CEU eTD Collection
L AGGARDNESS AS AGGARDNESS A In requir fulfillmentof the partial Comparative Slovakia and Hungary of study R Principal s EFROMS Department ofPoliticalScience F Central European University, ORMING POWERORMING Budapest, Hungary upervisor: Duman Anil
Jozef Marusik IN Submitted to Submitted
C ements for MastersArts thedegree of of ( 2011 by ENTRAL
)
OF
E
UROPE S
ECOND Ph.D
G ENERATION
CEU eTD Collection reforms labor. by for explanations causal of consolidation and corporations state the the exercise on to able leverage are corporations transnational that shows additionally research My systems actor. external main the as corporations transnational process. the political such the on conditionality factors EU and theunemployment leverage, economic of system, impact the analyze I respect this In Hungary. and Slovakia aim processes reform towards actors internal and external of attitudes unlike causing factors the find to me obliged question research My Abstract main actors main had hv ietfe pltcl ate ad ao as labor and parties political identified have I
. Finally . emerge
in both countries both in
d , the
the the
government reforms
l the ow institutionalization ofow institutionalization relation industrial reform cycles in Slovakia in cycles reform eainhp ewe hg uepomn and unemployment high between relationship
in Slovakia in prior to Second Generation Reforms as well as during the during as well as Reforms Generation Second to prior ny f there if only . The opposite applies in Hungary in applies opposite The i
ing on the attraction of foreign capital in in capital foreign of attraction the on ing
are and As a result result a As
few the
anti the r o alternatives no or - reform cycles in Hungary. in cycles reform an nenl cos and actors internal main fud u ta political that out found I
caused caused reform attitudes of attitudes reform a . I also provide also I . smooth launch launch smooth accep
o foreign to tance of of tance
CEU eTD Collection me too. thank tomy whoencouragedfriends family and to want I Lastly studies. my of periods stressful most the during encouragement and support for topic research my on discussions fruitful the for Folsz Attila and Greskovits Bela to particularly her beyond my improve to me helped Ph.D. Duman Anil supervisor, my to gratitude and appreciation deep my express to like would I Acknowledgements
for reading earlier drafts of the theses, for valuable comments and suggestions which which suggestions and comments valuable for theses, the of drafts earlier reading for
h tei. oe ay hns o y ilred aaa nrsoa o hr kind her for Ondruskova Tamara girlfriend my to thanks many owe I thesis. the
academic duties. Furthermore, I would like to thank to other professors at CEU at professors other to thank to like would I Furthermore, duties. academic
theses. theses. I would especially like to thank her for the the for her thank to like especially would I ii
dedication
CEU eTD Collection THEDEV IN ACTORS 3. GENERATION SECOND 2. INITIAL HERITAGE 1. INTRODUCTION Table ofContents FDI 2.1. 1.5. 1.4. 1.3. 1.2. 1.1. D M R A A ESEARCH CKNOWLEDGEMENTS BSTRACT EFINITIONOF ETHODS 2.1.4 Hungarian FDI support FDI Hungarian 2.1.4 Reforms Generation Second systemunder tax Hungarian 2.1.3. support FDI Slovak 2.1.2 Reforms Generation Second system under tax Slovak 2.1.1. development political Hungarian 1.3.2. development political Slovak 1.3.1 Hungary conditionality in EU of Factor 1.2.2. Slovakia conditionality in EU of Factor 1.2.1 Reforms Generation Second to prior Unemployment 1.1.3. Reforms Generation Second to prior economicenvironment systems and Tax 1.1.2. Post 1.1.1
B P U EU E SUPPORT R OLITICALSYSTE CONOMICLEGACIES AND ETTERINSTITUTIONALI NDERINSTITUTIONALIZA SRCUIG F ECON OF ESTRUCTURING
CONDITIONALITY
...... Q UESTION - ...... communist legacies communist S ECOND
...... MS AND MS PARTY SYSTEMS
......
...... - G
STARTING POINT OF SE OF POINT STARTING ELOPMENT OF SECOND G SECOND OF ELOPMENT
...... ENERATIONREFORMS
REFORMS
...... ZED ZED TIONOF
...... THEBUSINESS ENVIRON ...... MC ENVIRONMENT OMIC
...... PARTYINSYSTEM ......
...... - S
emergence of reform cycles reform of emergence LOVAKPOLITICAL SYST
...... - ......
emergence anti of emergence ......
......
......
...... H ...... iii – UNGARY ......
MENTPRIOR TO ...... COND GENERATION REFO GENERATION COND S
ECOND ECOND ENERATION REFORMS ENERATION ......
...... -
...... reformcycles EM ...... G ENERATION ......
......
...... S ...... ECOND ......
...... R G EFORM ENERATION ......
......
...... I TX YTM AND SYSTEMS TAX IN S RMS ...... R
...... EFORMS ......
......
42 40 39 37 28 23 20 18 15 13 10 43 36 36 34 32 22 17 10 .
II 8 4 3 3 1
I
CEU eTD Collection GLOSSARY LIST REFERENCE CONCLUSION S 3.2. 3.1. UGGESTIONSFOR FURTH 3.2.5 Unemployment as background factor shaping role role labor of shaping factor as background Unemployment 3.2.5 Refo Generation the Second in Labor Slovak 3.2.4 industrial relations Slovak 3.2.3. Hungar 3.2.2. industrial relations Hungarian 3.2.1
I L NFLUENCES OFTRANSNA ABORAND
......
...... SGR ian labor in Second Generation Reforms Generation Second in labor ian
......
...... ER RESEARCH ER TIONALS ......
...... ´
...... ONDOMESTIC IMPLEMEN
...... iv rms
......
......
...... TATIONOF
...... S ...... ECOND ...... G ENERATION ...... R ...... EFORMS ......
57 54 53 50 48 70 64 62 60 47 44
CEU eTD Collection as well as theses the of review critical provide to able be to results my summarize will I Inconclusioncase studies. my with compare them and andKovalcik Gyorffyof O´Dwyerand di additionally will I part same the In processes. reform the in parties of role the determines system the of up set political different how study will I finally And reforms. to connected decisions political on conditionality EU of influence the Iwill Later foreignenterprises. or local presenceof a and economicenvironment on focus will I countries. both of legacies economic study will I respect this In processes. reform analy must I circumstances, economic and political specific under went countries generationboth that Given reforms. second to prior factors the of identification the at aims theses my of part First and different ondomestic politics. impact ofTNCs acces EU to incentives different position, labor unlike systems, party different of factors consider and countries both in situations initial on reflect shall we approaches reform analyze ―socially apply to ability its to due environment competitive highly in capital international attract to capability the got and growth high of path a on economy the set to succeeded has which country the of example fina public consolidate to necessary reforms social and economic perform to inability for blamed often is government Hungarian similarities. many despite attitudes reform diverse the of examples interesting particularly are Slovakia from them obstruct factors which and reforms implement to ability country‘s to contribute factors which point, the on agree not do scholars theories, various Despite decades. for sciences political in discussed been has processes reform of topic The Introdu ction ze to what extend did a path dependency influence their performance during during performance their influence dependency path a did extend what to ze
painful‖ but economically necessary reforms. In order to objectively to order In reforms. necessary economically but painful‖ 1
cs I cnrr Soai i ue a an as used is Slovakia contrary In nces. scuss previously developed concepts developed previously scuss
launching. Hungary and Hungary launching.
check for check sion CEU eTD Collection Romania, States, Independent Slovenia of Commonwealth the States, Baltic the example, for comparable be to ethnic religion, of terms in heterogen characteristics similar has population their and 2004 in EU of became members Hungary simultaneously and Slovakia investment. foreign foradvantages countri represent both They characteristicssimilar capabilityHungary of and investment. Slovakia‘s toattractforeign of number a as well as models economic the in resemblance their primarily consider I study thei have to countries those consider moreover 2004 (Feldmann economies market coordinated to converge states Europe Central mentioned similarly that of cluster coherent rather represent c of variety particular a to belonging economies developing countries V4 that argue authors Many mystudies. Hungaryasand case Slovakia I justifychoiceof Iashall beforestart Nonetheless, accentof with laborreconciliation interests‘ onthe background legislative and labor organized scrutinize will I Lastly processes. the in TNCs of role the and decision parties‘ the on corporation transnational the of impact the consider will main the characteristics on focus will I part, third the in eventually but theses, entire the Throughout support. FDI and reforms tax on given be would accent Main environment. s The forpropositions future research. 275 , econd part will encompass details of SGR process in structuring of the economic economic the of structuring in process SGR of details encompass will part econd . (Nölke and Vliegenthart and (Nölke . eity, and social class division. Thus, Hungary and Slovakia are usually considered usually are Slovakia and Hungary Thus, division. class social and eity, ), others claim the existence of Liberal market paths in their economies. Some Some economies. their in paths market Liberal of existence the claim others ), — sharing very similar socioeconomic institutions while being distinct from, distinct being while institutions socioeconomic similar very sharing es with socialist history, similar industrial structure and location and structure industrial similar history, socialist with es
2009 , 61 , ) However as described previously, Slovakia and and Slovakia previously, described as However ) 2
on hbi vrey f aiaim Fr the For capitalism. of variety hybrid own, r unemployment. apitalism. While one group argues group one While apitalism.
actors. I actors.
or CEU eTD Collection at aiming reforms specifically more (SGR), Reforms Generation Second the as known processes reform Slovak and Hungarian between comparison on based is research My Methods a research to incentives ofTNCs and ondomestic theimpact decisions. like would I SGR, the of speed and depth the forming factors driven externally As factors. driven internally as processes reform on labor of position and systems party of impact the analyze to like would I particular, In programs? simi commence to governments Hungarian hindered contrary in in what and Slovakia program SGR deep and fast for force driving the was What answers question: find the to to especially like would I Hungary. and Slovakia in processes reform delve to intend ex to parties Hungarian of willingness of lack and Slovakia pro enthusiastic of forces driving the been have what on agreement aimi SGR, deeper and structural more implement and launch to able been has Hungary to contrary in Slovakia Research Question in question this following parts. scrutinize to intend I FDI. of attraction consoli to and connected ones launching the of especially determinants the at look to is research the of focus the Therefore, reform. to capability and readiness of terms in differ heavily Hungary
ng primarily at the attraction of foreign investment flows. Yet there is no is there Yet flows. investment foreign of attraction the at primarily ng
3
ecute similar steps. In my these my In steps. similar ecute rsne f U accession EU of presence - eom retto in orientation reform ain f reforms, of dation
lar reform reform lar attracting s I s CEU eTD Collection organization international by encouraged widely undercuttingwhile organi business 2007 Kovalcik, are investment which favorable reforms a to creating refers (SGR) reforms generation second of definition narrow The and Slovakia indeta Hungary in SGR on literature relevant the reviews research The methods. quantitative of use the with research qualitative comparative of combination on based is research my result a As also I but methods qualitative use I general In same forSlovakia. for Hungary as constant stay to me allow variables independent all However, periods. time other in adopted consid to me allow not does countries the in development diverse the However, factors. unsystematic eliminate to countries both for timeframe same the at variables same the consider to attempt variables main b actor‘s the different determining as TNCs of influence and accession EU of incentives position, labor system, party the identifyI mainly will addition In variables. independent as actorsmentioned stakeholders Sincecountries. both in reformprocesses mentioned the on actors the of relevance comparative identify mainly I (FDI). Investment Direct Foreign Definition Secondof Generation reforms er my dependent variable in the same time frame, since various SGR have been been have SGR various since frame, time same the in variable dependent my er are determining are , 4 , .Ohr ru hti nrdcs h eeuaoypcae t strengthen to packages deregulatory the introduces it that argue Others ). il and it identifies it therelevant indicators and il totest my hypotheses.
the ehavior in connection to pro to connection in ehavior behavior of one anoth one of behavior environment zed labor (Bohle and Greskovitsand (Bohle labor zed
4 utilize descriptive statistics wherever possible. possible. wherever statistics descriptive utilize
ne h market the once
icuig M o Wrd ak and Bank World or IMF including s the er, I w I er, actions of internal actors and external andactorsinternal of actions - reform or anti or reform ill also delve into delve also ill
s n lc (´we and (O´Dwyer place in is
2006 , 21 , - reform attitudes. I attitudes. reform ). SGR have beenhave SGR ).
interaction of interaction
CEU eTD Collection more provide and alleviatepoverty to help will that policies social particularly good, common creating by economy, ones the as them considers He SGR. of concept broader rather uses IMF of director managing former Camdessus, Michel promoted and developed originally (Gyorffy follow.‖ will benefits short for exchange in that government conceptualized usually are reforms Structural differ substantively. out point to like would countries, they since inV4 narrower and the broader ofSGR meaning differences between the I misinterpretations any avoid To transformation. str and to reforms connection in used usually is SGR of Term reforms. generation Second the define Ishall all of first literature, the in SGR of definition the on agreement no is there Since countries. SGR ob be can implementation of depth and range Dissimilar reforms. the of mode slower much adopted Hungary inflow, (FDI) Investment Direct Foreign for conditions favorable form to reforms the toward S and Hungary in SGR towards approaches diverse two of analysis comparative the is aim research main My environment. political similar relatively otherwise in SGR towards attitudes different of demonstration in enthusiasm Countrie SGR. launch to countries and particular readiness of levels diverse in evident are differences Major theorists. dependency many and movement labor by criticized deeply also but economists, neoliberal
a level playing field for all sectors and implementing policies for the the for policies implementing and sectors all for field playing level a served in heterogeneous forming of socio of forming heterogeneous in served "ensuring that the State fulfills its proper role in a market market a in role proper its fulfills State the that "ensuring
2008 lovakia. While Slovakia chose very steep and radical way way radical and steep very chose Slovakia While lovakia.
by the international monetary organizations, mainly IMF. mainly organizations, monetary international the by , 2 , - term sacrifices and increasing uncertainty of long of uncertainty increasing and sacrifices term ). SGR particularly represents the concept which was which concept the represents particularly SGR ). s of the Visegrad group seem to represent a fine a represent to seem group Visegrad the of s 5
as ― n mlct omtet rm the from commitment implicit an - economic models in both in models economic uctural uctural - ter m CEU eTD Collection 1 reforms welfare the leave and Slovakia and in Hungary reforms economic to approach different on exclusively focus to like would thes I my research, of limitations the to Due sphere. social and economic a usually are SGR described, problem the to addition In bea using narrower co defined I ThereforeHungarySlovakia.will ofin andactors intentions to better correspondsway athat o definition narrower that believe I intentions. same the for stand not does clearly inflow FDI maximizing towards transformation and good common for economy the in role state the of definition proper towards Transformation country. the maximize which way, a in economy reform to is O´Dwyer ala SGR of aim the but economy, market of sectors all in role proper its performs state the that ensure shall SGR that presume not does SGR of characterization Their executed). successfully are reforms favorable a creating areestablishing market of generation first (once place which a in is market the once reforms, climate investment to refers countries V4 in SGR that argue they con more in Slovakia and Hungary in process transformation the describes which definition, Narrower povertyand equal providing more opportunity. alleviating of concept the to fit barely 1997 in reform pension Hungarian or 2004 in reform the since way narrower a in term the use to and definition the reconsider to poverty. of reduction the with it uscompel SGR as considered Europe Eastern reformsin links implemented ofvariety the However and economy market the in state of role proper opportunity equal
Quoted in Wood 1997 1997 in Wood Quoted sistent way, can be found in O´Dwyer and Kovalcik. Unlike Camdessus or Wood Wood or Camdessus Unlike Kovalcik. and O´Dwyer in found be can way, sistent . "
( Camdessus, 1997) Camdessus,
ncept of SGR throughout ofSGR ncept these my 1
His definition of SGR clearly aims at redefining at aims clearly SGR of definition His 6
f SGR depicts the reform processes in in processes reform the depicts SGR f o ftr rsac. hrfr the Therefore research. future for pid n aiu dmnin of dimensions various in pplied s.
e s and coherence of my my of coherence and s s the FDI inflow in inflow FDI the s
Slovak flat tax flat Slovak the
CEU eTD Collection to completely otherexclude reforms. me allow not does SGR of complexity the However, labor. of position the regulating reforms and reforms market labor reforms, system tax particularly are interest main my of reforms
7
CEU eTD Collection Sklair 1993, (Ne suggest authors many as policies domestic in changes of forces driving main the been have systems political the since too, considered be to has environment political domestic to attempt I c role. the significant provide such play did factor this Hungary In way. significant very decision government‘s with Slovak the shape to seemed process integration of incentives the also study as will organizations international I thesis my of section same the In connectioneconomic perspectives. tofuture its and rate unemployment of development diverse the on focus specifically will I th section, In enterprises. of perspective the from environments business Hungarian and Slovak between differences main the disclose additionally will I programs. SGR to prior FDI attract Direct ( Investment Foreign and systems tax the examine domestic also will of I presence investors. foreign by and companies performance economic analyze will I Particularly, countries. I factor, first The the and SGR to prior factors selected the of characteristics actors of Hungary. identified and inSlovakia situation the dissect also will section t At place. first the in compared and identified correctly be must factors background and structural countries, target our in processes reform the concerning arguments causal infer to order In 1.
