User Tools

Site Tools


info_on_corporate_policy_in_the_countries

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

The share of environmental taxation out of total taxation has increased since 1995 in a number of the EU Member States (Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia). In new Member States the increase has been largely driven by the EU accession process, although some of them made use of the occasion to increase energy tax levels beyond the strict requirement of the EU provisions.

 

The definition of a tax as environmental is independent of its classification by economic function: any tax, be it on consumption, labour or capital, that has the effect of raising the cost of activities which harm the environment, is classified here as an environmental tax. Environmental taxes are subsumed under the classification by economic function because the use of the environment can be regarded as an additional production factor.

 

Environmental taxes can be divided into four broad categories (energy, transport, pollution and resource taxes. Energy taxes are by far the most significant, representing around three quarters of environmental tax receipts and around one twentieth of total taxes and social contributions. In the EU-27, transport taxes correspond to, on average, around a fifth of total environmental tax revenues and 1.4 % of total taxes and social contributions (in the weighted average). The remaining two categories, pollution taxes and resource taxes, raise only a marginal amount of revenue: together they make up a bit less than 5 % of total environmental taxes.

 

The predominance of energy taxes is common to most Member States; however, in some countries the contribution of transport taxes is significant: for instance, in Cyprus and Malta they account for between 38 % and 48 % of environmental taxes.

 

In 2009 the highest increase in energy taxation took place in Estonia, over 1 % of GDP, while other countries with non-negligible increases were Cyprus, Slovenia and Poland. On the other hand, there has been a strong decrease of energy taxes in Romania amounting to almost 2 % of GDP. One can also observe that the level of transport taxes has decreased quite strongly in Cyprus and Malta, the two countries where transport taxes form an important share of environmental taxation, but the fall is partly offset by increases in energy taxes (Cyprus) or pollution/ resources taxes (Malta).

 

The level of energy taxes in relation to GDP is by the highest in Slovenia and Bulgaria (3.0 % and 2.7 % of GDP respectively). The reason for their high energy tax, to GDP ratio, however, is not high tax rates as such but the high level of final energy consumption compared to GDP.

 

The predominance of transport fuel taxes is particularly striking in the new Member States; most of them levy between 85 % and 90 % of their energy taxes on transport fuels. The relative homogeneity with respect to high transport fuel shares in energy taxation in the new Member States is explained by the fact that they enjoy exemptions from the minimum excise duty, or at least considerably reduced rates, for taxing energy products such as electricity, natural gas and coal (Council Directive 2004/74/EC). The revenues collected from taxing these products are therefore low compared with those accruing from transport fuel taxes. Poland and, since 2008, Estonia represent the exceptions with a tax rate exceeding the minimum excise duty on electricity by ten and six times respectively. Hence, Poland generates about 9 % of its energy tax revenues on taxation of electricity, while Estonia still yields around 7 % of its energy tax revenues from electricity. All other new Member States yield less than 2 % of their energy tax revenues from electricity.

 

Countries raising considerable shares of fuel tax revenues on the non-transport use, are Romania and Cyprus (around 13 %).

 

The high share of taxes derived from the transport use of fuels is nothing but the mirror image of the minimum excise tax rates set up in the Energy Tax Directive (2003/96/EC). Minimum tax rates for petrol, which is almost exclusively used for transport purposes, are the highest among all products covered by this Directive. On the other hand, minimum rates for heavy fuel oil, primarily used for heating purposes, are relatively low. Tax rates for product categories, which are used for both transport and stationary purposes, such as gas oil, are heavily differentiated.

 

The differentiation of minimum tax rates between transport fuels and fuels used for heating and business use reflects that the choice of the minimum excise duty rates was not only influenced by environmental considerations. From a purely environmental viewpoint taxing equally polluting substances in an equal way is preferable. However, the current choice of minimum tax rates allows Member States to take social (fairness) considerations into account when setting tax rates, when e.g. allowing for lower tax rates for heating. Moreover, high taxes on transport fuels are motivated by the existence of negative externalities related to the transport sector (accidents, noise, and congestion), as well as the need to finance road infrastructure.

 

The minimum excise duty for e.g. gas oil used as a propellant is almost 15 times higher than if it is used for stationary purposes (business use and heating). Hence, even for countries which use only about 60 % - 80 % of the final energy consumption of diesel/gas oil for transport purposes, their revenue on the transport use of fuels is usually well above 90 % of total tax revenues on diesel/gas oil. Of course, the exact revenue shares depend on the shares of each of the activities and moreover on how the individual Member State chooses its tax rate in line with the minimum rates. Some countries such as the Czech Republic, Greece, Hungary, and Romania do not vary the rates according to different use and give tax refunds and reimbursements only on the proven use of gas oil for heating or agricultural use. Other countries, such as Latvia and Lithuania set tax rates for heating purposes at or below the minimum rates, thus creating a large spread between tax rates on transport use of fuels and heating use.

 

Even though the shares of transport fuel taxes in energy taxes vary considerably between countries, the shares are relatively stable over time within countries. Strong fluctuations are only observed for Cyprus and Estonia in 2008. In Estonia  this fluctuation is caused by the introduction of a tax on electricity. For most countries, time series are too short to identify a trend in the share of transport taxes in energy taxes. Due to the introduction of taxes on electricity in new Member States – such as in Estonia - it can be assumed that the share of transport fuel taxes in energy taxes will decrease over time.

 

A high ratio of environmental tax revenue to total taxation as such does not necessarily represent an indication of a high priority being attributed to environmental protection. Energy taxes were originally used purely as revenue raising instruments, without environmental purposes. Furthermore, the level of this indicator also says nothing about the achievement of environmental policy goals, as revenue increases could conceivably result from changes in the economy towards production and consumption patterns that are resource intensive and lead to even higher pollution.

 

Moreover, if green taxes act as an efficient disincentive, they will over time reduce the recourse to environmentally harmful goods and thereby erode the tax base, leading to a gradual fall in revenue. In addition, if tax breaks on environmentally friendly products or processes are granted, the same objective — protecting the environment — results in lower tax revenues. In either case we would witness a falling tax-to-GDP ratio for environmental taxes despite an increase in environmental protection.

 

It is also worth pointing out that the decrease in environmental tax revenues on GDP in recent years could be due in part to innovations in policy instruments. An example of this could be represented by an increased recourse to road pricing systems accompanied by a reduction in lump sum car circulation taxes, which would lead to lower tax revenues, since road charges are not booked as taxes. Another example of innovative instruments is the EU CO2 emissions trading system, which is likely to ‘crowd-out’ energy taxation in the sectors covered by the scheme.

 

The paradoxes outlined above suggest the introduction of an effective or implicit tax rate (ITR) for environmental taxes for analytical purposes. The interpretation of an ITR is generally more straightforward because this class of indicators is not affected by the erosion in the base due to the disincentive effect of the tax; a properly defined implicit tax rate would remain constant.

 

Constructing an implicit tax rate for environmental taxes overall is a daunting task: there is no easily identifiable denominator for the ratio because the diversity of environmental taxes leads to a multiplicity of bases. However, for energy taxes, which, as mentioned above, represent three quarters of environmental tax revenues, an appropriate indicator for the potential tax base can be identified. Eurostat publishes data on final energy consumption by country, aggregating the different sources of energy utilised in a single indicator. The data include energy consumed in the transport, industrial, commercial, agricultural, public and households sectors excluding the energy transformation sector and to the energy industries themselves. The various energy sources are aggregated on the basis of their net calorific value, and expressed in tonnes of oil equivalent; this measure is taken as the denominator of the ITR on energy published in this report, while the numerator is constituted by the revenue from all energy taxes.

 

This indicator is an appropriate measure of the policy stance in terms of taxation. Note that the ITR on energy treats equally all kinds of energy consumption, regardless of their environmental impact; an energy unit produced from hydroelectric power has the same weight as a unit produced from coal. In many countries, however, renewable energy sources are subject to lower tax rates than exhaustible energy sources, or altogether exempted in order to provide incentives to switch from fossil fuels towards these more environmentally-friendly sources of energy. Thus, paradoxically, a country with a large share of renewable energy will have a lower ITR on energy than a country, which relies largely on carbon-based energy sources.

 

Generally, the new Member States display markedly lower levels of taxation. However, most Member States in this group have been increasing energy taxes significantly, with the exception of Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia where taxation on energy has decreased in 2009 from 2008 levels. Malta and Slovenia are the new Member States with the highest absolute level of taxation in 2009.

 

ALBANIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Annual vehicle registration tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Change from a national to a local tax.

Other rate differentiation Tax is differentiated based on the type and size of the vehicle.

 

2. Name of Instrument Carbon tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Other rate differentiation Rates differentiated depending on the carbon content in the fuel.

 

3. Name of Instrument Charges for exploitation of minerals

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1994

Revision Details No revisions were made since introduction.

Rate differentiation for products Non-compliance fees are in the range of CHF 50,000 - 500,000, payable in ALL.

Other rate differentiation Rates depend on the type of license issued and group of minerals to which the licenses refer.

 

4. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation By type of fuel

 

5. Name of Instrument Harbour tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Rate differentiation for products Tax reductions applied for the ships anchoring at harbours other than Durres; for legal and natural persons (shipping agents) registered in the Republic of Albania; and for the ships carrying the Albanian flag.

Other rate differentiation Rates differentiated based on the type and size of the ship.

 

6. Name of Instrument Import tax for used vehicles

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details The tax level was changed and manipulated in a way that newer cars pay less import taxes than older ones.

Other rate differentiation Tax rates differentiated depending on the type and age of the vehicle.

 

7. Name of Instrument Mobility tax for foreign vehicles

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

8. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for sectors Charges are differentiated depending on the category of users.

Rate differentiation for regions Each municipality and the municipality council decide on the rate.

 

9. Name of Instrument Tax on plastic containers for beverages

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Other rate differentiation Rates differ depending on the size/volume of container.

 

10. Name of Instrument Tax on the use of fisheries

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Other rate differentiation Rates depend on type of fishing and size (power) of the boat.

 

11. Name of Instrument Turnover tax for used vehicles

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Rate differentiation for products Minimum tax amount differs depending on the age of the vehicle.

 

12. Name of Instrument Vehicle import duty

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

13. Name of Instrument Wastewater charge

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - For the operation of water supply enterprises and measures for water resources management.

Rate differentiation for sectors Charges are differentiated depending on the category of users - households, private enterprises and public institutions.

Rate differentiation for regions Charge varies from one municipality to another.

 

14. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for sectors Charges are differentiated depending on the category of users - households, private enterprises and public institutions.

Rate differentiation for regions Charges differ from one municipality to another.

 

15. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Specific tax-base Tax rate Violations of the Water Reserves Law

 

http://www.eizg.hr/en-US/Corporate-Social-Responsibility-in-Albania-670.aspx

 

Accelerating CSR in Albania: a SWOT analysis

 

Strengths

l  Increased attention to CSR in last 5 years

l  Comprehensive regulatory framework for business exists

l  Global Compact and other development projects have raised awareness of aspects of CSR

l  Leading companies have commitments to CSR and provide examples of good practice

l  Brand image and reputation emerging as key issues in some sectors of the economy

l  Growing interest in CSR by intermediary organizations including Chambers of Commerce and business interest groups

l  Growing awareness of business case for CSR and link between competitiveness and sustainability

l  First steps in teaching Business Ethics and CSR within higher education

l  Increasing interest and understanding in importance of ISO standards

 

Weaknesses

l  Understanding of CSR remains rather vague and even contested

l  Few companies integrate CSR into core management approach

l  CSR not yet integrated into corporate governance

l  Commitments in key CSR areas: labour standards; consumer protection; environmental protection; anti-corruption; procurement/supply chain remain rather undeveloped

l  Few companies report regularly, clearly and transparently on their social and environmental impacts

l  CSR through projects means many initiatives are time-limed and/or donor-driven

l  Lack of interest in CSR by key stakeholders

l  SME sector largely untouched by CSR thus far

l  Lack of incentives for CSR

 

Opportunities

l  Increased emphasis on FDI and export-led growth creates the conditions for new comparative advantage through CSR

l  Growing importance of CSR in the EU and in the EU accession process

l  EU and donor funds remain available for innovation in CSR

l  Increased government support and commitment

l  Added value of CSR activities in key sectors of the Albanian economy

l  Clear opportunities for progress exist in all aspects of CSR

l  Regional sharing of best practice likely including increasing focus on SMEs

l  Possibilities of public-private partnerships and new kinds of community investments

l  General public interest in increased transparency in business

 

Threats

l  Weak compliance and inconsistent enforcement mechanisms for existing regulations

l  Low prioritisation of CSR may continue for many stakeholders

l  Absence of NGOs and intermediary associations with clear CSR focus

l  Danger of lagging behind other prospective candidate countries in CSR

l  Poor co-ordination within government and little involvement of local government

l  Actions Plans remain on paper and are not implemented

 

ARMENIA

 

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/62/42/34500203.pdf  - 2004

 

Pollution charges in Armenia are levied on air pollution from stationary and mobile sources, water

pollution, and “placement” (i.e., storage and disposal) of waste.

 

Air Pollution Charges

Since 2000, ten air pollutants emitted by stationary sources have been subject to environmental charges: particulate matter (inorganic dust), carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, chlorine, chloroprene, chromium oxide, formaldehyde, toluene and xylol. This list was considerably shortened compared to the 51 air pollutants that were subject to charges in 1993-1999. According to the interviews with MNP officials, the choice of substances to be kept as the charge base was guided by their revenue generation and environmental impact. To some extent, the choice was also driven by the available monitoring technology: toluene and xylol (both solvents) are examples of substances kept on the list because they are actually monitored (MNP, 2004).

 

The current charge rates for air pollutants from stationary sources were set in April 2000, when a new rate calculation method was used, based on the toxicity of air emissions of individual pollutants. Under this approach, the rate for one ‘reference pollutant’ is multiplied by a coefficient reversely proportionate to a respective ambient air quality standard (maximal allowable ambient concentration), implying that the stricter the ambient standard, the higher the resulting charge rate (MNP, 2004). Not all charge rates were increased between 1998 and 2000. While, for example, the charge rate for chromium oxide was increased by a factor of 316, the charge rate for chloroprene remained the same, and those for particulate matter and SO2 were even decreased by roughly two thirds. For emissions above the specified ELVs, the 3-fold rate is applied.

 

The charges on mobile sources take two different forms:

• Charges per type of motor vehicle for vehicles registered in Armenia are payable once a year, by juridical and physical persons owning the vehicle. The payment is a precondition for receiving the vehicle’s technical inspection certificate.

• Transit vehicle charges per category of motor vehicles and their load carrying capacity for vehicles not registered in Armenia are payable by juridical and physical persons at each entry into the country.

