Wirtschaftsintegration, Sozialstaat, Mobilität, Europäische Wirtschafts- und Währungsunion, Economic integration, Welfare state, Mobility, European Economic and Monetary Union

Ivan Miklos

English

Research Papers in Economics

CESifo Forum 3/2004 27
IVAN MIKLOS
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance,
Slovak Republic
Let me start by saying that the best social policy is
to have as many well-paid jobs as possible and that
economic growth is the best way to get more and
better jobs.This is a quote from the Lisbon Strategy.
It is a very nice and ambitious goal,but the problem
is reality. Regarding economic growth and compet-
itiveness, from 2000 on the gap between the United
States and the EU has not shrunk but has rather
widened. And this has not been only due to differ-
ent developments in employment. GDP per
employed person is also decreasing in the EU as
compared to the U.S..Another fact is the composi-
tion of growth in past years: EU potential growth is
declining as compared to the U.S., and even more
alarming is the decline in competitiveness as mea-
sured by the quality of technology and the quality
of institutions, i.e. institutional conditions for high-
er growth.
Comparing the old and the new member countries,
i.e. EU15 and EU25, we see a big difference in eco-
nomic growth between the two groups of countries.
There are two major reasons for this difference.First
of all,in the new member countries there is converg-
ing growth from a much lower level. More impor-
tant, however, are the structural reforms.The lack of
structural reforms is the biggest problem of the EU
15.This is, of course, closely related with the sustain-
ability of the welfare system.
Let me tell you what I think are the greatest obsta-
cles to achieving higher and sustainable economic
growth in the old Member States and to an
increase in competitiveness. Firstly, it is the lack of
economic freedom in general. It is very difficult to
understand how a country, whose public expendi-
tures are 55 percent of GDP, like for example
France, should be able to be competitive in the
present conditions of globalisation and an increas-
ingly competitive environment. Secondly, it is
insufficient market flexibility, especially labour
market flexibility, but also financial market flexi-
bility, the lack of venture capital financing, etc.
Thirdly, it is long-term fiscal sustainability. High
fiscal deficits have very negative direct and indi-
rect effects on the competitiveness of business.
This is closely connected with important structural
reforms, of course, like pension reforms, health
care reforms and others. Fourthly, competitiveness
is also very closely connected with the business
environment. It is necessary to have structural
reforms for a more business and investment
friendly environment in the EU.
One good example is the tax system.
Let me just briefly outline the basic features of the
Slovakian tax reform. In Slovakia, from January of
this year, we have a new tax system that is much
more business friendly and has reduced the tax bur-
den from direct taxes significantly. We have can-
celled the dividend tax, the gift tax, the inheritance
tax and the real estate transfer tax. We have
changed the progressive taxation of personal
income, which ranged from 10 percent to 38 per-
cent, to a uniform rate of 19 percent.The corporate
tax, which was 25 percent, is now also 19 percent,
and we have also unified VAT to 19 percent from
previously 14 percent and 19 percent. We have cut
direct taxes and raised indirect taxes.These changes
have created a more business friendly system, they
have provided a very neutral, very simple, very
transparent system, which has improved the busi-
ness environment and is attracting more and more
investment to Slovakia. Of course, there have been
other reforms as well, which I have no time to dis-
cuss here, however.
From the point of view of enlargement,it is my opin-
ion that enlargement is a win-win strategy. I am
deeply convinced of that. Of course, enlargement is
also showing up weaknesses and deformations of
the present system. But one should not blame the
messenger.The problems are internal.The weight of
the new member countries is only 16 percent in
terms of population, but only 8 percent in terms of
GDP in purchasing power parities.In nominal terms
it is much less. Globalisation is here, competitive
Panel 1pressure is here,and enlargement is only making the
weaknesses more visible. If enlargement exerts the
pressure for undertaking the necessary structural
reforms it will benefit the old member countries,
too.Therefore I am convinced that enlargement is a
win-win strategy; it is not only good for the new
member countries but also for the EU15, because
without structural reforms we can forget about
becoming the most competitive economic region of
the world.
CESifo Forum 3/2004 28
Panel 1

Economic Integration and the Welfare State

http://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/page/portal/DocBase_Content/ZS/ZS-CESifo_Forum/zs-for-2004/zs-for-2004-3/forum3-04-panel1-miklos.pdf

Economic Integration and the Welfare State

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics