Ifs and VATs of Taxation in Macedonia - Should VAT be Applied in Macedonia?

To be justified, taxes should satisfy a fewas his poorer counterpart - but the tax will constitute a
conditions:Above all, they should encourage economicsmaller part of his income. This is the best definition yet
activity by providing incentives to save and to invest.found for regressivity.On the face of it - and for a
Savings - transformed into investments- enhancevery long time - VAT served as a prime example of
productivity and growth of the economy as a whole.Aregressive, unfair taxation.For a very long time, that is
tax should be simple - to administer and to complyuntil the development and propagation of the Life
with. It should be "fair" (progressive, in professional lingo)Cycle Theories. The main idea in all these theories was
- although no one seems to agree on what thisthat consumption was not based on annual, current
means.At best, it should replace other taxes, whoseincome only. Rather, it took into consideration future
compliance with the above conditions is less rigorous. Inflows of income (income expectations). People tended
this case it will, usually, lead to budget cuts and reduceto be constant in their level of spending (in different
the overall tax burden.The most well known tax is theperiods in their lives) - even as their annual income
income tax. However, it fails to satisfy even one of thevacillated. With the exception of millionaires and
conditions above listed.To start with, it is staggeringlybillionaires, people spent most of their income in their
complicated. The IRS code in the USA sprawls overlifetime.VAT was, therefore, a just and equal tax. If
more than 8,000 pages and 500 forms. This singleincome equalled consumption in the long run, VAT was
feature makes it expensive to enforce.Estimates area form of income tax, levied incrementally, with every
that 100 billion USD are spent annually (by bothpurchase. It reflected a taxpayer's ability to pay (=to
government and taxpayers) to comply with the tax, toconsume). It was a wealth tax. As such, it necessitated
administer it and to enforce it.Income tax is all forthe reduction in other taxes. Taxing money spent on
consumption and against savings: it taxes incomeconsumption was taxing money already taxed once
spent on consumption only once - but does so twice(as income). This was classic double taxation - a
with income earmarked for savings (by taxing thesituation which had to be remedied.But, in any case,
interest on it).Income taxes discriminate againstVAT was a proportional tax when related to a
business expenses related to the acquisition of capitallifetime's income - rather than a regressive tax when
assets. These cannot be deducted that same fiscalcompared to annual income. Because consumption
year. Rather, they have to be depreciated over anwas a parameter more stable than income - VAT
"accounting life" which is supposed to reflect the usefulmade for a more stable and predictable tax.Still, old
life of the asset. This is not the case with almost allconvictions die hard. To appease social lobbies
other business expenses (labour, to name the biggest)everywhere, politicians came up with solutions which
which are deductible in full the same fiscal yearwere unanimously rejected by economists.The most
expended in.Income taxes encourage debt financingprevalent was exempting a basket of "poor people's
over equity financing. After all, retained earnings aregoods" from VAT.This gave rise to a series of
taxed - while interest expenses are deductible.We canintricate questions:If food, for instance, was exempted
safely say that income taxes in their current form(and it always is) - was this not a subsidy given to rich
were somewhat responsible to an increase inpeople as well? Don't rich people eat?Moreover, who
consumer credits and in the national debt (aswill decide what is or isn't food? Is caviar food? What
manifested in the budget deficits). They also had aabout health food? It was obviously going to be very
hand in the freefall in the saving rate in the USA (fromhard to reach social consensus.If tax on these
3.6% in the 80s to 2.1% in the 90s). And moneyproducts were zeroed - taxes on other products
evading the tax authorities globalised itself using meanswould have had to go up to maintain the same
as diverse as off-shore banking and computerrevenue. And so they did. In most countries VAT is
networking. This made taxing sophisticated, big moneylevied on less than 45% of the GDP - and is reckoned
close to impossible.No wonder that taxes levied onto be twice as high as it should be.Some sought to
consumption rather than on income came to becorrect this situation by subjecting services to VAT
regarded as an interesting alternative.Consumptionbut this proved onerous and impossible to implement in
taxes are levied at the Point of Sale (POS). They arecertain sectors of the economy (banking and
a mixed lot:We all get in touch with Excise Taxes.insurance, to name two).Others suggested to dedicate
These are imposed on products which are consideredVAT generated revenues to progressivity enhancing
to be bad both for the consumer and for society.programs. But this would have entailed the imposition
These products bring about negative externalities:of additional taxes to cover the shortfall.It is universally
smoke and lung cancer, in the case of tobacco, forthought, that the best method to "compensate" the
instance. So, when tobacco or alcohol are thus taxed -poor for their regressive plight is to directly transfer
the idea is to modify and reform our behaviour whichmoney to them from the budget or to give them
is deemed to be damaging to society as a whole.vouchers (or tax credits) which they can use to get
About 7% of tax revenues in the USA come from thisdiscounts in education, medical treatment, etc. These
source - and double that in other countries.Sales taxesmeasures will, at least, not distort economic decisions.
