Les courtiers en gaz naturel doivent prélever la redevance sur les combustibles lorsqu’ils transigent avec des exportateurs non résidents, ce qui entraîne une augmentation des coûts d’exploitation pour les non résidents qui font affaire au Canada.
Consulter le document »

La tarification du carbone est l’une des stratégies adoptées par le Canada pour obtenir une économie à faible empreinte carbone. Les provinces et les territoires qui n’ont pas de régime de tarification du carbone, ou qui ont un régime de tarification ne respectant pas le modèle élaboré par le gouvernement fédéral seront assujettis au filet de sécurité fédéral. La Loi sur la tarification de la pollution causée par les gaz à effet de serre (appelée ci-après « la Loi »), adoptée en 2018, permet au gouvernement fédéral de désigner une province ou un territoire comme étant une province ou un territoire « assujetti(e) » et d’appliquer le filet de sécurité fédéral sur la tarification du carbone dans cette province ou ce territoire.

Le budget du Canada 2019 prévoit un déficit budgétaire totalisant 76,2  milliards de dollars pour les cinq prochaines années.
Consulter le document »

Le budget de 2019 poursuit la mise en œuvre du plan du gouvernement qui consiste à investir dans la classe moyenne en mettant particulièrement l’accent sur les investissements dans les personnes et dans ce dont elles ont besoin pour réussir : plus d’endroits abordables où vivre, surtout pour les acheteurs d’une première habituation; les compétences nécessaires dans un marché du travail en évolution; des coûts moins élevés des médicaments sur ordonnance afin de soutenir une bonne santé; des infrastructures locales qui aident à assurer une bonne qualité de vie; et de meilleures connexions entre les Canadiens et avec le monde grâce à un accès Internet à haute vitesse universel.

Afin de favoriser l’emploi des travailleurs d’expérience, le budget du Québec 2019-2020 annonce des mesures fiscales totalisant 872 M$ sur cinq ans.
Consulter le document »

Dès son entrée en fonction en octobre dernier, le gouvernement a posé les premiers gestes pour remettre de l’argent dans le portefeuille des Québécois avec la mise en place de l’Allocation famille et l’instauration du montant pour le soutien des aînés.

Le gouvernement réaffirme son engagement à cet égard dans le Plan budgétaire du Québec – mars 2019.

De nouvelles initiatives porteront à 5,2 milliards de dollars d’ici 2023-2024 le total des sommes qui seront remises dans le portefeuille des Québécois depuis la mise à jour de l’automne 2018. Réduire le fardeau fiscal des Québécois a toujours été un engagement pour le gouvernement, et les initiatives annoncées ne sont que les premières étapes.

Au-delà de cet important engagement, le gouvernement a clairement identifié trois grandes priorités qui guident ses actions afin de répondre aux préoccupations des Québécois, soit l’éducation, la santé et l’économie.

La réforme de l’assiette fiscale de l’impôt des sociétés en faveur d’un « impôt sur le flux de trésorerie » stimulerait l’investissement au Canada.
Consulter le document »

In “Tax Policy Next to the Elephant: Business Tax Reform in the Wake of the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” authors Kenneth McKenzie and Michael Smart argue US tax reform provides Canada an opportunity to make a bold move toward a corporate tax system that is grounded in sound tax policy principles, is less distortionary, promotes economic growth and prosperity, and restores Canada’s tax competitiveness.

The authors explore the effects of the new US tax measures on domestic and US foreign investment in Canada, and estimate it will have a negative long-term effects – including Canadian affiliates of US companies shifting back between 8 percent to 28 percent of their profits, and annual revenue losses in the range of $744 million to $2.4 billion.

“Ottawa, in its 2018 Fall Economic Statement, duplicated in part some aspects of the US reforms in accelerated depreciation for new capital expenditures,” say the authors. “While we think that this short-run response is reasonable in light of the fiscal constraints facing the government and the uncertainty regarding the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), we do not think that the work is done.”

