CC BY
511. Движение регионов России к инновационной экономике // под ред. А.Г. Гранберга, С.Д. Валентея. М.: Наука, 2006. 402 с.
12. Гранберг А.Г. Экономическое пространство России: вечные проблемы, трансформационные процессы, поиск стратегий // Экономическое возрождение России. 2006. № 4 С. 17-22.
13. Кулешов В.В. Современные вызовы социально-экономическому развитию России // ЭКО, 2014. № 12. С. 5-14.
14. Грибков А., Захарченко Д., Корниенко А. Конкурентоспособность станкостроения России //Вопросы экономики. 2013. № 4. С. 126-137.
15. Филатов В.И. Импортозамещение и формирование новой модели экономического роста российской экономики // Вестник Института экономики Российской академии наук. 2015. № 2. С. 76-85.
16. Румянцев А.А. Научно-инновационное пространство макрорегиона: перспективы инновационного развития территорий // Проблемы прогнозирования. 2015. № 4. С. 8595.
17. Некипелов А., Ивантер В., Глазьев С. Политика перехода к эффективной экономике // Экономист, 2014. № 1. С. 3-15.
18. Суховей А.Ф., Голова И.М. Инновационные возможности саморазвития региона. Екатеринбург, ИЭ УрО РАН, 2010. - 200 с.
19. Карачаровский В. Два измерения технологической модернизации: о коммерческой и общественной эффективности промышленного производства в России // Общество и экономика. 2012. № 12. С. 20-43.
20. Голова И.М. Инновационная конкурентоспособность российских регионов // Экономика региона. 2015. № 3. с. 294 - 311.
VECTOR CHANGES OF UKRAINE NATIONAL FISCAL SYSTEM IN EUROPEAN
INTEGRATION SPACE
Schava R.
PhD in public adminitfration, Doctoral tfudent of international accounting and auditing SHEI "Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman"
ABSTRACT
This article deals with European integration transformation of Ukraine fiscal syflem. The sectoral priorities of Ukraine national fiscal model harmoni-zation were analyzed. The hiflorical components of this process in the context of European integration trends were generalized.
Keywords: fiscal policy, harmonization of fiscal syflem, fiscal inflrument, fiscal model transformation, European Union, Ukraine.
In modern conditions there are qualitative changes in the development and implementation of fiscal policy. This is due to several factors; firmly, trends and deepening of integration processes in the global economy make it necessary to harmonize the tax field, payment inflruments, and practice of financing activities. Second, negative macroeconomic trends reveal the vulnerability of the economy and the financial sector of Ukraine, which requires a revision of exiting budget management syflem. Thirdly, the development of deflabilizing trends in the economic sphere require flrengthening of citizens social protection which foresees the decision of complex and contradictory objectives: on the one hand, the need to increase budget spending on social services, on the other - to create effective incentives for business development. Ukraine adopted course on reforming almofl all parts public adminiflration as well as the process of integrating the Ukrainian tax syflem in the world, require adjuflment of goals and objectives and mechanisms for the implementation of fiscal policy. This process is complicated by the fact that fiscal policy is closely intertwined legal, methodological and organizational aspects.
Mentioned problems explore many domeflic and foreign scholars: V Revun, T. Efimenko, O. Muzichenko, A. Melnyk, V. Andruschenko, O. Vasylyk, A. Sokolovska, A. Krysovatyi, E. Baldachchi J. Dzhosselin F. Padovano, A. Rokaboi, M., M. Khosli and others. Despite significant achievements in the fludy of this problem, a number of queflions concerning the transformation of Ukraine fiscal policy require research and scientific development.
Actuality of Ukraine fiscal syflem European integration transformation problem is due to permanent inflability of socio
and economic situation in Ukraine that is why the author offers his own vision of the aforementioned problems.
Invefligation of the national fiscal model transformation in terms of sectoral priorities againfl the background of European integration processes.
When forming a conceptual basis to improve the mechanism of fiscal regulation, important from a scientific point of view, is to eflablish the possible interdependencies between objective quantitative characteriflics and fiscal indicators of the economy as a whole. While the research author inclined to the hypothesis that the functional tax syflem in the country have an impact on inveflment processes, economic shadowing and Simulating expansion of production , thereby initiating the process of economic growth in all areas.