have a more modest calling: to raise revenues byAnd we, the less lucky taxpayers, will know how much
taxing the finished product in the retail level.we are paying for - and to whom.This is one of the
Unfortunately, so many authorities have the right tobudgetary items which increase with the introduction of
impose them - that they vary greatly from one locationVAT. Research shows that there is a strong
to another. This adds to the confusion of the taxpayercorrelation between the introduction of VAT and
(and of the retailer) and makes the tax moregrowth in government spending. Admittedly, it is difficult
expensive to collect than it should haveto tell which led to what. Still, certain groups in the
been.Moreover, it distorts business decisions:population feel that it is their natural right to be
businesses would tend to locate in places with lowercompensated for every income reducing measure -
sales taxes.Sales taxes have a malignant effect onby virtue of the fact that they don't have enough of
the pricing of finished goods. First, no tax credit isit.But VAT is known to have some socially desirable
allowed (sales taxes paid on inputs cannot beresults, as well.To start with, VAT is a renowned
deducted from the sales tax payable by the retailer).fighter of the Black Economy. This illegitimate branch
Secondly, the tax tends to cascade, increase theof economic activity consists of three elements:The
prices of goods (taxable and not, alike), affectnon official sales of legal goods (produced within the
investments in capital goods (which are not exempt). Ittax system)The sales of illegal goods (which never
adversely affects exports and domestic goods whichwere within the tax system)The consumption of
compete with imports.In short: sales taxes tend tomoney not declared or disclosed to the tax authorities
impede growth and prevent the optimization ofVAT lays its heavy paws on all three activities.VAT is
economic resources. Compare this with the VATself enforced. As we said, VAT offers a powerful
(Value Added Taxes): simple, cheap to collect, contain(money) incentive not to collaborate in tax scams.
