Double Dividend from Tariff Differentiation of Reforestation Fund

Abstract

Distortionary levy applied uniformly to all diameter classes of logs from logging natural forest can lead to inefficiencies; certain diameter should be left in the field because it is not economical to be used. Win-win or Pareto improving solution can be achieved if the government is more flexible. Social welfare is higher because of the waste that can be utilized to create employment, production and additional benefits for employers, as well as revenue for the state. Even if the levy rates are forced to zero for small-diameter timber, governments is actually not harmed at all because from the beginning the government does not get any revenue from small timber that is left in the field as waste. In scarcity situations of timber from natural forests, it is desirable if the government is considering differentiating charges in order to reduce or possibly eliminate the volume of waste generated by the levy. In general, tariff differentiation done in the form of higher tariffs for higher diameter logs. If possible, the lowest diameter limit of logs is forced down to its technical limits. That is, the processing tool that will determine how the minimum diameter logs can be processed profitably.

The State and the Development of Industrial Plantation Forest

“…The purpose of utilization permission granting is to increase the forest values, provide industrial raw materials and create employment/job (Srihadiono 2005). The improper/bad forest utilization is associated with high rates of deforestation (Amsberg 1998) and revenues (Soedomo 2013). Characteristics of forest timber product exploitation/ utilization permit which is regulated in the forestry regulations are shown in Delegation of authority and rights amendment Production forest is a state forest.…”

Implikasi Perubahan Tarif Dana Reboisasi Dan Provisi Sumber Daya Hutan Terhadap Laba Pemegang Konsesi Hutan Dan Penerimaan Negara Bukan Pajak: Studi Kasus Hutan Alam Produksi Di Kalimantan Timur, Indonesia

“…Dengan perubahan ini, pemerintah menghendaki pungutan bukan sebagai jaminan reboisasi tetapi sebagai pembayaran wajib reboisasi bagi pemegang HPH, sementara pemeliharaan hutan tetap harus dilaksanakan sesuai ketentuan TPTI (Saputra, 1995). Soedomo (2013) Pada Gambar 1 diketahui bahwa besarnya PNBP sektor kehutanan bersumber setidaknya dari dua jenis pungutan bukan pajak, yaitu: 1) penerimaan PSDH dan 2) penerimaan DR. Sumber penerimaan lain seperti IUPHHK-HA/HT/HTR tidak dimasukkan karena porsinya relatif kecil. Besarnya penerimaan PSDH dipengaruhi oleh besarnya tarif PSDH yang dikenakan dan harga kayu bulat di pasar serta produksi kayu bulat, sedangkan besarnya penerimaan DR dipengaruhi oleh besarnya tarif DR yang dikenakan dan produksi kayu bulat; harga kayu bulat tidak berpengaruh karena DR ditetapkan per m kayu 3 bulat.…”