CC BY
34Central or local manage the port authority Bui Ba Khiem (Socialist Republic of Vietnam) Центральная или местная организация портовой власти Буй Ба Кхием (Социалистическая Республика Вьетнам)
Буй Ба Кхием / Bui Ba Khiem - кандидат экономических наук, учебный отдел,
Хайфонский университет, г. Хайфон, Социалистическая Республика Вьетнам
Abstract: port Authority Model - an efficient model for many countries which have developed maritime sector. In Vietnam, this model is mentioned in the 2015 Maritime Law, however it has many questions needed to be answered. Special, central or local will manage the port authority. In the trend of world economic integration, Vietnam seaports are gradually transforming itself in the management method, follow the advanced model. One of the models was interested in is the Port Authorities model. This is the Model - an efficient model for many countries which have developed maritime sector. Practice has proved this model has several advantages in the process of management and port operators. In Vietnam, this model is mentioned in the 2015 Maritime Law, however it has many questions needed to be answered. Special, central or local will manage the port authority. Аннотация: в тенденции мировой экономической интеграции морские порты Вьетнама постепенно изменяют свои методы управления, следуя усовершенствованной модели. Одной из моделей является модель портовой власти. Это эффективная модель для многих стран, которые разработали морской сектор. Во Вьетнаме эта модель упоминается в 2015 году морского права, однако он имеет много вопросов, которые необходимо рассмотреть. Особенно центральный или местный порт будет управляться портовой властью.
Keywords: port, port authority, manage port authority.
Ключевые слова: порт, портовая власть, организация портовой власти.
1. Introduction
Port Authority is a term that is often mentioned in the recent time when lawmakers are debating about who manages it in the process of building Vietnam Maritime Law 2015. Look out world, the Port Authority is common model and succeeded in organizing the management and exploitation at the largest seaport. Adopting the model port authority in Vietnam has a major issue that must be resolved: central or local manage port authority to achieve high efficiency?
2. What is Port Authority?
2.1. The world's viewpoint on the Port Authority
* There are many different concepts of port authorities such as
- A government commission responsible for managing a port's trade and transportation infrastructure, such as harbors, tunnels and bridges; also in plural. [6].
- In Canada and the United States, port authority (less commonly a port district) is a governmental or quasi-governmental public authority for a special-purpose district usually formed by a legislative body (or bodies) to operate ports and other transportation infrastructure.
Most port authorities are financially self-supporting. In addition to owning land, setting fees, and sometimes levying taxes, port districts can also operate shipping terminals, airports, railroads, and irrigation facilities.
Port authorities are usually governed by boards or commissions, which are commonly appointed by governmental chief executives, often from different jurisdictions. In Canada, the federal Minister of Transport selects the local chief executive board member and the rest of the board is appointed at the recommendation of port users to the federal Minister; while all Canadian port authorities have a federal or Crown charter called Letters Patent.
* Role of Port Authorities [4]
Ports usually have a governing body referred to as the port authority, port management, or port administration. Port authority is used widely to indicate any of these three terms.
The term port authority has been defined in various ways. In 1977, a commission of the European Union (EU) defined a port authority as a "State, Municipal, public, or private body, which is:
Largely responsible for the tasks of construction, administration and sometimes the operation of port facilities and, in certain circumstances, for security". This definition is sufficiently broad to accommodate the various port management models existing within the EU and elsewhere.
Ports authorities may be established at all levels of government: national, regional, provincial, or local. The most common form is a local port authority, an authority administering only one port area. However, national port authorities still exist in various countries such as Tanzania, Sri Lanka, Nigeria, and Aruba.
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) Handbook for Port Planners in Developing Countries lists the statutory powers of a national port authority as follows (on the assumption that operational decisions will be taken locally):
• Investment: Power to approve proposals for port investments in amounts above a certain figure. The criterion for approval would be that the proposal was broadly in accordance with a national plan, which the authority would maintain;
• Financial policy: Power to set common financial objectives for ports (for example required return on investment defined on a common basis), with a common policy on what infrastructure will be funded centrally versus locally, and advising the government on loan applications;
• Tariff policy: Power to regulate rates and charges as required to protect the public interest;
• Labor policy: Power to set common recruitment standards, a common wage structure, and common qualifications for promotion; and the power to approve common labor union procedures;
• Licensing: When appropriate, power to establish principles for licensing of port employees or agents;
• Information and research: Power to collect, analyze, and disseminate statistical information on port activity for general use, and to sponsor research into port matters as required;
• Legal: Power to act as legal advisor to local port authorities.