The report argues that in looking to respond to tax changes south of the border, cutting statutory corporate tax rates, as some economists propose, is not the best answer. More effective in boosting investment would be a fundamental change to the taxable income base, regardless of the rates.

Le taux effectif des six grandes banques canadiennes est passé d’une moyenne de 28,9 % en 2004 à seulement 21,5 % en 2018.
Consulter le document »

Avec Donald Trump à la présidence des États-Unis, le débat sur la fiscalité des entreprises risque de prendre un nouveau tournant au Canada dans les années à venir. Sous sa présidence, le Congrès a fait passer le taux d’imposition maximal sur les bénéfices des sociétés de 35 % à 21 %. Étant donné l’importance des échanges entre les deux pays, cette réforme devrait augmenter de façon considérable la pression pour que le Canada redonne aux entreprises l’avantage fiscal qu’elles avaient auparavant sur leurs consœurs installées au sud de la frontière. L’un des premiers à monter à la barricade pour réclamer du gouvernement fédéral d’agir pour, dit-il, « endiguer l’exode des capitaux d’investissement vers les États-Unis » est Dave McKay, le patron de la plus grande banque canadienne, la Banque Royale du Canada. Dans cette fiche nous allons montrer, pourtant, que les grandes banques canadiennes profitent depuis plusieurs années de la baisse de leur taux d’imposition, au plus grand profit de leurs actionnaires.

Les Canadiens paient des impôts sur le revenu des particuliers plus élevés que les Américains à presque tous les niveaux de revenu.
Consulter le document »

Income taxes are a major attractant—or deterrent—for entrepreneurs, businesses and workers looking to start a business, expand operations or relocate. But Canadian workers across the income spectrum—and across the country—pay significantly higher personal income taxes than their American counterparts.
The stark difference in tax rates between the two countries is due in part to recent personal income tax increases at the federal and provincial levels. For example:

• At CAD$50,000 of income: Among all 61 provinces and states in Canada and the U.S., the highest combined personal income tax rates are in the 10 Canadian provinces, from a high of 37.12 per cent in Quebec to 28.20 per cent in British Columbia.
• At $75,000 of income: Eight Canadian provinces are in the top 10, led by Manitoba (37.90 per cent). Ontario ranks 13th highest (29.65 per cent) and B.C. ranks 25th (28.20 per cent).
• At $150,000 of income: Again, the 10 highest combined tax rates are in the 10 Canadian provinces, from 41 per cent in Alberta to 50 per cent in Nova Scotia.
• At $300,000 of income: Once more, the top 10 highest combined rates at this income level are in the 10 Canadian provinces, ranging from 47 per cent in Alberta to 54 per cent in Nova Scotia.

The ever-growing complexity and reach of the U.S. tax system impinges on the ability of U.S. taxpayers to live abroad, work abroad, open bank accounts abroad, or conduct business abroad. The difficulties caused by extraterritorial taxation are exacerbated by similar moves by other nations, often implemented as a response to aggressive policies by the United States. These developments create a challenging environment, with taxpayers being subject to onerous – and sometimes conflicting – requirements. The complex array of obligations put taxpayers in legal jeopardy as governments threaten to impose sanctions on investors and businesses – or even on other governments. Meanwhile, many of the disputes in international tax matters emanate from the overbroad extraterritorial reach of tax authorities.

Les États devraient miser sur les crédits d’impôt sur le revenu gagné, qui ont un impact réel sur les familles à faible revenu.
Consulter le document »

Twenty-nine states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have enacted their own version of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) to help working families earning low wages meet basic needs. State EITCs build on the success of the federal credit by keeping people on the job and reducing hardship for working families and children. This important state support also extends the federal EITC’s well-documented long-term positive effects on children, boosting the nation’s future economic prospects.

State EITCs provide extensive benefits to children, families, and communities, and are straightforward to administer and to claim. Lawmakers in states without their own EITC should consider enacting one. States that have cut back or eliminated their credits should reverse course, and states that have limited their credits so that they only offset income taxes should expand them to help offset the full range of state and local taxes that low-income households pay. This would vastly enhance the credits’ impact. By investing in an EITC, states can make a real difference in the lives of low- and moderate-income working families.

