Suchergebnisse

En este artículo se examinan las principales características de los sistemas tributarios de los países en desarrollo, su evolución y reformas, así como dos desafíos en particular que han surgido en los últimos años cambiando las reglas de la tributación: la expansión de la economía digital y el acuerdo sobre imposición a los grandes grupos multinacionales. La principal conclusión es que, pese a los retos y carencias aún existentes, se han producido mejoras muy significativas en los sistemas tributarios de los países en desarrollo.

La Unión Europea es un área de elevada tributación en el contexto internacional. No obstante, existen diferencias muy notables entre los Estados Miembros (EE.MM), tanto en términos de presión fiscal total como en relación a la estructura del sistema impositivo y al diseño de los principales impuestos. En general, se observa un cierto desplazamiento de la presión fiscal hacia la imposición indirecta, más particularmente el IVA, y una pérdida de importancia de los impuestos directos, que parecen afrontar serias dificultades para mantener el protagonismo de las décadas anteriores, en especial, el Impuesto de Sociedades. Por otro lado, a pesar de haberse logrado ciertos avances en materia de armonización tributaria, la fiscalidad europea sigue siendo más la expresión del funcionamiento de los sistemas fiscales nacionales y de sus tendencias hacia una eventual convergencia que una verdadera fiscalidad común ; The European Union still remains a high-tax area in the international context. However, big differences can be observed across Member States, both in terms of the overall tax burden and with respect to tax structures and the design of the most relevant taxes. Broadly speaking, there has been a shift over time towards indirect taxation, mainly VAT, while direct taxes are facing serious challenges to preserve the role that they had in the past, especially corporate income taxes. On the other hand, although some progress has been made, European taxation still remains a set of national tax systems eventually showing some convergence rather than the expression of a common tax policy.

AbstractThis paper provides new evidences about the determinants of institutional quality. Prior to implementing our empirical research, we discuss the criteria that should be used to judge the quality of institutions. Then, we identify the factors that, according to these criteria, determine institutional quality. The results obtained in the estimated model enable to draw some interesting conclusions. Firstly, development level determines institutional quality: the highest the former, the highest the latter. Secondly, income distribution conditions institutional quality. Thirdly, a sound tax system is positively associated with institutional quality improvement. Taxes provide the necessary revenue to generate quality institutions and create a narrower and more demanding relation between State and citizens. Finally, education improves institutional quality. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

During recent years, new doubts about the effectiveness of international aid have emerged. One of the arguments employed to justify this sceptical view is that aid can hinder tax effort in developing countries. Nevertheless, empirical research on the aid-tax nexus is inconclusive and it shows some shortcomings in the tax database employed and in the variables considered in the estimation. The main goal of this article is to overcome these shortcomings. The main results are twofold: i) income distribution is a crucial determinant of tax revenues; and ii) once income distribution is taken into account, aid shows no significant impact on tax revenue; not even when we control for institutional quality.

This paper provides new evidences about the determinants of institutional quality. Given the shortcomings of governance indicators, we first discuss the criteria employed to judge institutional quality. Then, we identify the factors that, according to these criteria, shape the quality of institutions. The results of this empirical research show that the main determinants of the quality of the institutions of a given country are its income per head and its income distribution, the efficiency of its tax system and the educational level of its population. Interestingly, some of the variables identified in previous literature (location, ethnolinguistic fragmentation, the origin of the legal system or colonial origin) either do not have any impact on institutional quality or they impact indirectly through the variables previously mentioned.

This paper provides new evidences about the determinants of institutional quality. Prior to implementing our empirical research, we discuss the criteria that should be used to judge the quality of institutions. Then, we identify the factors that, according to these criteria, determine institutional quality. The results obtained in the estimated model enable to draw some interesting conclusions. First of all, development level determines institutional quality: the highest the former, the highest the latter. Secondly, income distribution seems to condition institutional quality. A certain degree of social cohesion is needed to provide institutional predictability and legitimacy. Thirdly, a sound tax system is positively asso-ciated with institutional quality improvement. Taxes provide the necessary revenue to ge-nerate quality institutions, while creating a narrower and more demanding relation between State and citizens. Finally, education improves institutional quality. On the contrary, some of the variables identified in the literature either they do not seem to determine institutional quality or their effects are indirect, through the aforementioned variables.

The literature identifies seven major areas conditioning tax reforms which are of particular interest for this study: political factors, institutional framework, social support and state legitimisation, informality, avoidance and evasion, tax policy and administration, economic factors, and external actors. Nine different tax reforms have been identified as case studies to investigate the drivers and constraints that condition tax reforms. The analysis builds on existing studies on each particular reform under consideration as well as other available literature, political and institutional analyses, statistical data and indicators. Field missions were also conducted in the nine countries. The analysis has been implemented following a comparative structure. In order to ensure comparability, the case studies have been selected according to the following criteria: geographic distribution; comparable reforms; non natural-resource rich countries; country size and population; development level; tax-effort and tax revenue determinants; and consultation with tax experts in the different regions. The final selection has comprised tax reforms implemented in two South American countries (Uruguay and Paraguay); one Asian country (the Philippines); three sub- Saharan African countries (Uganda, Rwanda, and Kenya); one Southern Neighborhood country (Morocco); one Eastern neighborhood country (Armenia); and one Caribbean country (the Dominican Republic).

The literature identifies seven major areas conditioning tax reforms which are of particular interest for this study: political factors, institutional framework, social support and state legitimisation, informality, avoidance and evasion, tax policy and administration, economic factors, and external actors. Nine different tax reforms have been identified as case studies to investigate the drivers and constraints that condition tax reforms. The analysis builds on existing studies on each particular reform under consideration as well as other available literature, political and institutional analyses, statistical data and indicators. Field missions were also conducted in the nine countries. The analysis has been implemented following a comparative structure. In order to ensure comparability, the case studies have been selected according to the following criteria: geographic distribution; comparable reforms; non natural-resource rich countries; country size and population; development level; tax-effort and tax revenue determinants; and consultation with tax experts in the different regions. The final selection has comprised tax reforms implemented in two South American countries (Uruguay and Paraguay); one Asian country (the Philippines); three sub- Saharan African countries (Uganda, Rwanda, and Kenya); one Southern Neighborhood country (Morocco); one Eastern neighborhood country (Armenia); and one Caribbean country (the Dominican Republic).