bank’s Poverty Reduction zegovina (BiH). Strategy Paper processes. A large number of collective centres have been closed and the residents assisted in fi nding alternative housing. Working environment Recent developments Planning figures: Serbia and Montenegro Serbia and Montenegro Population Jan. 2004 Dec. 2004 The new State Union of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (refugees) 89,950 40,000 Montenegro (SCG) was established Croatia (refugees) 180,000 70,000 in February 2003. Upon accession IDPs 220,000 200,000 to the Council of Europe in April Mandate refugees and asylum-seekers 280 6,000 2003, SCG committed itself to the Other refugees 50 20 enactment of national legislation Returnee IDPs 2,000 2,000 compliant with international law Total 492,280 318,020 and standards, including refugee legislation, but, at the time of writing, Planning figures: Kosovo basic issues of institutional compe- Population Jan.
    [Show full text]