Initial heritage Initial he same time, I must provide the theoretical background for each factor. Secondly, this this Secondly, factor. each for background theoretical the provide must I time, same he FDI) support. Data will allow me to evaluate the capacity of the economies to economies the of capacity the evaluate to me allow will Data support. FDI) ua raoig o te U atr o. eie te xenl atr f U the EU, of factor external the Besides too. factor EU the for reasoning ausal and Robins Robins and
il un y teto t, s h dfeet cnmc eais n both in legacies economic different the is to, attention my turn will -
Starting S point of 2002, Kohli 2009). Therefore in order to correctly identify identify correctly to order in Therefore 2009). Kohli 2002,
h mi etra fco. nupiigy te U integration EU the Unsurprisingly, factor. external main the
8
econd econd - making pertaining to reforms in a in reforms to pertaining making
G eneration eneration R eforms lson
is CEU eTD Collection other alternatives to investments and framework. ofdomestic lack institutional In Slovakia the new of creation the from Hungary prevented position regional favorable Thus, prices. raise oriented innovations reform painful‖ ―socially the implement to willingness of lack a caused This unemployment. of level low comparatively in resulted Hungary in capital foreign to alternatives other and domestic that predicts section this in hypothesis main The process industrialization the speeded u and avoided, be can substitution import and income capita the time for waiting and slow the manner, this In framework. institutional better creates state the backwardness, its causes background institutional economic and structure relative industrial its realizing qu upon becomes state, backwardness, The development. future of perspective in behind lagging be to pays it country one for that argues Gerschenkron side, other the On the countries. 1995 an (Liebowitz been.‖ have we where upon also but now, are we where on only t due dependsgo not ―Where next simply we theory, matters. According history topathdependence important very is stages initial the of analysis The system. pre the during differences , 207 ,
p. (Gerschenkron ) Economic legacy and presence of market i market of presence and legacy Economic )
industrial structure to evolve towards industrialization with the growth of per per of growth the with industrialization towards evolve to structure industrial - SGR stages, I also need to scrutinize in detail the factor of political political of factor the detail in scrutinize to need also I stages, SGR
1962 t itrse i pooig nutilzto. ic missing Since industrialization. promoting in interested ite towards cuts in corporate taxes and VAT increases that would that increases VAT and taxes corporate in cuts towards , 7 )
9
the market experience and wide presence of of presence wide and experience market the nstitutions shape future development of development future shape nstitutions o path dependency arguments. arguments. dependency path o - osmn poes of process consuming Margolis d CEU eTD Collection 2 have establishedempire been Soviet before ofthe in1989. thebreakdown private Soviet of by state the over power establishment all of usurpation the witnessing of ma early and entrepreneurship Instead Hungary NEM. when year same launched the in successfully pact Warsaw the of troops the by Czechoslovakia of aga Cz the in conspiracy class working and initiatives democratization to associated was socialism‖ ―market for calling project Dubcek´s outcomes. different very in resulted Czechoslovakia in initiatives which economy, a launched second a (MSZMP) established practically NEM (NEM). Party Mechanism Economic New of Workers´ plan visionary Socialist Hungarian ruling the 1968 In regime. Paradox enterprises. capitalist of development the of foster to necessity environment enforcement the law proper a to implementing owing reforms of stages later in emerge institutions market Usually, 1.1.1 Generation Reforms 1.1. promoting and setup industrialization. institutional innovative as such package SGR the implement fully w as FDI
Slovak unemployment in 1999 was more than 16% and in 2001 exceeded to over 20%. to20%. over exceeded in and 2001 was16% more than 1999 in unemployment Slovak Post cnmc eais n te uies niomn pir to prior environment business the and legacies Economic ell as the highest unemployment rates in the regionthe in rates unemployment highest the as ell - communist legacies communist
loe te xsec o piae en private of existence the allowed
ically, the first Hungarian market institutions are rooted in the socialist the in rooted are institutions market Hungarian first the ically, echoslovak Socialist Republic (Č Republic Socialist echoslovak
rket institutions, the CSR experienced ―normalization‖ and re and ―normalization‖ experienced CSR the institutions, rket
10
- like elites. None of the private institutions institutions private the of None elites. like epie (Bertlett terprises SR), which led up to the occupation the to up led which SR), 2
forced political parties to almost to parties political forced
1997
136 , . Similar ). S econd inst - CEU eTD Collection 3 1990´s the direct Except in companies. foreign many attraction attract to able FDI was Hungary Therefore, Hungary‘s effortlessly. to contributed owners foreign to exclusively capita). per FDI in best (second Republic Czech in than larger times 1.8 was which capita, per GDP in reflected been has inflow FDI High 1999. and 1990 between inflows FDI total the of 5% than more absorbed cumulatively Hungary Eastern and Central and Union Soviet former the of countries 25 targeting inflows FDI total the of half almost absorbed Hungary 1993 and 1990 Between investors. foreign for country leading regional the into Hungary turned and Europe Central Hungary,2010) (ITD foreigncompanies potential of of profit the repatriate to cases right the and goods investment in free duty of import nationalization, compensation guaranteeing by inflow FDI supported investment foreign on act 1988 The Hungary. towards exclusively almost investments their channeled environment market developed more a of existence the by encouraged companies Foreign early (Swaan marketinstitutions h uncertainties these All situation. market differenta to SOEs adjusting in skilled very not usually managers, for challenges great were environment legal uncertain fairly a in networks new brand of establishment transfe the as well as shares, knowledge market of Problems reality. competition market the to adjustments demanding of (SOEs) the region led previouslytoseveral difficulties StateEnterprises Owned howeversti constrained highly on businesses their build could investors foreign as well as enterprises the in position advantageous early side, other the On
For more information see more information For ll existing market institutions. Market building transition process in most countriesmost in process transition buildingMarket institutions. marketexisting ll http://www.itdh.com/engine.asp
formation of the market institutions in the 60´s gave Hungary an an Hungary gave 60´s the in institutions market the of formation
ein o te uue (Kaminski future the for region , 1994 , 8 3 ). . These investment incentives have bee have incentives investment These .
11
x?page=doc_publication Privatization of state owned companies companies owned state of Privatization ave been weakened by the existence of of existence bythe weakened been ave Europe
2000
(Kaminski 6 , ). Present private private Present ). n a pioneer in pioneer a n
2000 r, loss of of loss r, , 16 , ).
CEU eTD Collection economy corrupted a with combination obstructed the economy Slovak g from in Slovakia in unemployment of levels High 2000 (Beblavy it changing towards act not did but structure economic unfavorable enterprises, medium and small of expense the at 1998 sector steel and until energy the in policy champions national government‘s of preservation the the on concentrated Slovakia, In level. political the at attention of lack good a ensured w politics to links fair had they However, institutions. market with experience no or little with market a to came entrepreneurs These people. of group small a to accrue did treasures‖ most when privatization, corrupted and fast by formed were elites Entrepreneurial on experiences short marketinstitutions. with was Slovakia Moreover, questions. economic towards attention political lacked (Beblavy Repub Czech to compared tradition industrial smaller and Slovakia Western from industry military of subtraction a to due Slovakia in absent almost were bourgeoisie 1993. in only state independent an became Slovakia licensi by entry market franchising. (Kaminski and production joint involving companies Hungarian c many facilities, production of ownership
2000 245 ,
lobby. By contrast, small and medium enterp medium and small contrast, By lobby. Te is Soa gov Slovak first The )
2000 , 17 ) The scenario opposite happened inSlovakia.
rowth. and against the official rhetoric that acknowledged acknowledged that rhetoric official the against and rmn ld y rm Mnse Vlii Meciar Valdimir Minister Prime by led ernment mais hs a om f on vnue with venture joint of form a chose ompanies
12
nrpeera eie ad national and elites Entrepreneurial rises (SMEs) had to deal with a a with deal to had (SMEs) rises lic or Hungary. or lic
―national ―national ng, i.e. i.e. ng, 231 , hat ). ).
CEU eTD Collection of system the in particularly tools, fiscal via investors foreign towards incentives Taxing developments onlabor were oftaxes inbothcountries. similar provision welfare extensive more by explained be can Hungary in income personal on taxes Higher 47%. and 15 between lower; were rates the However well. were groups i income highest the where taxation progressive introduced Hungary period. communist the during exist not did that taxes indirect and tax income personal particularly stages first the at done be to had system tax the in reforms the of Most transformation. economic of aspect essential the represented system tax the of functioning the and reform tax revenue, of source or limited only had bureaucracy State environment. market new brand a to adjusted be to needed region entire the in systems Tax I systempart, analyze will thekey thetax as incentive FDI prior toSGR inflow. for usually SGR capital. foreign to attractiveness country‘s 2008 collect is tax domestic of share appropriate an that ensure environmentFDI continually tax fora competitive thedesire tooffer balance ―Governments income. state‘s the in element key the as regarded usually is system tax The Reforms 1.1.2. iily ae a 6% Te lvk oenet nrdcd ntal porsie aain as taxation progressive initially introduced government Slovak The 60%. at taxed nitially
1 ,
a sses n eooi evrnet ro to prior environment economic and systems Tax Dfeet itiuin f ae o lbr n txs n aia pretby om a form perceptibly capital on taxes and labor on taxes of distribution Different ) aia i priual itrsig o m suy sne h sae a poie various provide can state the since study, my for interesting particularly is capital
of transformation. Both Hungary and Slovakia firstly introduced tax on labor, on tax introduced firstly Slovakia and Hungary Both transformation. of
no experience with taxes. Since taxes became a major major a became taxes Since taxes. with experience no 13
shift the tax burden on labor. In this In labor. on burden tax the shift d rm utntoas‖ (OECD multinationals.‖ from ed
(Duman Second Generation Generation Second , withtheto need
2010 CIT. Lower Lower CIT. 5 ,
. Still, ). CEU eTD Collection 4 Slovakia made subjects domestic to privatization and investors foreign to government the by capacit industrial domestic and institutions market of lack The situation. economic different a experienced hand other the on Slovakia part inthewhich privatization, considerably FDI increased inflowtoHungary. companies. foreign for schemes tax favorable and labor skilled tradition, industrial experience, market with environment business favorable a being ones main the investors, foreign to incentives various provide could general in Hungary 25% almost at consumption, (Duman 2010 on taxes highest the of one had Hungary consumption. on rates several introduced Slovakia and Hungary when 1990´s, the of end the by accomplished o Europe Eastern and Central in 25,3% to 19,3% from average in rose incomes tax indirect of Share indirec rising significantly by especially labor, onto burden tax the shifted and region the in trend general the followed Hungary as well as Slovakia resources. public on burden a creates incentives profit of repatriation ensured also They region. the in countries other than earlier much subsidies tax provide to started Hungary Slovakia. in performed were measures similar no Hungary,while in investment attractforeign exceptio several of implementation the observe can we 1990´s the During Slovakia. and Hungary in rates current the to compared high rather been have bodies corporate on levied rates Initial investors. more attract to expected are taxes corporate
For more information see more information For post f
- (Duman omns cutis Ms o te eom in reforms the of Most countries. communist txto, hc ws elce i reflected was which taxation, t , 8
). 2010
, 7 , http://www.itdh.com/engine.aspx?page=doc_publication ). This trend has created a completely new chapter in the tax system tax the in chapter new completely a created has trend This ).
s abroad (ITD Hunagry, 2010) Hunagry, (ITD abroad s ies, shortages of skilled labor, incentives provided provided incentives labor, skilled of shortages ies, 14 hge cnue pie (az 19, 21 1993, (Tanzi prices consumer higher n
Foreign companies were also able to take take to able also were companies Foreign au Add T Added Value ns and tax subsidies in order to order in subsidies tax and ns 4 . Provision of generous tax generous of Provision .
ax es
VT hd been had (VAT)
). ).
CEU eTD Collection low favoring pattern demand a generates income capita per low the and growth, industrial rapid support to insufficient is demand aggregate Furthermore, incomes. c ineffective using agriculture in engaged is force labor the of majority Indeed,the opportunities. employment new create to sectors old of inability the as well as country the of poverty the is industrialization this hindering obstacles t of one theory, his to According sector. industrial the in jobs new create to labor the on pressure of role significant a assigns backwardness of concept Gerschenkron´s SGR. provi me let scrutinizethefactor For will of inSGR. labor unemployment now, connectiontothe role in of I Therefore, to results. election in assigned reflected largely is which importance sensitively, very unemployment of D levels As different rates. caused unemployment market labor on development different very the that appears it However, section. previous the in described already factors re of factor a as unemployment The 1.1.3. environmentinstitutional promoting economicgrowth. and industrial innovative an represent SGR innovations. policy more adopt to state the pressured Slovakia as Czech1999.The Republic Hungaryand until backwardnesEuropeancountries the such Eastern other by received investment capita per the of amount the of sixth one only received restricti fact, in were, there 1999, until Up 1990´s. the in investors foreign for country unattractive very a
Unemployment prior to Unemployment de a theoretical basis for the role of unemployment as the background factor of of factor background the as unemployment of role the for basis theoretical a de n o frin eiet onn bsnse i Soai. s rsl, Slovakia result, a As Slovakia. in businesses owning residents foreign on ons razen or Pierce suggest, especially labor perceives the the perceives labor especially suggest, Pierce or razen Second Generation Reforms Generation Second form activity is usually analyzed in connection with other with connection in analyzed usually is activity form 15 liain ehd ta yed o agricultural low yield that methods ultivation
he most important most he - noe elasticity income s of s of CEU eTD Collection 6 domestic 5 no if especially capital, foreign in needs different to rise gives unemployment Statistical (Slovak 2001 in 20% reaching rate unemployment an and of opportunities shortage employment general international a and with domestic region the in laggard economic an was contrast by Slovakia when continued, market unemployment in2001dropped labor on development Positive changes. necessary on pressure low and country the of performance the with satisfaction general caused Hungary in investing positive with combined decreasing 2010) Hungary Office, Statistical (Central 1998 in 8,4% of unemployment low a all, Above 1990´s. the during Slovakia than situation different very a experienced Hungary job creating policies. tends tosupport it development,verya unpopular as increasingunemployment an perceives labor Since results. modify significantly can elections to prior rate unemployment additional ascribes (PBC) poli Cycles Business Political of concept Drazen´s Additionally, higher bewageswill thepressure relaxing inthe institutional framework. oninnovation country. the in development further steer to factor background key a as unemployment low and incomes low i promote product food as such branches,
For more see details For more see details For
ia prpcie o h fco o uepomn. e ugss ht cul ees of levels actual that suggests He unemployment. of factor the to perspective tical dsraiain (Gerschenkron ndustrialization. n h ohr ie sfiin epomn opruiis n comparatively and opportunities employment sufficient side, other the On http://portal.statistics.sk/showdoc.do?docid=4 http://portal.ksh.hu/portal/page?_pageid=38,119919&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL
ad etls rte ta te ev idsr bace that branches industry heavy the than rather textiles, and s to 5.8% (Central Statistical Office,to 5.8%(Central Statistical Hungary 2010)
fie 2011) Office, experiences of numerous ―success stories‖ of TNCs TNCs of stories‖ ―success numerous of experiences
1962 16 8 ,
) In this respect, Gerschenkron considers considers Gerschenkron respect, this In ) 6 Ti dfeet otx i trs of terms in context different This .