 

The charge rates on Armenian-registered motor vehicles essentially depend on the horsepower of the specific vehicle. According to EAP TFS/DANCEE (2000), in 1999, the rates varied between 1350 AMD (2.4 USD) for small cars and 36000 AMD (62.6 USD) for large trucks.

 

In 1993-1999, Armenia had motor fuel charges (only paid by companies), differentiated between leaded and unleaded petrol and diesel. These charges were replaced by the charge per type of motor vehicle and product charge on petrol and diesel (the latter was abolished in 2000 in favour of an increased excise tax on motor fuels). While there were plans to differentiate the excise tax on leaded and unleaded petrol in order to introduce an incentive for substitution, this idea was dropped when the import of leaded petrol was banned as of 1 January 2000.

 

Water Pollution Charges

Currently, charges are imposed on 19 water pollutants (before 1999, 27 water pollutants were charged). The choice of these 19 parameters is explained by the available laboratory capacity: in Armenia, analysis and monitoring is currently possible only for these parameters. According to the interview with the Water Resource Management Agency, these parameters are typical for Armenia and are believed to cover 80% to 90% of all water pollutants in the country (MNP, 2004).

 

According to the interviews with various departments of the MNP, the revision of charge rates at the end of 1998 and the following years lacked a clear rationale (MNP, 2004). In 1999, for example, the BOD rate was increased 6-fold, and the rate for suspended solids increased from 680 to 5310 AMD. In 2000, the charge rates were significantly reduced for some substances (e.g., phosphorus) and considerably increased for others (e.g., heavy metals and cyanides). For the majority of pollutants, however, the rates have remained the same since 1999.

 

Theoretically, all users have to pay the pollution charges levied on water effluents, including the water and wastewater utilities (Vodokanals). However, this would imply a double payment for the same discharges by industry into the sewerage system and by the Vodokanals into water bodies. This double payment has so far remained theoretical because the Vodokanals have been exempt from pollution charges.

 

Waste Charges

Waste charges are imposed on juridical and physical persons for the ‘placement’ of industrial and municipal waste in the environment. The translation of the Russian term ‘placement’ covers both the storage of waste and its disposal in landfills. There actually does not exist any other form of waste management in Armenia, there is no recycling or waste separation. The 459 existing open landfills are not differentiated into landfill classes, nor do they conform to any environmental and hygiene standards (there is, for example, no protection against leaching). They are essentially waste dumps in which waste is frequently burned in open air, but at low temperatures, which results in significant air pollution (MNP, 2004).

 

Five classes of waste are distinguished, four of which refer to hazardous waste (class 1 being the most hazardous and class 4 the least hazardous waste) and one to non-hazardous waste. Waste charges are differentiated by class of hazardousness. While industrial enterprises have to pay for the waste they generate, which they either store on-site or dispose of in landfills, households do not pay pollution charges for their municipal waste which goes to landfills (they pay user fees for waste collection). Mining/metallurgical companies are exempt from paying charges on non-hazardous industrial waste. On the other hand, the government has imposed waste charges on landfills under the pretext that they dispose of waste (MNP, 2004).

 

Normative documents related to waste policy have so far taken the form of government decisions. There are no waste-related permits and no limits for waste generation, so the charges are currently based exclusively on good-faith reporting by industry. A law on waste is expected to be adopted by the Parliament before the end of 2004. The introduction of waste permits for enterprises is planned for 2005 (MNP, 2004).

 

Environmentally Harmful Product Charges

The law of 1998 introduced, from 1 January 1999, charges on environmentally harmful domestic and imported products (transit goods are exempt from them). The product charges, designed as revenue raising and not as incentive instruments, currently cover 22 product categories, but the exact list of product categories subject to charges and their rates have varied since 1999.

 

Petrol and diesel, formerly subject to high product charge rates, were removed from the list in 2000. The excise taxes on motor fuels were simultaneously increased to provide the same revenue level. In fact, the MFE has always regarded the product charges on petrol and diesel as purely fiscal instruments.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/Armenia.pdf

 

This case study is designed to explore the level of commitment of Armenia’s largest companies to socially responsible behaviour and the role of Armenian CSOs in facilitating and enhancing the impact of CSR practices in the business community. This study hypothesizes that 1) examples of socially responsible corporate behaviour by large companies in Armenia are rare and that 2) for-profit – civil society relations are not used to their full potential in the implementation of CSR initiatives in Armenia.

 

The findings of the study show that practical examples of socially responsible corporate behaviour from Armenia’s largest companies are frequent but they are mostly “stand-alone” activities, not embedded into the companies’ core strategies. This can possibly be explained by the finding that some Armenian companies do not recognise or even recognise but ignore the relationship of CSR to business benefits. Many of the Armenian corporations view CSR as a one-way obligation rather than something that provides tangible benefits and a lasting competitive advantage to their organisations. To succeed, CSR practices must be a reflection of a clearer understanding among Armenian corporations that social responsibility emanates from the core values and objectives of the companies.

 

Furthermore, CSR initiatives in Armenia do not benefit from the involvement of civil society organisations. Civil society organisations do not pro-actively seek the partnership of business organisations, while the private sector remains sceptical about the capacities and trustworthiness of many CSOs. Armenian corporations often do not realize the potential benefits that for-profit – CSO partnerships could bring them. Improved corporate image and reputation, better acceptance and trust from the community and minimized costs as a result of combined efforts for a common cause are among the practical benefits that many corporations seem to overlook. Consequently, more often than not they choose to engage in non-systematic sponsorship of non-profit organisations. These single, short-term transactions should be expanded into long-term strategic collaboration on particular projects. For now, the study reinforces the necessity but current lack of networking and the concerted support needed to enhance the capacity of responding to social responsibility challenges. Fostering long-term collaboration between businesses and CSOs will maximize gains and minimize costs on both sides. This collaboration can contribute to the effectiveness of CSR practice in Armenia, and act as an impetus for sustainable development and the common welfare of Armenian society.

 

Although the corporate sector is quite developed in Armenia, research findings show that it does not follow principles and standards of corporate social responsibility, which has given rise to a broad range of criticism from civil society in the country. An assessment by international experts indicated that Armenia’s shadow economy comprises approximately 60% of the entire economy of the country. Since the shadow economy is hidden, the overall corporate sector has made limited contributions to the state budget formation, from which school education, medical aid, elementary and secondary education, subsidy and pensions are partially or wholly financed. Additionally, the corporate sector does not always follow proper standards during its hiring processes, and the exploitation of non-renewable natural resources by some members of the sector is an alarming concern.

 

The private sector has failed to release information concerning environmental pollution and use of natural resources, claiming the need to protect company secrets, which makes the protection and sustainable use of natural resources extremely difficult. However, some companies that are frequent environmental polluters buy the approval of the community through donations and sponsorship. Especially alarming in the private sector are the levels of gender and age discrimination, as well as sexual harassment in the workplace, which limits the employment and promotion of women. Approximately 30% of the unemployment rate for women is attributed to these factors.

 

The idea of corporate social responsibility in Armenia is relatively new. The welfare state that is emerging in Armenia does not contribute to the development of a socially accountable corporate sector. Only a small number of firms are beginning to establish socially responsible relations in the communities in which they are active, and there is uncertainty among those firms about their returns for these social investments. However, the importance of the existence of a limited number of small and medium entrepreneurial firms that have begun to make charitable donations to the regions in which they are based is growing.

 

AZERBAIJAN

 

http://live.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/epr/epr_studies/azerbaijan.pdf

 

Environmental charges, fees and fines

There are two types of emission charges, namely charges for emissions of pollutants within the established limits and charges for emissions exceeding those limits. The latter are five times higher than the former. Fines are imposed on polluters for accidental emissions and environmental pollution caused in the absence of established emission permits. Fines are ten times higher than the respective charge rate for emissions within established limits. All charge and fine rates depend, furthermore, on the environmental conditions in a given area and its ecological significance.

 

If an enterprise causes damage to the environment, it should pay compensation. The guidelines for assessing environmental damage used by the environmental authorities when preparing compensation claims were developed in the former Soviet Union in the 1980s.

 

Legal persons guilty of non-payment of mandatory charges and fines may be taken to court. However, Resolution 122 allows local authorities, in agreement with tax inspectors and the relevant bodies of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources, to consider the financial situation of enterprises and exempt them from charges for emissions above established limits or reduce their overall payments of pollution charges. Regional environmental committees may also allow enterprises that take agreed environmental protection measures to pay charges for excessive emissions at the rate of charges for emissions within established limits.

 

Air Pollution

The system of air emission charges is very similar to the system used in most other countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. Charges, which are levied on 88 different pollutants, vary according to the degree of hazard of the pollutants. Charge rates range from virtually zero for several pollutants to 10.1 million manats per ton for the most toxic. The applicable charges vary among regions to reflect differences in environmental conditions. The base rate is multiplied by a regional coefficient between 1 and 5. The highest values are in Baku and in the Sumgayit area – both are hot spots.

 

Another air emission charge is applied to mobile sources. The air emission charge on motor fuel is levied per ton of air emissions from fuel combustion. Based on standard emission factors, charge rates are calculated for different types of fuel. As emissions from diesel fuel, leaded and unleaded petrol differ, this creates a charge differentiation in favour of unleaded petrol. The charge rates for leaded petrol and diesel fuel are 61.7 and 50.1 manats, respectively, per ton of polluting substances from combusted fuel, whereas for unleaded petrol the charge is 37.4 manats/ton. This charge is so low however, that in practice there is no incentive to use unleaded petrol. Nevertheless, leaded petrol is no longer produced in Azerbaijan and its import is close to zero.

 

Water pollution and abstraction

The purpose of the waste-water charge is to motivate water users to comply with the sewage discharge limits and reduce their discharges of polluting substances into natural water bodies, either directly or through municipal sewerage systems. Waste -water charge rates are different for the Kura river basin and for basins of other rivers and the Caspian Sea. In all cases, however, the charge level depends on the amount of clean water required to dilute the pollution up to the established water quality standards. The base rate per m3 of water required to dilute the waste water varies between 16 kopeks for the Kura river basin and 12 kopeks for basins of other rivers and the Caspian Sea.

 

Fees for surface water abstraction differ according to five water quality categories established for the Kura river catchment area and for the catchment areas of other rivers, respectively. Water quality categories are established for individual water bodies or parts of these according to the State Classification. The fee for the abstraction of groundwater in the Nakhchivan autonomous republic (26.4 kopeks/m3) is approximately one third of that applied in the rest of Azerbaijan.

 

Waste disposal

A charge is levied on solid waste and the rate is differentiated according to the type of waste and its degree of toxicity. There are five classes of waste, including one class of non-toxic waste, for which the charge is 50 manats/ton, whereas the others range from 250 (slightly hazardous – class IV) up to 1,500 manats/ton for the most toxic class. The regional coefficients also apply to waste. Enterprises may be exempt from these payments if they discard their waste in specially equipped landfills that prevent emissions into air and water.

 

Mineral extraction

Fines on the non-licensed extraction of certain minerals depend on the mineral. The fines are defined for eight types of minerals, varying between 16,500 manats/m3 (rocks of various composition) and 275,000 manats/m3 (building sand). The fines are three times higher if the extraction takes place in protected areas and recreational zones.

 

Forestry

Logging charges are divided into stumpage fees and charges for firewood and industrial wood. The former is a fixed charge, and the latter is set in accordance with the wholesale price that is established by the Forestry Development Department under the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources. The aim of the charges is to stimulate the rational use of forest resources and to generate revenue for the forest management authorities. The current stumpage fees are defined according to four factors. First, a distinction is made for the timber species in question. Eleven groups of timber species are defined. The highest rate applies, for instance, to walnut, chestnut and plane trees. Second, rates for this group vary according to three quality categories and range from 165,322 to 46,298 manats/m3 of dense timber. Third, the rates are differentiated according to the required hauling distance (0-10 km, 10.1-25 km and 25.1-40 km). Fourth, the rates vary according to the size of the timber in question (small, average and large). Payments are collected from timber and firewood sales. The revenue covers up to 40% of the yearly reforestation costs.

 

Biodiversity and nature protection

All legal and natural persons engaged in non-commercial hunting are liable to pay a hunting charge. The charge depends on the type of game and there is a quota on the number of animals that may be killed during one season. For instance, the charge for brown bear is 165,000 manats per animal, and for mountain goat it is 110,000 manats. For most other game, the rate is 10,000 manats per animal.

 

Legal actions are brought against those who hunt and catch wild animals and fish (in excess of the fixed limits or without licences), and fines are imposed. The rate depends on the species in question and is defined per unit of game hunted. It varies between 11,000 manats for quail and sandpiper, and 825,000 manats for mountain goat. For fish, the rates are defined per fish caught. Rates vary between 5,500 manats and 330,000 manats (for great sturgeon). The current fines do not provide the desired disincentives and, pursuant to the recent poaching of a leopard (a flagship threatened species in Azerbaijan), the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources has proposed to the Cabinet of Ministers to drastically increase the fines for a number of protected species.

 

Other economic instruments related to the environment

SOCAR, the State oil company, is the country’s major taxpayer. In 2002, it paid 1,660 billion manats in taxes. That represented some 36% of the total levies to the budget of Azerbaijan. Oil extraction taxes and excise taxes on the production of oil and oil products represented the main taxes paid by SOCAR. Foreign oil companies are exempt, however, from these taxes.

 

New tax rates on mineral extraction or royalties have been in effect since 1996. Their main purpose is to raise revenue for the State budget. The tax is imposed on the wholesale price of the product. Tax rates are 26% for crude oil, 20% for natural gas and up to 10% for ore and non-metallic minerals. The collected tax revenue amounted to some 250 billion manats in 2002 (about 7.4% of total tax revenue).

 

The excise taxes on petrol are rather low. They vary according to petrol quality: 144% for AI95-grade petrol, 135.7% for AI92-grade petrol and 144.9% for A72-76-grade petrol. The excise tax on lubricated oils varies from 70 to 80% depending on the oil type. No excise tax is levied on diesel fuel as the latter is mostly for export. Producers pay the excise tax, which accrues to the State budget. The revenue from the excise tax on oil products constituted 98% of all excise taxes collected in Azerbaijan in 2002. The share of excise taxes in the overall tax revenue amounted to 13% in the same year.

 

There are a number of duties and taxes that are levied on vehicles in Azerbaijan. Their main purpose is to collect revenue for the State budget. Import duties on motor vehicles have been in force since 1995. The import duty is to be paid by all natural persons that import motor vehicles for private use. The duty is based on the engine capacity, and it is differentiated according to the manufacturing year. If the vehicle is less than one year old when it enters the country, the rate is US$ 0.4/cm3. If the vehicle is older, the rate is US$ 0.7/cm3. Payments must be made in manats although rates are set in dollars. The duty rate does not discourage the import of old (and, hence, environmentally less friendly) cars.

