The value added tax. The impact of procedures applyed to agricultural producers (reverse charge, quota reducing and the exemption from VAT). Case study: wheat, flour, bread and bakery products

Toma, Mircea (2014): The value added tax. The impact of procedures applyed to agricultural producers (reverse charge, quota reducing and the exemption from VAT). Case study: wheat, flour, bread and bakery products. Published in: Agrarian Economy and Rural Development – Realities and Perspectives for Romania , Vol. 5, No. ISSN – 2285 – 6803; ISSN – L – 2285 – 6803 (20 November 2014): pp. 36-48.

Abstract

The introduction or elimination, increase or decrease of taxes and contributions, theoretical and practical, can not ignore the direct and / or underlying effects (collateral) on chain: Financial institutions - Suppliers of inputs - Agricultural producers - En-gross traders - Processing industry - En-detail traders - Consumer - State Budget. Solutions require transparency, solidarity, equity, social justice in the distribution of efforts and usufruct(profit) for the whole chain participants in achieving useful goods and services to human society. A particularly aspect has VAT with effect from 1 July 1993, as a Romanian fiscal system compatible with EU procedures. By the additions and changes to VAT management procedures for agricultural activities (exemption from VAT of individual producers, the reverse charge in the production of cereals and technical crops, reducing the quota of VAT collected on chain at 9% for bread), fiscal inequity was created between farmers according to the legal status of the organization and operation, between sectors of agricultural production, but also to the users of agricultural production. The most disadvantaged are those of 3,859,000 individual farmers, family farms and associations without legal status, that use 7.45 million ha (56% of the total utilized agricultural of 13,306,000 ha). The study conclusion is the need of adapting VAT management procedures to the realities of Romanian agriculture by recognizing VAT on inputs used for agricultural production by individual producers, legal unorganized, valorised at the economic agents. By the recommended measures the individual producers' incomes grow by about 13-15% (300- 500 lei / ha wheat equivalent) without affecting the cost of raw materials to users of agricultural production, even if it increases the financial effort for its purchase. There are eliminated the discrimination between sectors of agricultural production (crop, livestock, horticulture, wine and fruit growing, fish, etc.), there are created conditions for the consolidation of farms and unblocking the association process and the formation of producer groups and/or agricultural cooperatives and a better use of financial resources and grants. It increases the efficiency and contribution of agriculture to the state budget revenues. Those 3,859,000 of individual producers (individual businesses, family farms, associations) legal unorganized, and the 31 thousand companies with legal personality for the 5.856 million ha(44%) of operation. (RGA-2010) beneficiate the measures proposed. Agricultural production is included in the fiscal system, the receipts and payments are fluidized and reduce the pressure for VAT refunds from the state budget (about 108 million. Lei / year for the wheat used for bread). It reduces the phenomenon of unfair competition and tax evasion area, bureaucracy, abuse and corruption. Fees, taxes and contributions should not be treated as simple budgetary resources, but also as effective tools of orientation farmers, and not only, through the level, mechanisms, procedures of charging and taxing that the state institutions can promote for the stabilization and improvement production and supply of agricultural services as part of a functioning market economy.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: VAT, reverse charge, exemption, reduced VAT rate, VAT collection; tax evasion, farms, farmers, financial resources, efficiency, economic crisis, budget revenues
• Subjects: E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E6 - Macroeconomic Policy, Macroeconomic Aspects of Public Finance, and General Outlook > E62 - Fiscal Policy; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q12 - Micro Analysis of Farm Firms, Farm Households, and Farm Input Markets; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q1 - Agriculture > Q18 - Agricultural Policy ; Food Policy

References

Toma, M., Agricultura-sincopele tranziţiei, riscuri asumate, Editura SC Tipografia Slobozia SA 2007;

Toma, M., Cercetarea-sincopele tranziţiei, riscuri asumate, Editura SC Tipografia Slobozia SA 2007;

Toma, M., Contracararea efectelor crizei. Reforma radicală a sistemului fiscal şi contributiv. Agricultura, prima şansă. Cine, cum, cât, cu ce efecte? Editura Terra Nostra” Iasi, 2009;

Toma, M., Impactul TVA pe filiera, producător agricol-procesator-comerciant-consumator-bugetul de stat; Revista “Agricultorul român”. Nr. 11 (167) noiembrie 2012, Bucureşti;

Toma, M., Estimarea efectelor reducerii taxei pe valoarea adăugată pe filiera la pâine; revista “Lumea satului nr. 16 (189) , 2013 şi nr. 5 (202), 2014, Bucureşti;

Toma, M., Revenirea la cota de 19% este posibilă. Cine, cum, cu ce efecte? Revista Profitul agricol nr. 14/2014, Bucureşti;

Toma, M., Impactul TVA pe filiera, producător agricol-procesator-comerciant-consumator-bugetul de stat; Simpozion ICEADR Bucuresti 11-13 noiembrie 2013, ASAS, Bucureşti;

Directiva 112, Directiva 2006/112 a Consiliului Uniunii Europene din 28 noiembrie 2006 privind sistemul comun al TVA, publicată în Jurnalul Oficial al Comunităţilor Europene (JOCE), Legea 347/11 decembrie 2006, cu modificările şi completările ulterioare