The idea that taxes affect economic growth has become a politically controversial subject of much debate in the press and among different social groups. Foreign and domeflic scientifls try to explore these interconnections [1, p. 37; 2, p. 58; 3, p. 122; 4, p. 98; 5, p. 112]. In economic theory, there are a number of competing concepts about what exactly is the engine of economic growth. Some supporters of Keynesianism believe the key factor is demand, others - Neoclassical - supply factors, and others - tend to recognize both factors equally important or find their unique root causes. Facts, hiflorical and geographical changes in key parameters would have to eventually solve the controversial issue, but the conflant changes in the global economy indicate that almofl any theory can be supported in certain situations.
Fiscal policy is a complex syflem of economic relations between the flate, business and citizens about the diflribution
and rediflribution of social product, creating a centralized fund of financial resources and its use to meet national needs. In the transition period feature of these relations is that they are characterized by a mismatch between the needs of society and opportunities to meet them.
The process of reforming the tax inflruments of fiscal policy is in difficult conditions. Reduced activity of inveflment processes negatively affected the dynamics of social production. The growing number of bankrupt enterprises threatens providing indirect negative impact on the development of related induflries. Among the problems should be highlighted negative trends of income budgets of all levels, and the presence of vertical and horizontal imbalance of budget syflem. This is reflected in uneven revenues separation between levels of budget syflem, excessive centralization of tax revenues, regional differentiation, which leads to different possibilities of local budgets, lack of conditions to ensure real independence of local executive bodies and is ¿till imperfect technique of evaluating the performance of flate tax authorities.
Today, fiscal policy in Ukraine turns into a new dimension of development that definitely causes difficulties in its implementation. Firfl of all these difficulties associated with the need to harmonize domeflic tax legislation with EU legislation, to meet the requirements of the IMF, to recover business and inveflment, to prevent living flandards worsening and more.
The firfl flep that Ukraine has made in the direction of harmonization of national legislation in accordance with European Community was the ratification in 1998 of the Treaty on Partnership and Cooperation between the European Community and Ukraine [6]. It concerns the approach to EU law in indirect taxation and business taxation. The general purpose of the tax provisions which were mentioned in the Treaty of European Community eflablishing is to ensure the effective functioning of the common market through non-discrimination imports and exports as compared to domeflic products sold on the domeflic market flate. Should be noted that the lafl time Ukraine subflantially closer to meeting the requirements of the EU. This is in particular the adoption of the Tax Code of Ukraine ratifying of international agreements aimed at preventing double taxation and prevention of tax offenses. But at the same time fiscal policy of Ukraine with the requirements of the European integration process requires bringing a huge number of adjuflments. In particular it concerns the provision of exemptions for the development of priority economic sectors (agriculture, alternative energy, etc.), Conditions for small business (ease of regiflration, convenient and burdensome payment of tax exemption firfl of small businesses, etc.). . All this requires further fleps by the State.
The main aim of harmonization of the tax syflem in Ukraine is to bring it in line with the priorities of the socio-economic development flate policy, principles and flandards of the EU, promoting growth through balanced innovation and inveflment policy and accelerate the development of national competitive advantage on the world experience, ensuring adequacy of total tax revenues to the flate budget and flate funds on the basis of a balanced budget policy in the medium term. For the approximation of national legislation to the EU certain demands in this area put forward Ukraine, including:
- gradual approximation of Ukraine legislation in the excise tax with EU legislation, including the convergence of excise rates on tobacco products;
- development cooperation of the Parties and harmonization of policies for prevention and fighting fraud and smuggling of excise goods - under the terms of the WHO Framework Convention on tobacco control;
- organization of events, including the creation of tax and price policies on tobacco products to protect the health of reducing tobacco use.
Basic directions of activity were identified to achieve these goals [7]:
- gradually increase excise duty on tobacco according to the obligations to the EU;
- develop a syflem of excise warehouses of European flandard;
- codify norms of the legislation on excise duties in a single piece of legislation, ensuring the harmonization of exiting legislation with EU legislation in the area of sale of tobacco products, alcohol and alcoholic beverages.