 

Owners of vehicles and wheeled machinery have to pay an annual property tax on their vehicles and a service charge for preventive maintenance. The rates vary according to the engine volume. Neither the tax nor the service charge provides incentives to use low-consumption and low-emission cars.

 

The transit tax  applies to the entry and transit of foreign-owned vehicles. For freight traffic, the transit tax is calculated based on the freight weight and hazardousness. The average tax is equivalent to US$ 20-30. Passenger traffic rates are US$ 15 for private cars and US$ 15-25 for buses.

 

Besides imposing taxes on oil and oil products, including petrol, the Government sets price limits on these products. This direct intervention keeps energy prices relatively low.

 

 

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/7/61/46959936.pdf

 

The Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources (MENR) is responsible for monitoring and enforcing compliance with environmental requirements. Its Department of Environmental Protection contains an Inspection Division which has its own enforcement staff and coordinates compliance monitoring and enforcement activities of the 13 regional departments of the MENR.

 

All the compliance inspections are planned in advance, as they have to be coordinated and conducted jointly with the Ministry of Economic Development. There are also periodic inspection campaigns targeting key segments of the regulated community: oil drilling, municipal wastewater treatment plants, car repair shops, etc.

 

There is no requirement to conduct follow-up inspections to verify the implementation of corrective actions and return to compliance, and such inspections are rarely performed. This leads to numerous cases of chronic violations where the operators simply ignore the inspectorate’s enforcement actions.

 

Administrative fines are most commonly used non-compliance sanction in Azerbaijan. However, if several violations are detected during an inspection (which is most often the case), a fine can be imposed only for one, most serious offence.

 

The fines increased in 2008 and are now the highest across EECCA countries. In addition, the latest amendments to the Code of Administrative Offences of 31 May 2009 introduced monetary denomination of the fines (before that, they had been denominated in the multiples of the minimum wage).

 

There is no guidance for the calculation of the exact size of an administrative fine. The Code of Administrative Offences stipulates a number of aggravating (e.g., repeated violations within one year, non-compliance with an administrative compliance order) and attenuating (e.g., voluntary compensation of the environmental damage caused) circumstances. The economic benefit from a violation or its seriousness are not formally accounted for. However, it is common for environmental inspectors to impose the maximum fine for a given category of offences.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Azerbaijan_Country_report.pdf

 

Within larger civil society and specifically in the mass media, there are significant levels of mistrust regarding corporate social responsibility and responsible “behaviour” of companies. There are very limited examples of positive partnerships between CSOs and businesses. Although some commercial entities support sports teams and the ecological initiatives of CSOs, a large number of interviewed social scientists and NGOs leaders consider these collaborations to be merely attempts to counter negative images of the company caused by their questionable activities. In particular, large companies very rarely publish independent reports concerning their social responsibility.

 

Some of the civil society experts interviewed noted that there is no activity within the corporate social responsibility framework in Azerbaijan, although this concept is quite often talked about in some publications and the mass media. One example was when some NGOs repeatedly warned the public that a BTC oil pipeline passed over a route with ecological and historical value. These warnings, however, had no serious effect according to the interviewed civil society experts.

 

That said, it should be noted that on 15 March 2005 Azerbaijan became the first oil producing country in the world to publish the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) reports, which were examined by an independent audit firm. Moreover, Azerbaijan was also first country to involve civil society in the implementation of this initiative. The reports represent a significant and public step forward in the implementation of the EITI in Azerbaijan and worldwide. Within this initiative several NGOs established the Coalition “For improving transparency in extractive industries” in an effort to ensure public control over the revenues obtained through the exploitation of the country's natural resources and their effective use. Meanwhile, on the basis of the presented information and their own knowledge about the behaviour of major companies, all NAG members hold the opinion that major companies frequently disregard negative social and environmental impacts.

 

The CSI study showed that the private sector does not regard civil society as either a full-fledged partner or as an important recipient of corporate donations. The private sector maintains an indifferent attitude towards CSOs, while establishing their own bodies to donate to social needs. The concept of corporate social responsibility is very new for Azerbaijan, although some positive steps have been taken to implement this concept.

 

BELARUS

 

http://www.globserver.com/en/belarus/environment

 

The introduction of economic instruments in environmental management in Belarus includes the planning and financing of environmental activities; concessional lending taxing and other payments for the use of natural resources, emissions (discharges) of pollutants into the environment, compensation in the prescribed manner of harm caused to the environment.

 

An economic incentive of environmental protection is based on:

 

– The establishment of separate categories of businesses and individuals tax and other benefits in the implementation of low-emission, energy-saving technologies, special equipment, reducing harmful impact on the environment by using waste as secondary raw materials and implementing other environmental activities;

– Accelerated depreciation of equipment and other facilities designed to protect and improve the environment.

 

Initially, the system of economic regulation of natural resources was rather fiscal than stimulatory, as environmental payments had no real impact on the technical and financial status of polluters. It subsequently improved and its effectiveness increased, it developed principles of payment for environmental management and compensation for harm caused to the environment, strengthening the role of environmental tax. Currently the system is largely aimed at encouraging business entities to reduce environmental impacts by reducing energy and resource consumption, preventive measures to ensure environmental safety.

 

Part of the economic mechanism of nature and the environment – the ecological tax consists of the following types of payments:

l  for the use (retrieval, extraction) of natural resources, pollutant emissions into the air, discharges of waste-water or pollutants into the environment, placing waste;

l  for production and (or) import of plastic, glass containers, container-based paper and paper-board and other products, after the loss of consumer properties that generate waste, which have harmful effects on the environment and require the organization of systems of collection, disposal and (or) use as well as the importation of goods packed in plastic, glass bottles and containers on the basis of paper and paper-board;

l  for the import and manufacture of products containing more than 50% of volatile organic compounds;

l  for import into the territory of the Republic of Belarus of ozone-depleting substances.

 

To enhance the catalytic role of the environmental tax the rate is adjusted periodically. There is also a simplification of the tax system. With this purpose in 2008 the list of taxable environmental  pollutants released into the air was significantly (11 times) reduced. Simultaneously the tax rate for emissions of those substances has increased.

 

In 2009, legislation was adopted to improve the business aimed at reducing the number of eco-tax payers. From the environmental tax payers are excluded business entities whose annual volume of non-hazardous wastes such as waste generated during the life activities is 50 tons or less. Amounts of water used for technological purposes in the manufacture of alcohol, soft drinks and beer also excluded from the objects of taxation.

 

The country established a system of privileges for the categories of environmental tax payers engaged in environmental activities. These activities should be aimed at reducing emissions of pollutants into the air (construction and reconstruction of gas purification equipment, the creation of automated systems for emissions control), discharges of waste-water (construction and renovation of facilities for sewage treatment) and the volume of waste (construction and reconstruction of the placement and removal of waste). Tax incentives also apply to enterprises introducing international environmental standards ISO 14000.

 

In Belarus environmental tax does not fully compensate for the costs of environmental protection. And over time, there is a decrease in its share of these costs. So, if in 2006 it was 43%, in 2009 – only 30%. There is also a decrease in the absolute magnitude of the environmental tax. During the period from 2006 to 2009 it decreased by 6.3%. Its share in the revenue part of the country's budget has decreased from 1,5 to 0,9%, and relative to GDP – from 0.47 to 0.36%.

 

For funding natural resource management and environmental protection in the country there are state budget environmental funds. Sources for their formation are the taxes, funds received as compensation for environmental damage, fines for pollution and other violations of environmental laws, etc. In recent years, the means of environmental funds are spent to ensure the uninterrupted supply of quality drinking water to the population, the introduction of advanced waste-water treatment technologies, reducing air pollution, the problem of dumping of toxic waste into the commercial production of secondary material resources, increased use of renewable energy sources, improvement of recreation areas and other activities.

 

Further development of the economic mechanism of nature and the environment involves the development of a system of economic stimulation for the introduction of environmental technologies and equipment with the use of differentiated credit. A promising direction is to introduce the rating of bank interest, depending on the environmental soundness of nature. One should observe the principle of «credit neutral», which provides for the imposition of economic sanctions in the form of increased interest for lending to environmentally unsafe companies and their compensation through concessional lending companies who successfully address environmental challenges.

 

To improve fiscal management of natural resources requires the orientation of taxation on the following tasks:

 

l  shift the tax burden towards those sectors which do the most damage to the environment;

l  tax incentives for investment in environmental protection in energy sector, transport and agriculture;

l  taxes on use of pesticides, nitrates, substances that deplete the ozone layer, etc.;

l  development trade of rights to carbon dioxide using emissions, sulphur oxides, and water use;

l  the inclusion of costs to eliminate the damage to the natural environment of harm in the price of goods or services, production of which caused the damage.

 

http://www.unglobalcompact.org/NetworksAroundTheWorld/local_network_sheet/BY.html

 

The Global Compact Local Network Belarus was created in March 2007. The Steering committee comprises 8 prominent businesses and non-governmental organizations. The Chairman of the Global Compact Local network Steering Committee is Alexander Denisov, Director General of Coca-Cola Beverages Byelorussiya.

 

The Global Compact Local Network in Belarus has done a lot of work in forming the national agenda of corporate social responsibility in the country. One of the most prominent achievements in this area is the introduction of a new nomination “Socially responsible brand” at the annual contest “Brand of the year”.

 

It has conducted numerous informational and educational activities in the sphere of CSR, both for businesses and undergraduate and graduate students, NGOs, and government representatives.

 

The Network has also conducted number of very successful joint projects, such as improving healthy nutrition of children by changing food consumption patterns through education, and bringing healthcare closer to people in remote areas through tele-medicine.

 

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Charge for materials extracted from watercourses

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Earmarking - Management of water resources

Rate differentiation for products In addition to extraction charge, a general water management fee is in place in RS. The fee is collected from all the natural and legal persons, in the amount of 1.5% of gross salaries and/or of gross earnings coming from copyright and patent rights.

Other rate differentiation According to type of material extracted

 

2. Name of Instrument Forestry charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for reforestation of karst and bare mountainous terrains, forest protection

measures, production of seedlings and research.

Rate differentiation for sectors Chare rates for forestry sector companies are different compared to other sectors.

Rate differentiation for regions The charge rate differs between FB&H and RS.

 

3. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

4. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Earmarking - Revenues used to cover operational costs of service providers and for investments to improve solid

waste services.

Rate differentiation for products Charges vary across the country, both in terms of structure and rates. Prevailing charge base is surface of premises, but some municipalities/regions apply fixed monthly charges or charges per m3

of generated waste.

Other rate differentiation Fixed monthly charges for households (in municipalities/regions where they are applied) range from 7 to 10 KM, and for enterprises from 15 to 50 KM. In few municipalities (Vitez, Zavidovici), charges for enterprises are set per m3 of generated waste.

 

5. Name of Instrument Road charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Payment responsibility changed from retail

Earmarking - Revenues used for construction, reconstruction, and maintenance of roads.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

6. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Rate differentiation for products Some municipalities differentiate between households, industry (or commercial users) and institutions when setting the rates. In others, sewage charge is determined as a percentage of total water price (e.g. 30% in Tuzla).

 

7. Name of Instrument Vehicle registration charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for products Administrative fee for Motor Vehicles Association is 8 KM per car and 15 KM per truck. Cantonal tax is 20 KM for the first, and 10 KM for other registrations. There is a 10% reduction in basic

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

8. Name of Instrument Vehicles import duty

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type and engine capacity

 

9. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Rate differentiation for products Some municipalities apply fixed monthly charges for households (in the range of 5 - 10 KM). Others apply progressive rates - in Zavidovici, monthly consumption of 12 - 20 m3 is charged at 0.75 KM/m3, and consumption above 20m3 at a rate of 1 KM/m3.

 

10. Name of Instrument Water protection charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for preparation of water protection plans and their implementation, development of monitoring system and protective measures, and construction and maintenance of water protection facilities.

Rate differentiation for products In addition to protection charge, a general water management fee is in place in RS. The fee is collected from all the natural and legal persons, in the amount of 1.5% of gross salaries and/or of gross earnings coming from copyright and patent rights.

 

11. Name of Instrument Water use charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for management of water resources

Rate differentiation for products In addition to water use charge, a general water management fee is in place in RS. The fee is collected from all the natural and legal persons, in the amount of 1.5% of gross salaries and/or of gross earnings coming from copyright and patent rights.

 

http://www.iei.liu.se/program/smio/722a31/file-archive/1.273422/SvjetlanaPantic_FranziskaMesche_CorporateSocialResponsibilityInEuropeanDevelopingCountries.pdf

 

BiH as a country is far from a regulated system in which social security or a legal structure, which protects human, economic and other rights, can be found. However, the companies in BiH and their management represent a substantial potential for change in overcoming the existing situation in the country. Spahic (2006) found that the majority of managers in BiH support CSR activities, but that the biggest companies in BiH are the most successful ones within the CSR field. The managers of these companies engage in the creation of good business practices, and are concerned with the impact of their operations on their owners, employees, consumers and society at large. However, the results show that the knowledge of BiH managers in general about CSR is not on a satisfactory level. Moreover, Spahic (2006) highlighted that the companies do not implement CSR activities strategically. It is therefore crucial to develop education systems on CSR practices in BiH, because CSR is one of the links to the future and advanced business practices.

 

Mesanovic (2005) states that CSR is still an undeveloped concept in BiH. Furthermore and in accordance with Spahic (2006), companies are not performing CSR strategies in an advanced fashion, i.e. CSR is not embedded into the companies’ core business and there is no long-term commitment to CSR. Moreover, the results of Mesanovic (2005) study showed that companies in BiH primarily involve in promotional activities such as sponsorship of different events. The reason for this is their unawareness of CSR benefits, their lack of resources as well as the lack of knowledge about the implementation of CSR strategies. In order for companies to be successful within the CSR field, they need to incorporate CSR into their strategy. And finally collaborations should be made with NGOs, academic institutions and the government to strengthen the awareness and understanding of CSR.

 

According to Saljic (2010) CSR is not developed and implemented with the same intensity in BiH as it is in the developed world. CSR works very well in companies in developed countries because its application is largely regulated by various economic and legislative frameworks. In BiH those frameworks do not exist, which is the main reason why corporate philanthropy remains the major CSR initiative in this country. Companies in BiH are aware of the importance of CSR, but their activities are often limited by economic and legal barriers. Saljic (2010) found that the barriers for advancement in the CSR field include insufficient technological development and the lack of trust in the institutions for economic development. Through a study done among companies in BiH the author found that large companies implement CSR activities because they know that this is one way to keep their competitive position in the marketplace. Further, the results showed that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are lagging behind, and that most of them are not aware of CSR. It is therefore important to intensify the education and promotion of CSR among both SMEs and large companies. Saljic (2010) also states that companies in BiH should keep in mind that the development of CSR has many benefits, such as creating a positive climate for foreign investment, community development, business ethics and increased transparency. Moreover, the companies should improve their communication with key stakeholders if they want CSR to provide adequate results in the future, not only for the community at large but also for the company itself. (cf. Saljic, 2010).