no implicit taxes on inputs. VAT renders the pricingEvery tax receipt means money begotten from the
structure of goods transparent. This transparencytax authorities.VAT is incremental. To completely
encourages economic efficiency.VAT is used in 80evade paying VAT on a product would require the
countries worldwide and in 22 out of 24 OECDcollaboration of dozens of businesses, suppliers and
countries, with the exception of the federal ones: themanufacturers. It is much more plausible to cheat the
USA and Australia.There are three types of VAT.income tax authorities. VAT is levied on each and
They are very different from each other and the onlyevery phase of the production cycle - it is possible to
thing common to them all is the tax base: the valueavoid it in some of these phases, but never in all of
added by the taxpayer.Economic theory defines Valuethem. VAT is an all-pervasive tax.VAT is levied on
Added as the sum of all the wages, interest paid onconsumption. It is indifferent to the source of the
capital, rents paid on property and profits. In themoney used to pay for it. Thus, it is as easily applied to
Addition VAT method, these four components are"black", undeclared, money - as it is to completely legal
taxed directly. The State of Michigan in the USA usesfunds.Surely, there are incentives to avoid and to
this method since 1976. Experience shows that thisevade it. If the amount of inputs in a product is very
method yields more predictable tax revenues and islow, the VAT on the sale will be very burdensome. A
less susceptible to business or industry cycles.Thebusiness non-registered with the VAT authorities will
Subtraction method, employed in Japan and a fewhave a sizeable price advantage over his registered
much smaller countries, is admittedly the simplest. Itcompetitor.With a differential VAT system, it is easy to
taxes the difference between a taxpayer's sales anddeclare the false sale of zero-rated goods or services
its taxed inputs. However, it becomes veryto linked entities or to falsify the inputs, or both. Even
complicated when the country has a few VAT rates,computers (which compare the ratio of sales to inputs)
because the inputs have to be separated according tocannot detect anything suspicious in such a
the various rates.Thus, the most widely acceptedscheme.Yet, these are rare occurrences, easily
system is the Credit Invoice. Businesses becomedetectable by cross examining information derived
unpaid tax collectors. They are responsible to get taxfrom several databases. All in all, VAT is the ultimate,
receipts from their suppliers (inputs). They will beinevitable tax.Moreover, it is virtuous. By making
credited with the VAT amounts on the receipts thatconsumption more expensive, it would tend to divert
they have collected, so they have a major incentive tocapital into investments and savings. At least, this is
do so. They will periodically pay the tax authorities thewhat our intuition tells us.Research begs to differ. It
difference between the VAT on their sales and thedemonstrates the resilience of consumers, who
VAT on their inputs, as evidenced by the receipts thatmaintain their consumption levels in the face of
they have collected. If the difference is negative - theymounting price pressures. They even reduce savings
will receive a rebate (in certain countries, directly toto do so. We say that their consumption is rigid,
their bank account).This is a breathtakingly simpleinelastic. Also, people do not save because it "pays
concept of tax collection, which also distributes thebetter" to save than to consume. They don't save
costs of administering the tax amongst millions ofbecause the relative return on savings is higher on
businesses. In the fiscal year (FY) 1977/8 in the UK -savings than on consumption. They save because
the tax productivity (cost per 1 dollar collected) wasthey are goal oriented. They want to buy something: a
2%. This means that the government paid 2 cents tocar, a house, higher education for their children.When
collect 1 dollar. But businesses paid the remaining 10the yield increases - they will need to save less money
cents.If introduced in the USA, VAT will cost only 3to get to the same target in the prescribed period of
billion USD (with 30,000 tax officials employed in atime. We could say that, to some extent, savings
separate administration). To collect 1 dollar of incomedisplay negative elasticity.Markets balance themselves
tax costs 0.56% in the USA. But, to collect VAT inthrough a series of intricate feedback loops and "true
Norway costs 0.32%, in Belgium - 1.09% and, onmodels" of economic activity. Take an increase in
average, 0.68%. In short, VAT does not cost muchsavings generated by the introduction of VAT: it is
more than income taxes to collect.Yet, what is true forbound to be short lived. Why? because the equilibrium
government is not necessarily so for their subjects.Thewill be restored.Increased savings will increase the
compliance cost for a business in the USA is $49. It isamount of capital available and reduce the yields on
$53-282 in other countries.Small businesses sufferthis capital. A reduction in yield would, in turn, reduce the
disproportionately more than their bigger brethren. Itsavings rate.Moreover, narrow (differentiated,