Increasingly, central governments implement seaport policies through the allocation of resources rather than through the exercise of wide-ranging regulatory powers.
While central governments should pursue macroeconomic objectives through an active seaport policy, port authority objectives should be more narrowly focused on port finances and operations.
It is a widely accepted opinion among port specialists that a port authority should have as a principal objective the full recovery of all port-related costs, including capital costs, plus an adequate return on capital. The full recovery of costs will help a port authority to:
• Maintain internal cost discipline;
• Attract outside investment and establish secure long-term cash flows;
• Stimulate innovation in the various functional areas to guarantee a long-term balance between costs and revenues, especially when faced with innovations by terminal operators, port users, rival ports, and hinterland operators;
• Generate internal cash flows needed to replace and expand port infrastructure and superstructure;
• Compete according to the rules of the market system, without excessive distortions of competition;
• Put limits on cross-subsidization, which may be rational from a marketing point of view (market penetration, traffic attraction), but which can undermine financial performance;
• Avoid dissipation of the port authority's asset base to satisfy objectives of third parties (for example, port users demanding the use of land in the port area with- out regard to the land's most economic use or port and city administrations using port authority assets to pursue general city goals);
Full cost recovery should be viewed as a minimum port authority objective; once this objective has been achieved, however, the port authority can pursue other-than-financial objectives considered desirable by the government or by itself.
• Objectives and Functions of a Port Authority [4]
The third section of a ports law should delineate the objectives and functions of a port authority. Usually, a port authority exercises jurisdiction over a port territory, which should constitute an economic and functional unit. The establishment of a port authority as this legal entity is one of the major elements of a ports law (Box 5). The law provides the legal status for the port authority which might be a public entity or a corporate entity under the commercial code of the relevant country, such as a joint stock company. The law should also indicate which public entity has the right to establish a port authority in the event that the state is not doing so. This might be a region, province, city, or a combination.
In the case of corporatized or privatized port authorities, linkages will be needed to the mercantile, corporate, or commercial code. Provisions should be included on shareholding, for example, or conforming changes made to commercial or corporate laws.
31
There is an important point affecting port authorities established as joint stock companies. Generally, port authorities are responsible for operating the entire port. In the event of a landlord port situation, a corporatized or privatized port authority must ensure a level playing field among many terminal operators and other service providers. To avoid conflicts
Of interest, the law should explicitly regulate the powers and duties of the port authority in relation to private operators with respect to investments and share participation.
Powers and duties of a port authority regarding land management require specific attention in the law. A landlord port authority is responsible for land management and overall port development. Special attention should be paid to the regulation of ownership and use of port land under the law. A port authority may own the land or have a perpetual or time-specific right to use the land. Powers to act as a land- lord may need to be specifically elaborated, as well as the limitations of such powers, such as the interdiction of the sale of port land. While the authority is engaged in, or provides for, construction of operational infrastructure, the maintenance of such infrastructure constitutes a duty for the authority. The ports law should specify the exact responsibilities of the port authority and those of the state with respect to investments in basic and operational infrastructure, maritime accesses, port access roads, and rail and waterway infrastructure as well as hinterland connections.
Generally, the objective of a port authority is to efficiently and economically manage the port. In a public landlord port, its objectives should be aligned with the macroeconomic goals of the state and the needs of the region, such as the creation of jobs, strengthening of the economic structure, and so forth.
Fundamental port functions that should be considered in the law include:
• Administration, management, and physical development of the port area;
• Maintenance, rehabilitation, renovation, and construction of basic and operational infrastructure;
Maintenance, rehabilitation, renovation, and construction of operational infrastructure (usually the construction of basic infrastructure is a responsibility of the state);
• Establishment of contractual (concession or lease) and other conditions (public license) for private operators to provide port services;
• Coordination of berthing and unberthing of vessels;
• Ensuring public order in the port area;
• Safeguarding the port environment;
• Port marketing;
• Port security.
2.2. The method to build model Port Authority
Currently, 4 port management models are commonly used, such as: public service port, tool port, landlord port and private service port. These models are summarized in the following table:
• The Pulbic service Port model:
All things: Management of land, water, infrastructure; Key Equipment; Management body, direct port operators; Other services (pilotage, supplies, repair ...); Investment funds are managed by PUBLIC. However, Technological innovation; Flexibility in the business, high competitiveness; Market -oriented business; Monopoly: aren't included in the model. And the last, government implements a long-term economic policy is included in the model.
