Environmental Taxation as a Tool for Sustainable Development Policy-State Comparison of Serbia and Application of Ecological Taxation Reform in European Union

Main Article Content

Olja Munitlak Ivanović
Mirjana Golušin

Abstract

National Strategy for Sustainable Development of Serbia has given clear guidelines for the direction of the economy, respect for ecological principles, development and implementation of better social and institutional policies. Environmental taxes and all other taxes, the fiscal revenue, but its application has special significance, because in addition to economic, it is ecological, institutional and social character, and as such it is an instrument of sustainable development. With this work the authors suggest moving the value of revenues from environmental taxes in the EU in the period 2005-2010. As this is a period characterized by economic problems caused by the crisis in all countries, there has been a decline in revenues from environmental taxes even in the most developed EU countries. n average, the EU has achieved the highest revenues from environmental taxes in 2008. The largest revenue from environmental taxes has made Germany (EUR 56.031,00 million) at the beginning of the period, while the lowest income in the value of (138,21 million EUR) has made Malta.  It should be noted that a downward trend in the character of all countries except Slovenia and Estonia, which joined the EU in 2004. Income that is realized by the collection of environmental taxes is significant and is measured in tens of million, but there is a possibility that the position of business entities that pay for it because it makes it difficult to become less competitive. This paper provides an overview of key economic issues in the use of taxation as an instrument of environmental policy.

Article Details

Section
Articles

References

Barde, J.P. 1999. “Green tax reforms in OECD Countries: on overview”. Journal of Business Administration and Policy Analysis, 2(1): 145-156.
Coase, R.H. 1960. “The Problem of Social Cost”. Journal of Law and Economics, 3(1): 1-44.
Eurostat Statistical Books, last update: 28.07.2011. http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product_details/publication?p_product_code=CH_11_2011_XLS
Foundation for Environment Protection and Energy Efficiency. 2010. ”Program of Foundation for Environment Protection and Energy Efficiency 2010-2012”, Zagreb: 23-25.
Foundation for Environment Protection and Energy Efficiency. 2010. ”Program of Foundation for Environment Protection and Energy Efficiency 2010-2012”, Zagreb: 23-25
Fullerton, Leicester and Smith. 2007. “Envormental taxes - Reforming the tax Systems for the 21st Century”. Mirrlees Review, 4(1): 1-5.
Fund for Environment Protection of the Republic of Serbia. 2011. “Information Booklet”, Belgrade: 1-24.
Fund for Environment Protection. 2011. “Report on Foundation for Environment Protection in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, Sarajevo: 24-28.
Golušin, Munitlak Ivanović. 2009. “Definition, characteristics and state of the indicators of sustainable development in countries of Southeastern Europe”. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, Elsevier 4(2): 67-74.
OECD. 1999. “Survey on the Use of Economic Insruments for Pollution Control and Natural Resources Management in the New Independent States”. EAP Task Force, Washington: 56-58.
Pigou, A.C. 1918. The Economics Welfare. London: MacMilan.
Pirvu, Clipici. 2010. “Perspectives of the Environmental Taxes Evolution in the European Union”. The Romanian Economic Journal, 38: 147-161.
Steinbach, Palm, Cederlund, Georgescu, Haas. 2009. “Environmental taxes”, 14th Meeting of the London Group on Environmental Accounting Canberra, Discussion Paper LG/14/18 27-30.
United Nation Conference on Environment and Development “The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development”. Rio de Janeiro, June 1992: 1-19.