Les crédits d’impôt sur le revenu gagné et le salaire minimum dans les États américains se complètent pour soutenir différentes familles à faible revenu.
Consulter le document »

As state legislative sessions move forward, policymakers can help build an economy that works for everyone by adopting or strengthening two policy tools at their disposal: state earned income tax credits (EITCs) and state minimum wages. These are the twin pillars of making work pay for families that earn low wages. They boost income, widen the path to the middle class, and reduce the gap between high- and low-income households. They help women and communities of color — two groups that disproportionately work in low-wage jobs — see the fruits of their labor and share more fully in economic growth. And they help build a stronger future economy by putting children on a better path in life. Children growing up poor tend to work less and earn less as adults relative to better-off peers, but children receiving additional income such as from the EITC experience a boost that lasts into adulthood.

Twenty-nine states plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have enacted earned income tax credits (EITCs) to supplement the federal EITC, one of the nation’s most effective tools for boosting the incomes of low-paid working families. Federal and state EITCs help workers meet basic needs and pay for things that allow them to keep working, such as child care and transportation. This support helps millions of people struggling to get by on low incomes stay on their feet and work toward economic stability. The federal EITC kept 5.7 million people — over half of them children — out of poverty in 2017, and helped many with somewhat higher incomes make ends meet.

The EITC also has lasting benefits for children. Young children in low-income households that get an income boost from the state or federal EITC tend to do better and go further in school, reducing the disadvantages associated with exposure to poverty. The EITC may play a particularly important role in helping children of color improve their math achievement, complete high school, and enroll in college, the research suggests.

State EITCs are a common-sense way to amplify the positive impact of the federal credit. They help working families keep more of what they earn by reducing the substantial state and local taxes they pay, leaving them with more to cover basic expenses and give their children a better start in life.

Les importantes dépenses fiscales avantageant les différents types de productions d’énergies renouvelables n’ont pas réussi à provoquer un changement majeur dans l’offre énergétique des États-Unis.
Consulter le document »

The U.S. tax code supports the energy sector by providing a number of targeted tax incentives, or tax incentives available only for the energy industry. Some policymakers have expressed interest in understanding how energy tax benefits are distributed across different domestic energy resources. For example, what percentage of energy-related tax benefits support fossil fuels (or support renewables)? How much domestic energy is produced using fossil fuels (or produced using renewables)? And how do these figures compare?

In 2017, the value of federal tax-related support for the energy sector was estimated to be $17.8 billion. Of this, $4.6 billion (25.8 %) can be attributed to tax incentives supporting fossil fuels. Tax-related support for renewables was an estimated $11.6 billion in 2017 (or 65.2 % of total tax-related support for energy). The remaining tax-related support went toward nuclear energy, efficiency measures, and alternative technology vehicles.

While the cost of tax incentives for renewables has exceeded the cost of incentives for fossil fuels in recent years, the majority of energy produced in the United States continues to be derived from fossil fuels. In 2017, fossil fuels accounted for 77.7 % of U.S. primary energy production. The remaining primary energy production is attributable to renewable energy and nuclear electric resources, with shares of 12.8 % and 9.5 %, respectively. The balance of energy-related tax incentives has changed over time, and it is projected to continue to change, under current law, in coming years.

Dans le but d’enrayer les inversions corporatives aux États-Unis, l’adoption d’un régime fiscal purement territorial n’est pas soutenable sans la combiner avec l’augmentation des taux d’imposition et la mise en place d’importantes mesures anti-évitement.
Consulter le document »

Two policy options had been discussed in response to corporate “inversions” or “expatriations”: a general reform of the U.S. corporate tax and specific provisions to deal with tax-motivated international mergers.

In December 2017, P.L. 115-97 (popularly known as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act) lowered the corporate tax rate as part of broader tax reform which some argued would slow the rate of inversions. Other tax reform proposals suggested that if the United States moved to a territorial tax, the incentive to invert would be eliminated. There were concerns that a territorial tax could worsen the profit-shifting that already exists among multinational firms. P.L. 115-97, while moving in some ways to a territorial tax, also instituted a number of measures aimed at combatting profit shifting, including a global minimum tax on intangible income that limited the tax benefits of a territorial tax.