5 parties withparties
constantly
CEU eTD Collection capitol ofthe every of fulfillment meant accession Successful changes. policy required of schedule detail a introduced It 1998. in Summit Copenhagen the at amended been have countries CEE 10 for East Central in reforms policy for driver external key becomethe become has EU the that argue authors Some to Slovakia. as such eligible policies domestic the in changes radical more implement to needed countries very the clear from had EU Hungary the enter as to such perspectives countries some While countries. the for applies incentives of differentiation Same possibilities. further and markets new means it company a for while of internationa of matter process a only be might While integration European actors. different for incentives various represented always CEE in EU 1.2. bewill provided after a analysis deep position. oflabor unemploymen of impact actual regarding Conclusions SGR. the in labor of role the discussed not have I although unemployment, of role the for basis theoretical a only provided have I far So process. transformation the in labor of position the with rates unemploymconnects necessarily PBC of concept Drazenas well as Gerschenkron´s theory alternatives are available. EU conditionality accession process,was since nonegotiation availablefor countries. these
Europe (CEE). (Grabbe, 1999 (Grabbe, (CEE). Europe 17
beginning due to favorable legacies, other other legacies, favorable to due beginning
l reputation for state bureaucrats, state for reputation l , 2 , ) EU conditionality criteria conditionality EU ) t in Hungary and Slovakia and Hungary in t
ent CEU eTD Collection 7 worries level too. atthe international the accelerated only acceptance international gain to difficulties obvious Meciar´s scene. course eastwards about Fears elite. political opposition the mobilized transformation Slovak of routing with na to wound deep a been has Europe Central of laggard economic and democratic of status Its aeconomic long perspective. planning with term consensual having ratherthan opposition the and government the between power for struggles development. political about Slovak doubts expressed also He 1997) (Jancik, rights.‖ minority and human and freedom press law, of rule the democracy, guaranteeing institutions of functioning the in situation the impro for room significant has ―Slovakia said: Boerk Den Van visit a During Republic. Czech the and Poland Hungary, including region the of countries other six with along EU the of postponement the declared Commission European the Boerk, Den van Hans Commissioner of visit official the after 1997 July in Additionally 1999. as early as entered which Hungary, and Republic de was candidacy Its round. level. international at 5 the in2004 entering NATO region V4 the country only Slovakia was of the reflected soon were SMEs towards interest of lack and corruption economic Slovak the of problems Structural Slovakia. of reputation international the hurting wounds open left government Meciar The 1.2.1
Mor tional pride for the newly constituted nation. On the other side, international disapproval international side, other the On nation. constituted newly the for pride tional e on e Factor of EU conditionality inSlovakia conditionality ofEU Factor http://www.sme.sk/c/2076106/van - the invitation of the Slovak Republic on its initial accession negotiations to negotiations accession initial its on Republic Slovak the of invitation the turning were present on the domestic as well as the int the as well as domestic the on present were turning
lnd n h 4 the in clined
7
ro t te lcin n 98 politic 1998, in election the to Prior -
den - broek th 18
- n pltcl ytm rpeso o opposition, of repression system, political and nagmn rud otay o oad Czech Poland, to contrary round enlargement expresses
- eu - concern - over - slovakia.html ws hrceie by characterized was s ernational political ernational th
enlargement
ving ving CEU eTD Collection mandatory process. toEUaccession on continue to voters of choice conscious a been have changes further perform to intentions reform obvious with governments of creation the and parties oriented reform of Reelection EU. the in future‖ ―brighter a to way the and integration international wide to tool economic unavoidable an as nevertheless austere, as perceived been had reforms development, this on Based planning. SGR further in reflected was reforms of results the received Slovakia 1999. December in Helsinki in Summit the during EU the to rounds accession of start official the once appreciated promptly were government the of activities Reform system. welfare same reform initial the justify took to government rhetoric Slovak The integration. European to return the as presented were IMF the and EU the by encouraged SGR integration. international on policy foreign as steps fast required players international other and EU the region, the of Since countries most policy. in foreign progressing already Slovak were processes the accession of orientation future the for decisive been has regime poli the of victory The election. parliamentary 1998 the during re The process. transformation economic also and democratic Slovak the on consequences deep have would the and NATO such organizations international enter to failing that realized bourgeoisie national the as well as parties Opposition domestically. issues economic on marginalization fir larger as well as SMEs firms created newly by mainly represented elite economic the addition, In - orientation of the Slovak foreign policy according to EU standards played a key role role key a played standards EU to according policy foreign Slovak the of orientation
ms suffered from international insulation and became depressed by constant constant by depressed became and insulation international from suffered ms the invitation two years after the invitation of Hungary and optimism about optimism Hungaryand of invitation the yearsafter two invitation the ln rqiig eea aseiy esrs n h tx and tax the in measures austerity several requiring plans
19
a proof from Slovakia that it will redirect its its redirect will it that Slovakia from proof a ia opsto t Meciar´s to opposition tical the track of reforms of track the EU - r CEU eTD Collection in improvements policy for standards European adopted country The enlargement. Eastern its on EU the access to countries CEE first the among be adopt to also trade its redirect to country first the only not been has Hungary Since integration. EU to inclination clear a meant which Party Socialist Hungarian the with 1994 in government with integration deeper of favor in advocated strongly They 1994. to 1990 from government Antall the during party opposition liberal a was (SZDSZ) Democrats Free of Alliance the instance, a national independence on reliance defended parties some since debate, international of matter of a been intensity has integration the Nevertheless, Union. European the and NATO especially affai international and economy of field the in settled been has consensus political and professional the however transition; the during question economic every on agreed Hungary in parties political that le eventually would that economy market and law of rule the democracy, establish to up set been had politics external Internal politicalmaintasksof actorstransformation. the consensus and over among themajor w there importantly More countries. European Central among Hungary of position beneficial the of advantage take to able been had politicians Hungarian 1.2.2.
uoe n cross and Europe Factor of EU conditionality inHungary conditionality ofEU Factor
European institutions (Gyorffy institutions European MZ, hl SDZ doae mxml nentoa itgain For integration. international maximal advocated SZDSZ while MSZP, s public administration. (Gyorffy administration. public s Is i ws o eoe mme o itrainl organizations, international of member a become to was aim Its rs. ad the country into country the ad - border cooperation with with cooperation border - making and and making
the EU (Balázs EU the
2008 20
2008 , 8 ,
), there was no doubt that Hungary would would Hungary that doubt no was there ), neighbors polity relatively easily as well as several as well as easily relatively polity , 9 , ) The only problematic point seemed point problematic only The )
1996 Te bcm a at f the of part a became They . , 4 , s oe r es common a less or more as ). It certainly did not mean not did certainlyIt ).
to Western Europe, but but Europe, Western to CEU eTD Collection instead ofNorthern Hungary expansion moved its it toSouthernSlovakia. but activities, its enlarge to decided Hungary in investors largest the of one be to used which 2008 (Greskovits labor cheaper with countries to production manufacturing intensive labor of plans relocation their started investors foreign Moreover, market. financial international the on levels confidence lower also faced Hungary th of future the about concerns many brought indebtedness rising the about carelessness the and environment business Hungarian the in improvements few only of decade A administration. public and education init health, pension, on reform launch programs to planning convergence postpone to decided concerns economic and political by pressured Gyurcsany as well as Medgyessy inflow. FDI boost to ones the including reforms, polit Domestic time. with changedaccession has zone perspectiveEuro ofHungarian the However, the election as in2006. in2002aswell of topic hot a became adoption Euro early for Plans competition. political of radicalization a short of continuation aIt discipline.in enforceresulted fiscal to conditionality and pressures external of removal the also brought accession EU the However, EU the joining by efforts integration Hungarian the achieved successfully government socialist decrease serious recorded economy Hungarian had Hungary 2008 (Gyorffy, management crisis successful After economy. competitive very a modeled privatization of rounds successful and potential export growingcompanies, domestic presen robust However, 1989. in GDP of 73% of level the at era communist the from debt inherited Hungarian the in rest to in 2004 with nine other countries of the region. Eventually Slovakia joined the EU too. EU the joined Slovakia Eventually region. the of countries other nine with 2004 in ical struggles have had an uneven impact on the ability of governments to perform any perform to governments of ability the on impact uneven an had have struggles ical
e u a ah f yai, emnl ssanbe cnmc rwh The growth. economic sustainable seemingly dynamic, of path a up set ce of foreign companies together with an increasing number of of number increasing an with together companies foreign of ce
21
in its international debt (Agh debt international its in
, 284 ). In 2004, the company SAMSUNG SAMSUNG company the 2004, In ). - term po term e Hungarian economy. economy. Hungarian e liticized decisions and decisions liticized
1999 , 8 , , 842 , ), by 1996 1996 by ), ). The ). ially CEU eTD Collection was government democratic HZDS. party Meciar´s and (SNS) Party National Slovak withnationalist formed social Fico´s Also reforms. radical oppose to tend which (SDL), Left Democratic 8 consists government current even as democracy‖ party ―two from far is system party Slovak never to due decisions government‘s on impact significant Sl governments, paths.right and socialist of cycles the by explained roughly be can Hungariancoalitions While different very follows Hungary and Slovakia in building coalition a Consequently following. polit the entering parties various by formed often youngergovernments democratic parliament.Insystem, ofhadbeen Slovak period Slovak the the in parties the of fluctuation the to due mainly underinstitutionalized or institutionalized Union Civic Hungarian by 2008 democrac party ―two as system election Hungarian the regard after especially institutionalized, (O´Dwyer 1998 in elections well as considered usually is system party Hungarian analysis to the fact that party due interest and more easier is stable identifiable. unit better a represent parties political factor. particularly internal and system key political the a Nevertheless as program reform a in interests their especially and governments sp When
1. is Duid´ gvrmn ws right was government Dzurinda´s First 3. 3. , 284 , Political systems and party systems eaking about launching of reforms, it might seem appropriate to delve into into delve to appropriate seem might it reforms, of launching about eaking ), since government has been formed either by Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP) or Party(MSZP)or HungarianSocialist byeither formedbeen has government since ),
ovak coalitions have always included unsystematic elements, which had a a had which elements, unsystematic included always have coalitions ovak
and Kovalcik 2007 Kovalcik and -
iez Soa pry ytm s often is system party Slovak Fidesz. - iea caiin omd afte formed coalition liberal 22
,
5, ical arena in one election and exiting in the the in exiting and election one in arena ical Markowski r election in 1998. It included Party of of Party included It 1998. in election r - nig bargaining. ending y‖ after year 2000 (Greshkovits 2000 year after y‖
2000, 77 2000,
). Some a Some ).
described as less less as described
8
uthors even uthors n addition In - wing
of of
CEU eTD Collection SaS). of ballot a Most and SaS 9 argumentationgoes however inthe deeper, sa My factors. other to SGR Slovak for roles primary assigning by underinstitutionalization of conception Kovalcik and O´Dwyer opposes partly parties political of conception Gyorffy opp completely with government, of types different two of changing in observed be can It election. parliamentary other every less or more place taken has which change, political of situation describing accurately word the is attitudes reform believ I reforms. the of constraints post ex and ante ex handle to government Slovak of capacity the with connected deeply be to seems it and scene political Slovak the par political Slovak of attitudes Hungary, including region the in countries most to contrary In development political 1.3.1 Slovak as wellto SGR as duringthe implementation period of SGR. des shall we processes reform in systems political of factor a identify correctly to order In parties. of interest the exercise representing better to was able and reforms was government second consistent ideologically the ideological contrary, In diverse party. of compromise in particular acceptable represent not did performance an reform current where backgrounds, as formed was government first betwe seen be 1 moderate can difference Clear party. any of interest particular in be not might which compromise a be only can performance reform the therefore and time same the 6 of
Slovak government in 2010 has 2010 in government Slovak ties towards SGR can be described as dichotomous. This contrast is highly observable on observable highly is contrast This dichotomous. as described be can SGR towards ties
parties. st - 9
hid had joint ballots with additional additional with ballots joint had hid
Dzurinda´s government in 1998 and 2 and 1998 in government Dzurinda´s
Multiparty coalitions can accommodate more and less reform less and more accommodate can coalitions Multiparty
been composed of 4 parties parties 4 of composed been
-
emergence of reform cycles ofreform emergence 2 parties (OKS, in ballot of Most of ballot in (OKS, parties 2 me direction. me 23
nd –
reform
SDKU
- st gas n em o reforms. of terms in goals osite - cribe Political development prior development Political cribe DS, KDH, Most KDH, DS, radical government in 2002. The 2002. in government radical
- Hid and Obyčajní ľudia, in in ľudia, Obyčajní and Hid
- Hid and SaS, however however SaS, and Hid - oriented parties in parties oriented e dichotomy of of dichotomy e terest of any of terest n reform en - CEU eTD Collection 3 democratic deficit. with deep Europe Central laggarda of political as was 1990´s perceived result Slovakia inlate changing for ―desire or deficit‖ ch for ―struggle as history Slovak in period this of descriptions the later created son president‘s opposing the of case kidnap the and rights, positions, other or constitutional firms organizations, state in representatives of state of designation in proportionality infringement repeated Especially Slovakia (ZRS). in Workers the of Union and (SNS) Party National Slovak nationalist (HZDS), party his of consisted government Meciar´s Meciar. governa state verycontroversial the for also but Republic, Slovak new the of building institution by only not characteristic been has 1998 and 1994 between period The necessary reforms. governme of type second anti clearly always is coalitions government of first types Governmental programs of be observed. can governments directly attitudes ofthese bac their on reforms of risks the and all take to fragmented very oriented, reform willingness and national of instead rhetoric European proclaiminggovernments, decentralized neoliberal, radically almost as characterized reform of risk populist to aversion quo, high and status decisions economic in sustaining power, concentrated of preference with governments, nation authoritative, as generallydescribed be can type First
rd
Meciar´s government had paradoxically declared the EU integration process as the main main the as process integration EU the declared paradoxically had government Meciar´s
nts always claim to take all the ―blameworthiness‖ for painful, but painful, for ―blameworthiness‖ the all take to claim always nts the rules of the game‖ (Butora 1999, 73, 1999, (Butora game‖ the of rules the ks for ―better Slovakia‖ in the future. Different Different future. the in Slovakia‖ ―better for ks 24
aracter of the regime‖, ―period of democratic democratic of ―period regime‖, the of aracter - eomn ad rsrig h sau quo, status the preserving and reforming -
Movement for Democratic Slovakia Slovakia Democratic for Movement rcs. hi cutrat cn be can counterparts Their process. - building and middle and building Beblavy 2006). As a a As 2006). Beblavy nce led by Vladimir Vladimir by led nce lmnto of elimination - left oriented oriented left CEU eTD Collection inter of number a by replaced Go issues. governmental quickly was government ruling of enthusiasm Initial were partyforced aswell tostayas inopposition thecommunist ofSlovakia (KSS). of Meciar´s was HZDS he left defined ethnically Also (SDL). in party communist of successor official the was government the in party second The parties. smaller 5 of alliance joint a (SDK) Coalition Democratic Slovak of consisted collation Government era. Meciar´s during society Slovak which regime, authoritarian to opposition the as gathered they contrary In background. ideological similar on based not was government the of creation that note should certainly We parties. political diverse very of alliance rare by formed was Th SGR. of most the on agreement find to able been not have they background, reform very also but fragmented, very created government the section, the of beginning at described As 1998. in opposition standpoint united by replaced was our Meciar V. by leaded government controversial when 1998, in from appears interesting development political dichotomous Slovak of sign First and connected toruling political parties. SOEs the up gave fact in Privatization process. privatization the influenced politically they and process privatization the in active very been have parties Governmental SOEs. of privatization the on participation from restricted were privatization. coupon the imitated additionally Government paper. the on only stayed government his of activities integration However government. the of objective - oriented Party of Civic Understanding (SOP) joined the coalition. Despite general victory victory general Despite coalition. the joined (SOP) Understanding Civic of Party oriented vernment formed by very heterogeneous parties needed to agree on on agree to needed parties heterogeneous very by formed vernment unable to form the government with SNS and ZRS. Asa and unable SNS resultgovernment with toform they the -
Party of the Hungarian Coalition (SMK) and newly created newly and (SMK) Coalition Hungarian the of Party - oriented coalition. However due to different ideological ideological different to due However coalition. oriented
25 Slovak Republic Slovak
state properties to the small elite elite small the to properties state
was quickly accommodating in in accommodating quickly was -
Party of the Democratic Left Democratic the of Party Foreign companies companies Foreign e government e
- CEU eTD Collection 11 ballot. own 10 reforms.‖Kovalčík(O´Dwyerand generation second radical the undertook Government Slovak the Miklos, I. minister finance ― creation. jobs boost to enterprises domestic unemployment high extremely the fix to aiming tools economic the on focused was This program. reform its clearly articulate to able were background ideological rest neoliberal right in consistent uniquely was government in parties the of orientation Political (ANO). Citizen New the of Alliance liberal created newly and SMK Christian (SDKU), Union Christian and Democratic Slovak reformed included agreement consistent, collation Final ideologically government. oriented represented reform and 2002 neoliberal in formed government Dzurinda´s Second allowing partic to theforeign subjects and sector banking bankrupting of sanitation example for as emergence highest the reformsof economic only involved therefore term election first during processes Reform postponed. refor economic some matters, economic in agreement of lack to Due process. re in and regime Meciar´s to opposition democratic of questions the in only found was them among compromise final The SGR. oriented business support left Especially reforms. towards attitude diverse with parties by formed addition in was Government EU. the access to chances Slovak rebound and Nevertheless issues. the of some only were by system banking bankrupting caused and elites HZDS to situation privatization economic disastrous the deficit, democratic The changes. structural
Unemployment in Slovakia in 1999 and 2001 was 2001 c and 1999 in Slovakia in Unemployment KDH was a was KDH
part of SDK coalition for elections in 1998. In 2002 they have decided to go to election with their their with election to go to decided have they 2002 In 1998. in elections for coalition SDK of part most challenging task was to rehabilitate international recognition of the countrythe of recognition international rehabilitate to was challengingtask most utrn o te tt. (Hurska state. the of ructuring
2007 ipate inprivatization. , 4 ).