Tax policy in recent years aimed at improving the tax syflem, such a syflem of taxation in developed countries. The positive effects of such policies include lower rates of fixed income. In particular, the VAT rate was reduced from 28% to 20%, profit tax - from 23% to 18%. Flat tax personal income was introduced. In order to encourage small business development in Ukraine has simplified syflem of taxation, accounting and reporting of small businesses. Avoidance of double taxation with other countries was agreed.
By analyzing these and a number of previous legislative innovations can be concluded that certain fleps on fiscal policy changes are taking place, but they are not syflematic, often the results are contrary to expectations. The problem of domeflic fiscal policy is to itself. Addressing the global economic theory and practice, it should be noted, fiscal policy consifling of the so-called discretionary fiscal policy and automatic. Discretionary policy is a conscious flate regulation of taxation and government spending to influence real GDP, employment, inflation and economic growth. Typically, discretionary fiscal policy can be predicted at different periods of the economic cycle. During the recession discretionary incentive policy consifls of: an increase in government spending; lower taxes; a combination of growth in public spending with tax cuts (including the fact that the multiplier effect of government spending growth greater multiplier effect than tax cuts). Such fiscal policy actually leads to budget deficit, but will reduce the decline in production.
In terms of inflation of excess demand at retraining discretionary fiscal policy consifls of: reducing government spending; increasing taxes; a combination of cuts in public spending from increasing taxation (given the fact that the multiplier effect of reducing government spending is greater than tax multiplier effect of growth). This policy focuses on budget surplus. Of course, this abflract pattern of behavior of the government and the mechanism of discretionary fiscal policy is not as simple because in the real economy there are parallel and multidirectional factors and it is clear that the search for optimal fiscal policy is a very difficult task.
Automatic fiscal policy is based on a syflem of embedded flabilizers. Automated or Built-in - is an economic mechanism that automatically responds to changes in economic condition without having to take certain decisions of the Government, the exercise of certain projects. The main built-in flabilizers include changes in tax revenues. The amount of tax depends on the income, so in periods of active growth of GDP, tax revenues automatically increase (at progressive tax syflem) that provides
lower purchasing power and holding back economic growth. Conversely, in periods of recession, tax revenues automatically decrease the amount withdrawn as income decreases, which is gradually increasing purchasing power in the economy, which hinders decline. In other words a progressive tax sySem in times of inflation growth leads to potential loss of purchasing power, and vice versa, during periods of slow economic growth, it provides minimal loss of purchasing power. And the firS and second is desirable due to economic Sability.
To embed Sabilizers devoted sySem of unemployment benefits and various social benefits programs to support the poor, etc., which prevent a sharp decrease in aggregate demand even in periods of economic downturn. In periods of recovery and reduction of unemployment assiSance or payment are terminated or reduced, retraining aggregate demand. World experience shows that the tax sySem - is not frozen circuit. It is conSantly changing, dynamically adapting to processes of reproduction market requirements of scientific and technological progress. For example, in the US in the 80's XX century were conducted two taxes reforms (1982 and 1986) that can be attributed to the conduct discretionary fiscal policy. If you analyze the mechanism of fiscal policy in Ukraine, it can be classified as discretionary. The main problem of fiscal policy in Ukraine in the 90's XX century was that it was done under the influence of natural inflation and the desire to solve the problem of the budget deficit as a result of undue issue of paper money and credit issue. As you know, it's hopeless way. Tax policy in Ukraine in recent years carried out in the absence of a holiSic concept of its economy in the transition from purely adminiSrative methods to market forms. MoS of the principles of the Law of Ukraine "On taxation sySem", adopted in 1991, then remained unfulfilled. Thus, the tax sySem has become one-sided, frankly fiscal (solely in terms of budget revenues and direction, and finally turned into a brake in the release Ukraine from the crisis. In other words, in terms of tax policy dropped its regulating criterion designed