The second option is to directly target inversions. The 2017 act included several provisions that discouraged inversions. In addition, further anti-inversion provisions have been introduced, most recently H.R. 5108 and S. 2459 in the 115^th Congress, to treat all firms in which former U.S. shareholders have more than 50% ownership (or in which management and control is in the United States) as U.S. firms. These bills also provided that debt could also be allocated to the U.S. member of a worldwide operation in proportion to the U.S. ownership of assets.

La création d’un crédit d’impôt pour les études ne relève pas du gouvernement fédéral.
Consulter le document »

In March 2019, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a proposal to establish a new, nationwide federal tax-credit scholarship program. Representative Bradley Byrne (R-AL) introduced a companion proposal in the House. Although Congress’ support of school choice is praiseworthy, a federal tax-credit scholarship program poses a threat to education choice in the states, and undermines the goal of a streamlined federal tax code. The federal government does not have the constitutional authority to create such a program, which would establish massive new federal spending and would likely subject private schools to future regulations from an Administration and Congress less friendly to education choice. State governments do have the constitutional authority to enact school choice policies, and have been the catalyst for the impressive growth in school choice over the past two decades in the United States.

Il serait pertinent d’exiger que OES fournisse des informations supplémentaires sur certaines propositions et de soumettre des documents de justification pour les futures propositions.
Consulter le document »

In this report, we assess the Governor’s 2019-20 budget proposals for the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES). The Governor’s budget proposes $1.5 billion (almost three-quarters from federal funds) for support of OES in 2019-20. Of this total budget, $1.3 billion is for local assistance. This total budget is a net decrease of $10 million (0.6 percent) from current-year estimated expenditures.

Sur les sept propositions, six nécessitent le recours à du financement et une n’en exige que partiellement avant la fin du processus de planification PAL.
Consulter le document »

In this post, we describe how the California Department of Technology’s (CDT) information technology (IT) project approval process—known as the Project Approval Lifecycle (PAL)—does not always align with the state’s annual budget process. We identify seven funding requests in the Governor’s 2019-20 proposed budget for IT project proposals that are currently in various stages of the PAL process. We then describe how these requests for project funding prior to the completion of the PAL planning process may inhibit the Legislature from fully realizing the anticipated benefits of the PAL process, discuss how some project-specific factors can cause misalignment of the budget cycle and PAL, and provide issues for legislative consideration.

Le gouverneur de l’Illinois propose de changer le système d’imposition forfaitaire pour un système progressif.
Consulter le document »

The new governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker (D), has one campaign behind him, but an even bigger one lies ahead: convincing the legislature—and Illinois voters—to scrap a key constitutional feature of Illinois’ system of taxation.

A provision in the state constitution which prohibits a graduated-rate income tax has long been a source of controversy. In a state where taxes tend to be high, it has also been crucial to keeping one tax (the individual income tax) highly competitive, because there are practical and political limits on just how high a rate can go when it is applied uniformly.

The constitutional amendment Gov. Pritzker is championing would change all that, and under the rates and brackets he has proposed, would give Illinois some of country’s highest income taxes (individual and corporate), particularly on businesses. That’s of particular concern in a state that has struggled to stem the tide of business departures, as the governor noted in remarks this week, but it’s only one of many issues raised by the proposal.

Under Gov. Pritzker’s proposal, however, the current 4.95 percent flat individual income tax would be transformed into a six-rate tax, with rates ranging from 4.75 to 7.95 percent. A recapture provision means that filers with income in the top bracket will have their entire income, not just their marginal income, subject to the top rate of 7.95 percent. Meanwhile, the base corporate rate would increase from 7 to 7.95 percent (10.45 percent counting the personal property replacement tax), in a misguided—and miscalculated—effort to match the new top rate on individual income.