 

Tihi et al. (2006) also argue that the majority of CSR activities implemented by companies in BiH are philanthropic, such as donating money to culture and sport. The authors state that the companies do not implement CSR activities strategically, which means that CSR is not integrated into the core business. Furthermore, in 2008 the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) did a study on CSR in BiH where they found that companies mainly engage in CSR in the form of philanthropy. The most common form of social engagement is donating money to various local organizations such as schools, sports, etc. Moreover, the study revealed that the lack of technical skills, funds and information on CSR is hindering the implementation of the concept in companies operating in BiH. The UNDP suggests that the awareness of basic values and understanding of CSR should be increased among companies and stakeholders in BiH.

 

Hence, the main findings regarding CSR in BiH are that the knowledge of CSR is not on a satisfactory level and that the majority of CSR initiatives implemented by companies are philanthropic. In addition, companies do not implement CSR strategically, which means that it is not aligned to their core business. Further, there is a lack of communication about CSR activities to key stakeholders and due to this the companies are not able to reap the benefits of CSR. In order to improve the situation in BiH there is need for more education about CSR, in addition to the implementation of economic and legislative frameworks.

 

BULGARIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air pollution non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking 20% - Revenues directed to environmental fund are earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation Base unit fees for NOx, SO2 and dust are differentiated depending on the source (power stations and other stationary sources). Monthly fee for substances causing unpleasant smell depends on the spread of the substance.

 

2. Name of Instrument Fee for excessive soil pollution

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking 20% - Revenues directed to environmental fund are earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation The fee is increased 1.5 to 3 times depending on the location of the soil (e.g. if the soil is within national park territory, or in a water spring zone, the fee is three times the basic unit fee).

 

3. Name of Instrument Fines for breaching nature protection laws

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Other rate differentiation In relation to fishing, hunting and protected areas regulations

 

4. Name of Instrument Fines for non-compliance with fuel/air regulations

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Year of last revision 2001

Earmarking - Fines related to non-payment of liquid fuel product charges are earmarked for environmental projects and for decrease of pollution from automobile transport and energy.

Rate differentiation for products Fines from non-payment of liquid fuel product charges are revenue of the Enterprise for Management of Environmental Protection Activities (environmental fund); other fines related to liquid fuels go to State Agency for Standardisation and Metrology.

 

5. Name of Instrument Fines for non-compliance with waste regulations

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking - Revenues going to municipal budgets and to Enterprise for Management of Environmental Protection Activities are earmarked for waste treatment projects.

Rate differentiation for products Municipal budget receives revenues from penal decrees issued by municipal authorities (the Mayor), environmental fund from decrees issued by the Minister of Environment and Water, and government from decrees issued by the Minister of Economy.

 

6. Name of Instrument Fines for non-compliance with water regulations

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for water protection activities and other environmental projects.

Other rate differentiation Various law violations

 

7. Name of Instrument Fishing charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1982

Year of last revision 1999

Earmarking 100% - Protection of species

Other rate differentiation Bulgarian vs. foreign citizens

 

8. Name of Instrument Forest resources charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation Charges are differentiated depending on the kind of trees/forests.

 

9. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2003, 2006 amended

Revision Details In 1991, excise tax was introduced for petrol and diesel fuels only. Trough subsequent revisions in

1999 and 2002, other fuels were included.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type and fuel use

 

10. Name of Instrument Fuel road charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Liquefied oil gas and other gaseous fuels added to the fuels on which road charge is levied

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked as follows: 30% for construction and maintenance of mountain roads, 30%

for construction and maintenance of third category roads, 10% for railways.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

11. Name of Instrument Hunting charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation Rates differ depending on the type of animal hunted in a particular reserve.

 

12. Name of Instrument Liquid fuels product charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for reduction of pollution from motor vehicles and from energy sector; 30% of revenues are earmarked for mountain areas environmental projects.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

13. Name of Instrument Mining charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Other rate differentiation By material type extracted

 

14. Name of Instrument Motor vehicles import duty

Type Tax

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation Rates are differentiated for new and old vehicles, and depending on the type of vehicle and engine power.

 

15. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1952

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Coverage of municipal waste management costs

Rate differentiation for regions Charges differ across the country, depending on waste management costs in each municipality.

Other rate differentiation Charge rates are differentiated depending on the level of services provided to users (e.g. if waste collection or public places cleaning is not provided to some users, their charge is reduced and only covers the service provided).

 

16. Name of Instrument Noise pollution non-compliance fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking 20% - Revenues directed to environmental fund are earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation The fee for acoustic load varies depending on the zone where noise limits have been exceeded (whether it is a living zone, zone with schools and health institutions, recreation zone or industrial zone), time of day and noise load.

 

17. Name of Instrument Passenger cars excise tax - motor vehicles tax / excise duty

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1994

Year of last revision 01/01/2003; amended 2006

Other rate differentiation By engine power

 

18. Name of Instrument Product charge on tyres

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the National Environmental Fund, for projects related to the treatment of waste tyres.

Other rate differentiation By tyre weight

 

19. Name of Instrument Radioactive waste charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2001

Earmarking 100% - Activities related to treatment and safe storage of radioactive wastes and activities on decommissioning of nuclear facilities

Other rate differentiation The charge varies depending on the activity and half lifetime of radioactive waste. Charge on radioactive waste from nuclear power stations is calculated based on electricity generation.

 

20. Name of Instrument Road tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Earmarking - Road maintenance (excluding highways)

Other rate differentiation By vehicle weight

 

21. Name of Instrument Vehicles, vessels and aircrafts tax - motor / transport vehicle tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1998

Year of last revision 2002; amended 2006

Rate differentiation for products Differentiation coefficients are applied to rates for passenger cars, and they vary from 1 for cars produced before 1988 to 2.8 for cars produced after 01/01/1995.

Other rate differentiation For cars equipped with catalytic converters, and for lorries with eco engines (corresponding to standards Euro 1, 2, 3), tax is reduced by 50 %. Buses servicing municipality subsidized routes (e.g. in mountain regions) pay 10% of the tax.

 

22. Name of Instrument Waste related product charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Charge on batteries and accumulators introduced in 2000, charge on tires in 2001 and charge on

motor vehicles in 2002.

Earmarking - Revenues from charges on batteries and accumulators earmarked for projects dealing with separate

collection, treatment and/or disposal of waste.

Other rate differentiation Charges are differentiated on the basis of the type of accumulators and weight/state of tires.

 

23. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for wastewater treatment projects and other environmental measures.

General tax base Specific tax-base Tax rate

Other rate differentiation Based on various contaminants. The fee is increased 2 to 3 times depending on the location of excessive water pollution (e.g. if pollution was evidenced in the national park territory or in the water spring zone, the fee is three times the basic unit fee).

 

24. Name of Instrument Water supply and sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of last revision 2003

Rate differentiation for products Rates provided refer to Sofia region and services provided by “Sofiyska voda JSC”.

Rate differentiation for regions Charge rates differ from one municipality to another, depending on the actual costs of provided services.

Other rate differentiation Charge rates differ depending on the type of consumer and the level of service; in some cases, wastewater treatment tariffs are differentiated based on wastewater quality parameters.

 

25. Name of Instrument Water use charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2001

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for construction of wastewater treatment plants and other environmental projects.

Rate differentiation for products Corrective coefficient is applied to the rate for water used in hydropower plants (average fall/450).

Other rate differentiation By water use. Charge for the use of water bodies as wastewater recipients is differentiated based on categorization of discharged and recipient waters.

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF 

 

At 3 % of GDP, revenues from environmental taxes are the fifth highest in the EU (2.6 %). This is due to high revenue from energy taxation, which — at 2.7 % of GDP — is the second highest in the EU (1.9 %). This again reflects the strong reliance of the country on revenues from indirect taxes and the high share of excise duties in total taxation, almost 50 % of which comes only from excise duties on fuel. Consequently, the country ranks also second in revenues from energy taxes levied on transport fuel – 2.6 % of GDP in 2009, while transport taxes excluding fuel are of somewhat lesser importance amounting to only 0.3 % of GDP.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/civil_society_in_bulgaria_final.pdf 

 

Regarding charity for 2009, business makes about 70% of all donations, indicating a positive development of corporate social responsibility.

 

According to a survey conducted among large international companies active in Bulgaria, most of them are active in a diverse number of civic and charity programmes at the local level. McDonald’s, for example, supports educational programmes and institutions in a number of ways. It develops and co-finances various projects, raises funds for schools and provides scholarships and education enhancements for its staff. Similarly to MacDonald’s, the Coca-Cola Company sponsors various art and educational programmes, and invests in promoting the activities of women’s and ethnic organizations. Yet, there is a prevailing opinion that most companies do not make any significant effort to mitigate the impact of their operations on the environment.

 

In the RSC Survey, answers to the question, ”How would you describe the efforts of large Bulgarian corporations directed towards overcoming the social and ecological consequences of their work?“ were: insignificant – 31%, limited– 40%, moderate–18% and considerable–3%, indicating a rather modest scope of corporate social responsibility in Bulgaria.

 

CROATIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emission non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 3/12/2004

 

2. Name of Instrument Air emissions charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2004

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues are used for financing environmental protection and energy efficiency projects and programmes.

Other rate differentiation Type of pollutant. Corrective incentive coefficients applied to basic charge rates based on emission volume and origin.

 

3. Name of Instrument Annual charge for the use of public roads

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1950

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Increase of rates

Rate differentiation for products The charge is paid on registration of motor and trailer vehicles. Also subject to the charge are tractors, semi-trailers and working vehicles and working trailers.

Other rate differentiation By engine capacity

 

4. Name of Instrument Annual vehicle tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details Changes in categorisation of vehicles, and increase of charges for older vehicles.

Other rate differentiation By car type, age and capacity

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for changing the use of agricultural land

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1984

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details Tax structure was changed

Earmarking - The revenue is earmarked for rehabilitation programmes and measures to increase arid land surface and agricultural land productivity.

Rate differentiation for products Due to 2001 changes in the provisions of the Law on Agricultural Land, the charge was not collected between January and November 13, 2001.

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge for environmental load caused by waste

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2004

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues are used for financing environmental protection and energy efficiency projects and programmes.

Other rate differentiation By hazardous or non-hazardous waste. The hazardous waste charge rate is differentiated through corrective coefficients that depend on the hazardous waste characteristics.

 

7. Name of Instrument Charge for multiple non-wood forest functions

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for forest management programmes, especially in karst areas, forest protection and scientific and research work.

Rate differentiation for products Multiple non-wood forest functions include: protection against erosion and floods, beneficial impacts on water regime, soil fertility, air and climate, and health and recreational values.

 

8. Name of Instrument Charge for sport fishing at sea

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By age

 

9. Name of Instrument Charge for transfer of rights on forest/forestland

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Earmarking 100% - Forest management

Other rate differentiation Taxable value of the land and age of the forest

 

10. Name of Instrument End-of-life vehicles charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues used to cover the costs of end-of-life vehicles management.

 

11. Name of Instrument Excise tax on oil derivatives

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1994

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details The rates were lowered (for example: from HRK 2.40 to 1.90 per litre of unleaded petrol; from HRK

2.90 to HRK 2.40 per litre of leaded petrol; from HRH 1.50 to HRK 1 per litre of diesel).

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

12. Name of Instrument Excise tax on vessels, vehicles and aircrafts

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 1999, 2000 and 2001

Revision Details Change of rates

Other rate differentiation Tax rates differ depending on the type and length of vessel, number of seats in an aircraft, and the sales price of a motor vehicle.

 

13. Name of Instrument Fishing charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Increase of charge levels

Earmarking - Revenues from marine fishing earmarked for monitoring the state of biological sea resources (30%) and for sea fishery improvement measures (70%); revenues from freshwater fishing earmarked for fish stock monitoring.

Rate differentiation for products State Budget (i.e. special account of the Ministry of Agriculture) receives revenues from all the types of fishing in marine, and from commercial fishing in freshwater. Revenues from other charges go to

owners of fishing rights and sport-fishing union.

 

14. Name of Instrument Forest contribution charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Earmarking - The revenues are used for financing municipal infrastructure.

 

15. Name of Instrument Hunting rent

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2001

Earmarking - Share of revenue that belongs to the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is earmarked for implementation of measures determined by the Hunting Law.

Rate differentiation for products Revenues are shared among hunting grounds owners who do not have hunting rights and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry.

 

16. Name of Instrument Import duty on passenger cars

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Rates lowered for cars imported from EU and CEFTA countries

Rate differentiation for products By Origin (EU, EFTA, CEFTA) and type (new or old). CEFTA countries include: Slovakia, Czech Republic, Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia.

 

17. Name of Instrument Mining charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1959

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Rate changes and harmonisation with provisions of the Law on Areas of Special State Care

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for economic development and environmental protection measures.

Rate differentiation for products Revenues are shared between local and county governments for the charges collected from exploitation of mineral raw materials in the areas of special state care; otherwise, collected charges go to local government budgets.

 

18. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for covering the costs of operation of service providers (public utility companies) and investments in municipal infrastructure.

Rate differentiation for sectors The charge paid by economic entities and other users are generally higher then prices for housholds.

Rate differentiation for regions The charge varies widely across the country, and is determined by service providers.

Other rate differentiation The level of the charge depends, among other things, on the frequency of waste collection (once, twice or thee times a week).

 

19. Name of Instrument National park entrance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - The revenues are earmarked for operations of the public institutions and implementation of nature

protection, conservation and national parks promotion programmes.

Other rate differentiation The entrance fees vary from one national park to another within indicated age ranges. There are 8 national parks in Croatia.

 

20. Name of Instrument Packaging waste charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues are used to finance separate collection and handling of packaging wastes.

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

21. Name of Instrument Road tolls

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1972

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details Recipient of revenues changed

Rate differentiation for products Hrvatske autoceste Ltd manages 80% of Croatian motorways. Autocesta Rijeka Zagreb Ltd is concession holder for Zagreb - Rijeka motorway (some sections still under construction)

Other rate differentiation By vehicle category

 

22. Name of Instrument Sand and gravel extraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Increase in rates for about 15%.

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for regular technical and economic maintenance of watercourses, regulative

and protective waterworks.

Other rate differentiation By extracted materials

 

23. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for products Rates for households are in the range of 0.9-4.2 HRK per m3 (0.12-0.55 EUR); rates for industry are in the range of 2.4-7.53 HRK per m3 (0.31-0.98 EUR). Sewage charge is a part of water consumption charge.

 

24. Name of Instrument Special environmental charge for motor vehicles

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2004

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues are used for financing environmental protection and energy efficiency projects and programmes.

