DOCSLIB.ORG

CE CFO Survey 2021 Baltics Download the Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CE CFO Survey 2021 Baltics Download the Report CE CFO Survey 2021 Baltics The inflation rate (for the Consumer Price Index) over the next 12 months In the Euro area 1.8% Central Europe countries* Looking into the inflation rate for the In their country 2.7% Consumer Price index, it seems that in general Central Europe countries are expecting a smaller inflation rate in the 0.9% Estonia Eurozone than in their countries. 1.1% Looking more closely into the Baltics, it seems that Estonia expects relatively 1.3% small inflation rate, both in the Latvia 1.7% Eurozone and in the country itself. 1.4% Lithuania 2% *Overall results of Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia. **Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Albania, Kosovo, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Slovakia and the Public Sector, data concerning those areas in this report need to be Member firms and DTTL: Insert appropriate copyright Presentation title 2 interpreted[To edit, click View with > Slide caution. Master > Slide Master] [To edit, click View > Slide Master > Slide Master] TOP 5 factors to pose a significant risk to business over the next 12 months 60% Estonia 58% Latvia Reduction in Overall* 52% Comparing Baltic results with the peers 30% Lithuania demand (domestic) from Central Europe countries, it 15% seems that peers are the most 36% Shortage of 33% concerned about reduction in domestic 60% skilled professionals and, then, foreign demand. Baltics are 45% sharing the concern in reduction in 42% 50% Economic domestic demand with 60% of Estonian 50% outlook/growth CFOs seeing it as a significant risk to 30% business over the next 12 months. 40% 39% Reduction in 30% demand (foreign) 35% *Overall results of Albania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Czech 19% 22% Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Kosovo, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Increasing 22 Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Slovenia. 30% regulations **Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Albania, Kosovo, Lithuania, North Macedonia, Slovakia and the Public Sector, data concerning those areas Member firms and DTTL: Insert appropriate copyright Presentation title 3 in[To this edit, click report View > Slideneed Masterto > Slidebe Master]interpreted with caution. [To edit, click View > Slide Master > Slide Master] Attractiveness of different sources of funding Interestingly enough, the most 80% attractive form of funding for the Baltic CFOs is internal financing. Actually, 80% of Lithuanian CFOs find this type 58% of financing to be the most attractive. Across all three countries, almost 40% 45% 45% of CFOs find bank borrowing as an 40% 40% 39% 40% equally attractive source of funding. 20% 21% 10% 5% Internal financing Equity Bank borrowing Corporate debt *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. Is mental health openly talked about in your organization? 70% COVID-19 pandemic has put an enormous 63% stress on our mental health, hence, the organizational openness about it is very 55% important. In Estonia and Lithuania, more than half of the respondents believe that 45% their organizations are open about mental 37% health. In comparison, 63% of CFOs in 30% Latvia believe that mental health is not talked about openly in their organizations. Yes No *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. Over the next 12 months how do you expect levels 80% of unemployment to change? 70% Looking at the upcoming 12 months, majority of the respondents expect an 47% increase in the levels of unemployment. The least optimistic about the employment levels are Lithuanians and Estonians (70% 29% and 80%, respectively). Latvian CFOs are a 24% bit more optimistic than their peers from 20% other Baltic countries with 47% of them expecting an increase in unemployment. 10% 10% 10% Decrease No change Increase *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. Based on the information you have so far, when do you expect your company to return to a pre-crisis level of revenues generation? 60% Looking at the pre-crisis level of revenue generation, majority of the 47% CFOs in the Baltics say that they are 45% already operating at or above pre-crisis level. However, 30% of respondents in 30% 30% Estonia expect their companies to come back to pre-crisis level at 2022 or later. 22% 15% 11% 10% 8% 8% 5% 5% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% Estonia Latvia Lithuania Already at or Q1 2021 Q2 2021 Q3 2021 Q4 2021 2022 or later above pre- crisis level *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. What percentage of work in your organization will be done remotely over the next 12 months? 40% 33% Looking at the CFOs expectations 30% 30% for the upcoming 12 months the wide majority expect that at least a 25% 25% 25% quarter of the work within the organization will be done remotely. 