Abroger le plan « Step up » rendrait le système fiscal plus neutre et éliminerait une dépense fiscale.
Consulter le document »

When a person leaves property to an heir, the cost basis of the bequeathed asset receives a “step-up” in basis to its fair market value at the time of the original owner’s death. Step-up in basis reduces capital gains tax liability on property passed to an heir by excluding any appreciation in the property’s value that occurred during the decedent’s lifetime from taxation.

This policy has been critiqued for its “lock-in effect,” that it discourages taxpayers from realizing capital gains by allowing a deceased person’s returns from saving, in the form of capital gains, to be passed on to heirs without tax. This reduces federal revenue and benefits mainly high-income taxpayers.

Yet, step-up in basis could also keep heirs from paying both the estate tax and capital gains tax on the same asset. In other words, step-up in basis protects capital from double taxation. The policy also reduces compliance costs for taxpayers, largely because proving the original cost basis of a deceased person’s asset can be difficult.

This analysis explains how step-up in basis works, focusing particularly on how the provision interacts with the estate tax. It discusses the considerations before policymakers when evaluating this possible policy change. In deciding whether to repeal step-up in basis, policymakers must confront several trade-offs. Eliminating step-up in basis would make the tax code more neutral and remove a tax expenditure that primarily benefits wealthy taxpayers. But eliminating step-up in basis without changing the estate tax would increase the tax burden on capital and compliance burdens for taxpayers.

Rationaliser ou consolider les dispositions fiscales existantes serait souhaitable pour mieux investir dans le capital humain.
Consulter le document »

Education and training are investments in human capital that can increase productivity over time, similar to the way investments in physical capital, such as machinery and equipment, can increase productivity. However, while physical capital accumulation can occur quickly, human capital accumulation occurs over a longer period.

Currently, employers can deduct certain qualified education and training expenses for tax purposes, and certain qualified educational benefits are excludable from the taxable portion of employees’ wages. Generally, at the firm level, only education expenses which improve worker skills for their current positions are deductible. If the education would qualify workers for a new type of work, the expenses are not deductible. At the individual level, the tax treatment of educational expenses varies by income level and type of education.

These differences are important because tax treatment is relevant to human capital investment decisions, and human capital accumulation is a key driver of economic growth. Differing tax treatment can distort costs of investments and decision-making by firms and individuals.

This paper reviews background information about human capital investment, how taxation affects human capital decisions, tax treatment across various jurisdictions, and proposals which would change the tax treatment of human capital investment in the United States.

Les recettes des fiscales des États depuis le passage du « Tax Cuts and Jobs Act » ont fortement fluctué ; les États devraient être prudents dans leurs prévisions.
Consulter le document »

State government tax revenues have fluctuated wildly over the past year largely because of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act passed in late December 2017. Overall, year-over-year growth in state tax revenues was strong in the third quarter of 2018 but weaker than the growth observed in the final quarter of 2017 and the first half of 2018.

Preliminary state government tax data for the fourth quarter of 2018 indicate declines in personal income tax collections, which was largely anticipated and is partially attributable to the disappearing impact of incentives created under the TCJA to accelerate payments of state and local income taxes into tax year 2017. In addition, wild swings in the stock market throughout the fourth quarter of 2018 likely also contributed to personal income tax declines.

Although the near-term economic outlook is positive, state revenue forecasters would be prudent to maintain a cautious revenue outlook for the remainder of state fiscal year 2019 and fiscal year 2020.

Les normes internationales élaborées au début du dernier siècle n’ont pas suivi le rythme de l’économie moderne, fortement connectée, numérisée et mondialisée.
Consulter le document »

This paper reviews recent international initiatives and domestic policy developments aimed at helping countries to protect their tax base against erosion by individuals and companies that allocate assets to or route income via low tax jurisdictions. The paper highlights the benefits and limitations of existing policy instruments from the perspective of capital-importing developing economies. Focusing on two common policy gaps for developing economies, options are explored for (i) introducing necessary charging provisions to ensure effective taxation of individuals, and (ii) an anti-diversion rule tailored to reflect developing economy contexts and administrative constraints. These proposals include a possible definition of excess profits in low tax jurisdictions and options for distribution keys to reallocate profits to countries where there is « real » economic substance and activity. The measures discussed could also address the diversion of profits to entities benefitting from preferential regimes in countries with high nominal tax rates.