Other rate differentiation Charges are differentiated (reduced) through the application of corrective coefficients (to reflect type of vehicle, engine and fuel type, engine volume or power, and the age of the vehicle).

 

25. Name of Instrument Special motor fuels charge for public roads

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Charge rates increased from 0.4 to 1.2 HRK per litre.

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for construction and maintenance of public roads.

Rate differentiation for products Revenues are shared between Motorways Management Enterprise “Hrvatske autoceste” Ltd and Public Roads Management Enterprise “Hrvatske ceste” Ltd.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

26. Name of Instrument Turnover tax on used cars, vessels and aircrafts

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Other rate differentiation Based on market value

 

27. Name of Instrument Waste batteries and accumulators charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

Earmarking Yes, fully - Revenues used to cover the costs of separate collection and recycling of waste batteries and accumulators.

Other rate differentiation  By product type

 

28. Name of Instrument Waste disposal charge

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - Revenues are earmarked for covering the costs of the service provider operation, maintainance and

investments.

Rate differentiation for products The charge levels (service prices) for quantity (1 m3) of municipal and industrial waste differ among towns. Because of a great diversity in pricing policies, it is impossible to state representative charge

level or charge range.

Other rate differentiation Charge levels vary across the country depending on the type of waste (municipal and industrial) and pricing policies of service providers. Counties have the authority over disposal of industrial, and local governments over disposal of municipal waste.

 

29. Name of Instrument Waste non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2004

Rate differentiation for products The level of the fee is determined by the court ruling, based on the type of violation. The lowest fees are paid for failing to meet the waste reporting requirements, the highest for illegal import of wastes.

 

30. Name of Instrument Waste oils charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

Other rate differentiation  based on quantities of new lubricant oil placed on the market

 

31. Name of Instrument Waste tires charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

 

Other rate differentiation By tyre source

 

32. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for products The charge includes basic water price, water use charge, water protection charge (all determined by the Government) and VAT. Additionally, the charge may include sewage charge and special charges

for infrastructure investments (these vary across country).

Rate differentiation for regions Except for mandatory charge components (basic water price, water use charge, water protection charge), local utility companies have their own pricing policies that vary from one place to another.

Other rate differentiation By consumer type. In some towns (mainly in the coastal zone area), the charge also differs depending on the season, so there are winter and summer tariffs.

 

33. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Regulation of watercourses and other water bodies in the river basin where violation was

committed.

 

34. Name of Instrument Water protection charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2000; 2005

Revision Details Level of the rate was changed in 2000. Marketing/imports of mineral fertilisers and/or pesticides

added as a tax base in 2005.

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for water protection measures, monitoring and construction of protection

structures.

Rate differentiation for products Annual water protection charge is calculated based on a formula that takes into account quantity of discharged water and its quality.

 

35. Name of Instrument Water use charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2000

Revision Details Level of the rate was changed.

Earmarking Yes - Revenues earmarked for the following purposes: maintaining water information system; managing and controlling water resources; waterworks (for e.g. water extraction, purification) and research; and construction of municipal infrastructure.

Other rate differentiation Charge rates are differentiated based on water use and water category.

 

36. Name of Instrument Water use concession charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By water use

 

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/croatia%20csi%20analytical%20country%20report.pdf

 

The trend of increasing corporate social responsibility was identified as laying the foundation for the possible development of the sector and enhancing its contribution to positive social change. However, although business actors in Croatia have started to discuss the importance of corporate social responsibility, cooperation between business actors and civil society to implement projects aimed at serving the public good is still rare.

 

Corporate social responsibility in Croatia only became a topic of discussion at the beginning of the new millennium, when the first research efforts and round tables on this topic were organized. Research revealed that the type of welfare state emerging in Croatia does not contribute to the development of a socially accountable corporate sector since the corporate sector is obliged to pay high taxes and contributions for social and public purposes, yet the corporate sector is not seen as an important stakeholder for society at large. As a result, only a small number of firms are beginning to establish socially responsible relations in the communities in which they are active and there is uncertainty among these firms about their returns for social investments. Also, the media review showed that the media pays close attention to charitable giving, and stories in the media have inspired individuals and donors to give more.

 

Overall, the corporate sector considers CSOs solely as beneficiaries of their support, while the associations consider the corporate sector solely as donors. Such a narrow view of civil society business relations results in a limited number of partnerships between CSOs and the corporate sector. This is confirmed by the stakeholder survey results on the extent of social responsibility of larger companies, which are mainly seen as insignificant (20.8%) or limited (33.6%).

 

Yet, the study of ten major Croatian companies' web sites has revealed some positive trends of corporate social behaviour. However, it is evident that companies do not have a clear policy of corporate responsibility and are unaware of the impact a company’s reputation can have on its economic success. In general, firms see this type of spending as another way of spending money on marketing or sponsorship, rather than as their social responsibility.

 

The regional consultations emphasized the importance of a limited number of small and medium entrepreneurial firms that have begun to make charitable donations. A few Croatian companies have a history of inviting tenders for grants to CSOs and reports are beginning to be published on social accountability in the corporate sector (Coca Cola Beverages Hrvatska, INA, Pliva). Also, companies that are a part of the Croatian Business Council for Sustainable Development promote the concept of sustainable development, through corporate responsibility. However, these companies form only a small minority among Croatian businesses. Thus, in comprehensive consultations on this topic concerns were voiced about the limited number of promoters and practitioners of corporate social responsibility in Croatia. Participants at the National Workshop also pointed towards problematic aspects of corporate social responsibility, namely the green wash phenomenon. Here, major companies which are frequent environmental polluters, buy the approval of the community through donations and sponsorship.

 

 

CYPRUS

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Excise duty - motor vehicles

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By engine capacity and net cargo area. The excise duty is differentiated according to the mass of carbon dioxide emissions as follows: a) for emissions up to 120 gr/km, a 30% reduction b) for emissions exceeding 120 gr/km but not exceeding 165 gr/km, a 20% reduction c) for emissions exceeding 165 gr/km but not exceeding 200 gr/km, a 10% reduction d) for emissions exceeding 200 gr/km but not exceeding 250 gr/km, a 10% increase e) for emissions exceeding 250 gr/km, a 20% increase

 

2. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

3. Name of Instrument Quarrying charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 1999

Revision Details Rate increase (from 10 to 15 cents)

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are used for reimbursements for environmental damages in local communities affected by quarrying (75%), and for support to projects for land and habitat rehabilitation in abandoned quarries (25%).

Other rate differentiation Materials extracted form quarries

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

Albeit on a decreasing path, the share of environmental taxes in GDP in Cyprus (2.9 %) is still above EU-27 average. This is mainly due to the large share of transport taxes (1.3 % of GDP), which is twice the EU-27 average. Revenue from energy taxes has doubled since 2000 as a proportion of GDP, but has been trending downwards in the past few years, just like the deflated ITR on energy.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/cyprus%20combined%20acr%20final.pdf

 

Greek Cypriot

When assessing CSR in this society one has to note that, according to official figures, 95% of all enterprises in Cyprus employ less than 10 persons and 99% employ less than 250 persons. In essence, the economy of the island is dominated by very small units and ‘corporations’ are few. In fact, the Association of the Commercial Banks of Cyprus estimates that there are only fifty-three corporations in Cyprus that could be categorized as large. This feature of the economy has obvious implications for the way CSR is understood and practised. To put it simply, CSR presupposes corporations and corporations are few in the country.

 

The study has shown that of the ten largest corporations, only the three major Banks appear to have a planned annual CSR policy. The activities carried out by these three Banks as part of their CSR policy range from health services (like the creation of the Oncology Centre, the Home Care Centre and the Arodafnousa Palliative Care Centre by the Bank of Cyprus), to culture (the Cultural Foundation and the Historical Archives of the Bank of Cyprus, the Cultural Centres of the Popular Bank and the Hellenic Bank), major charity events (the Bank of Cyprus supports the Christodoula March, the Popular Bank supports the Radiomarathon and the Hellenic Bank supports Telethon) to environmental and educational initiatives. The remaining companies contribute to charities and cultural events on an ad-hoc basis and they did not seem to have a systematic CSR policy in place.

 

It is interesting to note in this respect that, when they were asked to rate the work of major companies in the area of CSR, 56% of stakeholders described it as ‘limited’ while 13% said that it was ‘insignificant’. Only 7% answered that it was ‘significant’ and 15% described it as ‘moderate’. In conclusion, examples of CSR are rather limited mainly due to the lack of a significant number of large corporations in the country.

 

CSR is not a widespread notion in the southern part of Cyprus and it is doubtful if it will ever become entrenched in private companies’ agendas. This is due both to the small size of the economy and to the informal structures upon which most businesses in the southern part of Cyprus are built. Even though the majority of companies state that they do not have a CSR policy in place, most of them donate on an ad-hoc basis. This however entails risks for CSOs depending on private funding as private sector donations fluctuate.

 

The CSR study carried out by the research team as part of the CSI project revealed that Cyprus lacks both a coherent public policy and structured activity by private corporations on CSR. This could, and should, be attributed to the relatively small size of the island’s economy that does not allow for the growth of large corporations, which are usually the ones that have the drive and capacity to pursue CSR activities.

 

Turkish Cypriot

Corporate Social Responsibility in the context of northern Cyprus may seem to be an insignificant issue, since the ‘public’ sector is relatively large in the overall economy, and there are very few large corporations or industry. However, in recent years local corporations have been developing with unprecedented levels of economic growth.

 

The Corporate Responsibility Study Report dealt with the companies concern for the community rather than the environment. With respect to responsibility to the community, only 4 out of 10 corporations were found to have carried out any act of responsibility. It is mainly the service CSOs such as cancer association, disabled association, blind people’s association, a number of foundations, parents’ associations and sports clubs which receive the highest figures of donations.

 

According to the Regional Stakeholder Consultations corporate social responsibility is not very high. In fact, 36% maintain that the work of companies in taking account the social and environmental consequences of their activities are insignificant. A further 34% rated social responsibility as limited. Only 30% felt that corporate social responsibility was moderately developed among businesses. The PAG noted that on environmental issues corporate responsibility was notably low, but that corporations did play a role in supporting the arts, as well as book publications.

 

It is difficult to talk of a high degree of corporate social responsibility of the Turkish Cypriot private sector. Most companies, even if they are large in scale and profitable, still think that not much falls on them in terms of supporting the civil society activities in the country. The regional stakeholder consultations questionnaire findings and debates during these meetings have also revealed clearly that there is the assumption which the private sector’s attitude towards civil society is either hostile or suspicious. Only few respondents or participants argued that the private sector has an indifferent (neutral) approach towards civil society and, as a matter of fact, nobody said that the private sector is supportive to the civil society activities.

 

The Law on Taxation used to rule that a company can make donations to civil society organisations up to 5% of its annual gross income and receive tax deductions for that. With the change which took place in 2005, this percentage has been increased to 10% while allowing the private sector to make more donations and receive higher tax deductions in return. Another passed law is the Law of Sponsorship which also came into effect in 2005. Within the framework of this law, the private companies are able to provide financial support to civil society activities up to 60% of their annual gross income and again receive tax deductions. It should be kept in mind that in all cases, the companies are free to donate or sponsor more than the stated percentages but they would not receive tax deductions for the excess amount they may have donated.

 

It has been observed that most companies do not have a written policy on corporate social responsibility and institutional structures on this matter are very few. The companies’ managers in some cases appeared to be hesitant about releasing information on the issue and it almost created embarrassment for most of them to talk about corporate philanthropy. We must state here that this gave the researchers the impression that they actually feel that they have the capability to do more on corporate social responsibility but unfortunately they refrain to do so. However, in comparison to the previous decades, the private sector in Turkish Cypriot community has a higher degree of awareness on corporate social responsibility but still has a long way to go for having a healthy relationship between the private sector and civil society which would be based on the grounds of dialogue and cooperation.

 

CZECH REPUBLIC

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air pollution fee – Major stationary sources

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1967

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Fees are collected and exacted by their administrator - regional authority or different types of

municipalities (instead of customs offices)

Earmarking 100 % to the National Environment Fund - protection of the environment

Other rate differentiation By contaminant type

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution fee – Medium stationary sources

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Fees are collected and exacted by their administrator - regional authority or different types of

municipalities (instead of customs offices)

Earmarking 100% - All the revenues go to the State Environmental Fund and are used for the protection of the

environment.

Other rate differentiation By contaminant type

 

3. Name of Instrument Air pollution fee – Small stationary sources

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 12.2.2008

Revision Details Change of the date when the payer has to send records for calculation of the charge.

Earmarking 100 % , protection of the environment -

Other rate differentiation By contaminant type

 

4. Name of Instrument Car registration fee for the purposes of support of collection, processing, utilization and abolition of car wrecks

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2009

Year of last revision 19.9.2009

Revision Details Exemptions added

Earmarking State Environmental Fund, 100% - to support the collection, processing, utilization and liquidation of car wrecks

Other rate differentiation By vehicle emission standard

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for withdrawal of groundwater

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1980

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Charges are collected and exacted by respective authority with water rights/charge administrator

(instead of customs offices)

Earmarking 50% local government - building-up and maintenance of aquiculturing infrastructure, especially on the municipal territory where the undergrounr water is withdrawn (50%, State Environmental Fund, protection of the environment)

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge on municipal waste collection / treatment

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2001

Earmarking 100%, municipality - Municipal waste collection, treatment, usage, disposal etc.

Other rate differentiation According to expected costs of municipality (Waste Law) or up to 19.4€ per person per year (Local Charges Law). Municipalities can choose one type of charge or can also use a contractual relationship.

 

7. Name of Instrument Duty on ozone depleting chemicals

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Earmarking State Environmental Fund, 100% - Ozone layer protection

 

8. Name of Instrument Electricity tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Electricity price per MWh

 

9. Name of Instrument Electronic road-toll fee

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2007

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details More detailed segmentation of vehicles for the purpose of rating, changes in rates.

Earmarking 100% National fund of transport infrastructure (nett gain = collected amout minus costs of collecting the payments through system of electronic road-toll) - building-up, maintenance and modernization of roads and highways

Rate differentiation for products Rate is per kilometers passed. Rates differentiated according to the axles count (2, 3, 4 or more) and according to the emission standard of the vehicle (standard Euro 2 or less, standard Euro 3 or more), type of the road. Vehicles causing less emissions pay less. The rate of the charge is higher on Friday from 3pm till 9pm. Possibility of paying in advance or backwards, mostly for whole month.

 

10. Name of Instrument Fee for entrance to selected cities and places

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1990

Other rate differentiation The entrance of motor-driven vehicles to selected places. Up to 0.79€ per day; it is possible to set a flat price.

 

11. Name of Instrument Fee for extracted minerals

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Change in penalisation scheme

Earmarking 25% is earmarked for remedy of land previously used for mining purposes. - Fiscal, compensational

(damage from mining activity).