cost them 1.94% of VAT revenue in FY 1986/7 in thenon-ideal) based VATs lead to higher rates of VAT
UK. Rather more than big firms (0.003%!).Compliance(to generate the same revenue). This reduces the
costs are 40 times higher for small businesses, onincentives to work and the amount of income available
average. This figure masks a larger difference in retailfor savings.In a very thorough research, Ken Militzer
and basic industries (80 times more), in wholesale (60found no connection between the introduction of VAT
times more) and in manufacturing and utilities (45 timesand an increase in the rate of saving in 22 OECD
more).It was inevitable to think about exempting smallcountries since 1965 (VAT was first introduced in
business from paying VAT.If 16 out of 24 millionFrance in 1954). He also found no connection between
businesses were exempted - the costs of collectingVAT and changes in corporate (profit) and income
VAT will go down by 33% - while the revenues willtaxes.In Europe VAT replaced various turnover taxes
decline by only 3%. KPMG claims that businesses withso its impact on anything was fairly insignificant. It had
less than $50,000 annual turnover (18 out of 24 million)no influence on inflation, as well. VAT apparently has
exempted in the USA, revenues would have declinedtwo conflicting influences: it raises the general price
by 1.5%. About 70% of the tax are paid by 10% of thelevel through a one time "price shock", on one hand. On
businesses in the UK. For 69% of the businesses therethe other hand, it contracts the economy by providing
(with turnover of less than 100,000 USD annually) thea disincentive to consume. If VAT does influence
costs of collection exceed 60% of the revenues. Forinflation - its impact will be echoed and amplified
96% of the businesses (with less than 1 million USD athrough wage indexation and the linking of transfer
year) - the costs exceed 50%. Only in the case ofpayments to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). In this
30,000 companies - are the costs less than 20%.case, maybe its effects should be sterilized from the
These figures do not include compliance costs (=costscalculations of the CPI.But research was able to
borne by businesses which comply with the taxdemonstrate only the potentially dangerous contracting,
law).No wonder that small businesses borrow moneydeflationary (stagflationary, to be exact) influences of
to pay that VAT bills. Many of them - though exempt -this tax. The recommendation is surprising: the Central
register voluntarily, to get an endless stream ofBank is advised to increase the money supply to
rebates. This is a major handicap for the tax systemaccommodate the reverberations of the introduction
and reduces its productivity considerably. In aof this tax.Finally, VAT is a "border adjustment" tax
desperate effort to cope with this law-abiding flood,(under the GATT and WTO charters).This means that
tax authorities have resorted to longer periods ofVAT is rebated to the exporter and imposed on the
reporting (instead of monthly). Some of them (in theimporter.Prima facie, this should encourage exports -
UK, for one) allow annual VAT reports.Part of theand equally discourage imports.Surprisingly, this time the
problem is political. There is little disagreement betweenintuition is right - albeit for a limited period of
economists that VAT is a tax preferable to incometime.Despite a raging debate in economic literature, it
taxes. But this statement comes with caveats: the taxseems safe to say the following:VAT increases the
must have one rate, universally applied, without sectorprofits of exporters and producers of import
exemptions. This is the ideal VAT.The world being lesssubstitutes.VAT increases the investments in the trade
than ideal - and populated by politicians - VATs do notsector.VAT increases exports and decreases
come this way. They contain many rates andimports.These advantages are, ultimately, partially
exemptions for categories of goods and services.Thisoffset by the movement of exchange rates.If certain
mutilated version is called the differentiated VAT.Ansectors are not taxed - investment will flow to that
ideal VAT is economically neutral - though notsector and badly affect the trade sector and the
equitable. This means that the tax does not affectcompetitiveness of the country in world markets.With
economic decisions in ways that it shouldn't. On theits burgeoning black market, under-developed export
other hand, its burden is not equally distributed betweenindustries, huge shortfall in tax revenues - Macedonia
the haves and have nots.VAT taxes value added inurgently needs VAT.It will do well to learn from the
each stage of the production process. It does so byexperience of others and introduce a VAT which is as
levying a tax on goods and services - but what isideal as socially permissible and politically possible.The
really taxed are the means of production, labour anddraft law that I have seen is a copy - almost verbatim
capital. Ultimately, shareholders of the taxpaying- of laws in the European Union and is riddled with
businesses pay the price - but most of them try toexemption to various goods, services and
move it on to the consumer, which is where thesectors.VAT is a good idea - but it seems to be
inequity begins. A rich consumer will pay the same taxstarting on the wrong footing in Macedonia.