Improving the simplified taxation system in Ukraine, it is important to keep her positive traits – high degree of protection from corruption pressure, easy to use, low cost current administration, but to enhance the effect of the compromise legalization and reduce the potential for abuse.
As he writes in his article for ZN.UA senior economist at CASE Ukraine, member of Nestorivskiy group Vladimir Dubrovsky, we should not think that the need for the USN anymore, or ever will disappear: there will always remain objective factors, require the existence of special regimes for micro.
“While it is necessary to assume that the quality of management will change slowly and, most importantly, it will not allow new corruption opportunities to the temptation to distort this difficult and fragile process, – said Dubrovsky.
According to the author, change the “uproschenku” must respond to the process of institutional development of the state. “If it is absent or occurs very slowly, and the complexity of the STS, or the increase in tax rates is unjustified and leads to undesirable consequences”,
Due to the decline of small businesses, and more recently due to the outflow of the labour force, the welfare of the population increases slowly, and corruption continues to flourish and to take root at the expense of requisitions from small businesses.
“Important to simplify are the transition from the taxation of profits of enterprises to innovative taxation models of the initial capital, reduce the burden on the wage Fund, etc.” – adds the author.
Increase the viability of public institutions need to use in order to gradually simplified to make the system more fair and protected from possible abuses by differentiation of (set income), rather than by gain control, he said.
“Differentiation depending on the assets and the place of work carries relatively less risk of corruption than checks, especially with discretionary powers. It requires more complex calculations, absolute transparency, public control, but these are precisely the areas in which Ukraine achieved significant progress in the development of institutions,” says Dubrovsky.
While control should be limited and focus only on those categories of payers, for which, on the one hand, it is impossible to define objective criteria for the evaluation of the delivered income, but they belong to a pre-defined risk group from the point of view of possible abuse of simplified regimes.
“This is the direction you need to find a way to improve the simplified tax system, according to the complexity with the growth of the institutional viability and social control. But this, of course, predictable, not satisfied with lobbyists, who were able for the third time to push through devastating for the USN (and hence for agricultural development) laws…” – summarizes the author.