ulminating around 20%. 20%. around ulminating 26
udr rm Mnse M Duid and Dzurinda M. Minister Prime under …
2009 - retd ate fud probl found parties oriented 18 , -
wing orientation with focus on the the on focus with orientation wing (Zachar ) Political parties gathered on on gathered parties Political ) - democratic
2007 - anh f U accession EU of launch , 61 , movement (KDH) movement 11 )
n iaiiy of inability and s a o be to had ms ematic to to ematic 10 , CEU eTD Collection Eurozone on1 Gov inclusion. social and provision welfare wider on oriented Changes market. labor the on position labor of improvement and sphere social the in consequences SGR harmful of correction on focused rather They government. However require. social necessarily crisis economic which making, policy responsible on than rather 2010 in reelection on clearly aimed media critical towards practices authoritative with HZDS and SNS encompassing governments of habit a became companies friendly to given orders or firm‖ ―garage to emissions C02 of sale tenders, public sector. practices Overpriced withHZDSbroughtcorruption inpublic back SMER andSNS up 2010 election. Fico interest. national on accent i votes of 34% almost scored They arena. anpolitical Slovak in SMER established successfully with party democratic social to party‖ way ―third new direct future The Slovakia. reform of the routing clearly announced future government about government previous with disagreement govern reform on agreement find to able were they orientation, ideological different very with parties represented SNS and electorat the mobilize to able been has Fico by leaded SMER again. occurs priorities‖ ―national of redefinition complete and appears reforms towards dichotomy our 2006 in election the of development the Following - retd oenet i nt completely not did government oriented et eevd hi mnae wt cery reform clearly with mandates their received ment ion of Slovakia. Acting along with opportunistic tradition SMER rebranded from from rebranded SMER tradition opportunistic with along Acting Slovakia. of ion st
of January2009. - reversal policies or at least reform delaying policies. Parties forming the the forming Parties policies. delaying reform least at or policies reversal
e by opposing further reforms. Despite the fact that HZDS HZDS that fact the Despite reforms. further opposing by e - reversal measures and total disagreement with with disagreement total and measures reversal 27 rmn as scedd o iaie nr to entry finalize to succeeded also ernment
reverse the reforms taken by former former by taken reforms the reverse . Populist campaign combined campaign Populist . - eesl htrc n total and rhetoric reversal n CEU eTD Collection transi the during question 1996 count the lead eventually would that economy market s been had politics external and Internal transformation. of tasks main the over actors political major a the among less consensus common or more was there importantly More countries. European Central among Hungary tak to able been had politicians Hungarian 1990´s. among in consolidated only more much be to not seems life political its position also but elite favorable business international enjoying been had Hungary Slovakia, to Contrary 1.3.2. during campaign,following election fromprime by abdication minister. apostofpotential finances party unexplained with scandal to due minister prime as Minister continue not could Dzurinda Prime of chair the on women first with again started pro clearly with parties the of success with ends governments of cycle reform dichotomous Slovak spending. public significan or VAT in increase temporary 1% as reforms several introduced Most moderate pr of SDKU stars Fixed votes. minimum 5% of threshold the cross not did party since period, HZDS of end the as remembered also be will 2010 in Elections parties. other anti his share and government second his form to able not was Fico of victory decisive a Despite election. 2010 in preferences SNS and HZDS of decline sharp a caused spending public irresponsible against opposition media and intellectual Strong , 5 , Hungarian political development political Hungarian - ). It certainly did not mean that political parties in Hungary agreed on every economic every on agreed Hungary in parties political that mean not did certainlyIt ). S n KH ae clain ih e lbrl at SS n Hungarian and SaS party liberal new with collation a made KDH and DS - Híd party, replacing radicalized SMK. Government leaded by Iveta Radičova Radičova Iveta by leaded Government SMK. radicalized replacing party, Híd - reform rhetoric once again in 2010. The path of complete turnout complete of path The 2010. in again once rhetoric reform tion. However the professional and political consensus has been been has consensus political and professional the However tion. t p o sals dmcay n rl o lw and law of rule and democracy establish to up et -
28 emerg
e advantage of the beneficial position of position beneficial the of advantage e ence of y no h Erpa Uin (Balázs Union European the into ry anti -
reform cycles reform n V4 in - eom rga with program reform –
Iveta Radičová. Radičová. Iveta vos reforms evious srths in scratches t
- SMER, Slovak Slovak
CEU eTD Collection n a become benefits material and care social generous more of Promises restrictions. fiscal especially and measures austerity of kind any launch to reluctant very became MSZP elect After practicallyin Hungaryanother for theonly SGR decade. (Gyorffy ele on influence major have to appeared 1997 in successor his by reform introduc and Bokros Lajos minister finance by 1995 in implemented package system election Hungarian ―tw consolidated Fidesz. become practically in elites political rightwing and MSZP in enemies socialists political formed visions Different significantly. differentiated routing during development turbulent Hungarian future the of planesHoweverand ideas Slovakia. as 1998 in parliamentary election such undergo not did Hungary previously mentioned As Hungarian with PartySocialist which aclear meant inclination toEUintegration. 1994 in government of part a became They neighbors. with broader cooperation cross and Europe with process integration deeper of favor in advocated strongly 1990 in government Antall the during party opposition liberal a was (SZDSZ) Democrats Free of Alliance the example, For integration. SZDSZ international maximal while advocated MSZP, as independence national on reliance defended parties some since que been has integration international of intensity the Nevertheless Union. European and NATO especially organizations, international of member a become to was orientation whi constraint, budget the hardening and investors foreign to privatization of priority areas, major two had economy in Agreement orientation. international and economy of field the in settled h a be te ao polm o al p all for problem major the been has ch
2008 ion in 1998 we can observe a trend when even previously reform previously even when trend a observe can we 1998 in ion 8 , MZ rcre mmnos eet n pnin eom remained reform pension and defeat momentous recorded MSZP ) pry eorc‖ (Greshkovits democracy‖ party o 29
ltcl ate ltr (Gyorffy later parties olitical
2008 ction results in 1998. in results ction - oriented socialist socialist oriented 283 , tion of pension of tion
to 1994. They 1994. to 2008 . Surprise ). 8 , between stioned, stioned, orm for for orm . Its ). CEU eTD Collection 284 popularity their public, became plans government the educa and state welfare of reform at aimed also plan Convergence taxes. new of introduction and expenditures in cuts at aiming 2006, in originally zone Euro entering h a became adoption Euro early for Plans competition. political of radicalization and decisions short of continuation in resulted It discipline. fiscal enforce to pressures Slova with finally region, the of countries 9 other with 2004 in EU joining by efforts integration Hungarian terminated successfully government Socialist socialists. of victory close very emerged 2002 in Election business cycles in 2008 two between antagonism of intensification and referenda th of middle or the beginning at even reforms major any of lack with campaign election permanent as described be can 2000 since Period 2002. in election national for campaign intensive and long by replaced political their elections harm upcoming might during government preferences previous by implemented adjustment fiscal of central new However Forum. Democratic with government coalition a formed Fidesz reform inHungary. cycles (Gyorffy folklore. Hungari of part became voters of Buying agenda. election of during parties all ot topic of election in 2002 as well as in 2006. Socialists created a convergence plan for for plan convergence a created Socialists 2006. in as well as 2002 in election of topic ot Mdysys oenet a t blne n h eg o rsig eet u to due defeat risking of edge the on balance to had government Medgyessy´s ) 10 , Fsa dcso bcms oiiie ad ugra eooy mre political emerged economy Hungarian and politicized becomes decision Fiscal )
a form ofa massivepre form 2008 1; Greshkovits 10; , kia too. However EU accession brought also the removal of external of removal the also brought accession EU However too. kia e government term, especially due to large number of elections, elections, of number large to due especially term, government e
- election spending. . First two year of relative fiscal discipline was was discipline fiscal relative of year two First . - right government quickly realized that continuation that realized quickly government right 2008
Independent Smallholders Party and Hungarian Hungarian and Party Smallholders Independent 30
283 , Rlcac t rfrs mre anti emerged reforms to Reluctance )
rapidly plummeted. (Greskovits plummeted. rapidly
ao pltcl ap. (Gyorffy camps. political major tion system. When When system. tion - term politicized politicized term n political an
2008 - ,
CEU eTD Collection 24_hu_recommend 12 However avo to assessments implement to forced too. was government reforms SGR to reluctant rather remain they although situation, uneven economic for solution a finding on aim to had government New parliament. the in majority o in years 8 after power to came Fides of 2010 In Minster. chair prime a on him replaced Bajnai Gordon Later reforms. further to obstacle an be would Commission. EU the said debt.‖ been go of levels has high still to due crisis "Hungary financial the to exposed particularly markets. financial worlds´ on untradable almost be to started bonds never Hungarian of graduation a part and incomes tax in decrease sharp 2009, in growth GDP negative with connected was Hungary in Crisis too. economy Hungarian influenced deeply crisis economy World d hospital fees, visit doctor against voted referenda in voters of 80% result. referendum in reflected was furtherreforms with disagreement public However adoption. EURO for convergenceprogram socialist During in programs. starting reform needed incumbent much of launch for preferences political of short their sacrifice to able were camps political leading the of None perspectives. g parties political Hungarian 2008 (Greskovits, sphere. social in to sensibility of lack for also and adjustment fiscal implement to ―euro adopted II. Opposition ERM ec the prepare and SGR adopt or restriction fiscal of implementation
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/sgp/pdf/20_scps/2009 , 283 aily feeClear and refusaltoend. tuition. brought initiative ofreforms SGR alsothis )
ation_for_co_en.pdf
06 hr wr svrl teps o riuae n implement and articulate to attempts several were there 2006
nrly makd n h ra o short of road the on embarked enerally
12 - ending problem with public dept, when Hungarian state state Hungarian when dept, public with problem ending
- populism‖ rhetoric, attacking the government for inabilityfor government the attackingrhetoric, populism‖ n 09 eec yrsn rsge wt wrs ht he that words with resigned Gyurcsány Ferenc 2009 In 31
- 10/03_commission/2010 id further loans from IMF as well as as well as IMF from loans further id pposition by winning absolute absolute winning by pposition onomy for the entry to to entry the for onomy vernment and external and vernment - 03 - - term benefits benefits term - term losses term icularly
CEU eTD Collection reform as in2010. duringin2006 aswell even rhetoric election with support voters gain to continued Slovakia in parties reforming the of Majority Hungary. processes system partySGR Slovak during that evidence provides thesis my governments, on groups social of pressure political a determines directly institutionalization system party of level a that fact the politic from exit an risking be would they that reason the for measures austerity ―antisocial‖ such implement to effort not could parties as systems party developed more in them to According system. party Slovak the of underistititutionalization to due possible was taxes, indirect increasing st and benefits implement social significantly cutting to incentives, investment generous ability providing program, Slovak that argue Kovalcik and O´Dwyer allocation. inastate partyinstitutionalized allow suchresources Hungarychanges in steep didnot system pa Slovak of underinstitutionalization that Kovalcik and O´Dwyer of argument the challenge to like would I Hereby processes. reform in actors major the of one represent parties Political ide to progress might finally we countries, both in parties political and systems political characterized we After 1.4. consolidate public finances. experiment democratic as reflected policy However region. the in countries last the of one as system rate tax flat introduced government Orban´s Viktor 2010 In November debt. public of adjustments t sse gons h mds opsto t rfr porm i Soai, hl better while Slovakia, in programs reform to opposition modest the grounds system rty Under institutionalization tfcto o itrcin cnrbtn o dvre eom attitudes. reform diverse on contributing interactions of ntification proofed not to be significantly less institutionalized than one in in one than institutionalized less significantly be to not proofed
of Slovakof political system
ih boue aoiy hn eiu itnin to intention serious than majority absolute with al arena. (O´Dwyer and Kovalčík and (O´Dwyer arena. al 32
o eape n Hungary, in example for - making so far is often is far so making
2007 , 4 , eep SRG SRG eep ) Despite ) CEU eTD Collection votes. of 0,5% missing been have they when parliament to it make not did SMK and votes of 8% over with parliament Most party oriented 14 13 underinsti the of Relevance ones. stabile most the are Slovakia in movements reform of proprietorparties that is claimHowever main institutionalization. my period election every parties parties minority Hungarian of transformation liberal of reborn a Nevertheless parties of againlefty better institutionalization despite inSMER. parties middle and left opposing significan more been have reestablishments and swaps exits, party Major voters. their to responsibility of deficits by suffer not did parties reform major that claim I However th of lower levels experienced not has Slovakia that claim a not is here illustrate to trying am I What too. crises internal of number a survived Hungary and Slovakia in parties other than similarly have always KDH and SMK SDKÚ, parties reformer core side other the On governments. mentioned of all in parties new find can we since fact, this challenge hardy can I too. 2010 in finally and 2002 1998, in one the reforming that argue Kovalcik and O´Dwyer contra my dissect shall I However reconstruction. economic and EU to directing reforms towards and O´Dwyer of argument the support to seem not does reforms further announcing government proverelevant not during tobe the reformSlovakia.of Reelection in processes,the did SGR it underi that fact the Despite
ANO in 2002, Free forum in 2006 and Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) in 2010. in 2010. (SaS) Freedom and Solidarity and forum 2006 Free in ANO2002, in After radicalization in SMK between 2006 and 2010, former chairman B. Bugar created new ethnically ethnically new created Bugar B. chairman former 2010, and 2006 between SMK in radicalization After Kovalčík about underinstitutionalization, but rather oppositely clear orientation of voters of orientation clear oppositely rather but underinstitutionalization, about Kovalčík
- argumentdetails. inmore e party system institutionalization during a reform process compared to Hungary. to compared process reform a during institutionalization system party e - Hid based on rhetoric of cooperation of rhetoric on based Hid
- left parties. Voting outcomes in 2010 gave a revival to same reform same to revival a gave 2010 in outcomes Voting parties. left nstitutionalization of party system might play a significant role in role significant a play might system party of nstitutionalization
had very stabile electorate. Nevertheless those parties parties those Nevertheless electorate. stabile very had
14 33 governments have always had ―newcomers‖ as as ―newcomers‖ had always have governments
puts a question mark on Slovak party system party Slovak on mark question a puts
and inclusion of Hungarian minority. Most minority. Hungarian of inclusion and tutionalized political system is system political tutionalized
13
n curre and t in reform in t t steep nt - hid get to to get hid - CEU eTD Collection economic required situation several reforms. parliamentaryDespite Hungaryelections. in thefact that reforms are very unpopular thea not support government2006. Additionally system 2002andreforms in recent tax theHungarian in do part ofMSZP Hungarian isstill Insame forming time MSZP parliament. the has been the the underinstitutionalization of Theirand implement successelection theintentionto in seem reforms didnot come to from Reforms were implemented byaalready established partyonHungarian well political scene. the parliament to andthereforehave didnot a problem Major reforms inHungarymajority in1995.MSZP wonabsolute implemented been have in mentioned onesgone have thoroughsignificant too. transformations PartySocialist orby Union Hungarian Civic (Greshkovits evenHungarian regard election the party system as―two democrac afterelections in Hungarian often system is party regardedas well and institutionalized consolidated, especially preferencesfr tochoose choices: arenumber there aw of limited stableparties systems,―In institutionalized elections presentwith manageablemeaningful and voters 1.5. therefore questionable. Better institutionalized party system in Hungary
2008 rgument. FidesMSZPrgument. in2010same in1998wonabsolute as majority inthe 1998 (O´Dwyerand Kovalcik , 284
). Since 2000thegovernment). hasbeenformed by either Hungarian om.‖ (O´Dwyerand 2007 om.‖ Kovalcik,
political system. later Despite changeorientation, inreform -
Fidesz. However Hungarian includingFidesz. parties 34
2007
, 5; ith familiarith coalition pass the reform intheparliament. laws
Markowski 2004 ) As mentioned previously ) As mentioned
y‖ after yeary‖ after 2000
, 77 - building ). Some authors ,
CEU eTD Collection Slovakia makevery theclaim unconvincing. s political Hungarian in present are transformation and changes hand other the On ones. Slovak than institutionalized more be to appeared parties Hungarian systems. party the institutionalization of terms in situations a Hungary descriptions above the from appears it As etu to As pltcl ucse o rfr pris in parties reform of successes political Also too. pectrum
35
nd Slovakia have faced very different different very faced have Slovakia nd CEU eTD Collection Slovakia. Since al to possibilities better in country the inherited time same the to had Slovakia While t 2.1. public debt meanta road weredirect paving toEU. historically lo Hungary at situation opposite the end experienced of the 1990´s. Slovakia.additional incentives toinvestin transnational for corporations comparativ infrastructure development,uncertainty about sustainabilityreform development ofthe and much moreinHungary. industrialized emerging Additionally, level than of the Europe. Recalling f reformers Central of competitivein turnedbusiness themost environment creation into Slovakia were package. concerning SGR thesame extensive ofSlovak impact of Attempts national wa development that The verygeneration ofsecond fundamental aim capital reformstoattract boost is to foreign Reforms Generation 2. Second ax system most all other economic indicators important for investments, Hungary highly outperformed outperformed Hungaryhighly investments, for important indicatorseconomic other all most Restructuring of economic environment economic of Restructuring ely lower qualityely labor lower education due systemrequired tounderdeveloped some s
westgradualeconomic growth decrease levels, unemployment the and stable of and FDI support
year rom previous chapter, a Slovakia investments in for need appeared tobe
1998 1998
domestic and domestic face Sl a ovakia s heavilyduringexpectations in The lagged in Slovakia 1990´s. difficult economic situation in 19 in situation economic difficult
launched foreign
much better shape better much
opne yseilcroaetxshms In schemes. tax corporate special by companies a 36 substantial
–
Second Generation Reforms in Reforms Generation Second s
. Hungarian tax system also offered offered also system tax Hungarian . reconstruction 98 A p , Hungarian government Hungarian , olitical stability,olitical
of the economy.of
in in CEU eTD Collection 15 and individuals for environment friendly investment and business a create to became the became educa system, reorganization complex very with a starting procedure represented Slovakia in conception reform that reason from reform one exclude to complicated seems It foreign to investors.‖ 2004) (IMF onSlovakia, 2004;EIU onSlovakia, incentives generous and regulations, labor weakened programs, social in cuts business unif of a of institution the taxes, set in reductions radical a on based was turnaround ―Slovakia's SGR. of plan courageous started elites educated foreign domestic and consultants coo in technocrats State Slovakia. in reforms structural of wide and broad a of part as envisaged was 2003 in initiated reform tax The personal and VAT income too. taxes in performed were changes Minor 25%. to later and 29% to reduced CIT1999. in systemstarted tax Slovak the in changes First investors. foreign of attention (Mitra 2000 year until tax income corporate of system tax Slovak 2.1.1.
