2008
DOI: 10.5089/9781451870572.001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Efficiency Costs of Myanmar’s Multiple Exchange Rate Regime

Abstract: 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.Myanmar's multiple exchange rate system creates various economic distortions. This paper describes the exchange rate practices in Myanmar, develops a model of foreign exchange mark… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In 1989 the retention rate was raised to 100%, but exporters were subject to a 10% export tax paid in foreign currency. 12 Since then, there was no surrender requirement on export earnings for the private sector or on foreign exchange allocation to private importers, so the foreign exchange market became divided between the public and private sectors (World Bank, 1995;Hori and Wong, 2008;IMF, 2012 The gap between the official exchange rate and that of the parallel market did not itself directly distort the economic activity of the private sector. Since private exporters were permitted to retain export earnings as FCDs, the gap between the two exchange rates did not impose an effective tax on exporters, unlike the dual exchange rate regimes in other countries.…”
Section: Market Liberalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1989 the retention rate was raised to 100%, but exporters were subject to a 10% export tax paid in foreign currency. 12 Since then, there was no surrender requirement on export earnings for the private sector or on foreign exchange allocation to private importers, so the foreign exchange market became divided between the public and private sectors (World Bank, 1995;Hori and Wong, 2008;IMF, 2012 The gap between the official exchange rate and that of the parallel market did not itself directly distort the economic activity of the private sector. Since private exporters were permitted to retain export earnings as FCDs, the gap between the two exchange rates did not impose an effective tax on exporters, unlike the dual exchange rate regimes in other countries.…”
Section: Market Liberalizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As described above, the foreign exchange market was segmented between the private and public sectors (World Bank :18; Hori and Wong ; IMF ). The market structure can be depicted as in Figure .…”
Section: Structure Of the Foreign Exchange Marketmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Instead, FCDs could be used for own imports or could be withdrawn in foreign exchange certificates (FECs). 10 As described above, the foreign exchange market was segmented between the private and public sectors (World Bank 1995:18;Hori and Wong 2008;IMF 2012). The market structure can be depicted as in Figure 3.…”
Section: The Segmented Foreign Exchange Market Before the April 2012 mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The foreign exchange market is effectively segmented between the private and public sectors (Hori and Wong, 2008).…”
Section: Ii1 Trade Policiesmentioning
confidence: 99%