Rate differentiation for products Ratio of fee to the value of extracted minerals is set for each type of mineral by legislation Act no. 617/1992 as amended by Act no. 426/2001.

 

12. Name of Instrument Fee for permitted discharge of waste water into underground water

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 1.5.2004

Revision Details Some exemptions were added

Other rate differentiation Fixed annual tax

 

13. Name of Instrument Fee for the discharge of waste water into surface water

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1966

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Fees are collected and exacted by respective fee administrator/ authority with water rights (instead of

customs offices)

Earmarking 100% - All the revenues go to the State Environmental Fund and are used for the protection of the

environment.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. There are also emission limits for each pollutant, for example: Phosphor: 13000 kg/year and 3 mg/litre; mercury: 0,4 kg/year and 0,002 mg/litre; cadmium: 2 kg/year and 0,01 mg/litre; non- treated waste water: 20000 kg/year and 40 mg/litre.

 

14. Name of Instrument Fee for the withdrawal of forest land

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 1.1.2006

Revision Details Administrative change

Earmarking 100% - 60% State Environmental Fund - environmental protection, 40% Local authority - environmental protection in the area of this particular municipality.

Rate differentiation for regions Different forests have different ratios that take into account their non-production functions.

 

15. Name of Instrument Fees for the disposal of waste

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Unpaid charges are exacted by the administrator/recipient of the fee (instead of customs offices),

change in penalization scheme

Earmarking yes - the risk unit of the charge is earmarked for environmental protection (State Environmental Fund)

Other rate differentiation Hazardous or municipal waste

 

16. Name of Instrument Fees to cover watercourse and river basin administration and to cover public interest expenses

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1962

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Interest on late payment in the amount of 1 ‰ has been introduced

Earmarking 100%, watercourse administrator - watercourse administration

Rate differentiation for sectors Rates are assessed separately for flow-cooling, agriculture irrigation, filling of artificial holes and other purposes.

Rate differentiation for regions Rates are different for individual watercourse companies and other watercourse administrators.

 

17. Name of Instrument Fuel excise duty

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 1.4.2010

Revision Details Compressed natural gas (CNG) for purpose of propelling means of transport temporary exempt from excise duty.

Earmarking 9,1% State Fund of Transport Infrastructure - Maintenance, repairs and construction of new roads and highways, railway infrastructure and domestic water ways.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

18. Name of Instrument Highway fee

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Information exchange between ministries

Earmarking 100% National fund of transport infrastructure - maintenance, repairing and building of transport

infrastructure

Other rate differentiation By usage time (10 days, a month or a year)

 

19. Name of Instrument Levy on withdrawal of land from agriculture

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1966

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Change in the recipients of the revenues (newly 75% to the national budget), change in penalisation

system

Earmarking 100% - 15% State Environmental Fund - environmental protection, 10% local authorities - environmental protection in the area of particular municipality, 75% national budget

 

20. Name of Instrument Licence fee for geological prospecting

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Other rate differentiation Payment per km2 per year

 

21. Name of Instrument Natural gas tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation By natural gas purpose

 

22. Name of Instrument Packaging registration and evidence fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 15.3.2006

Revision Details Changes in charge-rates and in the way of payment.

Earmarking 100 % to the National Environment Fund. - Means from National Environment Fund are earmarked for environment protection.

 

23. Name of Instrument Payments for use of mining space area

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Change in the penalisation scheme

 

24. Name of Instrument Radioactive waste fee

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 1.1.2003

Revision Details Tax rate and form of payment

Earmarking - Every municipality in which the dump inheres receives a financial benefit of maximum 3 million CZK. The benefit has to be used beneficial activities.

 

25. Name of Instrument Road tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 1.1.2011

Revision Details Small changes, for example in conditions of the declaration of the tax

Earmarking 100 % of the revenues go to the National Fund for Transport Infrastructure - Maintenance, repairs and building of highways and first class roads.

Other rate differentiation By cylinder capacity, weight and number of axles

 

26. Name of Instrument Solid fuels tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Payment per GJ of total heating value

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

The Czech Republic introduced an environmental tax reform in 2008, which would increase the tax rates of most energy products over the period 2008 – 2012 and would use the tax revenues to support the state employment policy.

 

Environmental taxes represent 2.5 % of GDP. This value is slightly below the EU average (2.6 %) and has remained roughly constant in the last decade. As in the majority of Member States, most of this revenue is realised on energy (2.3 % of GDP).

 

There is also an environmental tax on electricity, natural gas and solid fuels. Reductions in taxation are available for renewable and alternative electricity, biogas and CHPs and specified environmentally sound vehicles. A tax refund is available also for public transportation using green electricity.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_CzechRep_Country_Report.pdf

 

Large companies know how to use the rhetoric of corporate social responsibility and have begun to portray their activities using this concept. However, this behaviour is sometimes regarded as self-promotion and PR. Whereas small firms are not aware of the notion of corporate social responsibility, they often behave responsibly in the communities where they operate, e.g. through supporting community activities. Cooperation between business and civil society is still rare.

 

A survey of annual reports of the largest companies in the Czech Republic reveals that almost all the companies surveyed devote space to themes linked to care for their employees and many include the environment or publicly beneficial activities. Another study shows that most large companies believe that they should be actively engaged in contributing to society. Seventy six percent of companies stated that they look after their employees, and 44% mentioned care for the environment, above all companies whose activities directly impact upon the environment.

 

However, in civil society and the media there is a considerable degree of caution regarding the “responsible” behaviour of companies. In the Czech Republic there is still no clear distinction between corruption and sponsoring and some organisations are extremely cautious to partner with business. For example the Foundation Partnership supporting projects and organisations in the environmental sphere rejected the donation from the tobacco concern Philip Morris ČR. Another, debated example could be the donation from the Appian Group to the Czech Swiss National Park. At the same time cooperation between companies damaging the environment and ecologists has taken place, for instance in the creation of the public benefit corporation Lower Moravia Bio-spherical Reserve, which linked Moravian Diesel Mines, Czech Forests, the District Economic Chamber and members of the Czech Nature Conservation Federation and the Veronika Ecological Institute. Such a cooperation can be seen as beneficial, but also as an attempt to legitimise negative consequences of a company’s conduct. As well as the annual grants from the public budgets the creation of the Foundation Investment Fund (NIF) in 1992 must be mentioned, where a government resolution allocated 1% of the stock intended for privatisations for the financing of foundations. The aim was to support the financial independence of foundations in order for them to participate in the development of civil society.

 

In recent years corporate social responsibility has become a more and more popular theme of surveys, conferences, round-table discussions, projects, etc. Several CSOs are concerned with it. Some large companies created via the Donors Forum a corporate donors club named DONATOR, and the Viva Etika project is part of the Transparency International ČR project.50 VIA Foundation has for several years worked on developing cooperation between firms and CSOs and it awards the VIA Bona prize for corporate philanthropy since 2001. The first large companies are publishing independent reports on social responsibility.

 

It is necessary to distinguish between small Czech companies and large companies, often with foreign capital or part of supranational corporations, since they have a different approach to civil society and social responsibility. Large supranational companies are sensitive to social responsibility (foreign practices play a decisive role in the cultivation of the environment), they have their own strategy of philanthropy, etc. Small companies not only lack these opportunities, but above all do not even understand the significance of the notion of social responsibility. However, small companies (family and local firms) often provide material assistance to civic associations (e.g. they make available a car, premises, some of their products – foodstuffs, furniture, etc.); they are automatically part of the community in question and behave responsibly without even knowing they thus implement the concept of “corporate social responsibility”.

 

In the Czech Republic under socialism all companies were state run and performed certain social functions, e.g. they were part of the central national planning process, ensured 100% employment, each company provided social and cultural benefits to employees, and many structures of political participation – however forced and formalised – also routinely functioned at the workplace. A legacy of this situation is still manifest in the attitude of the general public, the overwhelming majority of which believes that large companies should help the government resolve the country’s social problems (76%). Two thirds of people believe that a company should do more than simply generate profits and pay taxes. However, most people believe that the management of large companies is not interested in assisting the government resolve these questions (67%).

 

In the regional survey two thirds of respondents described the approach taken by companies to CSOs as indifferent, and the same number stated that companies were not concerned with the impact of their activities on people and the environment. Opinions differed significantly regarding how frequently companies became involved in the activities of civil society. Most respondents in each region provided specific examples of corporate involvement in the civil sector over the last three years. Practically all the examples related to one-off assistance and donations (e.g. donations of materials, reductions on the rent of premises or work carried out), which were usually directed at a specific event (often a sports event or something involving children and young people).

 

There are companies which describe their individual activities in the sphere of CSR on websites, but not in a special report, or which issue separate reports regarding one aspect of CSR. Research shows that 64% percent of companies know the concept of CSR, but only 10% of companies have employees concerned exclusively with CSR. These are mainly large companies with a foreign investor or part of supra-national corporations. Ecology was a sphere in which activities were undertaken by more than 40% of participating companies; these were mainly companies which produce or utilise natural resources or are involved in the construction industry. Many of them intend to acquire environmental certificates or have already done so. The conclusion seems to be that positive steps in the sphere of ecology are being taken mainly by companies whose activities have direct impact on the environment. Eighty four percent of companies plan to expand their CSR-related activities.

 

 

EGYPT

 

http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNACU108.pdf

 

There are a number of economic instruments currently applied in Egypt comprising the following:

 

User charges for solid waste collection and disposal

The waste generators pay on a monthly basis these charges to Zabbaleens and private contractors. There is a price differential for the charge existing among households and between households and other types of economic activities. Private contractors collect, sort and dispose solid wastes from households, service sector and industry, particularly in areas where wastes include valuable recyclable materials. However, solid waste collection does not cover all solid waste generated especially in the Greater Cairo area due to shortage equipment and personnel. In some cases, only 60% of the daily quantity of solid waste is lifted while the rest stays overnight.

 

The user charge for solid waste management is paid directly to the private contractors and is charged per unit of housing whether residential or business. The fee is a monthly flat rate that is neither related to the volume or weight of the waste generated. Unfortunately, there is no exact record or data pertaining to the number of subscribers to such a service or the proceeds resulting from such a charge. This is attributed to a number of factors, primarily:

 

l  This fee /charge is paid on a voluntary basis. That is, should waste generators not wish to receive this service, and then there is no obligation to pay the monthly charge/fee.

l  If residential units or offices are unoccupied for any reason, the tenants or the owners are not obliged to pay the fee to the SW contractors.

l  All monthly payments made are not recorded in any official way. This is the case, as the private contractor does not issue any receipts or official document of any sort to prove any kind of contractual agreement or financial transaction taking place between the two parties.

 

Lack of supervision and close monitoring by the local authorities is the primary reason for the system’s inability to deliver and function efficiently. In many instances, the usual waste pick-ups are missed quite frequently and so the waste is left abandoned on streets in front of houses and offices until a pick-up is made. The abandoned waste is a suitable environment for stray cats to carry out scavenging which is also done frequently by the traditional zabbal who sometimes collects only parts of the waste that has economic value like paper and carton boxes.

 

As regards construction waste, the picture is somehow different. That is, for one to obtain a construction permit, a charge (variable) is levied as a kind of performance bond for construction/demolition waste. In theory, this charge is reimbursable once construction activities are over and the site is clear of any waste. However, in practice, probably no reimbursements were ever made regardless of the state of rehabilitation of the construction sites. There is therefore no interest or incentive for building contractors to remove the waste coupled with no effective enforcement on the part of the municipality/local administration. All of which is reflected in the picture observed in many of the construction sites today.

 

Nonetheless, removal of construction waste is yet another complicated matter. It is a relatively expensive operation as there are some restrictions on the movement of trucks on the streets of Cairo. Moreover, there is a charge levied on the disposal of waste in landfills (dump sites). Such factors culminate by scattering construction waste in unused land plots in the midst of residential areas or simply nearby construction sites.

 

There is, however, another charge levied on all housing units by the municipality and is also related to general street cleansing and waste management services in general. This cleansing charge is set at 2.5% of the value of property tax determined for each housing unit. This charge is mandatory in comparison to the user charge for solid waste management (aforementioned), which is paid to the contractor for services rendered. However, in any case, the owners have to pay the cleansing charge to the municipality.

 

In an unprecedented step, Alexandria has levied a monthly surcharge on electricity bills regardless of actual occupancy. The latter is of particular importance to a summer resort city like Alexandria where many housing units are only occupied during the summer season. However, in this case, tenants or owners will have to pay such a surcharge irrespective of occupancy or services rendered. The monthly charge varies is either L.E. 1, 2, 3, or 5 depending on the district and type of housing unit ranging from low-income or the luxury type. However, it is still early days to draw any conclusions from such a case.

 

User charges (visiting fees) for access to natural protectorates

Paid by visitors to finance environmental activities and maintenance of the protectorates. The proceeds are directed to the EPF. However, the natural protectorates have not received any funding from the EPF to-date. The reason for that is due to the fact that the protectorates have not yet developed clear strategies with details of their mandates and activities as well as the budget required for implementation of such strategies.

 

User fees for the exploitation of mines and quarries

The governorates collect these fees on behalf of the government and then the proceeds are transferred to the Ministry of Finance accounts in the form of government revenues for the state budget. The governorates do not withhold any amounts for activities related to the maintenance of the mines or for any similar activities. To compensate for that, the governorates levied a surcharge on each truckload coming out of the quarry areas. The proceeds from the truck-related charge would go to a special fund set up by the individual governorate to be disbursed according to preset executive regulations. It is believed that this special fund disburses certain undisclosed amounts of money for special purposes. Some of these purposes include bonuses and incentives for staff of the mines management department in the governorate.

 

Deposit-refund schemes on certain containers that are reused on recovery

This is the case on certain beverage bottles and on Liquified Petroleum Gas (LPG) containers. I believe that such schemes are quite efficient and can achieve their targets with a high degree of success. Moreover, a post-audit can be conducted on this instrument with a fair amount of ease.

 

Environmental charges on the cement industry

As public concern with regard to the cement industry in Egypt and its negative impacts on human health and the environment at large has reached its peak by the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, the government took some important steps in this regard. First and foremost, the cement companies who were then owned 100% by the government, were to install hardware (or mitigation measures) like bag filters and electrostatic precipitators. Secondly, the imposition of an L.E. 5 per ton to be born by the consumer and the proceeds of such a charge is earmarked for environmental protection projects. The annual revenue amounts currently to approximately L.E. 135 million. The Minister of Public Enterprise whose responsibility then included the cement companies introduced the charge in July 1995 by virtue of a ministerial decree. The cement charge is divided into two parts:

 

l  60% of the charge (i.e., L.E. 3) is deposited in the Cement Fund which covers the expenses of ASEC/ASENPRO which is the company established specifically for the purpose of upgrading cement filters as well as carry out their maintenance.

l  The residual of the cement charge (i.e., L.E. 2) is left for the cement companies to finance projects to improve the indoor environment as well as the surrounding environment.

