Skip to main content

Making the Best Better

Estonia is a model for many economic policies. A pioneer in simple taxation and the open economy, there is much for other countries to admire and to emulate. Yet there remain several issues in the micro economy that hurt Estonian competitiveness.

The relative isolation and northern geographical location of the country is something that will always place limits on the Estonian economy, but there are clearly things that can be done to improve the transport links. However one of these is not a high-speed rail line. Even if the billions could be found to fund a high speed line to Warsaw, it would still be a journey of three-four hours. This is never going to be competitive with flying. While freight rail links could be improved, the fact is that the existing line to Riga makes a giant dog-leg via Tartu and Valga and thus passenger traffic will tend to prefer the direct route by bus, which at present takes three hours to get to Riga. It would be quicker, of course if the road were upgraded, and it is quite clear that the vision of the via Baltica as a multi-lane highway should now be realized. The highway to Narva is already being upgraded, and Tallinn Tartu should also be a priority, but for the competitiveness of the country, the international road links should clearly receive priority in future transport planning.

Then there are various tax issues. The fact is that the burden of taxation is falling disproportionately on the poor- the tax threshold needs to be raised in order to reduce the burden on the poor. Furthermore the burden of social taxes- at 30%, a significant cost to entrepreneurs- needs to be reduced. The combination of 21% flat income tax and 30% social tax, makes Estonia a relatively highly taxed nation. The original plan to cut income taxes to 18% should now be progressively reintroduced too.

The great advantage of Estonia, despite being a relatively expensive place for entrepreneurs, is that the process of taxation calculation and collection is pretty simple, but there are clear exceptions. Taxing hotel stays and other travel expenses above a very low cost threshold is not only expensive in terms of the cost of taxation, but also in terms of administration. Either a much higher threshold should be introduced, or better, these legitimate business costs should be made fully deductible.

Since Estonia joined the EU, the administrative burdens on companies have increased: this year new statistics collection has added further work for companies to report new information. There is a growing attitude that the state has a right to impose these burdens, but if Estonia does so, without significant reform elsewhere, it will quickly lose its competitive edge.

As the country comes up to the twentieth anniversary of the restoration of independence, it is clear that politicians on all sides should not be resting on their laurels: Estonia still has much to do if it is to be able to achieve its declared goal of one of the highest living standards in the EU. Increasingly tired and jaded, the politicians are losing their focus on reform, and some political figures are more interested in their own personal political point scoring than in advancing the cause of the country. Estonia should not have time for that kind of political immaturity. The task remains immense and even these relatively small changes will take significant political will. It will be the acid test for the government and the wider political process to ensure that the country continues to move forward.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...