For more details please see more please details For Slovak tax tax Slovak
eta eeet falSR process SGR all of element central tion, health system etc. (Mitra and St and (Mitra etc. system health tion,
had been highly unattractive highly been had system under Second Generation Reforms Generation Second under system
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2004/052704.html
a sse ad oncig l pbi atvte, nldn welfare including activities, public all connecting and system tax
orm flat tax for individuals and businesses, steep steep businesses, and individuals for tax flat orm 37
to and Stern and es in Slovakia. Basic Slovakia. in es
domestic and foreign companies too. 40% too. companies foreign and domestic ern another,
- 2003 oriented reforms, including sharp sharp including reforms, oriented
2003 15 eain ih oeg neoliberal foreign with peration
, 124 , hn nlzn them analyzing when , 129 , )
However the tax reform reform tax the However ) caused only caused )
or or aim of the conception the of aim www.eiu.com - ranging program ranging a
, minimal minimal
o the for was CEU eTD Collection 16 Additionally 2008. in 10% on products medical introduced. been formation government after wealthy (Jančík anti on building parties Opposition businesses‖ ( impe vital create to is percent 25 to 34 from rate Kovalcik we as taxes their lower to Austria even and Hungary Republic, Czech the well as labor for doubts as TNCs for beneficiary unquestionably represented 2010) (SARIO, 2005. in transfer by completed was reform The accordingly. new of simplicity with accordance In 19%. tax income corporate and personal for rate Accordingly 2010) (SARIO, taxes. indirect to direct from burden tax the shift equally income of amounts all and taxing all types fairness by degree tax of highestachieve possible the and to law in the tax companies,
For more details please see more please details For
2007 to O´Dwyer and Kovalcik and O´Dwyer 2007,5 an the flat tax system came system tax flat the eliminate existing weaknesses o weaknesses existing eliminate , 5 ,
2006) and decrease VATand 2006) boue oet i te eta Erpa area. European Central the in novelty absolute The o The ) Federal Chancellery of Austria noted ―The reduction of the corporate tax corporate the of reduction ―The noted Austria of Chancellery Federal ) a sse, h rfr abrogated reform the system, tax nly change in change nly as for neighboring countries. countries. neighboring for as http://www.sario.sk/?why
a
in 2006 in
ocpin f o obe aain fins, effectiveness fairness, taxation, double no of conception 16 . In fact no significant changes in changes significant no fact In .
- t s eesr t nt that note to necessary is It eom gna none pas o inc to plans announced agenda reform the tax system was the was system tax the int
well as for domestic companies. domestic for as well o for drugs and food (Hambalkova and food for drugs es a ). the introduction introduction the
38 force - as well as for value added tax added value for as well as
f invest
the the tus for the relocation and foundation of new of foundation and relocation the for tus the on - complicated tax system and inefficiencies and system tax complicated in reduced tax rate tax reduced
- ―Slovakia‘s ta ―Slovakia‘s slovakia h ihrtne gf ad iied tax dividend and gift inheritance, the 1st January 2004. The general flat tax tax flat general The 2004. January 1st
decrease of VAT for books and books for VAT of decrease
of zero tax zero of
eom of reform x policies have pressured pressured havepolicies x
e t New the of of
6% for home for 6%
rates flat tax system had had system tax flat How 2006) immediately ll.‖ (O´Dwyer and (O´Dwyer ll.‖ es
ax system was was system ax es txs for taxes rease h tx system tax the
ever it caused caused it ever was stated on on stated was nra estate real on - made made and CEU eTD Collection 18 17 of revitalisation support to measures byreplaced were later and time of period short a onlyfor stat Slovak First 2.1.2 Reduced VAT when criter Maastricht as GDP rehabilitation reform bee has 2010 in reform Tax 2010. in corrections Last 201 to 43,78%ofin 27,48 %national ofGDP 2008GDP in public inefficient an of decline bulky a experienced Slovakia 2009 in (10.4%), EU in highest the among was 2007 in refl was products Slovak for demand European lower by caused capacities production decreasing with combined trend current The 20 (SARIO decease. significant a recorded inflow FDI 2008 From term. election Fico´s cr the by hit was Slovakia globally, countries many As diarygrocery farmers.and was small introduced 2010) tosupport products (SARIO,
Maastricht criteria require maximal government deficit of 3% of GDP. ofGDP. 3% of deficit maximalgovernment require Maastricht criteria m See - 4.9%. (Slovak Statistical Office record, 2010) Negative GDP growth in combination with combination in growth GDP Negative 2010) record, Office Statistical (Slovak 4.9%.
Slovak Slovak the general government deficit government general the s ore on ore
n 04 2004. in http://www.sario.sk/?fdi
package FDI support FDI for farmers small have been e incentives e
the spending due to corruption brought up the gross Slovak public debt from debt public Slovak gross the up brought corruption to due spending The ,
Slovak tax system have been introduced by introduced been have system tax Slovak which
a requires. ia i ncrease
schemes
aims to decrease to aims - and n initiated by the same financial minister Ivan Miklos as tax as Ivan Miklos minister financial same bythe initiated n
of VAT VAT of - ected on GDP growth. While annual gross GDP growth GDP gross annual While growth. GDP on ected success
18 reaches have been introduced in 1993. „These measures lasted lasted measures „These 1993. in introduced been have
h vldt of validity The
abolished - stories 39
y one by less
the
than 3 than government spending government
too
ises above all during the last 2 years of of years 2 last the during all above ises percentage
. this
percent, what is planned is what percent, 0.
temporary
point the
current incumbent in incumbent current increase a a was deficit
part over 8% of 8% over will
by 2013 by
of the the of expire 10 ) 17 .
CEU eTD Collection was trend t of Development 2.1.3. Fico´s anti of part a as investment more attract to 2008 in requirements investment minimal he lowered governments the of None regions Slovakia Western has investors and resources public so the in b should incentives investment the of tax transfers, grant cash direct especially are types frequent Most incentives. investment allow schemes These restrict which regulations, European with compatible fully are they and Aid Investment on Coll. 561/2007 No. Act and Aid State 231/ No. Act the by regulated are schemes Aid regional and Aid State Slovak costs exceededIncomeamount stated inthe the ta investment that and 75% exceeded owner foreign a of share ownership the that condition investments all to granted automatically were breaks tax 2000, Since companies. state rend of shift from direct to indirect taxes continu taxes indirect to direct from shift ofrend Hungarian tax system tax Hungarian
of - called disadvantaged localities.‖ (SARIO, 2010) Despite huge amounts of allocated of amounts huge Despite 2010) (SARIO, localities.‖ disadvantaged called
- the Ce crisis package. relief
ntral lowest in caparison to other countries in the in countries other to caparison in lowest es the alse ter production their tablished . The regions had regions The .
n Esen lvka tl record still Slovakia Eastern and role primary ―The 2010) (SARIO, jobs. created newly on contributions or Hungarian
the investors to reimburse up 50% of eligibl of 50% up reimburse to investors
change i t spot seily project especially support to aim
tax system was more dynamic than dynamic more was system tax under d
the existing schemes. Moreover the Ministry of Economy Economy of Ministry the Moreover schemes. existing the highly developed industrial infrastructure. Less developed developed Less infrastructure. industrial developed highly
completion e the motivation of investors to place their new projects new their place to investors of motivation the e
Second Genera Second capacities 40
via state aid proposals among EU co EU among proposals aid state via ed even after 2000. However in Hungary the Hungary in However 2000. after even ed x Act.― (Marcinekovax Mihok and
p to up in tion Reforms tion
the region. 5 o rgoa unemployment. regional of 25% in
e costs from various types of of types various from costs e ot nutilzd part industrialized most es develo less
In 2002 2002 In that
one in Slovakia. T Slovakia. in one ped region, most most region, ped s Hungary had Hungary , free 1999 Coll. on Coll. 1999 2007 real estate estate real untries. untries. , 8 s on ,
the the ) he
of
CEU eTD Collection flour, andother milk dairy anddistrict(ITDproducts heating on18%. Hu for exceptions stated also They 25%. to 20% from VAT of approved created government previous the 2009 in taxes Already Hungary. in also directlabor on burden in Cuts 2013. till 10% of rate reduced with Ft. mil 500 than lower reduced 17 rate Tax model. rate tax flat a by replaced be will system came tax on law new changes However changes. tax further of promises with introduced been has estate real on tax 2008 In 2010. Kovalcik 38 and 26, overall, but 18, respectively, percent, to percent 40 and 30, 20, from tax, income of rates in 2004 in reductions modest made also Socialists the and government, in period its during area this in changes for including countries well toretainenterprises as their foras competitiveness domesticHungary their taxes tolower neighboring pressured had policies tax Slovakia‘s situation. current agenda reform tax the to approach gradual rather chose Hungary contributions paid bygross a income. employerrose to40%of and 18% Bok of part a Tax introduced. were rates tax flat no however often, very at VAT average - 32% D. ODyr n Kovalcik and (O´Dwyer FDI.
o were
the reduced the n 200
16%.
7 ros package in 1995. Corporate 1995. in package ros qaie o 1% o al noe rus T groups. income all for 16% on equalized 19 , 20,4% (Mitra and Stern and (Mitra 20,4% h a The in the in ) Since 2004 only minor changes have been done in in done been have changes minor only 2004 Since )
rate of VAT of rate into a force. The major amendment is that is amendment major The force. a into nti
tax system did not come true after all. From 1 From all. after true come not did system tax - rss akg as cags h cmais ih nul turnover annual with companies the charges also package crisis personal and employers' taxes rem taxes employers' and personal
increased increased 2007
19 , 2003 ) 41 from 10% to 12%. However social and health health and social However 12%. to 10% from
, 124 , I „Fidesz did manage to make make to manage did „Fidesz ncome ncome
). The T ax (CIT) was reduced from 36% to to 36% from reduced was (CIT) ax s Hungarian tax system was changed was system tax Hungarian
for personal for rates corrections were corrections rates e t he the
x on ax and mostly only reacted on reacted only mostlyand staples such as bread, grain, bread, as such staples a personal income bracket bracket income personal ain high‖ (O´Dwyer and (O´Dwyer high‖ ain capital gains was also also was gains capital incomes ranging from from ranging incomes ngary, 2011) st the , January 2011the January , tax system till till system tax only only
amended cosmetic cosmetic
the rise as a a CEU eTD Collection labor inmore way. extensive increase significant and rate tax flat of introduction later addition In extensively. more much however – countr first the was Hungary that mention in existing functioning well relatively to innovation consid measures find hardly can r and state the of introduction system pension the in reassessments several Except (Mitra and Stern ― in billion 3 HUF (or billion 10 HUF than more at valued project investment new a yearsof five first the to applicable credit tax development a to ―access have fo labor of retraining and investments tax scale small the for incentives to use can Next investor the holidays, 2011. till available are incentives Those 5%. by least at grows annually 10 a for eligible are areas, developed low stipulated in HUF billions 10 least at invest who investors, the 1998 10 a for enterprise an entitled Ft. mil. 500 exceeding companies to region the in country first the impl was Hungary section, previous the in mentioned As 2.1.4 ilr pensio pillar c. (Sedmihradsk rce.‖ ement investment incentives in incentives investment ement Hungarian FDI support FDI Hungarian s
n A i Hungary in VAT in
led i 1988. in already n system in 1997. Slovakia followed the pension reform only 8 years later, later, years 8 only reform pension the followed Slovakia 1997. in system n
2004 - ye r a hldy, f h ivso cets 0 nw os n te turnover the and jobs new 500 creates investor the if holidays, tax ar ad Klazar and y , 124 )
egional incentive law and law incentive egional
n 199 In followed erable as SGR. SGR did not embody interesting institutional institutional interesting embody not did SGR SGR. as erable
2001 a 3 form of tax relief and special tax schemes for foreign for schemes tax special and relief tax of form
a exception tax 88 , h rgoa dvlpet raig tx udn on burden tax a creating development regional the y of the region to implement to region the of y Fo 20 frin n dmsi enterprises domestic and foreign 2003 From ) 42
- s which , year exemption from taxation. ―Since taxation. from exemption year
tttoa st p Hwvr I However, up. set stitutional several changes in the tax system, we system, tax the in changes several ha ve
en nrdcd Investments introduced. been started already in 1997, the the 1997, in already started underdevelo
reform s
towards three towards ped areas‖)‖. ped
shall
CEU eTD Collection of Slovakia. Hungry TNCsin and in manner a in processes reform on participated TNCs Slovakia and Hungary in Since SGR. the on focus therefore will I section last In th systems. party indevelopment the connectionto in characterized alsohaveparties political andGovernments have I eachactor ofsecondgeneration inthereform. processes on focus additionally will I chapter same the In reforms. respective words during performed them the of actors the identify shall part Third I opposition. also have provided of I processes. reform to contributing provided I section first the In 3.
e actors and their early post early Actors . Based on previously developed concepts I concepts developed previously on Based .
already wl b intereste be will I , I will provide will I , - in the in communist era. I identified I era. communist Due to Due identified the the
position inthe reformposition processes
development of development a SGR initiatives as well as as well as initiatives SGR causal inferences, which shall explain explain shall which inferences, causal
fluency and complexity of my thes my of complexity and fluency
and sc and i t in d e anh f eom ciiis s el as well as activities reform of launch he the rutinized the rutinized
a
characteristic of diversecharacteristic of therole party of systemsand EU. characterization focused on economic legacies of legacies economic on focused
a reform process reform labor to connected unemployment of role potential identification of TNC of identification Second generation reforms generation Second domestic political actors political domestic 43
aim to investigate the actual role actual the investigate to aim h impacts the
already part. inthe first n tertc akrud for background theoretic and
es e s
, and possible interactions among among interactions possible and differences I provided I on s and the and s reform reform a
c particular in the previous chapter. previous the in ommunist ommunist
between the in processes
role
characteristics of of characteristics osldto of consolidation interaction performed
regimes
the
the
.
of actors of di I position position
n other other n factors fferent fferent and
of of in in
CEU eTD Collection 19 result, a As Slovakia. in owningbusinesses residents foreign on restrictions fact, in were, there 1999, until Up Slovakia. in happened companies domestic also became thus and companies production of ownership 1992) (Stallings contributions social and labor health on flexible expenditures lower and more costs administration to less market, due mainly production, efficient cost more a provide economies u are TNCs 2002, Kohli2009) be hassystems place, first the at considered be to has environment political imports. basic and markets b has countries developed political domestic ii An also considerrole companies. a ofdomestic how describe to attention my dedicate dome analyzed have We G 3.1.
For more details see the section on economic legacies economic on section morethe see details For eneration eneration mportant issue discussed by discussed issue mportant Influences uly eadd s the as regarded sually R en the main driving force of drivingforce main the en
eforms Hungary was historically more successful more historically was Hungary
of n eooi dvlpet D development. economic and
transnational
stic political incentives of SGR programs. Here programs. SGR of incentives political stic facilities TNC the on dependent always een (Smith 1991; Stallings 199 Stallings 1991; (Smith
many a
ore f upr t neoliberal to support of source number of authors authors of number
a s TNCs
´ presence TNC presence
changes in domestic policies. (Nelson 1993, Sklair1993, (Nelsonpolicies. domestic in changes till 1999 till
on
44
chose a form of joint venture joint of form a chose
domestic Slovakia
(Kaminski 2000 (Kaminski pnec terss ru ta less that argue theorists ependency 2) Other authors argue that domestic that argue authors Other 2) scrutinizes s
in the country shaped SGR. shaped country the in in attracting TNCs. attracting in
mlmnain f S of implementation because acknowledged s
o tcnlg, financ technology, for the impact of TNCs on a on TNCs of impact the
measures. , 17 , their domestic political domestic their with ) Opposite situation Opposite
s with Hungarian Hungarian with s only one sixth of sixth onlyone
19 I
would Except Laissez
econd
like to like I will I direct - faire ing, ing, .
CEU eTD Collection parties goo Since establishment. politically p highly already sector industrial domestic in sponsors and supporters find to challengingtask very HZDS to connectionspolitical in capacities production of i industries strategic of exceptions of most 1998 By elites. party in enterprises owned elite economic Slovakia In and characteristicspolitica between ofrelation and TNC companies. domestic support to schemes the also develop to succeed they however, TNCs, on oriented largely also been has policies Hungarian enterprises. domestic of development for framework inflow support to oriented clearly and steeper been has Slovakia in performed SGR opposite. be to out turned development to pressured directly exercised figures described on Based Hungary Czech Republic. and the by received investment capita per the of amount the connections d
were not able to find find to able not were related n u An
impleme olitically uul eeomn rqie te cuiy f alternativ of scrutiny the requires development nusual
to HZDS. HZDS. to to improve their local positions. positions. local their improve to ih rvt sco yt De o saturation to Due yet. sector private with
to parties t wdr ag SR n ao of favor in SGR range wider a nt hands
saturated. Especially saturated. s
we
emerged after emerged in the government were relatively new, they have not have they new, relatively were government the in the Current links obstructed them to cooperate with a new political new a with cooperate to them obstructed links Current h national the
of . Political parties Political .
