This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF.The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. This paper examines how growth has varied across India's states. It finds that (i) the income gap between rich and poor states has widened; (ii) rich and faster-growing states have been more effective in reducing poverty; (iii) poor and slower-growing states have had little success in generating private sector jobs; (iv) labor and capital flows do little to close income gaps; and (v) the volatility in economic growth is greatest in poor states. Differences in states' policies affect the cross-state pattern of growth. Greater private sector investment, smaller governments, and better institutions are found to have a positive impact on growth.

This paper estimated the distributional impact of the main elements of general government taxation and spending in South Africa, applying fiscal incidence analysis to the 2010/11 IES (Stats SA 2012b). On the tax side, it analyzed the incidence of 64.5 percent of total tax revenue, including PIT, VAT, excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco, and the general fuel levy. On the expenditure side, it analyzed the incidence of 43 percent of general government expenditures, focused on social spending including direct cash transfers, free basic services, and health and education spending.The results show that South Africa uses its fiscal instruments to significantly reduce market income inequality and poverty through a progressive tax system and highly progressive social spending. The rich in South Africa bear the brunt of taxes that we examined, and the government redirects these resources to the poorest in society to raise their incomes. Only the top three deciles of the income distribution pay more in taxes than they receive in transfers. As a result, the fiscal system lifts some 3.6 million individuals out of poverty. Despite the large fiscal redistribution, however, South Africa remains one of the most unequal countries in the world. More can and should be done to improve the quality of education and health service delivery.

This Working Paper should not be reported as representing the views of the IMF. The views expressed in this Working Paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent those of the IMF or IMF policy. Working Papers describe research in progress by the author(s) and are published to elicit comments and to further debate. The paper traces the Baltics' adjustment strategy during the 2008-09 global financial crisis. The abrupt end to the externally-financed domestic demand boom triggered a severe output collapse, bringing per capita income levels back to 2005/06 levels. In response to this shock, the Baltics undertook an internal devaluation that relied on unprecedented fiscal and nominal wage adjustment, steps to preserve financial sector stability as well as complementary efforts to facilitate voluntary private debt restructuring. One-and-half years on, the strategy is making good progress but not yet complete. Confidence in the exchange rate was maintained, the banking system was supported by its parent banks, external imbalances and inflation have largely disappeared, competitiveness is improving, and fiscal deficits are gradually being brought back towards pre-crisis levels. However, amid record levels of unemployment, further reforms are needed to foster a return to more balanced growth, fiscal sustainability, and a healthier banking system.

This paper estimated the distributional impact of the main elements of general government taxation and spending in South Africa, applying fiscal incidence analysis to the 2010/11 IES (Stats SA 2012b). On the tax side, it analyzed the incidence of 64.5 percent of total tax revenue, including PIT, VAT, excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco, and the general fuel levy. On the expenditure side, it analyzed the incidence of 43 percent of general government expenditures, focused on social spending including direct cash transfers, free basic services, and health and education spending.The results show that South Africa uses its fiscal instruments to significantly reduce market income inequality and poverty through a progressive tax system and highly progressive social spending. The rich in South Africa bear the brunt of taxes that we examined, and the government redirects these resources to the poorest in society to raise their incomes. Only the top three deciles of the income distribution pay more in taxes than they receive in transfers. As a result, the fiscal system lifts some 3.6 million individuals out of poverty. Despite the large fiscal redistribution, however, South Africa remains one of the most unequal countries in the world. More can and should be done to improve the quality of education and health service delivery.

No abstract