IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bal/journl/2256-074220195217.html

Assessment Of Favourableness For The Tax System Of Ukraine In The International Context

Author

Listed:
  • Valentyna Martynenko

    (University of State Fiscal Service of Ukraine, Ukraine)

Abstract

The purpose of the article is to study the background and key factors that ensured an increase in the ranking of the Ukrainian tax system favourableness from the 174th position to the 43-d position during 2005-2016 - the greatest progress in the whole history of the "Paying Taxes" ranking. Methodology. The research was made on the basis of the countries ranking method according to the tax system favourableness, conducted by the World Bank together with the consulting firm PricewaterhouseCoopers for the implementation of the annual "Paying Taxes" ranking. The ranking is based on the analysis of: taxes and mandatory deductions that a typical medium-sized enterprise must pay in the concerned year; the administrative burden connected with the payment of taxes and deductions; processes after filing and paying taxes. Another method used in the article is the regression analysis of the impact of the unified social tax rate, the corporate income tax rate, the personal income tax rate, the volume of tax revenues, consolidated budget revenues and gross domestic product (GDP) in actual prices on the ranking position of Ukraine in the "Paying Taxes". Results. In course of the study, it was found that the increase of the ranking of Ukraine from the 174th to the 43-d position in the "Paying Taxes" during 2005-2016 became possible due to the liberalization of taxation for 2013-2017, in particular, the reduction of the corporate income tax rate by 7% and the unified social tax rate by 10%. Other factors are as such: improving the tax administration quality: reducing the time for registration, filing and tax payment from 2185 hours in 2005 to 328 hours in 2016, with the worldwide average index of 240 hours per year; reducing the number of tax payments from 98 in 2005 to 5 (the worldwide average index is 24 payments) in 2016. Practical implications. The result of the effective tax policy of the Government of Ukraine was the reduction of the total tax burden on business from 60.3% in 2005 to 37.8% in 2016 at the worldwide average index of 40.5% at the end of the investigated period. Also, during 2005-2016, the consolidated budget revenues grew from 131.3 to 782.7 billion UAH, including tax ones - from 100.7 to 650.8 billion UAH. Value/originality. Based on the results of the study, the author substantiated that the main factor of the significant progress of the tax system of Ukraine in the "Paying Taxes" ranking (from the 174th to the 43-d position during 2005-2016) was the liberalization of taxation by reducing the tax rates of corporate income tax and a unified social tax, as well as improving the quality and efficiency of tax administration.

Suggested Citation

  • Valentyna Martynenko, 2019. "Assessment Of Favourableness For The Tax System Of Ukraine In The International Context," Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, Publishing house "Baltija Publishing", vol. 5(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:bal:journl:2256-0742:2019:5:2:17
    DOI: 10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-2-124-130
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/644/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.baltijapublishing.lv/index.php/issue/article/view/644
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-2-124-130?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bournakis, Ioannis & Mallick, Sushanta, 2018. "TFP estimation at firm level: The fiscal aspect of productivity convergence in the UK," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 579-590.
    2. Ruiz, Francisco & Cabello, José M. & Pérez-Gladish, Blanca, 2018. "Building Ease-of-Doing-Business synthetic indicators using a double reference point approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 130-140.
    3. Eric Ohrn, 2018. "The Effect of Corporate Taxation on Investment and Financial Policy: Evidence from the DPAD," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 272-301, May.
    4. Dominika Langenmayr & Rebecca Lester, 2013. "Taxation and corporate risk-taking," Working Papers 1316, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martynenko, Valentyna, 2019. "Estimation Of The Overall Tax Burden On The Economy In Ukraine," EUREKA: Social and Humanities, Scientific Route OÜ, issue 4, pages 23-29.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ioannis Bournakis & Mike Tsionas, 2024. "A Non‐parametric Estimation of Productivity with Idiosyncratic and Aggregate Shocks: The Role of Research and Development (R&D) and Corporate Tax," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 86(3), pages 641-671, June.
    2. Wei, Hao & Yuan, Ran & Zhao, Laixun, 2020. "International talent inflow and R&D investment: Firm-level evidence from China," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 32-42.
    3. Ly, Alpha, 2025. "Scaling up renewables without phasing down fossil fuels? Rethinking the role of financial globalization," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C).
    4. Cao, Xiaping & Leng, Tiecheng & Goh, Jeremy & Malatesta, Paul, 2020. "The innovation effect of dual-class shares: New evidence from US firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 347-357.
    5. Holtmann, Svea & Braun, Anna-Sophie & Cho, Jae & Koch, Reinald & Langenmayr, Dominika, 2025. "Investment effects of a quasi-robot tax: Evidence from South Korea," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 308, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Abhay Aneja & Nirupama Kulkarni & S. K. Ritadhi, 2021. "Consumption Tax Reform and the Real Economy: Evidence From India's Adoption of a Value‐Added Tax," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(3), pages 569-602, September.
    7. Langenmayr Dominika & Mittermaier Ferdinand, 2021. "Nachhaltiges Wirtschaften, nachhaltig finanziert: Herausforderungen für die Politik in den 2020er Jahren," Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 22(3), pages 176-190, September.
    8. Daniel G. Garrett & Eric Ohrn & Juan Carlos Suárez Serrato, 2020. "Tax Policy and Local Labor Market Behavior," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 83-100, March.
    9. Omar Chafik, 2021. "Impôt sur les sociétés et investissement : quel lien au Maroc ?," Document de travail 2021-4, Bank Al-Maghrib, Département de la Recherche.
    10. Khine Kyaw, 2020. "Market Volatility and Investors’ View of Firm-Level Risk: A Case of Green Firms," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, August.
    11. Adrien Matray & Charles Boissel, 2020. "Higher Dividend Taxes, No Problem! Evidence from Taxing Entrepreneurs in France," Working Papers 276, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    12. Qiping Xu & Eric Zwick, 2020. "Tax Policy and Abnormal Investment Behavior," NBER Working Papers 27363, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Cao, Yuqiang & Lin, Shaoyan & Li, Mangmang & Shan, Yaowen & Wang, Peipei, 2024. "Green taxes: Productivity effects of tax-based environmental regulations on heavily polluting firms," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    14. Zhang, Qizheng & Qian, Zesen & Wang, Shuo & Yuan, Lingran & Gong, Binlei, 2022. "Productivity drain or productivity gain? The effect of new technology adoption in the oilfield market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    15. Baoqing Tang & Bo Gao & Jing Ma, 2021. "The impact of export VAT rebates on firm productivity: Evidence from China," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(10), pages 2798-2820, October.
    16. Huang, Liangxiong & Ma, Minghui & Wang, Xianbin, 2022. "Clan culture and risk-taking of Chinese enterprises," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Mara E. Vidali, 2025. "Measuring Productivity and Convergence Across Countries and Sectors," Post-Print hal-04988644, HAL.
    18. José Manuel Cabello & Francisco Ruiz & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2021. "An Alternative Aggregation Process for Composite Indexes: An Application to the Heritage Foundation Economic Freedom Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(2), pages 443-467, January.
    19. Eichfelder, Sebastian & Knaisch, Jonas David & Schneider, Kerstin, 2025. "Bonus depreciation as instrument for structural economic policy: Effects on investment and asset structure," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 288, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    20. Harju, Jarkko & Koivisto, Aliisa & Matikka, Tuomas, 2022. "The effects of corporate taxes on small firms," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • E62 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook - - - Fiscal Policy; Modern Monetary Theory
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H24 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Personal Income and Other Nonbusiness Taxes and Subsidies
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bal:journl:2256-0742:2019:5:2:17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anita Jankovska (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.