SOEs shall sufficient number of reliable allies in allies reliable of number sufficient several privileged privileged several
n utilities, n s
expect that expect f oeg cptl ahr hn on than rather capital foreign of had been sold in sold been had industr a
fast privatization fast energy sector energy 45
form privatized large and medium enterprises were enterprises medium and large privatized
an y
influence of TNCs on domestic policies is policies domestic on TNCs of influence Hungary people
et to went other Eastern European countries such as such countries European Eastern other ing
the
l parties. a
government
with unique with coupon privatization, with several with privatization, coupon and transportation and
in this respect respect this in new , which brought previously state state previously brought which ,
n h piae etr coalition sector, private the in
Ns However TNCs.
entrepreneur in 1998 in private a connect es to foreign capital capital foreign to es rain f na of creation should .
sector had thereforehad However most most However a elites ial ions , which was was which ,
hav
an actual actual an . For this this For . HZDS to achieved e been been e tional tional
wit h a
CEU eTD Collection worldinto wereincorporated when banks Slovak Slovakia, in investments TNCs 20 1990´s. of beginning at already environment business attractive and developed The s thesethe government parties were notin anymore. regulation incentiveInvestment application. investment exclusion early Sympathy privatization in involved income explain to able not was found. been never has proof final the However, practices. the several of connections forming or ZRS enthusiasti finances and support order t government Reelected inflow toSlovakia. negotiated the reason
Mainly priv Mainly
lvk economy Slovak alaetr eeto i election parliamentary ituation in Hungary seem inHungary ituation o opee their complete to the scope of their interests started to turn increasingly turn to started interests their of scope the sc andals with unexplained unexplained with andals c during to foreign companies rather than rather companies foreign to aid law approvedaid in1999, law atization of a banking sector to foreign companies largely increased opportunities and easiness of of easiness and opportunities increased largely companies foreign to sector banking a of atization upres f elbrl nubn, ahr tha rather incumbent, neoliberal of supporters
the f lvk opne from companies Slovak of
the
left reform
first Dzurinda´s government Dzurinda´s first F . n wdr nentoa respect international wider and - retd opposition oriented improve additionally to needed herefore successful
rin companies oreign f tt ond oes n Bratislava in hotels owned state of - retd pa oriented 2010. n
s
to be very different different be very to s
endowments to SDKU to endowments n las oig rm opne cnetd to connected companies from coming loans and retto o frin companies foreign on orientation Slovak entity Slovak lo te pris ae en upcos om shady form suspicious been have parties other Also te wt foreign with rties s
lately to the w 46 nonig reform announcing
ere domestic domestic
netet netvs schemes incentives investment ,
20
reform was not was in this respect too. respect too. in this investing investing
created wide opportunities for future FDIcreated opportunities for wide future fe iiil r initial after - ed in t in ed ones DS, published published DS, In this particular case M. Dzurin M. case particular this In
TNCs cmrmsd ZS SS and SNS HZDS, compromised n eligible for on
n Slovakia in uig zrnas incumbent. Dzurinda´s during can be also observed also be can his regard only in 2006, when 2006, onlyin regard his
the abroad.
- ee rvd correct proved were - eesl measures reversal wide banking networks. networks. widebanking
frs wih a been had which eforms, business environment business The c The and and
the several weeks several G
investment stimuli reater openness of openness reater to naturally ountry had secure As described As .
In the first first the In
from a . Close Close . beca
before before a TNCs future future
after after well well me an da in
CEU eTD Collection labor of organization processes SGR In backlash, reforms. of consolidation reform from government of source likely a as regarded usually th on attention my turn will I section this In 3.2. relaxed A inflow. FDI further on dependent been has labor neither elites, TNCs of amount sufficient provided sector alternatives TNC po of survival ensure to required necessarily been not has SGR sudden and steep Additionally players industrial new attract governm regard this In party of source accordingly. created long several or one to connected elites economic addition In Hungary. to inflow FDI accelerated with Privatization emerging enterprises. as well domestic as ventures joint or companies foreign of amounts large by penetrated previously litical actors inpoliticalarena. - i Soai cud xrie their exercise could Slovakia in s Labor SGRand lasting
TNCs´ pressures on thereforms.TNCs´ pressures ,
Hungary consumed most of FDI in first half of 1990´s. of half first in FDI of most consumed Hungary
or higher penetration of penetration higher or and transparent. and
support or income or support Hungarian political parties parties political Hungarian
ns had ents
C in industrial sector industrial in onsequentlypoliti
ee incentives fewer s , since domestic market provided sufficient opportunities. sufficient provided market domestic since ,
TNCs already investing in the country. country. the in investing already TNCs
n exclusive an
odtoaiy u to due conditionality as well as domestic firms since 1990´s. since firms domestic as well as e impor e political 47
cal connection cal have not been forced been not have , and
rvtzto hs o cetd monopolized created not has privatization
o mlmn datc G t massively to SGR drastic implement to tant role of labor. W labor. of role tant to parties. Pr parties. risk significant looses in looses significant risk
orientation s in industrial sector have sector industrial in s which ivatization was more gradual, more was ivatization D a
omestic market has been been has market omestic lternatives ak f any of lack on foreign companies companies foreign on obstruct to orking population is population orking search for for search Hungarian private private Hungarian
r block or to FDI have have FDI to the election the a domestic domestic Political Political
foreign and its and
been been
the .
CEU eTD Collection labor legislationas alllegisl well as the of drafting on participated actively have they and indicators wages the negotiate annually differ in dialogue social of extent employers that extensive and government ins tripartite towards Hungarian to assigned powers Functions significantly. bargaining as well actual as and functions influence its countries, both in established was tripartite that fact the Despite 3.2.1 way toan budget on pressures and institutions market of establishment Nonetheless one loosing from required the change regime a after relations industrial in labor the of position new past, socialist experienced countries both process I 2006 is level corporate f in implemented reforms to due protection social and welfare for funds lowering 21 1993, (Tanzi consumption. we as incentives exercised actor, other some of expense the on be state the within position n the part dedicated to labor, I labor, to dedicated part the n , 22 Hungar es )
as well as well as by emergence of conflictsemergence ofgovernment, of betweeninterests and labor. employers
a shift a ian ll as lower corporate tax rates is shifted to indirect taxes taxes indirect to shifted is rates tax corporate lower as ll
a industrial relations industrial
l the impact of unlike of impact the in sources of taxes, when burden created by tax exceptions and special and exceptions tax by created burden when taxes, of sources in had had imit
is particularly is
for consolidation or withdrawal or consolidation for las eknd oil conflicts social weakened always a ) In this respect this In ) reconstruction of the whole system. Job securi Job system. whole the of reconstruction
analyze the sources of diverse posit diverse of sources the analyze ative changes affecting labor positio
important usual
interests interests
Slovakia. Hungarian unions have been enabled to to enabled been have unions Hungarian Slovakia. 48 , ly on the expense of labor. The labor. of expense the on ly
labor reaction labor
as of labor labor of
r eforms in Hungary and Slovakia. and Hungary in of SGR. (Bohle and Greshkovits and (Bohle SGR. of s , iuin have titutions
on increasing life expenses and and expenses life increasing on attracting foreign capital foreign attracting
uig omns regime. communist during ion of labor in the SGR the in labor of ion n. (Avdagic –
constraint paved the the paved constraint
especi
en uh more much been ty and no stress no and ty
shift is mostly mostly is shift ally VAT on on VAT ally
2005 Because vr of avor ,
, 29 must must )
CEU eTD Collection the fact MSZP had thatrelation unions friendly socialist to despite appeared, government and labor capital, of interests between differences the period tripartite import. of depreciation as such export, domestic supporting introduced package‖ ―Bokros 2000) a implemented tripartite the facing enjoyed they than power incumbent more gain will party the supporting openly fo MSZP After the with rights governmentright tocreate andthecollectiveagreements. consultative the including unions to rights important several established th at relations labor unions of structure will significant Tr Independent of League Democratic such firms existing of interests representing unions created newly The (MSZOSZ). Unions Trade of successor for speaking organizations of plurality with decentralized as characterized be can 1990´s in relations labor Hungarian
as for instance instance for h c The
even deepened even s
body .
. Paradoxically opposite became true. Hungarian true. became opposite Paradoxically . economic crisis in 1995 have not been able to negotiate consensual solutions in solutions consensual negotiate to able been not have 1995 in crisis economic to The l The communist unions. Most important Most unions. communist las o croaim n Hungary in corporatism of ollapse
Scait oenet eyn o aslt mjrt i majority absolute on relying government Socialist . deep neoliberal austerity package that affecte that package austerity neoliberal deep md h gvrmn i 1994, in government the rmed ast category of of category ast
and their competences depended competences their and Workers Council (WC). However, it mostly only undermined the existing the undermined only mostly it However, (WC). Council Workers e
einn o 19´ hd en ahr am Lbr oe rm 1992 from code Labor calm. rather been had 1990´s of beginning the the diffidence of workers to their union representation. After representation. union their to workers of diffidence ao. iial t Soai mjr nos ae mre as emerged have unions major Slovakia to Similarly labor. trade u trade a nominal wages freeze in public sector and measures measures and sector public in freeze wages nominal nions has been created been has nions 49
t a gnrly xetd ht trade that expected generally was it one one
n ttl miscarriage total and
d Uin (IA hv as become also have (LIGA) Unions ade highly on incumbent motivations. I motivations. incumbent on highly was especially Hungarian Confederation especially Hungarian was Hungarian Hungarian
.
socialist socialist d Hungarian labor instead. ( instead. labor Hungarian d on the bases of government‘s of bases the on Forint and surcharge on on surcharge and Forint government of te parliament the n uig previous during trade ,
which was was which u nions
unions, unions, a nitial nitial calm calm Ost
in a
CEU eTD Collection 21 Budape in U regulations were acceptedand any approved without onthetripartite. discussion representa labor 2004) (Eurofound, body. new a to policy economic over dialogue social tasks a by criticized highly was decentralization Additional policy. economic on dialogue social for alternative an supply to created was GT) Council, (Economic Tanács Gazdasági body, Another relations. industrial and employment social level national for forum a provide to OMT) Council, Government withgovernment.position step to of possibility a by threaten (Kubicek decision economic agreeme collective conclude the and WC of Creation 1998. in Fidesz liberal with continued labor Hungarian of depression The 3.2.2.
nions organized the organized nions For more information see more information For between Hungarian labor in labor Hungarian
over the rival the over st on 11, November 2000. ―Unions protested against the amendment of the Labor the of amendment the against protested ―Unions 2000. November 11, on st
additionally
two bodies reduced the coverage of effective social dialogue by transferring the bythe transferring dialogueeffective social coverageof reduced the bodies two tives even enhanced when when enhanced even tives it ir y and gathered against ―common enemy‖ ―common against gathered and y
http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/10/en/1/EF1110EN.pdf first common demonstration of the six national union confederations union national six the of demonstration common first
eie t cet Osáo Mnagi aás Ntoa Labour (National Tanács Munkaügyi Országos create to decided
additional nts on the enterprise level enterprise the on nts
Second Generation Reforms Generation Second
2004) Trade inclusion from social dialogue have finally found finally have dialogue social from inclusion ll trade unions trade ll
nos erse by depressed unions the mnmn o lbr code labor of amendment 50
mini a wg a wl a ohr labor other as well as wage mal ,
even decreased the impact of labo of impact the decreased even ´
representatives. In fact In representatives. - osraie oenet e by led government conservative dialogue responsible in fields of fields in responsible dialogue
,
to gain back the bargaining bargaining the back gain to the austerity measures and and measures austerity ,
21 iig h rgt to right the giving
Conflict between Conflict
a
split of the of split
- related a way way r on r CEU eTD Collection bargain its and making policy to compared package‖ 1994 in package‖ ―Bokros balance taken previously ―new with development different very observe can We had tobepostpo and 7% on inflation predicted of disclosure national sub was program Balance New the policy, support this with accordance In to organizations. partner social the continue and dialogue social tripartite would it that partners social the assured government ―the measures reduce to aim primary with announced been has package Balance‖ ―New 2006 in reelection after However program. reform extensive of implementation from government obstructed defeat election next from ele the won 2002 in SZDSZ and MSZP by formed government MSZP Two termselection of dial social level trade social New group peo of services. public and sectors all from people 2 almost for lasted 2000 of January in workers sectorial There 2004) (Eurofound, pensions.‖ of rise a and increases wage higher demanded also unions The forum. tripartite level national the sidelining government‘s the and Code
no it a osdrto ad o esals oe oy en responsib being body one reestablish to and consideration a into union - - ee tiatt frm fr oslain― Tt ad Neumann and (Tóth consultation.― for forum, tripartite level oriented demonstrations in 2000 and 2001. 2001. and 2000 in demonstrations oriented - liberal government came to came government liberal ple can not be historycan found inSlovak ple not labor.of organized ogue in fields of employment, of fields in ogue ned due to massivened public due the the public spending deficit deficit spending public in government in ing power could be exercised due to several legal improvements improvements legalseveral to due exercised be could power ing mitted to the National Interest Reconciliation Council, the Council, Reconciliation Interest National the to mitted a power in 2002. They dec They 2002. in power opposition program. SGR to expected - strengthen 1995. Labor interests have been reflected in the in reflected been have interests Labor 1995. 51 s A
full industrial relations and economic policy too. policy economic and relations industrial
to 3% in 2010. Despite intended sweeping intended Despite 2010. in 3% to mlr development imilar weeks. drop of wages by 3 by wages of drop ed a h bget s biggest The
Trade position of labor in Hungary. First inHungary. of labor position ction by a small margin. Fear margin. small a by ction
unions were able to involve involve to able were unions ided to take complaints of complaints take to ided rk o 56 of trike
,
invo -
4%, reform package package reform 4%, 2006) After public public After 2006) lving such large large such lving e o national for le
0 railway 000 were
als o CEU eTD Collection 22 that labor interests tobewellin Hungarian succeed established policy making. d Current promised tok workers casual and seasonal of employment a introduced Fidesz, by o line credit substantial on agreed quick relatively to needed Hungary currency, national of deprecation by crunchfollowed r delayed to due Nevertheless population. also for upcoming period. working of favor in made policy the on position labor a been secured relations industrial of development had code labor in changes major (Eur legitimacy.‖ appropriate without bodies by exercised be not rule or lawmaking administration, public in veto co of right partners‘ n social ―the anchor introduce should that legislation to parliament Hungarian the obliged Court Constitutional the of No. 40/2005 ―Decision Thirdly strikes. further risk to want not did 2001 and 2000 in strikes labor in dialogue of favor in court of decisions several to thanks as well as position labor the of
For more information see more information For evelopment
f 20 billion € with EU, IMF and world bank. world and IMF EU, with € billion 20 f tripartite. Secondly tripartite. eep a the the social dialoguesocial active during the and the involvement of trade unions unions trade of involvement the and http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/c ao. isl retbihd OM reestablished Firstly labor. decrease of consumer demand consumer of decrease
e lbr oe n 00 Hwvr ny io changes minor only However 2010. in code labor new
eforms, Hungary fell into into fell Hungary eforms, the the social ist
52 government threatened by previous strength of of strength previous by threatened government ,
has been performed. performed. been has the the - setting, constitutes public power that must must that power public constitutes setting, entire term. .
Due to extremely large public debt and and debt extremelylargepublic to Due ountry/hungary.htm provided T a The government, constructed only only constructed government, The in deep crisis with American credit credit American with crisis deep the - determination, or the right of of right the or determination,
the Hungarian tripartit Hungarian ofound, 2011) ofound, Hungarian Constitutional Hungarian a lo e g new Also ea bss o social for basis legal
- making in Hungary in making
22
overnment overnment Lastly e signify e ,
easing easing This the ew
CEU eTD Collection 23 Theyals lost completely also they in involved unions priv upcoming from profit SR) (AZZZ Republic Slovak the of Associations Employers' of interests‖ of hostage as―takinglabor a wil unions create to decided therefore Meciar Saktor waspoliticized. often p between Relations he when Meciar Vladimir of practices the On interests. labor with line in development (ZRS) Slovakia of Slova of hands to weapon (Hruska relations. property with (ROH) union as formed was SR KOZ since rivality, of interests representing Republic Slovak the of Unions Trade of Confederation trade Slovak of Constitution 3.2.3. eiet o vn atr KZ became KOZ Saktor, Ivan to resident
ZRS is no labo or trade union, it isunion,a trade or labo no ZRS is Slovak o become focused onpoliticalratherthan fight, on focused o become was forcing was
industrial rel industrial
a the 23 the
political action openly criticized privatization in Slovakia. Nevertheless Slovakia. in privatization criticized openly action political the the
n eirs oenet betokened government Meciar‘s in
continuation of legislative, administrative background as well as as well as background administrative legislative, of continuation gov
union representatives to sign the general agreement under pressure. under agreement general the sign to representatives union k labor representatives. Also a Also representatives. labor k atization and delegitimate KOZ delegitimate and atization an the
2009 rmn ad O hd eoe ct. fe cag o KOZ of change After acute. become had KOZ and ernment personally
influence o influence
ations too. Already in 1995 he brought the brought he 1995 in Already too. labor. Slovak Slovak labor. nos pursues unions
political party. political , 6 , ) Obviously )
,
the only the in order to pr orderto in present at opposition meetings.opposition present at ver
ey cie n all in active very
decisions made by government with AZZZ SR. AZZZ with government by made decisions 53 trade , n t spot oenetl p governmental support to ing
a
unified struct unified labor communistic monopolistic of successor
other side unions had to bear authoritative bear to had unions side other ifrn pt ta th than path different nos a nt experienced not had unions oceed a planned privatization plannedoceeda
concern of the of concern
,
(KOZ a mobilizing labor mobilizing to enforcea embark the the ure and continuity gave a strong strong a gave continuity and ure - ) society issues and became became and issues society i epcain o future on expectations big ,
was established established was ed eln te potnt to opportunity the feeling
first
on Meciar´s boat. Trade boat. Meciar´s on
U at assault on tripartite, on assault nion of the Workers Workers the of nion
n i Hungary. in one lce and olicies
. Federation. inter s body a as -
union labor labor
not the
CEU eTD Collection extremely is It support. public any without progressed it that me to suggest would smoothly 'quasi [Czec our to them liberal prefer I and a positively reforms "As economic Slovak the noted. view I economist, minister prime and finance former and president Czech current As raised thepriceenergy offood, and me sharply that increase VAT a and half in benefits unemployment the cutting by funded were gason taxes 29 2007 (Zachar billion‖ 13.2 minus at estimated was finances public on reform tax of impact amongreforms arenon social observable especially costsof Slovakia happened not have scenarios by line poverty the face can Slovakia in class of pocket the from paid are inflow capital international for condition favorable that fact the is Europe Central in reforms tax current many As tax on pressuring Although decreases. by countries neighboring the to times hard brought reform tax Slovak 3.2.4 in labor questions. du itself labor andmembers its from alienatedrather and politics the in involved deeply KOZ met 1998 in formed government Opposition policy. economic the in interests udnws tra was Burden ) - Slovak Labor in the in Labor Slovak eom. Hwvr te at ht h woe eom rcs i Soai wn very went Slovakia in process reform whole the that fact the However, reforms.' . (Gerbery .
authors argue (Duman 2010, 2, Tanz 2, 2010, (Duman argue authors
and mineral oils pasted the burdenthe pasted oils mineral and
serdit niet taxes indirect into nsferred 2008 the , 21 , population
) However ) Second Generation Reforms Generation Second as
after 2004 after , that , dicine.‖ (Bohle and Greskovits (Bohle dicine.‖ enormous social inequalities in distribution and high and distribution in inequalities social enormous
has
working populati working at least at 54 paid the most for the SGR the for most the paid . ―In Slovakia, tax cuts and business incentives business and cuts tax Slovakia, ―In . i 1993, i a .