 Il est recommandé de redistribuer l’intégralité des nouvelles recettes de la taxe carbone française supportée par les ménages en prenant en compte les revenus et les disparités géographiques.
Consulter le document »

Si la nécessité de lutter contre le réchauffement climatique semble consensuelle en France, les politiques environnementales restent encore largement débattues comme l’a montré le mouvement de contestation vis-à-vis du relèvement de la taxe carbone. Pourtant, la lutte contre le changement climatique réclame une action résolue sur les investissements et les comportements, et à ce titre le « signal-prix » via la fiscalité environnementale est un outil incontournable. Quelles politiques envisager pour répondre au triple impératif de transition rapide vers une société décarbonée, de justice sociale et de transparence ?

Dans cette nouvelle Note du CAE, Dominique Bureau, Fanny Henriet et Katheline Schubert recommandent de redistribuer intégralement les nouvelles recettes de la taxe supportée par les ménages, de mieux partager l’effort de décarbonation avec les entreprises, et de mobiliser un mix d’instruments complémentaires afin de concilier efficacité et équité pour soutenir la transition énergétique.

La Cour des comptes de France formule sept recommandations afin de corriger les défaillances majeures touchant 20 % de l’ensemble des dépenses fiscales françaises.
Consulter le document »

Les 66 principales dépenses fiscales en faveur du logement (crédits et réductions d’impôts, exonérations et abattements, taux réduits…) représentaient 18 milliards d’euros en 2018, soit près de 20 % de l’ensemble des dépenses fiscales.

Le coût de cet abandon de recettes est sous-estimé dans les lois de finances. L’absence de pilotage de ces dépenses en cours d’exécution ne permet pas d’en modifier les modalités de mise en œuvre, ces mesures s’apparentant pour l’essentiel à des dépenses de guichet. La mesure de leurs effets économiques et sociaux est par ailleurs insuffisante, bien qu’essentielle, tout comme le contrôle de leurs contreparties sociales (loyer modéré…).

Ces dépenses demeurent donc globalement encore trop peu maîtrisées pour être des instruments efficients de la politique du logement. En réponse à une demande d’enquête de la commission des finances, de l’économie générale et du plan de l’Assemblée nationale, la Cour recommande avec insistance, dans ce rapport, de limiter la durée d’existence de ces dispositifs et de ne conserver que les dépenses fiscales qui, après avoir été évaluées avec rigueur, ont fait la preuve de leur efficience.

Google, Apple, Facebook et Amazon supportent un poids fiscal du même ordre que les grandes entreprises de la zone euro, soit une imposition réelle moyenne de 24 % sur leurs bénéfices mondiaux.
Consulter le document »

Depuis 2017, les autorités françaises défendent la mise en place d’une taxe GAFA censée corriger une « injustice » fiscale. Si l’on se fie aux déclarations officielles, les grands acteurs américains du numérique bénéficieraient d’une fiscalité particulièrement avantageuse. Ils supporteraient 14 points de fiscalité en moins que les entreprises traditionnelles françaises ou européennes.

Cependant, cette étude montre que :

• Les ordres de grandeur véhiculés par les autorités françaises ne sont pas étayés. Les grands du numérique américains ne supportent pas 14 points de fiscalité en moins que les entreprises françaises ou européennes.
• L’analyse factuelle des résultats montre que les GAFA se sont acquittés de 24 % d’imposition sur leurs bénéfices mondiaux durant les 5 et 10 dernières années.
• Ce niveau de fiscalité, loin d’être anormalement bas, est légèrement supérieur à la fiscalité moyenne constatée dans l’OCDE.
• Les GAFA ont une fiscalité du même ordre que les grandes entreprises de la zone euro et de l’Europe constituant les indices Euro Stoxx 50 et Stoxx Europe 50. Sur les 5 dernières années, ils ont eu 1 point de fiscalité en plus. Sur les 10 dernières années, ils ont supporté 2 points de moins.