to influence the conditions competition, efficiency of resource use and economic growth. Unfortunately, in Ukraine monetary measures were not supported by relevant Seps in the tax policy of privatization and reSructuring of the economy. The consequence of the lack of Sructural reforms and conSant approach in the conduct of fiscal policy, budget rigidities coSs was a significant Srengthening of the tax burden. Expanding of budget expenditures as a method of anti-crisis fiscal policy (by Simulating demand) in terms of Ukraine is not suitable because the coSs and so excessive. So, much better to expand aggregate demand by reducing taxes and simultaneously cut spending to avoid an excessive deficit. But in the domeSic economy with its subSantial Sructural deformities such a policy requires (to avoid a new outbreak of inflation) as Sructural reforms and Simulate production, is expanding not only aggregate demand, but also aggregate supply. This requires improving of fiscal sySem with the following principal terms: despite the advantages of using indirect taxes in transition period, in perspective the basis of fiscal policy should be direct taxes, where the subject of taxation are income of judicial and physical person, land, property, capital; indirect taxes should be used only in the form of excise taxes (to limit the consumption of certain goods, unreasonably high income producer monopoly, and to tax luxury) and small (at 10 - 12%) value added tax; reasonably differentiated tax rates, given the objective characterises and conditions of revenue; eliminate excessive amount of tax benefits that contribute to the rediSribution of income and coS indicators diSort the economy
and reduce the competitiveness of producers; benefits can be provided for a certain period and on condition that the funds be used for certain purposes by the Sate; tax sySem muS be predictable and Sable; calculation of taxes - clear and simple; the amount of tax revenue is relatively moderate, to provide incentives for the development of the enterprise; Srictly observe sySem separation taxes to budgets of different levels.
For poS-socialiS countries in general and for Ukraine in particular an effective fiscal policy has been and remains a serious problem. It is primarily associated with the controversial undemanding of the budget and taxes as independent economic categories, their place in the economic and social impact on forms of production in a certain period of development. However, given the lack of a coherent and consiSent Sate policy, imbalances of the economy led to a protracted socioeconomic crisis. One of the important factors that led to this situation is unreasoned tax policy. It is led to a sharp deceleration of innovation and inveSment processes, which in turn led to a decline in real tax revenue.
The main task in reforming of tax policy should be a reorientation of the tax sySem from purely fiscal targets to Simulate economic growth. It can be implemented in such way, firS of all, by reducing the tax burden of the economy the share of taxes in GDP. Reducing tax rates will help revive business activity and as a result will not reduce, but rather increase tax revenue. The Simulating effect has radical reduction of benefits, except social impact (Srengthening the principle of fairness in taxation), it will help expand the tax base, reduce opportunities for tax evasion. The experience of many countries, Sability and moderation of the tax sySem give a better and longer simulative effect than tax incentives. Of course, in some cases, incentives play a positive role, but muS find a compromise between their number and the need to maintain "intact" tax field.
References
1. Гречко А. В. Дослщження впливу податково! политики на економiчний розвигок Украши / А. В. Гречко [Електрон-ний ресурс] // Електронне наукове фахове видання «Ефек-гивна економжа» - 2012. - № 10. - Режим доступу: http:// www.economy.nayka.com.ua/?op=1&z=1443.
2. Запатрша I. Фшансова политика га ii вплив на еко-номiчне зростання // Економкт. - 2006. - № 3. - С. 27-31.
3. Захарш А. В. УДосконалення мехашзму податкового регулювання Сталого економiчного розвитку / А. В. Захарш // Фшанси Украши. - 2005. - № 2. - С.92-100.
4. Панченко В. I. Податкова политика як зааб впливу на фiнансово-економiчнi процеси в УкраМ / В. I. Панченко // Актуальш проблеми економши. - 2006. - № 9. - С. 94-100.
5. Свердан М. Податкова политика держави та ii вплив на економiчне зростання суспшьства: теоретичш засади ре-алiзацii / М. М. Свердан // Збiрник наукових праць «Менеджмент». - 2010. - № 13. - С. 201-215.
6. Колотуха С. Адаптацiя податкового законодавства до европейських стандарпв - лише перший крок [Елек-тронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://www.Sa.kr.ua/ integration/110106/index.html.
7. [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://sfs.gov. ua/control/ru/publish/article