• The Tool Port model:
All things: Management of land, water, infrastructure; Key Equipment; Investment funds are managed by PUBLIC. Management body, direct port operators is managed by PRIVATE and Other services (pilotage, supplies, repair ...) is managed by both PUBLIC AND PRIVATE. However, Technological innovation; Flexibility in the business, high competitiveness; Market -oriented business; Monopoly: aren't included in the model. And the last, government implements a long-term economic policy is included in the model.
• The Landlord Port model:
Only Management of land, water, infrastructure is managed by PUBLIC. All things: Key Equipment; Management body, direct port operators are managed by PRIVATE. Other services (pilotage, supplies, repair ...) and Investment funds are managed by both PUBLIC AND PRIVATE. However, Technological innovation; Flexibility in the business, high competitiveness; Market -oriented business; government implements a long-term economic policy are included in the model. And the last, Monopoly isn't included in the model.
* The Private Service Port:
Only Management of land, water, infrastructure is managed by PUBLIC. All things: Key Equipment; Management body, direct port operators; Other services (pilotage, supplies, repair ...) and Investment funds are managed by PRIVATE. More, Technological innovation; Flexibility in the business, high competitiveness; Market -oriented business and Monopoly are included in the model. And the last, government implements a long-term economic policy isn't included in the model.
Among all current port management models, Landlord port has advantages over the remaining models, expressed through the following points:
- Harmonize the interests and maximize the strengths of the State and private sector;
- Help balance public investment, utilize private investment, limit dispersal State resources, and reduce risk;
- Private operators dedicate to port operation thanks to long-term contracts and the right to invest in essential facilities.
* Port organized models
There are many types of Port organized models, for example:
- Organization of port management is an agency of the central government;
- Organization of port management is an agency of local government;
- Organization of port management established under separate regulations, specifically by law: Port Authority (Port Authority - PA); Port management (Port Management Body - PMB);
- Organizations of port management as private organizations are specified separately by national laws.
Among models of port management institutions, Port Authority (PA) or Port Management Board
(PMB) has the advantage of specializing in the field of investment and construction, leasing operation of seaports, proactively in port development, utilizing resources and capabilities of the public and private sectors.
2.3. Vietnam's viewpoint on the Port Authority
With the current port organization and management structure, adopting Port Authority in Vietnam seaports faces different opinions debated time to time. Many arguments are in favor of while others against this model.
2.3.1. Supporting port organization and management model as Port Authority
Derived from the current need, the urgency of port management in the spirit of the Resolution No.09-NQ/TW dated 09/02/2007, the Fourth Conference of the Party Central Committee on Operation Lock X Vietnam sea strategy to 2020; June 02 2014, Minister of Communications and Transport has assigned the Vietnam Maritime Administration to build scheme "Recommendations on seaport organization and management model, application testing on Lach Huyen Terminal - Hai Phong international gateway ", which refers to the" Port Authority "[10].
Based on the research results, the Ministry of Transport has bravely added to some aspects related to setting up "Port Authority" from the scheme into Vietnam Maritime Law (Adjusted in 2015) and explained to the Congress on this issue. According to the revision, adding some clauses to the Vietnam Maritime Law, in "Article 64b. Port Authority. Port Authority is the organization functions to invest, construct, operate and manage seaport infrastructure, logistics facility behind the port; performs certain State management functions within the assigned lands and waters" [8].
The Ministry of Transport also determined that there are Port Authorities established in major ports such as Haiphong, not in every seaport.
The Port Authority is not in the Government System from Central to local organizations but is the unified collaboration from investment to effective port operation. This organization has functions of both state management and business.
At the National Assembly session in November 2015, before the approval of Vietnam Maritime Law 2015, "Port Authority" was changed into "Port Management Board" however this cannot fully express the essence of this matter, leaving the Ministry of Transport many hesitations. As a result, the argument of setting the Seaport Operation and Management Board as a State-owned company in the context that the Government is pushing equitization needs carefully considering. "When we need to mobilize resources for investment, whether Port Operation and Management Board will be equitized or not, if equitized, it is no longer called state-owned organization". Comparing functions and tasks, this model is not really a port management board thus the Congress is suggested to correctly use the word "Port Authority".
2.3.2. Inappropriate adopting port organization and management model as Port Authority
In constrast to the above viewpoint, there are many suggestions that Vietnam is inappropriate to adopt the seaport operation and management model as Port Authority. That is expressed in National Assembly session in April 2015 in which several questions were raised up, for examples:
33
- Are there any differences between Port Authority and Maritime Administration? What is its organizational structure and relation to other governing offices to avoid overlap? Whom does the Port Authority report to, Ministry of Transport or Government or other Offices?
