Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Any new taxes or increases of the current ones would further dent business
and consumer confidence and postpone investments and consumption; the
government will have to focus on sustainable revenue sources – more
efficient SOEs and a smaller shadow economy. On the expenditure side,
structural reforms and a smaller public sector will have to replace outright
spending cuts.
Public finances steered to calmer income and corporate tax were slightly higher than
waters after the storm expected as well, while excise tax revenues fell
short of expectations by 8.4%.
Lithuanian public finances have stabilised and
market confidence has improved since the end of Revenue sources for state government, Jan-Aug 2010
last year, thanks to the bold austerity measures to
Income tax,
curb the budget deficit, totalling approximately 10% Other, 12.0%
6.1% Prof it tax,
of GDP, adopted for 2009-2010. In the first quarter, 3.4%
Other tax,
the stringent budget consolidation package brought
3.3%
some positive developments, mostly in the
recognition of the government’s efforts by
international institutions and ratings agencies.1
Over the second quarter of the year, the
improvement in public finances was clearly visible Excise tax,
20.7%
amidst better revenues and some reduction in
expenditures. Government budget revenue plan in VAT, 53.8%
first eight months of the year was exceeded by
8.4%, supported by unexpectedly strong value-
added tax (VAT) collections (exceeding the plan by
22.3%, at close to EUR 1.5 billion). Revenues from
1
In February 2010, Standard and Poor’s ratings agency lifted its
outlook for Lithuania to stable from negative on its BBB long- Successful collection of revenues this year can
term debt rating; in March, Fitch and Moody’s ratings agencies
followed by raising their outlooks on BBB and Baa1 ratings,
largely be attributed to conservative planning. The
respectively, from negative to stable as well. On 27 Jan, the EU revenue collection patterns this year, however,
also affirmed that consolidation efforts were sufficient and raise concerns by indicating signs of a large
allowed Lithuania until 2012 to narrow the budget deficit to within procyclical shadow economy.
3% of GDP.
First, lower-than-expected excise revenues can be
attributed to a jump in smuggling and unaccounted
Economic Research Department. Swedbank AB. SE-105 34 Stockholm. Phone +46-8-5859 1000
E-mail: ek.sekr@swedbank.com www.swedbank.com
Legally responsible publisher: Cecilia Hermansson, +46-8-5859 7720
Nerijus Mačiulis + 370 5 258 2237. Lina Vrubliauskienė +370 5 258 2275. Ieva Vyšniauskaitė +370 5 258 2156.
The Lithuanian Economy
Subsidies 0% 50%
-4% 30%
2.1%
Other
1.5% 4.8% -5% 25%
-6% 20%
-7% 15%
The decision of the government to use excess
-8% 10%
revenues primarily for reducing debt rather than
increasing expenditure is welcome; this partly -9% 5%
2 (4)
The Lithuanian Economy
the importance of the stability of public finances, it more than 1% of GDP. The government is working
is very unlikely that the government will stray from on a strategy to make Lithuanian SOEs more
this road now, even considering the municipal and effective by increasing their transparency and
government elections approaching in 2011 and depoliticising them. One way to do this is to float a
2012. fraction (less than 50%, if they are perceived
strategic objects and state ownership is crucial) of
General government budget, 1Q 2006 – 1Q 2010 each enterprise’s shares on the equity market – the
300 45 requirement to publish quarterly financial
200 statements would make them more transparent and
100
private capital would keep an eye on obvious acts
30
0
of corruption and inefficiencies. The requirement
-100
would also have the positive secondary effect of
-200
15 increasing the liquidity of the Lithuanian equity
-300
market and adding substantial income to the state
-400
0 budget, which would lower debt and its servicing
-500
costs.
