Figure 9 - uploaded by Samuel Freije
Content may be subject to copyright.
Reform-2: Tax maneuver, nobody formalizes. Percentage change in consumable income w.r.t. no-reform scenario by decile, age group, household and location types.
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... case of the tax maneuver followed by 50 percent formalization, under scenario B average incomes of the formalized are lower by 14.2 percent compared to the baseline scenario and their poverty rate is higher by 9.8 p.p. than in the baseline, which are lower losses than in the case of enforced formalization (see lines 2 and 3 of panel 2B of Table 6). Figure 9 shows the results of reform 2 with the assumption that nobody formalizes by income deciles and socio-demographic groups. In this case the distributional impact of the tax maneuver completely depends on our assumptions about the economic incidence of SIC. ...
Context 2
... case of the tax maneuver followed by 50 percent formalization, under scenario B average incomes of the formalized are lower by 14.2 percent compared to the baseline scenario and their poverty rate is higher by 9.8 p.p. than in the baseline, which are lower losses than in the case of enforced formalization (see lines 2 and 3 of panel 2B of Table 6). Figure 9 shows the results of reform 2 with the assumption that nobody formalizes by income deciles and socio-demographic groups. In this case the distributional impact of the tax maneuver completely depends on our assumptions about the economic incidence of SIC. ...
Similar publications
Citations
The article examines the impact of tax deductions for education and healthcare on income inequality in Russia. The objective of the study is to quantify the redistributive effects of this fiscal measure. Additionally, the paper assesses the potential effects of proposed reforms to tax deductions, with a particular focus on changes proposed in the President’s Address to the Federal Assembly in February 2023 and implemented in 2024. The study uses data from the Federal Tax Service and the Russia Longitudinal Monitoring survey of the National Research University Higher School of Economics (RLMS-HSE), in conjunction with the microsimulation model RUSMOD, which enables the estimation of the short-term redistributive effects of changes in taxes and transfers. The study demonstrated that the current tax deductions for education and health care have a marginal impact on income inequality. Conversely, if tax deductions are reformed in a manner that increases their limits and take-up, this may result in an increase in income inequality.
The exacerbation of social problems during the pandemic is due not only to medical and psychological issue but also to the social factors such as the loss of work and sources of labor income. The hidden sector of the labor market is transformed during epidemics and pandemics, negatively affecting the economic sustainability and leadership in business and economics as a whole. This chapter is devoted to the analysis of the depth of the leading role of the informal employment on the structure of the Russian economy during the COVID-19 pandemic. The dynamics of the informal sector in total employment, the digitalization of the economy, the structure of income of the officially and unofficially employed, and the effectiveness of public spending on financing social policies were assessed and analyzed. This chapter presents the results of a study of the relationship between quarantine measures, shadow employment, the life quality, and well-being. The analysis concluded that social policy plays a leading role in reducing informal employment and, consequently, the strengthening of economic sustainability. Governmental policy measures identified in course of this research might help to stimulate the development of the formal labor market. The leading and most relevant policies appear to be the development of social programs, investing into the human capital and ICT, supporting the poor and families with children, and improving the life quality of vulnerable social groups.KeywordsInformal employmentDigitalizationSustainable developmentLeadershipLabor marketJEL ClassificationG14E24L80
The outbreak of COVID-19 has had severe negative economic impacts on households and businesses in Russia. Russia’s GDP declined by 2,7% in 2020. To mitigate the adverse impacts of the pandemic, in March—June 2020 the govern- ment implemented a number of fiscal and social policy measures aimed at support- ing businesses, employment and incomes of vulnerable groups of the population. This paper presents the results of the impact assessment of the COVID-19 crisis and the related policy interventions on the income distribution and poverty in Russia in 2020. The analysis is based on the tax-benefit microsimulation model for Russia, which allows for assessing the redistributive effects of direct and indirect taxes and transfers in Russia at the federal and regional levels. We find that the net effect of the crisis and policy interventions was strongly progressive at the bottom of the income distribution and equalizing across regions.
In contrast to the liberal orientation in the 1990s, the 2000s saw a strong trend towards the ‘state-led’ system of governance. Emerging market economies such as China and Russia have achieved high economic growth on the basis of state-led capitalist systems, and political and economic frictions with developed countries have become apparent. These economic frictions have intensified the politicisation of economies worldwide. This study provides empirical evidence of the effectiveness of the state-led system and its stability.
The role of social protection in supporting people’s well‑being, reducing poverty and inequality is difficult to overestimate in stable times, but its importance increases especially in times of crisis, as confirmed by the global shock of the COVID‑19 pandemic. Under the conditions of increasing uncertainty, a social protection system turns into a “safety cushion” — a macroeconomic and sociopolitical stabilizer. The purpose of the article is to show, based on the analysis of the main trends in the development of the Russian social protection system and considering the challenges of the current moment, possible alternative choices in its development in the mid‑term period. Authors use a broad definition of the social protection system, which includes non‑contributory measures of social protection (social assistance), contributory and non‑contributory pensions, minimum wages, and social services (long‑term care). The article contributes to the literature on economics and public administration, which focuses on social policy in times of economic crises. The article discusses the turn in social protection associated with the adoption of the national development goals in 2018. The authors analyze to what extent has the coronavirus pandemic affected the main challenges and problems facing Russian social protection; what were the key decisions in the field of anticrisis support for the population, and how they affected indicators of poverty and inequality. The article also presents recent research results on changes in public attitudes toward social protection as well as issues of using the time‑budget as a component of a comprehensive assessment of the population ’ s quality of life. In conclusion, the article discusses lessons which can be learned from the experience of the pandemic‑related crisis for the future development of the Russian social protection system, including in the conditions of turbulence that have arisen in 2022.