While the draft functions of this organization is very broad, is this regulation in consistent with the Local Government Establishing Law [7]?
There are also opinions that at the maritime area, there are many forces from State units and offices (such as Maritime Administration, border guards, customs, pest control department, fisheries surveillance authority...) people, organizations, businesses, maritime service providers whose activities relates to not only Vietnamese citizens but also foreigners. Thus, it is necessary to have State organization which has enough functions, power and take responsibilities to coordinate, collaborate, harmonize and strictly manage activities in port area.
- Other ideas suggest that, the phrase "Port Authority" should not be used, there must be consensus understanding, otherwise a number of industrial zones will ask for "Industrial Park Authority" or "Airport Authority".
- At the same time, there is argument that the name "Port Authority" is not correct because "Government Authority must have People Council" [7].
At the Parliamentary meeting in November 2015, the issue of "Port Authority" again warmed up the debate.
- There are ideas that to match current situation, the draft law should indicate that this model is applied to some regional (new) seaports prescribed by the Government. Besides, the name "Port Authority" was replaced by "Port Operation and Management Board" to avoid misunderstandings at local authority level.
- Another opinion was raised up that no matter what word is used; this is a bisexual institution. That means "it has functions of a public authority and a business", petitions must be bisexual regulatory that the authorization will perform State functions while the other components perform as a business, similar to the model of Industrial Zone Management Board and Infrastructure Investment Company [9].
It is those arguments made the Congress choose a "safe" solution by adding "Port Operation and Management Board" into Article 87, 88 and 89 of the Maritime Law 2015.
Consequently, "Port Operation and Management Board is established by the Government, provided with the lands, port waters for planning, investment, construction, operation of seaport infrastructure and logistics facilities behind the port".
2.3.3 Causes of the dissent
- The concepts, functions and duties of "Port Authority" and "Port Operation and Management Board" are not clearly distinguished. That has ruffled the application of operation and management model for ports in Vietnam.
- What law will "Port Authority" be subjected to, Business Law or Maritime Law?
- The most significant problem to solve is whom Port Authority will directly report to, Ministry of Transport or Local Authorities at the port?
- Are there any different effects that adopting Port Authority or Port Operation and Management Board will generate compared to our current port management model?
3. Central or Local manage the Port Authority?
From the analyzes, arguments and practices in the management of ports, I have synthesized, compared Central manage the Port Authority with Local manage the Port Authority
Table 1. Compare strong or weak point of City People's Committee and Ministry of Transport when Manage the Port Authority
No Functions and Duties City People's Committee Ministry of Transport
Duties which City People's Committee and Transportation Ministry can do
1. Construction management and detailed planning for the entire port
2. Promulgate regulations on management activities in the lands, waters of port; Construction plans for leasing port infrastructure
3. Authorizing the construction of piers, docks accordance with the approved plans.
4. Issuing fees, port charges and direct the collection of such
5. Providing services in ports
6. Monitoring all activities of enterprises en gaged in the exploitation of ports
7. Planning for the annual budget of revenues and expenditures operations of the Port Authority
Duties which City People's Committee can do better than Ministry of Transport
1. Owned lands, waters The owns is consistent with the Laws of Vietnam Unable to land ownership
2. Ensure the port logistics area which behind the port, develope to meet the requirements of the port area Focus investment in building infrastructure connecting the port; freeing congested roads Not carried out because the Ministry of Transport can not manage the roads after the port
3. Maintenance, overhaul and repair of port infrastructure, maintenance dredging in the port, maritime signals Because direct managementn so City People's Committee know position which need to dredge and more frequent dredging. MOT khong nam ro tinh hinh thuc te cua cang ve nao vet
4. Consistent with the Code of Maritime Vi etnam 2015 The government doesn't designate to manage the Port Authority The government designate to manage the Port Authority
5. Planning are generality Do not perform this task because the ports depend on other local Perform well as managerial and executive planning of ports in the country.
4. Conclude
So, we found the management of the Port Authority by the Central or Local always has two sides, have strengths and weaknesses. Depending on the place, each specific case that Central or Local manage Port Authority to promote their strengths.
References
1. Bui Ba Khiem. Direction for Port Management Model in Vietnam. Transport Magazine, October/2015. P. 72-75.
2. Bui Ba Khiem. Port Authority model in the world - experience for Vietnamese port, Transport Magazine. December, 2015. P. 108-110.
3. Bui Ba Khiem. Trends for the Port Authority of Hai Phong port. The Publisher Vietnam Maritime University, 2016. 107 p.