 

However, it is not certain how investors who have started producing cement or have taken over ownership from the public sector will deal with such a charge. It is not even clear whether they will acknowledge the presence of the charge especially at present when cement producers are under-cutting prices.

 

Air Ticket Charge

A 12.5 - 15% value charge is levied on international air tickets. The proceeds of the charge are channelled to the Environment and Tourism Fund whose Secretary General is the Minister of State for Environmental Affairs in addition to the presence of three other cabinet ministers sitting on its board. At present, the fund is providing financial assistance to a number of government run projects in the areas of environment and tourism.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Egypt_Country_Report.pdf

 

Most recently, corporate social responsibility is being used to revive the relationship between the business sector and the corresponding social development efforts. CSR is still a new concept for the business sector in Egypt; hence its limited contribution to date.

 

A study conducted for the project indicated that the concept of corporate social responsibility has yet to take root in Egypt. The study relied on data collected from interviews with important stakeholders and experts in this sector, as well as a review of the annual reports of Egyptian corporations, to analyse whether CSR featured in their activities, and to determine its prominence. The annual reports for the years 2002 and 2003 of eight of the top 20 publicly traded Egyptian corporations by revenue were analysed in terms of two criteria: (1) the level of responsibility towards the community and (2) to what extent do they feel responsibility towards the environment? In six of the eight reports, there was mention of community-related activities or the promotion of higher environmental standards. Yet among the companies, there was a significant level of variation in the level of institutionalization and commitment towards these two principles.

 

The study revealed that CSR activities feature more prominently among multinational corporations working in Egypt. Since CSR as an integrated set of principles and activities originating in North America and Europe, multinationals from these regions first introduced the concept to the Egyptian market. Their international exposure, wide experience and knowledge on how to adapt CSR packages to a local context make multinational corporations the most visible advocates in this field. Such companies include Shell, British Petroleum, British American Tobacco and Proctor & Gamble.

 

The lowest level of CSR awareness, or interest, is found among local companies where there is minimal engagement in systematic CSR programs. A business consultant who has held several top level positions in a number of corporations states that, in his opinion, CSR “hardly exists in Egypt and is not part of the business culture here”. On the other hand, pragmatically, some companies are beginning to recognize that practising CSR is important for their public image, which is an important factor if they want to conduct business abroad or with foreign corporations.

 

The Global Compact Initiative, which was launched in Egypt by the UNDP in early 2004, introduced the concept of CSR to representatives of the private sector. According to a UNDP representative, so far, around 35 Egyptian companies, mostly medium-sized, have joined the Global Compact. The companies have joined on a voluntary basis and are working on translating the Global Compact’s nine principles into concrete activities.

 

The modest role of CSR in the Egyptian private sector was also confirmed by the regional stakeholder survey, in which the largest number of respondents’ assessment was that the private sector’s practice of corporate social responsibility was limited. A small percentage believed that this role was moderate, while another percentage believed that they did not have a role in the first place.

 

The broader national picture suggests that the majority of Egyptian businesses and companies are still unfamiliar with this new concept, and cases of adopting CSR values are few and scarce. The scope and extent of institutionalizing CSR in these companies is still very limited. The situation may change in the future, especially since in the light of the developments that have taken occurred in the past five years, with more companies exhibiting an interest in publicly embracing CSR and publicizing their commitment to one or more of its component principles. Such companies perceive such principles to be important to their company, whether in terms of relationships with employees, customers, shareholders, prospective investors, officials or with the general public.

 

 

At the same time, it is becoming increasingly recognized by Egyptian companies that CSR will not only provide moral and ethical validation of their activities, but will also reinforce their reputation locally and help put them on the map globally. It is probably due to this last consideration that many of the companies pioneering the CSR trend in Egypt are those that conduct or hope to conduct business abroad or with foreign corporations. One of the most prominent examples is SEKEM Holding, a group of companies that produce organic vegetables and fruit, spices, herbal remedies and phyto-pharmaceuticals, mainly for export. The company also has a visible presence in the local market and is widely known for its philosophy of caring for the environment and investing in the community, an approach it has been following since the early 1980s.

 

In Egypt, CSR as an institutionalized concept is still very much in the early stages of its development. Most companies do not have CSR programs incorporated into their structure. Yet CSR is gaining prominence in the business community as traditional notions of charitable giving combine with Western-style social responsibility and environmental standards to encourage more Egyptian companies to adopt CSR as part of their business culture.

 

 

ESTONIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Increase in rates

Earmarking Until 2009 100%; from 2010 majority, earmarked is revenue based on 2009 tax-bases. - Under the Pollution Charge Act the revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage through the Environmental Investment Centre (until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Rate differentiation for products CO2 pollution charge is paid by the heat producer according to the amount of CO2 emitted in heat production.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. Charge rates are multiplied with coefficients from 1.2 to 2.5 depending on the location of polluters (polluters located in bigger towns and recreational areas pay more).

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution non-compliance fees

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision

Revision Details

Earmarking Until 2009 100%; from 2010 majority - From 2010, charges calculated using 2009 year rates will be

earmarked, revenues above go to general state budget. Under the Pollution Charge Act the revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage through the Environmental Investment Centre(until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Rate differentiation for products The non-compliance fees are 5 - 200 higher than the basic air pollution charge rates.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. Rates are increased based on the size/location of point-sources: 1.2 times for large air polluters; 1.5 times for polluters located in larger towns; 2.5 times for polluters located recreational areas.

 

3. Name of Instrument Electricity excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Electricity price per MWh

 

4. Name of Instrument Fee for hunting rights

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2003

Earmarking Fully earmarked and revenues shall be directed for the restocking and protection of such resources. -

Revenues used for replenishing and monitoring wild game resources, training, research and hunting grounds surveying and management planning (under the Act on Environmental Charges

Other rate differentiation Per hectare price. The rate depends on quality category of habitats suitable for wild game.

 

5. Name of Instrument Fishing charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Earmarking Earmarked at the proportion of 2009 year tax-base, other goes to state budget - Funds earmarked for

regenerating natural resources, including fish resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage (under the Act on Environmental Charges).

Other rate differentiation Charges are differentiated based on species, local natural conditions (different rates for Atlantic, Baltic Sea, Lake Peipus and inland water bodies), type of fishing gear and purpose of fishing.

 

6. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 01.03.10.

Revision Details The tax rate on electricity was increased to 4.47€ per MWh.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

7. Name of Instrument Heavy goods vehicles tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2004

Rate differentiation for products Within the same axle/weight category, tax rate depends on the type of suspension of the driving axle of the vehicle.

Other rate differentiation Tax rate differs depending on technical criteria.

 

8. Name of Instrument Mining charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Charge rates were increased

Earmarking 50% - Share of the mining charge that is paid into State Budget is earmarked for environmental protection purposes (under the Act on the Environmental Charges); until 1999, it was revenue of the Environmental Fund. Local Government receives 50% of the revenues at the tax base of 2009 year level

Rate differentiation for products Different quality and type of mineral resource has different tax rate.

 

9. Name of Instrument Nature protection non-compliance fees

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Since 2003, only environmental damage of fishes are subject to non-compliance fee

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for nature protection, in accordance with the Act on Use of Money Accruing from Exploitation of Environment.

Other rate differentiation By species

 

10. Name of Instrument Packaging excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Adjustment of the payment details

Earmarking 50% - 50% of revenues from packaging excise tax are to be used for environmental purposes as settled in Environmental Charges Act.

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

11. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for products Tax rates include VAT.

Other rate differentiation Companies vs. households

 

12. Name of Instrument Waste disposal charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Increase in rates.

Earmarking At the level of 2009 tax-base, the revenues are earmarked, other goes to state budget. - Under the Act on the Use of Money Accruing from Exploitation of Environment, revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage (until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Other rate differentiation Rates are differentiated based on the level of hazardousness and type of landfill.

 

13. Name of Instrument Waste disposal non-compliance fees

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1994

Earmarking Until 2009 100%; from 2010 majority - From 2010 charges calculated using 2009 year rates will be

earmarked, revenues above go to general state budget. Under the Pollution Charge Act the revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage through the Environmental Investment Centre(until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Rate differentiation for products The non-compliance fees are 5 - 1000 times higher than disposal charges.

Other rate differentiation Rates are differentiated based on the level of hazardousness and type of landfill.

 

14. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Increase in rates

Earmarking 50% - Part of the water abstraction charge that is paid into State Budget is earmarked for environmental improvements (under the Act of Environmental Charges).

Rate differentiation for products Rates are differentiated depending on the source and water use.

 

15. Name of Instrument Water pollution charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2011

Revision Details Increase in rates

Earmarking Until 2009 100%; from 2010 majority - From 2010 charges calculated using 2009 year rates will be

earmarked, revenues above go to general state budget. Under the Pollution Charge Act the revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage through the Environmental Investment Centre(until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. The rates can be increased 1.2 to 2.5 times, depending on sensitivity of the recipient. In case the effluent indicators meet the condition set by the environmental permit and the other permit conditions are also met, the rates can be decreased 2 times.

 

16. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fees

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1994

Earmarking Until 2009 100%; from 2010 majority - From 2010 charges calculated using 2009 year rates will be

earmarked, revenues above go to general state budget. Under the Pollution Charge Act the revenues are earmarked for regenerating natural resources, preserving the state of the environment and repairing the environmental damage through the Environmental Investment Centre(until 1999 for Environmental Fund).

Rate differentiation for products Non-compliance fees are in most cases 10 times the basic effluent charge when there are discharges above permitted level, and 15 times the basic charge when discharges are made without a permit. For

hazardous substances, respectively 100 and 1000 times.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. Depending on the location of discharge and other indicators, special correction factors are applied (e.g. non-compliance fee is increased 1.2-2.5 times if the receiving water body is located in an area with unprotected groundwater).

 

17. Name of Instrument Water usage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2011

Year of last revision 2011

Other rate differentiation Companies vs. households

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

In Estonia the increases in excise duties have been used to finance substantial cuts of personal income taxes up to 2008.

 

Revenue from environmental taxes forms 8.3 % of total taxation in 2009, exceeding the EU average by nearly one percentage point. The proportion of environmental tax revenues displays a rather steadily rising trend from 1995 onwards, reflecting partly the need to adjust the excise duties up to the EU minimum rates, but also a deliberate policy of the government to finance the cuts of personal income taxes by increases in consumption and environmental taxation.

 

The long-term aim of the tax policy is to shift the tax burden from income and employment towards consumption and the environment. Most of the excise duties have been increased in 2010, including those on alcohol, tobacco, transport fuels, liquid fuel and electricity. Excise duties on transport fuels and natural gas were increased also in 2009. All the excise duties exceed now substantially the EU minimum tax rates with the exception of oil shale, for which there is a transition period up to 2013.

 

http://www.lm.gov.lv/upload/darba_devejiem/csr_060220_estonia_latvia_lithuania.pdf

 

Respondent companies were asked to define their understanding of “socially responsible activities”. Three in four respondent companies link these activities to ethical conduct. More than half of respondent companies associate socially responsible activities with environmentally friendly activities. Addressing stakeholders’ concerns is a socially responsible activity for 43 percent of respondent companies; transparency in operations is so for 35 percent of respondents. Correcting social inequalities and establishing stakeholder partnerships are perceived to be socially responsible activities by about one in six companies. Only 3 percent of respondent companies believe CSR is also a P issue. Financial services companies seem to be much more knowledgeable on the interpretation of CSR.

 

Small companies seem to associate socially responsible activities primarily with respect for the environment. Very large companies tend to associate the concept of social responsibility with the correction of social inequalities, whereas only one of these very large companies believes that respect for the environment is related to the concept of social responsibility. Protecting the environment is considered to be one of the companies’ main roles in society by nine out of ten Estonian companies. However, only half of these companies are absolutely convinced about this role. Small and medium companies are more deeply convinced about this role18 than large and very large companies.

 

During the last three years, half of Estonian companies engaged in environmental projects, a third did not, and 15 percent do not know whether they did. Of those which engaged in environmental projects, 80 percent engaged in projects linked to the company’s operations (internal), 10 percent engaged in projects not linked to company’s operations (external), and 10 percent engaged in both kinds of projects.

 

Production companies engaged mainly in internal projects. Financial services companies engaged in external projects, while non–financial services companies engaged, in almost equal measure, in external and internal projects. Very large companies seem to invest relatively more in external projects.

 

As observed with social projects, respondent companies appear very hesitant about their environmental project plans for the next five years. The number of companies which plan to engage in environmental projects increased from 40 to 46 in the past three years, with a shift from internal to both internal and external projects. In order to implement their environmental projects, most companies collaborate with a number of institutions that can be broken down into: other businesses; municipal institutions; CSOs; governmental institutions; and community institutions.

 

Activities providing education and information on environmental issues (for example, school programs, community meetings, internal training, etc.) are not very popular in Estonia.The companies that develop these activities address them primarily to their employees and secondarily to management, local communities, and company owners. Institutions, employees’ families, and other stakeholders are the participants in 15 percent of these activities.

 

Recycling programsare more widespread, present in almost half of respondent companies. Non–financial services companies and large companies seem to be behind other companies in the adoption of recycling programs.

 

A large majority of Estonian companies have no environmental certification. Of the 21 percent of companies that have an environmental certification, 86 percent obtained an ISO 14000 certificate. Financial services companies understandably have no environmental certification, and only 14 percent of medium companies are certified. Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) of companies’ operations are relatively widespread in Estonia, conducted in 45 percent of respondent companies.

 

When asked about the government’s role in helping companies meet their social responsibilities, Estonian respondents responded that the government does not provide significant assistance. This is confirmed by data that shows the impact of government policies on investment in CSR.

 

 

FYRO MACEDONIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Charge for generation of electricity from fossil fuels

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2007

Earmarking Yes - Financing of environmental management programmes and activities linked to energy generation in municipalities in which the producers paying the charge operate.

Other rate differentiation Charge per kWh

 

2. Name of Instrument Charges for imports and exports

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation Different rates for different products (from protected plants and ozone depleting substances to cars and waste).

 

3. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 2005

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

4. Name of Instrument Mining charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Extraction of sand and gravel 5% of the price

 

5. Name of Instrument Motor vehicles and vessels charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation With or without catalytic converters

 

6. Name of Instrument Oil and oil derivatives charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Year of last revision 2007

Revision Details Payment frequency changed

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

7. Name of Instrument Plastic products and plastic packaging charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Year of last revision 2007

Revision Details Tax bases changed/simplified.