L’abolition de l’impôt des sociétés, qui incombe d’ailleurs aux travailleurs plutôt aux sociétés, résoudrait le problème des paradis fiscaux.
Consulter le document »

Corporate taxes are inefficient, with much greater deadweight costs than most other taxes. The optimal corporate tax rate is zero. •  Bad policies are often good politics. Most voters are easily deluded into thinking that corporate taxes impose no cost on them. Cutting corporate tax and increasing personal taxes is a vote loser. • Politicians around the world have cut corporate tax rates, not because they have decided to put the welfare of the population ahead of electoral self-interest, but due to tax competition. The electoral cost of the economic effects of increased capital flight would be greater than the electoral gains from holding up corporate tax rates. • Politicians outside tax havens are reluctant corporate tax-cutters and, thus, reluctant participants in tax competition. Ending such competition would suit them better than winning it. Hence their crackdown on the tax havens that provide the competition. •  Principles that UK and EU politicians would normally claim to support have been abandoned in the war on tax havens, including the sovereignty of third countries in tax policy, the right of law-abiding citizens to keep their financial affairs private and the rule of law. •  The war on tax havens is an inherently dirty business. Most tax havens are stable democracies, with the rule-of-law and tax regimes that are superior to the inefficient systems that have become the norm in Western countries. The UK and EU have no proper justification for interfering in their affairs.

L’implantation de mesures fiscales importantes sans en vérifier systématiquement l’impact budgétaire a fortement dégradé la situation financière des pays de l’Afrique du Nord et du Moyen-Orient.
Consulter le document »

Fiscal democracy is the capacity of the legislature to make budgetary choices in response to the emerging needs of citizens. This study indicates that, in Middle Eastern countries, there are specific limitations to fiscal democracy in the process of law-making: most notably the lack of attention to financial impact assessments (FIAs).

Without systematic FIAs, mandatory out-of-budget allocations are inadvertently included in public spending, as they do not require parliamentary approval within the regular budgeting process. The low level of effective citizens’ engagement in the process of law-making worsens the situation. Budgetary decisions are not well informed by national priorities and preferences.

This study utilizes the dataset of the Open Budget Index (OBI) to measure the quality of the law-making process of the budget law in a sample of Middle Eastern countries. The study concludes with recommendations on mapping the law-making process to increase budget transparency.

Des prix du fer plus élevés que prévu pourraient conduire à une augmentation des recettes de l’impôt des sociétés à court terme.
Consulter le document »

With the federal election expected to be called shortly after the Budget on 2 April 2019, the Budget will form a significant part of the Government’s economic strategy and its policy platform for the election. The Budget is likely to reconfirm an improvement in the Commonwealth’s fiscal position. The 2019-20 MYEFO forecast a return to surplus in 2019-20 with Commonwealth net debt forecast to have peaked (as a proportion of GDP) in 2017-18. The Budget is also likely to contain some significant policy announcements. The aim of this briefing is to provide some context for the 2019‑20 Budget based on the latest economic and fiscal forecasts released at the 2018‑19 MYEFO in December 2018.

Les fusions volontaires ont permis d’enregistrer une baisse significative des dépenses totales.
Consulter le document »

Higher levels of government motivate municipal consolidations as a tool to increase efficiency in the local government sector, yet research shows consolidations typically fail to deliver the promised spending reductions. Since mergers often require significant changes to institutional structures, one potential explanation is that local decision makers can substantially influence the outcomes of the consolidations process. To explore this possibility, this paper contrasts “encouraged but voluntary” mergers with those that were “forced” on local governments in the state of New South Wales, Australia. Results show voluntary mergers resulted in a ten percent decline in total per capita expenditures, but forced consolidations failed to reduce spending across the board. The policy conclusion is decision makers considering structural reform should invest in obtaining the support and participation of local government decision makers.