4. The World Bank, Port Reform Toolkit, Second Edition, 2007. 375 p.
5. The World Bank, Logistics and Port Management, 2004.
6. Website Oxford Dictionaries. [Electronic resourse]. URL: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/p ort_authority Difinition about Port Authority/ (date of access: 08.06.2015).
7. Website. [Electronic resourse]. URL: http://laodong.com.vn/chinh-tri/ai-lai-goi-la-chinh-quyen-cang-313780.bld/ (date of access: 08.06.2015).
8. Dinh La Thang - Ministry of Transport's Minister, introduce Port Authority model. [Electronic resourse]. URL: http://vneconomy.vn/thoi-su/bo-truong-thang-gioi-thieu-mo-hinh-chinh-quyen-cang-20150818021323457.htm/ (date of access: 18.08.2015).
35
9. Argument about Port Authority. [Electronic resourse]. URL: http://vnexpress.net/tin-tuc/thoi-su/mo-hinh-chinh-quyen-cang-gay-tranh-luan-3310612.html/ (date of access: 11.11.2015).
10. Website Consider to Port Authority in Lach Huyen. [Electronic resourse]. URL: http://www.cangsaigon.com.vn/news-details.aspx?page=1252. New model about port development (date of access: 13.11.2015).
Influence tax burden on financial stability Bulava I.1, Men'shikova E.2 (Russian Federation) Влияние налоговой нагрузки на финансовую устойчивость компании Булава И. В.1, Меньшикова Е. В.2 (Российская Федерация)
'Булава Игорь Вячеславович / Bulava Igor' — кандидат экономических наук, доцент;
2Меньшикова Елизавета Владимировна /Men Shikova Elizaveta — бакалавр, направление: экономика и финансы, департамент корпоративных финансов и корпоративного управления, Финансовый университет при Правительстве Российской Федерации, г. Москва
Аннотация: одним из актуальных направлений устойчивого функционирования экономики РФ является разработка действенного механизма управления налоговой нагрузкой субъектов хозяйствования. Данный механизм должен учитывать структурные изменения в налоговой политике государства, которые происходят в последние годы. Критическая оценка существующих дефиниций, характеризующих влияние налогообложения на экономические процессы; систематизация показателей, измеряющих влияние налоговой нагрузки на экономику и субъектов предпринимательства; обоснование на этой основе дефиниции налоговой отдачи на макро- и микроуровне и методических подходов к их определению. Abstract: one of the important directions of stable functioning of the Russian economy is the development of effective control mechanism of the tax burden of business entities. This mechanism should take account of structural changes in the tax policy of the state, which occur in recent years. Critical evaluation of existing definitions, describing the impact of taxation on economic processes; systematization of indicators that measure the impact of the tax burden on the economy and businesses; justification for this based on the definition of tax return on the macro- and micro-level and methodological approaches to their definition.
Ключевые слова: анализ, налоговая нагрузка, финансовая устойчивость, налоговые платежи, налоговая отдача, коэффициент корреляции, финансовая автономия.
Keywords: analysis of the tax burden, financial stability, tax payments, tax returns, the correlation coefficient, financial autonomy.
Одной из актуальных, пока не решенных проблем, является проблема оптимизации налоговой нагрузки, которая основывается на анализе зависимости экономического поведения агентов от изменения налогового давления и обязательно должна учитывать возможность оппортунистических действий с их стороны, решение которой позволит повысить эффективность выполнения доходной части бюджетов [1, с. 126].
Налоговая нагрузка для конкретного субъекта определяется как доля налогов в выручке от реализации. Основные трудности в оценке уровня налоговой нагрузки на предприятие обусловленные неоднородностью налогов и уровня их влияния на экономику [2, с. 33]. Во-первых, бремя налоговой нагрузки по налогам, уплачиваемых за счет себестоимости, надо измерять удельным весом этих налогов в составе себестоимости. Во-вторых, налоги, уплачиваемые за счет финансовых результатов деятельности предприятия, целесообразно сравнивать с прибылью от реализации по основной деятельности.
Налоговая нагрузка является объектом регулирования деятельности предприятия и используется в процессе налогового контроля предприятий с учетом показателя налогового риска [3, с. 5].
Реформирование налоговой системы Российской Федерации осуществляется путем:
- выравнивание условий прямого налогообложения доходов (прибыли) юридических лиц и доходов, на которые начисляется налог с доходов физических лиц, с целью постепенного приближения ставки налога на прибыль предприятий к ставке налога с доходов физических лиц;
- устранение двойного налогообложения доходов;
- создание равных условий хозяйствования для субъектов разных форм собственности, организационно-правовых форм и видов экономической деятельности;