19% 20% 30% of CFOs in Estonia and 15% Lithuania expect that the remote 14% work will take a quarter to half of all 10% 8% the work done, in Latvia 25% of peers expect this. 5% 0% Estonia Latvia Lithuania 5% or less 6 - 25% 26 - 50% 51 - 75% 76 - 95% *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. What would be the most valuable to your executive team within the next 12 months, given the current pandemic? 6%6% Access to better technology 6% to facilitate remote work 10% We have asked CFOs their opinion on what would be the most valuable for Alignment on how to view 0% their executive teams within next 12 remote work and lead remotely 29% 10% months. Out of the given choices, 44% of Estonian CFOs and 40% of 25% Lithuanian CFOs believe that an New business opportunities created by the pandemic 23% understanding of the change in 20% customers’ needs and habits would be the most appreciated by their executive Understanding of customers' 44% team. Interestingly, only 17% of Latvian needs and habits change 17% 40% CFOs share this view. Estonia 25% Hybrid work Latvia 26% Lithuania 20% Member firms and DTTL: Insert appropriate copyright Presentation title 9 *[ToPlease edit, click note View >that Slide Master due >to Slide the Master] limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. [To edit, click View > Slide Master > Slide Master] Would CFOs expect bigger Government support in order to overcome Covid-19 effect? 50% 50% 45% The support from government is very important 42% to overcome effects of the pandemic, thus we asked Baltic CFOs if they would expect bigger 35% government support for that? 50% of peers 30% from Latvia would expect a bigger support, while 50% Lithuanian and 45% Estonian effects would not expect a bigger support. 20% 20% 8% Yes No Don’t have negative effect *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. The most attractive forms of Government support 50% 50% We have asked respondents which form of 43% 43% the government support is the most attractive. 43% and 50% of Estonian and Lithuanian CFOs find Financing and Reduction of payroll taxes the most 28% 28% appealing form of support. However, Latvian peers do not hold the same 17% 17% sentiment for reduction of payroll taxes 14% and would rather like to have 11% postponement of tax payments. However, they are sharing the view of financing as a very good form of governmental aid with 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Estonia Latvia Lithuania their peers from Estonia and Lithuania. Participation Financing Postponement Reduction of Liberalization of in equity of tax payments payroll taxes COVID-19 related regulations *Please note that due to the limited number of responses from CFOs in Lithuania data concerning this area in this report need to be interpreted with caution. Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (“DTTL”), its global network of member firms, and their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte organization”). DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) and each of its member firms and related entities are legally separate and independent entities, which cannot obligate or bind each other in respect of third parties. DTTL and each DTTL member firm and related entity is liable only for its own acts and omissions, and not those of each other. DTTL does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more. This communication contains general information only, and none of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited („DTTL“), its global network of member firms or their related entities (collectively, the “Deloitte organization”) is, by means of this communication, rendering professional advice or services. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your finances or your business, you should consult a qualified professional adviser. No representations, warranties or undertakings (express or implied) are given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information in this communication, and none of DTTL, its member firms, related entities, employees or agents shall be liable or responsible for any loss or damage whatsoever arising directly or indirectly in connection with any person relying on this communication.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and Country Reports
    Flash Report 01/2017 Flash Reports on Labour Law January 2017 Summary and country reports EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate DG Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Unit B.2 – Working Conditions Flash Report 01/2017 Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union. Freephone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11 (*) The information given is free, as are most calls (though some operators, phone boxes or hotels may charge you). LEGAL NOTICE This document has been prepared for the European Commission however it reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. More information on the European Union is available on the Internet (http://www.europa.eu). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 ISBN ABC 12345678 DOI 987654321 © European Union, 2017 Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged. Flash Report 01/2017 Country Labour Law Experts Austria Martin Risak Daniela Kroemer Belgium Wilfried Rauws Bulgaria Krassimira Sredkova Croatia Ivana Grgurev Cyprus Nicos Trimikliniotis Czech Republic Nataša Randlová Denmark Natalie Videbaek Munkholm Estonia Gaabriel Tavits Finland Matleena Engblom France Francis Kessler Germany Bernd Waas Greece Costas Papadimitriou Hungary Gyorgy Kiss Ireland Anthony Kerr Italy Edoardo Ales Latvia Kristine Dupate Lithuania Tomas Davulis Luxemburg Jean-Luc Putz Malta Lorna Mifsud Cachia Netherlands Barend Barentsen Poland Leszek Mitrus Portugal José João Abrantes Rita Canas da Silva Romania Raluca Dimitriu Slovakia Robert Schronk Slovenia Polonca Končar Spain Joaquín García-Murcia Iván Antonio Rodríguez Cardo Sweden Andreas Inghammar United Kingdom Catherine Barnard Iceland Inga Björg Hjaltadóttir Liechtenstein Wolfgang Portmann Norway Helga Aune Lill Egeland Flash Report 01/2017 Table of Contents Executive Summary ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • In the Baltic States
    A comparative review of socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) in the Baltic States 2020 Table of Contents 1. The uneven geography of the crisis: economic effects in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania .... 3 2. Key factors in overcoming the crisis and the potential long-term economic impact ......... 8 3. The bright side: opportunities arising from the crisis ...................................................... 14 4. Possible coordinated actions of the three Baltic States to build back better .................. 16 This review is a joint work of Foresight Centre of Parliament of Estonian, LV PEAK of the University of Latvia and Government Strategic Analysis Center (STRATA) of Lithuania. The review was finalized in October 2020. 2 Introduction and aims The COVID-19 crisis has been a true black swan – an unexpected event that is having enormous consequences on virtually every aspect of our daily life. Next to the 1918 flu pandemic that occurred in a very differenc socio-economic context, there are no historical parallels close to the current crisis, which makes forecasting and future prediction a tough task. Due to the global scale of the crisis, the collaboration and joint efforts are at the heart of solutions to the COVID-19 situation. Close cooperation is especially important in the Baltic region with highly interconnected economies and societies. This paper aims to provide a comparative picture of the effects of the crisis and describe the key factors and uncertainties affecting the recovery. Despite the sharp recession, there are also some opportunities arising from the situation, which are discussed in the third section of the paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Systems in Transition
    61575 Latvia HiT_2_WEB.pdf 1 03/03/2020 09:55 Vol. 21 No. 4 2019 Vol. Health Systems in Transition Vol. 21 No. 4 2019 Health Systems in Transition: in Transition: Health Systems C M Y CM MY CY CMY K Latvia Latvia Health system review Daiga Behmane Alina Dudele Anita Villerusa Janis Misins The Observatory is a partnership, hosted by WHO/Europe, which includes other international organizations (the European Commission, the World Bank); national and regional governments (Austria, Belgium, Finland, Kristine Klavina Ireland, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the Veneto Region of Italy); other health system organizations (the French National Union of Health Insurance Funds (UNCAM), the Dzintars Mozgis Health Foundation); and academia (the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and the Giada Scarpetti London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM)). The Observatory has a secretariat in Brussels and it has hubs in London at LSE and LSHTM) and at the Berlin University of Technology. HiTs are in-depth profiles of health systems and policies, produced using a standardized approach that allows comparison across countries. They provide facts, figures and analysis and highlight reform initiatives in progress. Print ISSN 1817-6119 Web ISSN 1817-6127 61575 Latvia HiT_2_WEB.pdf 2 03/03/2020 09:55 Giada Scarpetti (Editor), and Ewout van Ginneken (Series editor) were responsible for this HiT Editorial Board Series editors Reinhard Busse, Berlin University of Technology, Germany Josep Figueras, European
    [Show full text]
  • Minority Rights After EU Enlargement: a Comparison of Antigay Politics in Poland and Latvia
    Original Article Minority rights after EU enlargement: A comparison of antigay politics in Poland and Latvia Conor O’Dwyer* and Katrina Z.S. Schwartz Department of Political Science, University of Florida, 234 Anderson Hall, PO Box 117325, Gainesville, Florida 32611-7325, USA. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected] *Corresponding author. Abstract This paper examines the recent backlash against gay rights in Poland and Latvia as a test case of the depth and breadth of ‘europeanization’ in the new postcommunist member-states of the European Union (EU). We argue that antigay mobilization in these countries constitutes illiberal governance (and thus a failure of europeanization) on three grounds: failure of institutional protections for sexual minorities, broad inclusion of illiberal elites in mainstream politics and virulence of antigay rhetoric by political elites in the public sphere. To explain the stalled europeanization of nondiscrimination norms regarding sexual minorities, we apply two analytical models widely used to explain successful norm adoption in other policy areas: the ‘external incentives’ and ‘social learning’ models. We find that in the case of gay rights, EU conditionality was weak, and national identity and ‘resonance’ operated against norm adoption, as did domestic institutions (namely, weakly institutionalized party systems). The EU might have overcome these obstacles through persuasion, but deliberative processes were lacking. Our analysis suggests that some of the key factors underlying both models of norm adoption operate differently in the new, postaccession context, and that social learning is likely to play a greater role in postaccession europeanization. Comparative European Politics (2010) 8, 220–243. doi:10.1057/cep.2008.31 Keywords: Latvia; Poland; sexual minorities; European Union; europeanization; illiberalism Introduction In May 2004, Poland and Latvia joined the European Union (EU), ending a long process in which the strength of their democratic institutions was carefully tested and validated by the European Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Projev T Pstross Anglicky
    Ladies and Gentlemen, Today we mark the anniversary of the proclamation of the Czech Republic that took place on 28 October 1918, and we do so in a year that is of extraordinary importance in terms of contacts between the Czech Republic and Latvia: this year, exactly 90 years have passed since our countries established diplomatic relations, and 20 years since their restoration in the year 1991. This provides an occasion to reflect on the achievements within our mutual relationship, on what binds us together and what awaits us in the future. The high standard of quality and friendly nature of our relations is a long-lasting tradition. Both our independent states were born at the same moment, and in the twenty inter-war years they moved closer in many areas of cooperation. The aspirations of independent Latvia for economic and cultural development found many proponents among us. Many of them tirelessly promoted your culture, which, until then, had been virtually unknown to us. Trade evolved, and Czech industrial products earned a steady place within the Latvian market. Latvia was perceived in our country as the natural centre of gravity of the southern Baltics and, among other things, as a potential economic springboard into the Russian space. In the context of the foreign policy orientation of pre-war Czechoslovakia, Latvia did indeed occupy a peripheral, yet never a marginal, place. The subsequent trajectory of this relationship was affected by the loss of both countries’ independence on the eve of World War II and the ramifications this brought along. The restoration of Czech-Latvian relations at the level of sovereign and independent states was only enabled by the collapse of the Soviet empire in the early 1990s.
    [Show full text]
  • Automatic Exchange of Information: Status of Commitments
    As of 27 September 2021 AUTOMATIC EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION (AEOI): STATUS OF COMMITMENTS1 JURISDICTIONS UNDERTAKING FIRST EXCHANGES IN 2017 (49) Anguilla, Argentina, Belgium, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Cayman Islands, Colombia, Croatia, Cyprus2, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Guernsey, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Isle of Man, Italy, Jersey, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Montserrat, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Seychelles, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Turks and Caicos Islands, United Kingdom JURISDICTIONS UNDERTAKING FIRST EXCHANGES BY 2018 (51) Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan3, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China, Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Curacao, Dominica4, Greenland, Grenada, Hong Kong (China), Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Lebanon, Macau (China), Malaysia, Marshall Islands, Mauritius, Monaco, Nauru, New Zealand, Niue4, Pakistan3, Panama, Qatar, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sint Maarten4, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago4, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Vanuatu JURISDICTIONS UNDERTAKING FIRST EXCHANGES BY 2019 (2) Ghana3, Kuwait5 JURISDICTIONS UNDERTAKING FIRST EXCHANGES BY 2020 (3) Nigeria3, Oman5, Peru3 JURISDICTIONS UNDERTAKING FIRST EXCHANGES BY 2021 (3) Albania3, 7, Ecuador3, Kazakhstan6
    [Show full text]
  • Baltic States Part II: Latvia
