commission on fiscal imbalance 合集

10 5750 5855 5925 estonia 6595 6697 7310 7204 iceland

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: itures reported in the GFS.6 The revenues of subnational governments are less than their expenditures in both unitary and federal countries. The vertical imbalance is financed through intergovernmental transfers. However, in many countries, intergovernmental transfer system is not formula based and the central government decide on the amount of transfer on a discretionary basis. Therefore, intergovernmental transfer system in many countries is not transparent and subject to political manipulation, which lead to uncertainties on the part of subnational governments. Such uncertainties discourage fiscal planning and effective budgeting. 4 5 6 There are data sets available about subnational finances only for selected countries, such as Indian Subnational Database of the World Bank. Bird (2000) defines own revenues as taxes (i) that are assessed by subnational governments, (ii) for which subnational governments set the rate, and (iii) the revenues accrue to the local government. A revenue may be "own source" even if the tax base is centrally defined and the proceeds are centrally collected. Since these figures are from the GFS, they are subject to constraints discussed above. For example, the revenue figures include shared taxes and other taxes which their rate and base are determined by central government. However, regardless of local governments' control over revenue resources, Table 1 shows that subnational revenues are less than their expenditures. 148 Commission on Fiscal Imbalance TABLE 1 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES AS PERCENT OF TOTAL SUBNATIONAL EXPENDITURES Unitary Countries Albania Azerbaijan 1995 1996 1997 1998 5.64% 6.85% 3.69% 4.05% 73.97% 68.65% 66.78% 58.30% Belarus 73.18% 70.63% 77.73% 81.69% Bulgaria 57.27% 66.19% 65.35% 61.08% Croatia 98.11% 93.62% 93.83% 89.18% Czech Republic 72.26% 60.28% 72.74% 75.80% Denmark 57.10% 57.50% 58.55% 59.25% Estonia 65.95% 66.97% 73.10% 72.04% Iceland 87.26% 84.64% 84.29% 85.31% Kazakhstan N/A N/A 78.76% 71.68% Latvia 75.53% 77.93% 73.82% 72.08% Lithuania 73.82% 72.22% 71.71% 80.65% Mauritius 39.51% 39.91% 40.68% 42.52% Moldova 72.74% 60.50% 58.66% 62.49% Mongolia 58.46% 56.92% 60.10% 57.32% Norway 60.96% 62.10% 61.30% 59.71% Poland 71.52% 66.49% 66.21% 64.83% N/A 89.65% 79.75% 73.69% Slovenia 77.31% 82.83% 81.88% 80.60% United Kingdom 27.47% 27.31% 27.91% 29.33% Slovak Republic Federal Countries* Australia 85.73% 83.28% 81.92% 81.80% Austria 82.74% 85.31% 87.28% 83.89% Bolivia 85.64% 85.93% 85.85% 85.76% México 97.37% 97.72% 99.98% N/A Switzerland 81.35% 81.91% 81.96% 82.02% United States 62.43% 63.51% 64.32% 64.51% *In federal countries local government is the lowest tier of government. Note: Intergovernmental transfers are not included in local government revenues. Source: International Monetary Fund. 1998. Government Finance Statistics Year Book 1998, Country Tables. Second, striking variations appear in the size and capacity of subnational governments in all countries. There are big differences in terms of population, expendi...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online