M further implementation further
the ainly
21, in - VAT, work poverty has has poverty work Zachar 2007 Zachar - on. Zachar argued Zachar on. working population. working population.
prices of energies and higher higher and energies of prices
2006 ) foremost problem of problem foremost ) , of of
is cl is , 21 been SRG. Such tragic tragic Such SRG.
early the labor. labor. the early that ) e to inactivity to e
―The overall in decreased the middle middle h] ,
CEU eTD Collection 24 th government reform Second document process. during legislative he Despite 2001. in government by accepted and dialogue social the of parties all by approved was relations labor governing of reform the about KOZ with negotiate labor caus for used also was 1999 opposition. with collaboration intensive and protests due accepted be not can KOZ of demands that announced Finance of Minister taxes. of decrease wagesor in increaseconcerningsignificant KOZ offurther demands with continuedprograms tripartit on KOZ and AZZZ dialogue l The 1999. in force trade biggest the with dialogue introducing law a adopt to agreed government Dzurinda´s First 1998. m The cabinet asinterests as onlabor cuts inunemployment well asa r his refuse 2004) (Klaus, society." in debates tough without pace a such o at Italy Republic France, Germany, in undertaken be could reforms such that unlikely
Quoted in Zsilleova 2004 Zsilleova in Quoted d nenl laae and cleavages internal ed to their int their to interests jr hne o Soa lbr oeet cm wt atrto o te oenet in government the of alteration with came movements labor Slovak for change ajor . Law has been discussed publicly discussed been has Law .
li I claim . (Jan . ernal will ic inconsistency and lack of reasoning. KOZ started with with started KOZ reasoning. of lack and inconsistency ek 2004 ek w oiid h rsosblte of responsibilities the modified aw
a propagation of HZDS and ZRS. and HZDS of propagation a ok n ao psto during position labor on look
e.
, 11 ,
rfr eie o articulate to decided erefore
undermined
a union However ) In 2001 several protest actions forced the government to to government the forced actions protest several 2001 In ) omn gemn KZ a rpael ciiiig the criticizing repeatedly was KOZ agreement common con
the federation, KOZ. Law on the on Law KOZ. federation, a and a
rtqe gis gvrmn ad nta reform initial and government against critique 55 labor code. Also code. labor ecpin f O a rpeetto o actual of representation as KOZ of perception
it was O p KOZ additionally the the
ZRS and HZDS with Cooperation first and than second Dzurinda´s Dzurinda´s second than and first the a
brand new conception of labor labor of conception new brand rotest meeting in Bratislava in in Bratislava in meeting rotest
the elaxing factor ofelaxing labor strikes. social partners in the social social the in partners social labor code as code labor appro the tripartite came into into came tripartite ved by government, by ved tripartite and social and tripartite 24 a
o prv or approve To preparation of preparation te Czech the r general law law general a
CEU eTD Collection blockading in2004. state borders of were SGR steep and harsh extraordinary to responses only ne the of announcement for petition in involved got also KOZ 2009) (Hruska, action. common on rather again aimed actions agreed, and found was solution Compromising government. with negotiated firstly KOZ reform the block to order In dialogue. social on participate to confederations smaller also allowing KOZ, of monopoly diminishes with trade in tradition and impact no with employer the by ordered be can year Labora CodeSlovak s was leave Annual hours, 40 on settled within released introduce to expected encompassed In2004 1998) in awa of validity analyze ― by relations w parliamentary election and announced their political support to SMER. Surprisingly the the Surprisingly SMER. to support political their announced and election parliamentary w a y on restrict wouldnot that ey ite oe ad only and power little very tre ots rbto period. probation months three d
boost the attractiveness of Slovak labor labor Slovak of attractiveness the boost
substantially ao changes major ,
the three
the existence of existence the new Labor Code was introduced as introduced was LaborCode new ae o 2 dy, xedd to extended days, 20 on tated excluding 30 min. break min. 30 excluding lso allowed one special measure to employeto measurespecial oneallowed lso
months for no particular reason. Maximum weekly Maximum reason. particular no for months although KOZ was organizing protests after the final agreement. Its agreement. final the after protests organizing was KOZ although
reducing the reducing
unions. Unions become practically non practically become Unions unions.
a n lxblt o te ao mre. hge flexibil higher A market. labor the of flexibility on
search for political partners that on that partners political for search
competition
chambers
limited limited level
, of corporatism of
56
t rcial meant practically It with compulsory with .‖ (Slovak government .‖ (Slovak programannouncement, and extra con
maximally 8 hours 8 maximally uttv competence sultative 5 da 25 bonus pa bonus market to foreign investors. Labor code code Labor investors. foreign to market substantial part substantial s fe 1 yas f employment of years 15 after ys
and in this respect this in and id
membership . the rs.
The
the 150 hours of overtime per per overtime of hours 150 ht mlye ol be could employee that - eea hu strike hour general existent. They remained They existent.
r of of organizing of labor for for labor of organizing eform also diminish also eform
s overtime the SGR package. Itpackage. the SGR . Labor code code Labor .
working time time working
and
to particularly particularly to
reduce s
per week. week. per ity was was ity
them them also was was and es . CEU eTD Collection facts These institutionalization that argue I section previous In 3.2.5 activities by imitated government andemployers. wide a to exposed is labor Slovak the and result, governmenta As the employers. to threat sufficient and effective an represent not does mobilization possibilities. mobilization low in results labor Slovak the of institutionalization succe been have Hungary in trade of levels Different planning inSlovakia. same the remains of role a general In yet.2006, however measures nosignificant hasbeen executed on flexibility by led government Recent process. decision on impact real no with therefore and consultative remained position their Nevertheless dialogue. on workovertime as well as layoffprocess 2006. SME with came dialogue social of change The the Unemployment as background factor shaping role oflabor shaping factor as background Unemployment The r The ao mar labor enewed labor code labor enewed the asd oprtvl sote cnoiain f reforms of consolidation smoother comparatively caused labor market labor .
e, beside ket, Trade du trade
to e
unions are often excluded from social dialogue concerning economic concerning dialogue social from excluded often are unions union institutionalization provide us with answer, why answer, with us provide institutionalization union
union their te at ht trade that fact the s
again supported competencies of competencies supported s ou o political of focus su wt brann oe te G pro SGR the over bargaining with ssful
the n Slovakia in . Plans mostly aim to return to return to aim mostly Plans .
trade . However no significant changed had been performed performed been had changed significant no However .
nos n lvka have Slovakia in unions 57 a etbihd s mostly as established was after government the leading R
struggles nos ee re were unions Iveta trade Radicova intends to create more more create to intends Radicova
n lw neato with interaction low and
r and deeper range of reform reform of range deeper and r unions and it also hardened also it and unions the state of arts before year before arts of state the habilitated a lower
consultative
the gram. ee o legal of level in in trade
Low labor labor Low election in election the Slovakia
unions unions L and it it and social labor ower ower a . . CEU eTD Collection employment Hungary. in SGR to Prior levelsduring ofunemployment plans. SGR needimmediate the Hungarynot feel in did labor smoother for reason major abnormally to due especially an services. had usually labor be to appeared electorate of as riots and Strikes they time on about restrains competences labor for base legal a of Absence the shaping in unanswered. remain decision Nevertheless a nttto o sca daou. e a nt bev smlr development similar observe not can We dialogue. social of institution cri political involvement and involvement political
in the ia staino SG of situation tical - Hungarian makin
Since s Since important economic decision with important did not succeed tomobilize succeed did not of
direct high unemployment rate and rate unemployment high
was , a the labor resistance to SGR. SGR. to resistance labor the hr dwtr in downturn Sharp
Slovak Slovak question why labor movements in Hungary succeed to integrate into economic into integrate to succeed Hungary in movements labor why question g and Slovak unions linger with only limited influence on influence only limited with linger unions Slovak and g uch
later impact on impact a a
tripartite. tripartite. It appears that different levels of levels different that appears It situations are highly unpopular, unpopular, highly are situations ifrn pors wt unemployment with progress different demonstration of demonstration
l accelerated by accelerated abor appeared to be to appeared abor
anha wl s during as well as launch R labor an behavior tie cause Strikes on
effective tool to improve to tool effective
future benefits from benefits future acceptance a ainl upt olwd by followed output national the the of power and representation of most numerous segments numerous most of representation and power the coupon privatization and ―tunneling‖ of state of―tunneling‖ and privatization coupon laborstrikes for H general in
d ungarian labor movement was movement labor ungarian
an
electorate via media as well as via limitations of limitations via as well as media via electorate
58 a o ol sgiiat e significant only not of impact on very different situation compared to compared situation different very
G plce i Slovakia in policies SGR to create new jobs due to significantlydue lower createjobs new to lack of lack the u
supported political g political supported nemployment played nemployment the government tries to avoid strikes via via strikes avoid to tries government
the the in the most criticalin the most periods. their influence on decision on influence their the employment opportunities was the was opportunities employment amendments of labor legislation labor of amendments
labor
negotiation power negotiation n Slovakia in . Slovak trade Slovak . a ooi losses conomic significant
the
. able to mobi to able roups. In the same same the In roups. .
age that argue I a economic policy economic
n co In significant role role significant s
unions reliedunions of organized of n Slova in decrease in in decrease , ntrary
the but -
making making owned lize in lize labor they the the kia the .
CEU eTD Collection growth about collectiverights andreg labor economic of situation the unemployment, In employers. and government high fairly with combination in firms domestic new of emergence economy, the of path gooddevelopment generally encouragedby did 6% of Unemployment path Hungary in Situation priority layoffs additional with labor with bargaining in incentives provided Situation by and promising were have not 20% companies the the a .
and attacking 25% attacking and decrease of unemployment for a short term austerity measures. Labor austerity shorttermmeasures. ofunemployment a decrease for b A seriousness of the situat the of seriousness
in bargaining, wage increases since
any etter situation was reflected on on reflected was situation etter nusinby uh es ma less much unquestionably the of . h h The experience with unemployment. with experience an netvs o ep mlyet r rte ls iprat than important less rather are employment keep to incentives cnm, hn lot vr fut pro i person fourth every almost when economy, soia mxmm o uepomn crossing unemployment of maximums istorical inflow of foreign companies, foreign of inflow during
caused serious doubt serious caused
not
. an ion on the labor market were able to accept to able were market labor the on ion the
offer Additionally economic transformation was generally on very promising promising very on generally was transformation economic oenet n epoes Frty mlyr threaten employers Firstly employers. and government ular increases of wages.ular increases
rao t pnc bu fas f rsi lyfs Labor layoffs. drastic of fears about panic to reason a FDI inflow FDI evrn sae n significant and space neuvering would ifrn in different 59 s an On the other side other the On
among
s nrae o increase sharp
also was
the causeadditional layoffs. able to put much more pressure on the the on pressure more much put to able centive increase of employment of increase labor f employment rates becomes the the becomes rates employment f
s ,
. In addition Slovak labor Slovak addition In . r n brann i tripartite. in bargaining a in eform atv a active n a psychical threshold of of threshold psychical - oriented governments oriented
austerity measures. measures. austerity movements
e a jobless was ge n decreasing and changes
oppo h bargain the rtunities of feared
did the ed ed ,
CEU eTD Collection reform Reform jobs. new of creation to investments to growth sustainable of path decrease on economy the rebound to groups social the of pressure The parties. oriented to government I and consolidation ofreforms. institu anti as same parties oriented Hungary. Political main internaland as actors transnational themainexternal corporations actor. processes. Reform Generation Second the of leverag economic system, politic Second of blockage the Hungary.in processes Reform Generation or delays causing factors the as well as Slovakia in enthusiasm a identified theses My processes. reform the of blockages or delays significant achieved Hungary in actors main the program, Reform Generation Second extensive the implemented to able been has government Slovak While C
also onclusion
tionalized reform tionalized
ru ta under that argue rhetoric as aofprogram. European partrhetoric as integration parties an lvk oiia sse eegd eom yls ih ntttoaie reform institutionalized with cycles reform emerged system political Slovak nrcdne unemploymen unprecedented
launch and consolidate SGR. consolidate and launch
in Slovakia
ability of Slovak government to implement SGR was based on high high on based was SGR implement to government Slovak of ability - institutionali cause obviously It parties. oriented - seemed to have much stro much have to seemed reform parties. In Hungary political system does not encompass encompass not does system political Hungary In parties. reform
e, unemployment and EU conditionality on the main actors actors main the on conditionality EU and unemployment e, zation In this respect I analyzed the impact of factors such such factors of impactI the analyzedrespect In this
t and and t of the Slovak Slovak the of d nlzd h mi fcos f h reform the of factors main the analyzed nd I have identified political parties and labor as the the as labor and parties political identified I have
60 It - retd p oriented
was rather institutionalization of the reform the of institutionalization rather was to ov desperate solve nger incentives to launch SGR than in than SGR launch to incentives nger ltcl ate cncosy adopt consciously parties olitical
political d
major difficulties in the launch the in difficulties major i not did ed for need
allowed Slovak Slovak allowed sources of of sources ed - -
CEU eTD Collection reluctan general with parties highly endanger been by supported to transformation fast unemployment, low with contrary In smoothly austerity implement SGR package. jobs. new of creation in labor in power for fight to able been enforce to tools an for costs major labor of power bargaining low 2004, been has TNCs political survival of path on the of source provide to Due inability to participate on policy making policy on participate to inability emergence of new businesses represented very represented businesses new of emergence the uniquely generous investment incentive schemes as well as favorabl as well as schemes incentive investment generous uniquely unnecessary. a
first candidate to EU accession and ev and accession EU to candidate first a orpe piaiain nw uies lt connec elite business new privatization, corrupted the the
social dialogue has dialogue social Hungary experienced initially experienced Hungary re a - oiin f einl leader. regional of position acceptance massive FDI inflow and emergence of new domestic companies. Hungary has has Hungary companies. domestic new of emergence and inflow FDI massive
successfully SGR
labor interests. Internally and externally and Internally interests. labor of reform partiesof reform a support for new parties in government. Massive attraction of TNCs and TNCs of attraction Massive government. in parties new for support Hungarian political system institutionalized to a presence of anti of presence a to institutionalized system political Hungarian , due to their bad institutionalization. bad their to due , a epcfl oiin in position respectful for attracted ce to reforms. to ce the . T . been ihu opsto fo a ie f ao, oenet could government labor, of side a from opposition Without he t he . U acces EU
abrogated due to high unemployment and and unemployment high to due abrogated
hes to invest in the country with country the in invest to e s also showed also s a
T in n fn new find and sion Favorable economic and international conditions international and economic Favorable were lookin were more favorabl more
herefore austerity measures were perceived as as perceived were measures austerity herefore 61
the a en short term crisis in 1995 in crisis term short en
market economy with economy market feasible alternative feasible
economic policy making. Its bargaining bargaining Its making. policy economic g for political partners rat partners political for g
that labor that depressed e economic situation than Slovakia than situation economic e Labor movements movements Labor e t peiu rgm dd not did regime previous to ted industrial industrial
a
in Slovakia has Slovakia in
per labor movement has not has movement labor ,
how to how spective to join EU in EU join to spective stabile allies needed for for needed allies e tax system and and system tax e - disheartened by disheartened 1996 could not could 1996 set the country country the set the GDP growth GDP her than for for than her interests of interests
beard beard - reform the the a CEU eTD Collection enterprises. developm Mentioned on foreignIn the same it corporations. time quest foreign andthe companies suppo lacks nationalboost bourgeoisie. on thedomestic market. for While looks itself. SGR Slovakiathewa still The topic, which Suggestions for further negotiationconsultancyfor laborcode. process orreforms body interests, W policymaking. tha mind in p political international with combination L accepted unionas role of i by caused difficulties initial despite allow n 2000 and 2001 and 2000 n ack of job opportunities for opportunities job of ack ions theadvantagesof TNCs thenew dependency on ed the Hungarian trade unions trade Hungarian the ed arties and low backlash from backlash low and arties h Hnain rd uin are unions trade Hungarian the t position of labor in Hungary was very different and more embedded more and different very was Hungary in labor of position t
institution institution
will requirewill additional
hile threatened social partners. P partners. social threatened o do no the have been major linkage between enthusiasm for reform processes in in processes reform for enthusiasm between linkage major been have Hungaryadvantage alre an TNCs triestotake present of the Slovak labor had difficulties to find to difficultieshad labor Slovak etc lentvs o FDI to alternatives mestic While Slovakia relyWhile almost exclusively on
researc voice oflabor. the ent can labor
inter to organize and organize to h rt forenterprises domestic
and low legislative framework for organized labor in labor organized for framework legislative low and research, side of of side be - union reality. union
increase clearly of inreform seen thet
el salse a the as established well 62 articularly government and all political bodies political all and government articularly the the yof higher and deeper
is especially labor in Slovakia. However we must keep keep must we However Slovakia. in labor s
the support effectively The m The n hg ntoa recognition national high and
and triestolevyadditional a the search obilization of labor and strikes and labor of obilization relevant intermediary for their relevantintermediarytheir for ,
towards domestic towards domestic
represent the represent (Uhrik, 2009) Hungary 2009) (Uhrik,
the forming penetration of TNCs
for alternativesfor to ax systemax in GDP created by labor interests labor par ady and
in industrial in t of wage wage of t taxes taxes
of ,
CEU eTD Collection economic Slovakia. in stateinterest targetsoftenconflictswith decision makingconcerning national appear todynamize economy susceptible Howeverlimits. and centrally more made appears economicflexible also tobe policy less of thestate toremainposition seems present about Hungary its despite in muchdiscussion State has always played significantly the state making. limited role ineconomic Opposite istrue decision inHungary. country bureaucracy importan from various breakingHungary significantly between the point and state limited Slovakia. SGR Hungary.role The of
with society to the political reasoning inHungary.Higher involvement in ofsectorial lobbies - wide impactswide the a state involvement anda seem traditions state represent of to n y important rolein . Deeper and. Deeper steeper in Slovakia SGRimplemented t decisions, which forms
63 the
economic and social sphere. Privilegedeconomic and social sphere. the
industrial policyindustrial of the the economy, howevereconomy, CEU eTD Collection ------Reference List
uoen onain o te mrvmn o Li of Improvement the for Foundation European 24_hu_recommendation_for_co_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/sgp/pdf/20_scps/2009 Commission European of University Vienna WU Economics and Vienna. Business, Coordination, Tax International SFB 36. Coordination, S Member EU New in Investment A. Duman International 41,(1) (Spring). Development Comparative in Studies Industries. Transnational New Europe's Eastern in Labor Weak B Greskovits D., Bohle 21 P. Balázs Policy 1990 inSlovakia M. Beblavy Democratization D. L. Bartlett in UnionEffectiveness. Socio S. Avdagic, 854 839 1999: December 6:5, Policy Public European of Journal accession. EU to approach Erfud (01: ugr: nutil eain poie 2011 profile, relations Industrial Hungary: http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/pubdocs/2011/10/en/1/EF1110EN.pdf (2011): (Eurofound) Agh, A Agh, - 28.
