The burden of labour taxation in Croatia, Slovenia and Slovakia in the period 2011–2017

Urban, Ivica; Čok, Mitja; Verbič, Miroslav

doi:10.1080/1331677x.2019.1638291

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is worth mentioning that the results of the research of Palić et al (2019) reflected the assessment of the impact of selected labor market factors and personal income taxes. It is also claimed that the level of the average monthly wages and the number of employees are affecting the efficiency of the personal income tax in the long run (Urban et al, 2019). Taking it into consideration, the authors confirmed the correlation of previously mentioned indicators.…”

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 55%

Mutual impact of personal income tax and macroeconomic indicators

Ćurčić¹,

Milojević²,

Krunić³

2020

Industrija

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From mid-2006 to the end of 2008, numerous decisions were adopted in the public finances of the Republic of Serbia, which resulted in a permanent reduction in tax revenues and in increase of public expenditures. It creates a systemic imbalance between government revenue and expenditure, that is, the fiscal deficit. The emergence of the fiscal deficit is the main motive of the conducted research, where by using a simple regression analysis of the time series of macroeconomic data, authors linked the indicators of economic growth and personal income tax. The results of the research indicate the importance of the influence of personal income tax on the creation of a favorable macroeconomic environment, where the regulation and reform of the existing tax system are imposed as imperatives.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewsupporting

confidence: 55%

Mutual impact of personal income tax and macroeconomic indicators

Ćurčić¹,

Milojević²,

Krunić³

2020

Industrija

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and in Slovenia 2.6 p.p. In terms of tax burden, both countries have undergone major tax reforms, but if we express the tax burden as a percentage of the countries' GDP as reported in Urban et al (2019). Slovakia and Slovenia are close to the EU-28 average, but in terms of total tax burden, this burden in Slovakia is significantly lower than in Slovenia.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They show that a move to a highly progressive tax structure leads to employment gains but at the same time is "associated with a drop in aggregate income and tax revenue". Urban, Čok and Verbič (2019) analysed the labour income taxation during 2011-2017 in Slovakia, Slovenia and Croatia using microsimulation models and assess the impact of tax-benefit systems on income distribution.…”

Section: Preliminarymentioning

confidence: 99%

The Tax Burden CGE Analysis for Slovakia and Slovenia

Mitkova

Jánošová

2019

Naše Gospodarstvo/Our Economy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the paper, the static computable general equilibrium model for Slovakia and Slovenia is used for a tax burden analysis. There was considered simultaneous 1% increase in taxes on primary factors, on firms’ and government domestic and imported purchases, on import taxes, on output (or income) tax, on private domestic and imported consumption taxes and export subsidies. The direct tax burden as well as the allocative efficiency effects of a tax, the welfare effects and welfare decomposition of such change for both countries is analysed. The most sensitive sectors on tax rate changes is heavy manufacturing and processed food and the most distorting effect has the tax increase on private consumption tax. The government’s tax increase should generate return at least 105.75% of its costs in Slovakia and 101.92% in Slovenia, otherwise the welfare will decline.

show abstract

“…Following the 2008 economic crisis Slovenia was particularly concerned for lower income population and PIT reforms increased the progressiveness of the tax system. For those at the bottom of the income distribution general allowance was increased while for top income earners new, higher tax rate was introduced (Čok, Urban, and Verbič 2013;Urban, Čok, and Verbič 2019). Croatia experienced negative economic growth rates for nearly seven years following the 2008 crisis.…”

Section: Personal Income Tax Reforms In Former Yugoslav Countriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tax reforms and income inequality in former Yugoslav countries: Escaping the avant-garde neoliberalism in the income tax policy

Rakić

Vladisavljević

2021

Panoeconomicus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the breakup of former Yugoslavia Croatia, Serbia and Slovenia followed different income tax reform trajectories that could explain currently different levels of income inequality in these countries. Our paper analyzes redistributive effects of introducing progressive tax systems, like the ones currently implemented in Slovenia and Croatia, in the Serbian context. Using microsimulation modeling and Survey on Income and Living Conditions data for 2017 our results suggest that implementation of both Croatian and Slovenian tax system would yield lower levels of income inequality and poverty if applied in Serbia. Slovenian system achieves larger decrease in inequality due to higher tax burden on the top incomes and brings significant increase in tax revenues. Croatian tax schedule achieves stronger decrease in poverty as more generous personal allowance exempt higher portions of low incomes from labour taxes.

show abstract

The burden of labour taxation in Croatia, Slovenia and Slovakia in the period 2011–2017

Cited by 11 publications

References 21 publications

Mutual impact of personal income tax and macroeconomic indicators

Mutual impact of personal income tax and macroeconomic indicators

The Tax Burden CGE Analysis for Slovakia and Slovenia

Tax reforms and income inequality in former Yugoslav countries: Escaping the avant-garde neoliberalism in the income tax policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About