Nispacee-Propertytax2010.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NISPAcee The Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe Property Tax in Economies in Transition: Selected Case Studies Edited by Lucie Sedmihradská, University of Economics, Prague, Czech Republic This book was sponsored by a grant from The Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative, Open Society Institute, Budapest, Hungary. Copyright © 2010 by NISPAcee The Network of Institutes and Schools of Public Administration in Central and Eastern Europe http://www.nispa.org Property Tax in Economies in Transition: Selected Case Studies Reviewer: Phillip J. Bryson, Brigham Young University, USA Published by NISPAcee Press Polianky 5 841 01 Bratislava 42 Slovak Republic phone/fax: +421 2 6428 5557 e-mail: [email protected] http://www.nispa.org/press Printed in Slovakia ISBN 978-80-89013-49-4 NISPAcee is an international association focused on public administration. Its mission is to foster the development of public administration disciplines and training programmes in post-communist countries, increase the quality of instruction and research and assist the development of its member institutions at both international and national levels. Table of Contents List of Contributors .......................................................................................................4 Preface ...............................................................................................................................5 1. Property Tax as a Key Tool for Fiscal Decentralisation: Unfulfilled Expectations in Central and Eastern European Countries Lucie Sedmihradská....................................................................................................7 2. Property Tax in Belarus Yuri Krivorotko .........................................................................................................16 3. Property Tax in Bulgaria: A Case Study of Blagoevgrad Desislava Stoilova .....................................................................................................30 4. Property Tax in Bulgaria: A Case Study of Silistra Nadezhda Bobcheva .................................................................................................57 5. Property Tax in the Czech Republic Lucie Sedmihradská and Phillip J. Bryson .............................................................70 6. Land Taxation in Estonia Viktor Trasberg .........................................................................................................95 7. Property Tax in Kosovo Gani Asllani ............................................................................................................106 8. Property Tax in the Republic of Moldova: Basis for Local Autonomy ? Boris Morozov .........................................................................................................127 9. Property Tax and Inter-Governmental Fiscal Relations in the Republic of Moldova Eugenia Busmachiu ................................................................................................151 10. Property Tax in Ukraine: To Be, or not to Be – Is this the Question ? Sergii Slukhai ..........................................................................................................168 11. Property Tax and Local Finances in Ukraine Artem Rudyck and Iryna Scherbyna ....................................................................185 List of Contributors Gani Asllani Ministry of Economy and Finance, PISG Kosovo Nadezhda Bobcheva Municipality of Silistra, Bulgaria Phillip J. Bryson Brigham Young University, USA Eugenia Busmachiu Academy of Economic Studies, Moldova Yuri Krivorotko Belarus Private Institute of Jurisprudence, Minsk, Belarus Boris Morozov Public Administration Institute, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, USA Artem Rudyck Institute for Budgetary and Socio-Economic Research, Kyiv, Ukraine Lucie Sedmihradská University of Economics, Prague, Czech Republic Iryna Scherbyna Institute for Budgetary and Socio-Economic Research, Kyiv, Ukraine Sergii Slukhai Economics Faculty, Taras Shevchenko Kyiv National University, Ukraine Desislava Stoilova Faculty of Economics, Southwest University, Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria Viktor Trasberg Faculty of Economics, University of Tartu, Estonia 4 Preface Property tax, or to be more precise, real estate tax, is a well-suited revenue source for local governments, which may serve as a tool for fiscal autonomy of local governments. However, this is only true in the case where local governments have some real decision-making powers regarding property tax and that the proceeds from this tax are sufficiently significant. The ten presented case studies show that in all seven central and eastern European (CEE) countries, these two conditions are fulfilled either to a very limited extent, or not at all. The expectations of international experts at the beginning of the transformation process, twenty years ago, were not met and local governments in the region still do not have sufficient fiscal autonomy and thus the process of fiscal decentralisation is for now, incomplete. This volume presents ten country case studies, focused on property taxation from several points of view; first, the role of property tax in the national tax system and as a source of local government revenue is evaluated; second, the property tax incidence is discussed; third, the property tax procedure is described, and finally in some of the chapters, a case study of selected municipalities is presented. This standardised approach allows for a comparison of the situation in the individual countries. Three countries are presented twice; we decided on this format, as the papers complement, rather than overlap each other. The key step, preceding the preparation of the individual case studies and the entire volume, was the compilation of the research protocol of the NISPAcee Working Group on Public Sector Finance and Accounting carried out by Mihaly Lados from the Centre for Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Pécs, Hungary. The completion of this book would not have been possible without the mutual collaboration of each of the authors, who served as peer reviewers for the other papers and who responded to most of the comments and suggestions in a very limited time. Comments from Phillip J. Bryson, from the Brigham Young University, USA, who served as a reviewer of the entire volume, were very beneficial and we thank him for his precise and rapid work. We appreciate the assistance of the NISPAcee Secretariat with regard to all the technical aspects of the preparation of the book and of Jane Finlay for language editing, which is, for most of our papers, inevitable. We are grateful to the Local Government and Public Service Reform Initiative at the Open Society Institute in Budapest for its generous financial support without which, most of the working group members would not have been able to attend the 16th NISPAcee Annual Conference in Bratislava, Slovakia in May 2008. 5 1. Property Tax as a Key Tool for Fiscal Decentralisation: Unfulfilled Expectations in Central and Eastern European Countries Lucie Sedmihradská 1.1 Introduction After the fall of the central planning system in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) twenty years ago, many expected that fiscal decentralisation would be amongst the first reform steps, alongside price liberalisation and privatisation. Despite the common belief that decentralisation could improve the performance of the public sector, the transition countries are still, in many aspects, far from having a well- functioning inter-governmental system in which individual local (sub-national) governments enjoy sufficient fiscal autonomy. Fiscal decentralisation means that local governments make decisions regard- ing the provision of public services and at the same time, they bear a significant share of the associated costs through their own revenue base (see Oates 1991, 263). Thus, a necessary condition for the efficient functioning of local governments is their ability to influence their revenues. This clearly-stated situation raises a fun- damental question: Which tax or taxes should be assigned to local governments ? Musgrave (Oates 1991, 266) defined the following tax assignment principles: 1) Highly progressive taxes should be centralised, 2) Sub-national governments should avoid taxes with a highly mobile tax base, 3) Central governments should collect taxes with an unequally distributed tax base and 4) Local taxes and fees can be decentralised. Respecting these criteria leads to the assignment of the largest taxes (i.e. in- come tax and value added tax, which have already replaced other types of general consumption taxes across the region) to central government, and local governments have to rely on property taxes with only very limited proceeds. At the same time, many of the CEE countries use a form of tax or revenue sharing among different governmental levels; however, the ability of local govern- ments to influence the revenues from these shared taxes is, for the most part, very limited, so that these revenues almost assume the character of an unconditional grant. A comparison of the tax autonomy in the ten new EU member states, us- ing the OECD system of classification regarding own taxes of sub-national gov- ernments (see OECD 2002, 60), shows that out of the ten countries, only in three (Slovakia, Poland and Hungary) can the sub-national governments, to some extent, 7 Property Tax in Economies in Transition: Selected Case Studies influence more