.
(1999): Europeanization of policy of Europeanization (1999):
(1996): Integration Objectives of Hungary. European Business Journal. 8 (3): 8 Journal. Business European Hungary. of Objectives Integration (1996):
(2005): State (2005): (2000): Industrial Poli Industrial (2000): (2010): Flux or Fixed. Tax Reforms, Informal Economy and Foreign Foreign and Economy Informal Reforms, Tax Fixed. or Flux (2010):
(1997):
in Hungary AnnArbor Political Economy Political – . (2006): Capitalism without Comprom without Capitalism (2006): .
- 1999. Bratislava: INEKO.1999. Bratislava: Labor Relations in East Central Europe: Explaining Variation Explaining Europe: Central East in Relations Labor
- Economic (1) Review 3 n ugra cnegne ln (2009), plan, convergence Hungarian on
cy. In Marcincin A. and Beblavy M. (Eds.). Economic (Eds.). M. Beblavy and A. Marcincin In cy. ae. icsin aes F Itrainl Tax International SFB Papers Discussion tates.
, Mich.: The 64
- of
making in East Central Europe: the Hungarianthe Europe: Central East in making
Dual Transformations Dual University
ig n Wrig Conditions Working and ving - 10/03_commission/2010
of ise: Strong Business and and Business Strong ise: Michigan : Market Reform Market
Press, 1997 - 03
and
- s -
CEU eTD Collection ------
ugra Cnrl ttsia Office Statistical Central Hungarian (Augustbudget 2006). 17, Pravda proposal) J. Hambalkova, UniversityOxford Press. Oxford: Decade. First The Euro: the and States European ed., K. Dyson, in Forthcoming B. Greskovits di FiesoleInstitute University (FI): European App European East and Central the for H. Grabbe Slovakia. TIGER Working Series,Warsaw Paper No. 112, G Londonand The 1976/1962: Belknap Press University ofHarvard Press. A. Gerschenkron Prague, 2008. RILSA, materi and D., Gerbery, 2 272 (June): no. 46, Studies Economic Comparative Republic? Czech the and Hungary, Poland, H. Feldmann, Hungary. EconomistUnit Intelligence in resolution conflict EconomistUnit Intelligence and dialogue http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/country/hungary.htm Social (2004): (Eurofound) Foundat European http://portal.ksh.hu/portal/page?_pageid=38,119919&_dad=portal&_schema=PORTAL ofy D. yorffy al deprivation in the Republic of Slovakia], in: Fórum sociální politiky, 5/2008, 5/2008, politiky, sociální Fórum in: Slovakia], of Republic the in deprivation al –
(1999): A Partnership for Accession? The Implications of EU Conditionality EU of Implications The Accession? for Partnership A (1999): 310.
(2008): Structural change without trust: Reform cycles in Hungary and and Hungary in cycles Reform trust: without change Structural (2008): (2008): Chudoba a materiálna deprivácia v Slovenskej republike‘ [Poverty republike‘ Slovenskej v deprivácia materiálna a Chudoba (2008):
(2004):
20) Hnay n Soai: opine and Compliance Slovakia: and Hungary (2008): (2006) Z návrhu rozpočtu zostane iba schodok. (Only deficit left from left deficit (Only schodok. iba zostane rozpočtu návrhu Z (2006)
(1962): Economic Backwardness in Historical Perspective. Cambridge Perspective. Historical in Backwardness Economic (1962): o fr h Ipoeet f iig n Wrig Conditions Working and Living of Improvement the for ion
How Flexible Are Labour Markets in the EU Accession, Countries Accession, EU the in Markets Labour Are Flexible How
(EIU). Hungary: Profile Country 2004, (EIU). Slovakia: Profile Country 2004, licants, EUI Working Paper 99/12, San Domenico San 99/12, Paper Working EUI licants, 65
21) ifrain n cnmc indexes. economic on information (2011),
www.eiu.com www.eiu.com
Its
Discontents.
CEU eTD Collection ------
Slovakia. Presented on 2nd Central European Conference in Regional Science Regional in Conference European Central 2nd on Presented Slovakia. P. Mihok Z., Marcinekova History‘,Law, 205 Economics,Organization, 11of Journal and Liebowitz infirmity. (Pittsburgh: J. P. Kubicek IssueInternational Vol.44 Sep2009, 4,p.386 Development, Comparative in. Studies World‖, Globalized a in America Latin and Asia of Development. Pathways International Comparative in Studies World Globalized a in Pathways A. Kohli Economic March Management Series, P Technical Bank World B. Kaminski Masterunions), 2004,Masarykcollection Brno theses University, 2009. M. 2004, Janíček, 27, (AugustSme 2006) 24, May L. Jancik Statement, http://www.itdh.com/engine.aspx?page=doc_publicatio publications Hungary Concluding ITD Republic: http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2004/052704.html Slovak Fund Monetary International reconciliation Slo in M. Hruska, 2007
"Štát posúva hranicu pre vyššie dane" (State moves the border for higherfor taxes). movesthe border (State "Štát posúva prevyššie hranicu dane" 20) Ntoait ess eedn Cptls Dvlpet Alternative Development: Capitalist Dependent versus Nationalist (2009): .. n Mroi Sehn E. Stephen Margolis and S.J.
(2009): Systém sprostredkovania záujmov na Slovensku. (System of interests of (System Slovensku. na záujmov sprostredkovania Systém(2009):
(2000): Foreign Investment and Restructuring: and InvestmentForeign (2000): (2004): Konfederácia odborových zväzov SR (Confederation of trade trade of (Confederation SR zväzov odborových Konfederácia (2004):
20) Ognzd ao i pscmuit tts fo sldrt to solidarity from states: postcommunist in labor Organized (2004): vakia) 2009,Masaryk Master collection Brno2009 theses University, University of Pittsburgh Press)University ofPittsburgh
aper No. 453, Europe and Central Asia Poverty Reduction and and Reduction Poverty Asia Central and Europe 453, No. aper
20) Ivsmn icnie ad einl oein in cohesion regional and incentives Investment (2007):
IF ocue 20 Atce V oslain with Consultation IV Article 2004 Concludes IMF . 21) ―ugr: uies re― Arl 2010, April Brief―, Business ―Hungary: (2010):
66
19) ‗ah eedne Lock Dependence, ‗Path (1995),
ns
- The Evidence from Hungary. Hungary. from Evidence The 410. - 226.
– -
n and in CERS,
CEU eTD Collection ------
AI (2010) SARIO in (2010) SARIO class identities,Postcommunist Politics and Society 28(4), p.503 D. Ost inComparativeStudies Economic 2007, Development,Winter Second and Institutionalization B. Kovalcik, C., O’Dwyer http://www.o OECD Politics World 61(4): 670 Europe. Central East in Economies Market Dependent of Emergence Vliegenthart A. and A. Nölke Politics,Vol.World Relevant Eastern in 45,No.3(Apr., Europe? 1993). J. Nelson Ba2947, World. N. Stern P., Mitra Presentation forHarvard attheCenter University,22,2004 European April Studies, Mi Instituteand for Slovakia, Bratislava, Democratic public affairs, Bratislava Rebirth in G. Mesežnikov c Trend R. Markowski, invest ommunist Europe:London: Decade,ommunist Lewis. the First ed. p.55 Paul Frank Cass - slovakia ls I. klos, - - Setter with no Followers. In Party Development and Democratic Change in Post in Change Democratic and Development Party In Followers. no with Setter in
(2008): Policy brief: Tax Effects on Foreign Direct Investment, February 2008 2008 February Investment, Direct Foreign on Effects Tax brief: Policy (2008): 20) Ilsrtr croaim n atr Erp: elbrl rprim and Tripartism Neoliberal Europe: Eastern in corporatism Illustratory (2000): - slovakia
- (1992): The Politics of Economic Transformation: Is Third World Experience World Third Is Transformation: Economic of Politics The (1992):
702.
ecd.org/dataoecd/62/61/40152903.pdf 20) "uoen cnmc opttvns ad U Enlargement," EU and Competitiveness Economic "European (2004):
- Publication Investment Incentives 2010 Incentives Investment Publication nk, Washington, DC.
ulcto Txs n Sca Scrt 2010 Security Social and Taxes Publication (2000) Party System Institutionalization in New Democracies: Poland Democracies: New in Institutionalization System Party (2000) Bútorová Z. Bútorová
(2003): Tax systems in transition. Policy Research Working Paper Paper Working Research Policy transition. in systems Tax (2003): -
-
generation Economic Reform in Post in Reform Economic generation Fisher S Fisher (2007): And the Last Shell be First: Party System System Party First: be Shell Last the And (2007):
20) Elrig h Vreis f aiaim Th Capitalism: of Varieties the Enlarging (2009):
. (1999)(eds.): The 1998 Parliamentary Elections Parliamentary 1998 The (1999)(eds.): . 67
http://www.sario.sk/?why Vol. 41 http://www.sario.sk/?why - 530. - Communist Europe. Communist
- 77. -
invest
- A e - - - CEU eTD Collection ------
Institute of Political Science, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 2006 2006 Sciences, of Academy A. Wood Hungarian Science, http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/eiro/20 Political of Institute and A. Tóth International Fund. Monetary V. Tanzi, InstituteEconomies. Mimeo. ofEconomics. HungarianBudapest Academy ofSciences, W. Swaan Princeton 41 1992: University Press Princeton: State. the and Conflicts, Distributive Constraints, International Adjustment: Economic of Politics The eds., R. R. Kaufman, and S. Haggard, In Reform.‖ Structural B. Stallings Princeton: Princeton University 25 1991: Press World. Third the in Development and State The ed. A., Kohli, In Theory.‖ Dependency T. Smith http://portal.statistics.sk/showdoc.do?docid=4 Office Statistical Slovak WorldThird World. Quart T. P. Robbins L., Sklair republic.php Republic, Slovak government ofthe the Office governmentof Slovak announcement, 1998, program Countries‘, Dept. Finance, ofPublic Economics, University ofPrague. Klazar M., Sedmihradsky Brettonwood Project,
19) Te M‘ Fnl rnir Assig Scn Gnrto‖ Reforms, Generation‖ ―Second Assessing Frontier? Final IMF‘s The (1997):
19) Te nedvlpet o Underdevelopment The (1991): 19) Tasto t mre: tde i fsa rfr. ahntn D.C.: Washington, reform. fiscal in studies market: to Transition (1993): (1994): Behavioral Constrai Behavioral (1994):
(1992): International Influence on Economic Policy: Debt, Stabilizatio Debt, Policy: Economic on Influence International (1992):
emn L. Neumann http://www.government.gov.sk/10887/government http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org/art
20) Goa Cptls ad ao Croain fo the from Corporations Major and Capitalism Global (2002):
S. S. 20) Ipc o gvrmn rfr ad a measures, tax and reform government of Impact (2006): (2011), information on basic economic indexes., indexes., economic basic on information (2011), erly, 23, No. 1, 2002: 81 erly, 23,No.1,2002: 20) ‗a cmeiin o FI n Central in FDI for competition ‗Tax (2001): - 88.
06/07/articles/hu0607059i.htm nts and the Creation of Markets in Post in Markets of Creation the and nts 68
- f Development Literature: The Case of of Case The Literature: Development f 66.
- 100. -
16159
-
office
- of - the - European European - Socialist - slovak n and n
- CEU eTD Collection - -
Would Not Pass in a in NotPass WellWould Zsilleova M. Inštitút(Projekt HESO),pre verejné a otázky,Batislava sociálne 2007. D. Zachar
(200 (2004): "Vaše(2004): reformyReforms by vzrelej demokracii neprešli" [Your 7): Slovensko 2007, Hodnotenie ekonomických a sociálnych opatrení opatrení sociálnych a ekonomických Hodnotenie 2007, Slovensko 7): - DevelopedD emocracy]. (February Sme 11,2004) 69
CEU eTD Collection ZRS WC VAT TNCs SZDSZ SOP SOEs SNS SMEs SMK SMER SGR SDL SDKU SaS SARIO SDK PBC OMT OKS NEM MSZOSZ MSZP MSZMP LIGA KSS KOZ KDH GT GDP FDI FIDESZ EU ČSR CIT CEE AZZZ SR ANO Glossary - – – – – -
– - – – – – - – Gazdasági(Economic Council) Tanács –
– – – – -
European Union
– - - Workers Council
- – – Freedomand Solidarity
Corporate IncomeTax Corporate ForeignInvestment Direct - –
Party ofCivic Understanding – Central East Europe -
Union of th Slovak NationalSlovak Party CommunistSlovak Party – Party of the Democratic Left DemocraticParty ofthe Confederation Political BusinessPolitical Cycles Czechoslovak Republic Socialist
Second Generation Reforms
– Alliance ofthe Citizen New Slovak DemocraticSlovak Coalition Civic Gross Domestic Product Party Hungarian Coalition ofthe
Value IncomeValue tax - DS LabourOrszágos Munkaügyi TanácsCouncil) (National
Christian
New Economic LeagueIndependent TradeUnions of – State
Transnational Corportations Small andMediumSmall Enterprises
Hungarian Party Socialist - Alliance of Free DemocratsFree Alliance of Direction party
-
Slovak Investment andTrade Slovak
- Hungarian Civic Union Hungarian Civic - Hungarian Workers´ Socialist Party
–
Hungarian Confederation of Trade Unions ofHungarian Trade Confederation Unions Federation Employers' of Associations ofthe Republic Slovak
- - Slovak Democratic and Christian Coalition DemocraticSlovak and Coalition Christian conservative Party owned enterprises - Democratic Movement e Workers inSlovakia e Workers
of Trade Republic of Slovak Unionsofthe
Mechanism launched by Socialist Workers´MechanismSocialist Hungary launched byin1968 Party
-
Fidesz
Development Agency
70
–
Democratic Party