-600 -15 The government should keep moving in the
-700 direction of liberalising labour laws and offering
-800 -30 incentives to hire unemployed and create new
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 workplaces. Minimising unofficial income has
Budget balance, EURm (ls) Rev enues, y oy (rs) positive effects on both budget income and
Expenditures, y oy (rs) expenditure – unjustified unemployment benefits
are reduced and income tax revenues are
The consolidation package should be broad based, increased. Ending the practice of turning a blind eye
encompassing both expenditure and revenue to cross-border smuggling and enacting clear
measures. The primary criteria, however, in measures to improve border control (and punish its
adopting these measures, especially on the absence) can substantially increase income from
spending side, should be clear-cut and, above all, excise duties.
should ensure a balance between, on one hand, Doing more with less
making short-term savings that can be delivered
swiftly and, on the other, ensuring that long-term The measures that addressed spending – wage,
costs are not increased as a result. Balancing the pension, and other social benefit cuts – were easy
budget should not come at any cost for society as a to implement but are unsustainable, temporary, and
whole – long-term competitiveness and the sometimes harmful. In particular, the decision to
consequent public welfare have to remain the reduce contributions to second-pillar pension funds
underlying criteria. is a measure that undermines the whole idea of
pension reform and addresses today’s problems by
Possible sources of sustainable transferring them to the future. Furthermore,
income pension and social benefit cuts have a strong, direct
negative impact on household consumption.
Fiscal consolidation measures that addressed the
Universal wage cuts in the public sector are
revenue side (tax increases, concession and
temporary and do not solve the main problem there
exemption eliminations, etc.) were too
– inefficiency. A much more agreeable structural
straightforward and inefficient. Further increases in
reform would address the necessity, relevance, and
current taxes or introduction of new ones would
appropriateness of the size of many public
further depress the sentiment of business,
institutions and organizations – there is no doubt
consumers, and potential foreign investors. Even
that the same amount and quality of public services
potentially stabilising real estate taxes should wait
can be provided with fewer disappointed
for economic recovery and be announced well
before their introduction. There are at least two employees. This would cause a temporary increase
in unemployment (as the workforce would have to
healthy alternative sources of budget revenues – a
drift from the public to the private sector) but be
more efficient management of state-owned
beneficial in the long term.
enterprises (SOEs) and a smaller shadow
economy. SOEs were valued at EUR 5.2 billion, but Lithuania is among the leaders in Europe in such
in 2009 their contribution to the state budget in the ratios as the number of hospital beds per capita,
form of dividends was only a little more than school teachers per capita (or has lowest number of
EUR 10 million, about 0.05% of GDP. By pupils per teacher), and policemen per capita,
comparison, dividends of Estonian SOEs amount to
3 (4)
The Lithuanian Economy
which indicates further possibilities for optimising the economic growth periods. This would enable a
spending in these sectors. small country to build up a cushion against future
turbulences in international markets, on which
Another area with an obviously wasteful approach
Lithuania greatly depends. Fiscal austerity
is public procurement – recent scandals in some
measures enacted now must be seen as first steps
SOEs and public institutions show that there is
on the path towards long-term competitiveness and
much room for savings there.
prosperity, not just temporary measures to calm the
There are many paths towards welfare and markets, convince the European Commission, and
prosperity and larger government spending is not allow adoption of the euro.
the only one. The main structural reform that must
take place in Lithuania is a mental one – the social
and political elite must understand that consistent Nerijus Maciulis
budget deficits are unsustainable (not once since Ieva Vysniauskaite
1995 has Lithuania had a budget surplus). A
prudent step towards sustainable public finances
would be setting a long term target not of 3%
budget deficit, but some surplus – at least during
Swedbank
Economic Research Department Swedbank’s monthly newsletter The Lithuanian Economy is published as a service to our
SE-105 34 Stockholm customers. We believe that we have used reliable sources and methods in the preparation
Phone +46-8-5859 1028 of the analyses reported in this publication. However, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or
ek.sekr@swedbank.com completeness of the report and cannot be held responsible for any error or omission in the
www.swedbank.com underlying material or its use. Readers are encouraged to base any (investment) decisions
on other material as well. Neither Swedbank nor its employees may be held responsible for
Legally responsible publisher
losses or damages, direct or indirect, owing to any errors or omissions in Swedbank’s
Cecilia Hermansson, +46-8-5859 7720.
monthly newsletter The Lithuanian Economy.
Nerijus Mačiulis, +370 5 2582237.
Lina Vrubliauskienė, +370 5 268 4275.
Ieva Vyšniauskaitė, +370 5 268 4156.
4 (4)