    Baltic States Part II: Latvia The interest of U.S. business in the Baltic States is growing rapidly, most recently shown by the U.S. Investment and Trade Mission to the Baltic States at the end of May 2006. Looking at each Baltic State separately, we can see intensive economic Sweden Finland development, as well Norway Estonia as a large growth in Latvia Russia trade and investments. Denmark Lithuania This article, second of Belarus ranked sixth among new EU Germany Poland a three-part series on Ukraine states for FDI stock per capita. the region, draws your Czech Republic Since 2000, Latvian GDP has attention to Latvia and its increased annually by 7.7 percent. connections to the United Such indicators of development are States and Indiana. among the highest in the European Union. The Nation of the Soviet Union. After a difficult The dominating investors include Latvia has 2.3 million people, making transition period, they joined NATO Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark it the second largest Baltic State. The and the European Union in 2004. and Germany. They account for more majority of the population is Latvian Latvia was also the first Baltic country than 50 percent of the total investment, (57 percent), with Russians as the next to be accepted to the World Trade primarily in the fields of finance, real largest ethnic group (29.6 percent). Organization (WTO) in 1998. estate, telecommunications, trade and This country, which is slightly larger export-orientated manufacturing. About then West Virginia, is located at the Economy 5 percent of Latvia’s FDI comes from crossroads of Northern and Eastern Latvia has already completed the United States (see Figure 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Illiberal Democracy Trends in Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary and Latvia
    Report on illiberal democracy trends in Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary and Latvia Report on illiberal democracy trends in Croatia, Slovenia, Hungary and Latvia Zagreb, Ljubljana, Budapest, Riga – February 2018 Editor: Gordan Bosanac Authors: Croatian Platform for International Citizen Solidarity (CROSOL) Latvian Platform for Development Cooperation (LAPAS) Slovenian Global Action (SLOGA) DemNet Publisher: Croatian Platform for International Citizen Solidarity (CROSOL) /Platforma za međunarodnu građansku solidarnost Hrvatske More Democracy for More Europe - project supported by EU - Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency. The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsi•ble for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Introduction In recent years, we have seen the rise of the anti-liberal democracy politics in Eastern European EU member states. In the meantime, those trends are becoming visible in some Western European Countries but also USA. The situation in Poland and Hungary is maybe the best example of such politics where citizens are giving support to political parties whose political objectives are against the EU rule of law principles and against some fundamental human rights. Recent refugee crisis has also deepen those concerns. This is a clear sign that the citizens of Eastern European EU member states are willing to give up of some of the fundamental human rights values such as freedom of expression, freedom of assembly, free media, civil society or independent judiciary. Those trends are seriously harming EU rule of law principles but also are derogating human rights and democratic standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Latvia and Slovenia
    FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN LATVIA AND SLOVENIA PREAMBLE The Republic of Latvia and the Republic of Slovenia (hereinafter called "the Parties"), Recalling their intention to participate actively in the process of economic integration in Europe and expressing their preparedness to co-operate in seeking ways and means t o strengthen this process, Recalling their firm commitment to the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), the Charter of Paris for a new Europe, and in particular the principles contained in the final document of the CSCE Bonn Conference on Economic Cooperation in Europe, Reaffirming their commitment to the principles of a market economy, which constitutes the basis for their relations, Reaffirming their commitment to a pluralistic democracy based on the rule of law, human rights and fundamental freedoms, Desiring to create favourable conditions for the development and diversification of trade between them and for the promotion of commercial and economic cooperation in areas of common interest on the basis of equality, mutual benefit and international law, Resolved to contribute to the strengthening of the multilateral trading system and t o develop their relations in the field of trade in accordance with the basic principles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO), Considering that no provision of this Agreement may be interpreted as exempting the Parties to this Agreement from their obligations under other international agreements, Declaring their readiness to examine, in the light of any relevant factor, the possibility of developing and deepening their economic relations in order to extend them to fields not covered by this Agreement, Have decided, to conclude this Agreement: Article 1 Objectives 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Free Trade Agreement Between the Czech Republic and the Republic of Latvia
    FREE TRADE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CZECH REPUBLIC AND THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA PREAMBLE The Czech Republic and the Republic of Latvia (hereinafter called "the Parties"), Having regard to the Declaration of Prime Ministers of the Central European Free Trade Agreement countries, done on 11 September 1995 in Brno, Recalling their intention to participate actively in the process of economic integration as an important dimension of the stability on the European continent and expressing their preparedness to co-operate in seeking ways and means to strengthen this process, Reaffirming their firm commitment to the principles of a market economy, which constitutes the basis for their relations, Recalling their firm commitment to the Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Paris Charter, and, in particular, the principles contained in the final document of the Bonn Conference on Economic Co-operation in Europe, Resolved to this end to eliminate progressively the obstacles to substantially all their mutual trade, in accordance with the provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994, Firmly convinced that this Agreement will foster the intensification of mutually beneficial trade relations between them and contribute to the process of integration in Europe, Considering that no provision of this Agreement may be interpreted as exempting the Parties from their obligations under other international agreements and organizations, especially the World Trade Organization, Hereby agreed as follows: Article 1 Objectives 1. The Parties shall gradually establish a free trade area on substantially all their bilateral trade in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement and in conformity with Article XXIV o f the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and with the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Poverty and Inequality in Latvia: Advantages of Harmonising Methodology UNITED NATIONS
    Measuring poverty and inequality in Latvia: advantages of harmonising methodology UNITED NATIONS Inter-regional Expert Group Meeting “Placing equality at the centre of Agenda 2030” Santiago, Chile 27 – 28 June 2018 Viktors Veretjanovs Senior Expert of Social Statistics Methodology Section of Social Statistics Department (EU-SILC survey manager) Central Statistical Bureau of Latvia Structure of the presentation ▪ Latvia ▪ Data sources ▪ Methodology ▪ Data dissemination ▪ Sharing of experience ▪ National and international strategies ▪ Future challenges 2 Latvia Founded in 1918 Independent country since 1991 EU country since 2004 (euro since 2014) Number of population – 1.93 million Territory – 64.6 thsd km2 Capital city – Riga (32 % of the population) 3 Data sources (1) Before implementation of survey “EU Statistics on Income and Living Conditions” (EU-SILC survey): ▪ Household Budget Survey (HBS): • 1926-1927 and 1936-1937 – first HBS in Latvia; • 1952-1994 – Family Budget Survey; • 1995-2016 – HBS with updated methodology (with the support of the UN and the World Bank). Prior to joining the EU, HBS was the main data source on income, inequality and poverty; • next data collection year of HBS data will be carried in 2019 (or in 2020) and then every 3 years. ▪ Survey on income and living conditions (during the Soviet times; every 5 years); ▪ FAFO (Norway) NORBALT (1994) and NORBALT II (1999) – survey on living conditions in all Baltic States. 4 Data sources (2) Implementation of EU-SILC survey in Latvia: ▪ since 2005; ▪ EU-SILC survey is organized under a framework regulation and it is compulsory for all EU Member States http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/income-and-living-conditions/legislation ; ▪ EU-SILC is based on the idea of a “common framework” in contrast with the concept of a “common survey”.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgian Economic Outlook
    Georgian Economic Outlook Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Country Overview Area: 69 700 sq km Population 2008 E: 4 630 841 Life expectancy: 76.51 years Official language: Georgian Literacy: 100% Capital: Tbilisi Currency (code): Lari (GEL) GDP 2008E: US$ 12.80 billion GDP - real growth rate 2008E: 2.1% GDP - Per Capita 2008 US$ 2 920.3 Inflation rate 2008 (average annual): 10.0% External debt to GDP 2008: 21.4% Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Liberal Reforms for Long Term Sustainable Growth • Liberal Tax Code Only 6 taxes left Significant procedural and institutional reforms Simplified system of tax disputes discussion • Customs Reform Simplified customs procedures Simplified and sharply reduced the costs connected to the foreign trade Number of import tariffs were abolished on approximetaly 90% of products 3 tariff rates (0%, 5%, 12%) remained No quantitative restrictions (quotas) on imports and exports • Modernized system of Licenses and Permits Number of licenses and permits reduced by 84% Licenses and permits are only used in the production of highly risky goods and services, usage of natural resources and other specific activities Significantly simplified procedures of issuing licenses and permits Introduced “one-stop shop” and “silence is consent” principles Ministry of Economic Development of Georgia Liberal Reforms for Long Term Sustainable Growth • The reform of Technical Regulation System National mandatory standards system was replaced by the voluntary standards, giving entrepreneurs the
    [Show full text]