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

8. Name of Instrument Vehicle excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 2005

Other rate differentiation By engine capacity

 

9. Name of Instrument Waste disposal charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Fixed price of solid waste per tonne

 

10. Name of Instrument Waste management charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation Price of collection of industrial non-hazardous waste 0.5% of the price of waste collection

 

11. Name of Instrument Waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for sectors Rates differ depending on the type of user - households and commercial users.

Rate differentiation for regions Rates vary across the country, depending on waste collection and disposal costs.

Other rate differentiation In some municipalities, waste user charges are set as fixed monthly rate per user, while in others they depend on surface of premises owned or used by the charge payer, or on the quantity of generated waste.

 

12. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

13. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Rate differentiation for products Sewage charge is included in water consumption charge.

Rate differentiation for sectors Rates differ depending on the type of user - households and commercial users.

Rate differentiation for regions Rates vary across the country, depending on water supply (and sewage collection) costs.

 

14. Name of Instrument Water effluent non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the Environmental Fund.

General tax base Specific tax-base Tax rate

Other rate differentiation Law Violations

 

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/macedonia%20acr%20final.pdf

 

The socialism based on self-management and the socially-owned property of the enterprises that existed at the beginning of the 1990s was supposed to represent the responsibility towards social needs. This system did not create the space for a debate regarding this issue. However, the transitional processes which led to a change in the ownership capital imposed the need for developing and implementing the concept of social responsibility, a concept suggesting responsibility towards tax obligations, employees, marginalised groups, the community and the environment. The first public debate on this subject was held in 2002 within the NGO Fair – Civil Society Forum of Macedonia. What was concluded was that the primary responsibility of the managers is the responsibility towards the profits, then the responsibility to fulfil the obligations towards the state and finally the responsibility towards everything else (culture, sports, health care, environmental protection, etc.). It was also concluded that, except for a few cases, the general level of social responsibility of entrepreneurs is still at a low level.

 

An analysis about the social responsibility of enterprises, covering the ten most profitable enterprises in the Republic of Macedonia for the year 2003, was made. According to the findings,  although there is a positive tendency, there is generally no long-term strategy for this purpose and, if there is, it has just been established so the results cannot be seen yet. A small number of them have separate departments dealing with activities of social responsibility, while others have placed these activities within the marketing department and the public relations department. Most of the activities taken are directed towards the development of sports (sports clubs and events) and the culture (support of major cultural events), being the most visited events that allow promotion of enterprises. A part of them also show concern for their employees through providing training courses regularly, crediting their employees, employing members of the family, etc. Even when they are prepared to discuss the topic, the business entities in Macedonia are not willing to give precise data on their socially responsible activities.

 

Three out of the ten business entities that had the biggest profit in 2003 are part of Macedonian Telecommunications, two in the area of pharmaceutical industry and one business entity in the tobacco industry, oil industry, extractive industry (ore and minerals), food industry and construction material industry.

 

At the question asked in the regional stakeholder consultations relating to the social responsibility of enterprises, most of the participants (42%) answered that its presence can hardly be seen, while 26% feel that its presence is limited and 25% that its presence is moderate. Only 3% feel that the social responsibility is significantly present.

 

General level of social responsibility of the private corporations is still at a low level, with very few companies practising social responsibility and many ignoring the negative effects on the communities and environment.

 

 

GEORGIA

 

http://live.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/epr/epr_studies/georgia.pdf

 

Economic instruments for the environment were rarely used in Georgia before independence. The broader introduction of economic instruments for environmental protection and natural resource use coincided with the beginning of the political reform and the transition to a market economy. Taxes on environmental pollution with harmful substances were introduced in 1993 and taxes on the use of natural resources in 1994. When Georgia adopted a single tax code in January 1998, these taxes were incorporated in that Tax Code, in sections XI and X, respectively.

 

Chapter 5 of the Law on Environmental Protection of 12 October 1996 provides the basic principles for environmental taxes: the polluter pays and the user pays principles. More specifically, the pollution tax was aimed at moving to market-based methods in environmental management, and protecting and improving the environment by raising revenue for the State budget. The tax on the use of natural resources was intended to be levied according to the user pays principle, although this principle was not defined in the resolution introducing this tax.

 

The pollution and natural resource taxes were modelled on systems that were in force in other countries in the subregion, with some modifications to take Georgia’s specific conditions into account. One important difference is that Georgia’s system does not include charges on solid waste. Furthermore, no environmental fund to support environmental investments has ever been established.

 

The economic instruments in force in Georgia today include:

l  Taxes on environmental pollution, i.e. on air emissions and waste-water discharges;

l  Taxes on the extraction and use of natural resources;

l  User charges for municipal services;

l  Product charges on certain environmentally harmful products, e.g. on petrol;

l  Penalties and fines for non-compliance;

l  Financial incentives such as grants and soft loans.

 

The reviews all indicated that the number of substances covered by the pollution tax is very high, making monitoring and enforcement difficult and expensive even in a well functioning enforcement system; payment is based on permitted emissions, not on actual emissions; the number of enterprises liable to pay tax is theoretically very high; and revenues are not used for environmental protection.

 

Instruments for air pollution management

The two instruments for air pollution control from stationary sources are air emission taxes and product charges on fossil fuels.

 

The air emission taxes have been in force since January 1993, with the introduction of environmental pollution taxes. The taxes are to be paid by all natural and legal entities that have an environmental permit for their activities. The air emission taxes cover 200 different pollutants. The amount is not related to actual emissions but based on the maximum emissions permitted by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection or its regional agencies. Each year enterprises have to file information on the expected amount of emissions based on their business plans and submit it to the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Protection or its regional agencies for approval. The Ministry and regional agencies compare the estimated emissions with the planned production (based on former Soviet standards on emissions for different industries) and decide whether the emissions will significantly affect ambient environmental quality. If no unacceptable deterioration is expected, the enterprise receives air or water emission quotas (environmental permit). The tax on the 200 substances depends on the relative toxicity of each. The toxicity indicator is based on former Soviet standards for daily maximum allowable concentrations (MAC). Furthermore, the tax depends on the location of the activity. This regional factor ranges from 1 in the least affected areas to 1.5 for the highly polluted areas.

 

Official statistics on emissions from stationary sources indicate that NOx, solid particles and SO2 have the biggest revenue raising potential. They account for about 95% of potential revenue. CO and CO2 contribute very little due to their low tax rates.

 

The product taxes on fossil fuels have been in force since 1998 and have their legal basis in the Tax Code. The tax applies to fuel, natural gas, liquefied gas and kerosene. The tax on fuel oil is differentiated according to sulphur content. Natural gas is taxed at a rate of 5 lari/m3, liquefied petroleum gas at 10 lari/ton and kerosene at 20 lari/ton. In 1999, a tax differentiation was introduced for fuel oil. Fuel oil with a sulphur content above 2% carries a tax of 20 lari/ton, whereas fuel oil with less sulphur carries a tax of 10 lari/ton. The tax differentiation is supposed to promote the use of fuel oil with a low sulphur content, but the only threshold is that of 2%.

 

Instruments related to transport

Transport fuels are taxed as part of the economic instruments for environmental protection. In addition, there are other non-environmental economic instruments in force that may affect the level of transport. Vehicle fuels are subject to excise duty and value-added tax (VAT), and there are various taxes on vehicles (e.g. import of cars, registration tax on cars).

 

The taxes on petrol and diesel have been in effect since January 1993. At present, the taxes are to be paid by both the importer and the producer of the taxable fuel. The purpose of the taxes was to limit air emissions from vehicles and to generate revenues for environmental purposes. However, there were no mechanisms to ensure the latter. Initially, the tax differentiated between leaded and unleaded petrol. This differentiation was abandoned in 1997, reportedly due to difficulties encountered in monitoring and controlling the fuel content. In June 1999, tax rates on leaded and unleaded petrol were again differentiated. However, one month later, Parliament adopted a law banning the import and production of leaded petrol (with more than 13 mg of lead per litre) from 1 January 2000. Nevertheless, the actual phasing-out of leaded petrol has encountered a number of obstacles. There is no efficient fuel quality control and monitoring system for the entire distribution chain (from imports to filling stations). There is also a high percentage of illegally distributed leaded petrol in the Georgian market, which means that taxes worth about US$ 30 million go uncollected annually. This undermines any effort to improve the legal petrol market. It is therefore unclear whether the tax differentiation is relevant. Under the current system, the tax on unleaded petrol is 40 lari/ton and on leaded petrol 120 lari/ton. The actual tax difference of 80 lari/ton (or 0.08 lari/l) is substantially higher than in most other countries of Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia and at levels similar to many OECD countries; yet, most cars run on leaded petrol.

 

Instruments for water management

Instruments for water management include water effluent taxes and non-compliance fees. For municipal services there are user charges for water supply, sewerage and waste water.

 

The water effluent tax has been in effect since January 1993. Since January 1998, these taxes have been unified in the Tax Code. The water effluent taxes as well as the non-compliance fees follow the same general principles as the air emission taxes. All natural and legal entities that conduct economic activities requiring an environmental permit are subject to the water effluent tax. The tax is imposed on about 140 substances that can be discharged into surface waters. The amount of taxes to be paid does not relate to the actual emissions, but is based on the“permissible emissions” included in the environmental permit. The system and the procedures for calculating and collecting the taxes are the same as those for air emission taxes. There are substantial variations in the levels of taxation: the tax on sulphates is 0.5 lari/ton, on phosphates 156 lari/ton, on nitrogen 390 lari/ton, and on biological oxygen demand (BOD) 13 lari/ton. Very hazardous heavy metals such as mercury, beryllium, gallium and molybdenum are subject to a tax of 390,000 lari/ton. Precise data on the revenues collected for the specific substances are not available.

 

The municipal user charges include charges for water supply, sewerage and waste water. The supply of water and the collection and treatment of waste water are the responsibility of the public water companies. The current water tariffs barely meet the water companies’ operating and maintenance costs and do not allow them to upgrade the distribution networks which have significant leaks. The unrealistically low tariff (0.05 lari/m3 for domestic consumers) combined with poor collection rates (70% overall, but only 50%  from domestic consumers) put the water utilities in an unviable financial situation, jeopardizing their operations.

 

In most households, water consumption is not metered, which does not encourage users to save water. In 2001, households paid 1.2 lari per month as a fixed charge for water supply and sewerage. Enterprises and public institutions pay per cubic metre of water supplied (including sewerage), which amounted to 1.6 lari per m3 in 2001. The Environmental Financing Strategy of the Municipal Water and Wastewater Sector in Georgia estimated that, using the existing system in 2000, the total cost of producing one cubic metre of water through basic maintenance and operation of the system was 0.27 lari. According to the Strategy, the only sustainable option to close the gap is to increase user charges step by step, to the maximum level that the average household can afford.

 

Instruments for waste management

The only economic instrument related to waste management is the user charge for municipal waste services. Inhabitants pay a user charge for the collection and disposal of municipal waste. The rate differs from municipality to municipality, with the average at 0.4 lari per capita per month. Enterprises do not pay for waste disposal, and some of the larger enterprises have their own industrial waste sites. Only about 40% of households pay their waste charges. The low tariffs and collection rates do not create true market conditions, and social considerations still dominate when setting waste charges.

 

Economic instruments for natural resources management

The abstraction of mineral resources, surface and groundwater, and the use of flora and fauna are all

subject to taxation.

 

The tax on the extraction of mineral resources has been in effect since 1994. Its purpose is to ensure the rational use of natural resources and to generate revenue for the State budget. All physical and legal entities undertaking activities that are subject to licensing for the use of mineral resources are liable to this tax. The tax rate is determined by the Inter-ministerial Council on Licensing of Mineral Resources Use, which also issues the licence for the extraction of mineral resources. In establishing the rate, the Council considers the quality and the availability of the resource in question. The rate is a percentage of the market price of the resource (without VAT). For each resource, the Tax Code establishes a minimum and maximum percentage (rate) of the market price that can be imposed as tax. For example, for coal the rate varies between 2% and 5%. The taxes are useful in terms of revenue generation but have limited environmental impact.

 

The tax on groundwater abstraction has been in force since January 1994 and the tax on surface water abstraction since January 1998. The taxes apply to all legal and natural entities that conduct an activity that requires a licence for the abstraction of water resources.

 

There are three different rates for the abstraction of surface water; the highest is 0.01 lari/m3, which applies to the Kura river with its tributaries and connected water bodies. The tax on water for irrigation and thermal energy is only 1% of the basic amount of 0.01 lari/m3, making it merely symbolic. The same applies to water for hydropower enterprises, which are supposed to pay less than 1% of the basic amount. For groundwater abstraction, the tax is calculated as a percentage of its “price”. The tax varies between 2% and 8%.

 

The tax on the use of natural resources includes a specific tax on tree cutting. The charge on the extraction of wood from State forests has been in effect for a long time. In 1998 it was included in the Tax Code. This system, too, suffers from the fact that no mechanisms have been established to promote its objectives. The revenues go to the regional budgets. The tax rate depends on three parameters: the type of tree, the quality of the wood, and the diameter of the wood. The tax varies from 34 lari/m3 for tree species that have the highest commercial value to 1 lari/m3 for firewood of the lowest commercial value. The tax serves mainly to collect revenue from the forest operations. The overall levels of cutting are managed through licences.

 

A charge on hunting and fishing was introduced in January 1998. However, it has not yet been fully implemented and enforced. Regulations and procedures for recreational fishing and hunting have not yet been fully drawn up. For commercial fishing and hunting, the licences are allocated by the Inter-ministerial Council on Licensing of Fauna Resources Use. The rate is a percentage of the market price. There are 24 different tax rates (percentages) and each rate applies to a specific group of species. For example, the rate for bears is 35% and for wolves 25%.

 

Enforcement incentives (fines and non-compliance fees)

Non-compliance fees can be imposed if evidence is found of a violation of environmental legislation. The punishments vary from 1 to 360 times the daily salary or imprisonment for a period of up to five years, and the deprivation of the right to hold any official position or conduct specific proscribed activities for a period of up to three years. For example, significant pollution of water bodies is punishable by up to three years’ imprisonment. These sentences are rarely carried out due to the weak legal and judicial system. Only an extremely low number of cases are actually likely to reach the courts.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/georgia%20final%20acr.pdf 

 

Georgia’s 12 top rated companies practice some form of corporate social responsibility. Although they admit lacking experience in this field, they understand that participation in social programmes is essential. Moreover, these companies are involved, to a certain degree, in such programmes. But their attitude towards CSOs is quite different. The companies either know nothing about the activities of CSOs, or cast doubt on their efficiency. As a consequence, joint projects between Georgian businesses and CSOs are extremely rare. Furthermore, companies argue that if the number of foreign-funded programmes, seen as the main source of income for CSOs, is reduced, cooperation with CSOs will become pointless and useless.

 

The last five years are marked by the emergence of discourse of corporate social responsibility in public–state–business relations in Georgia. Several projects have been implemented by non-governmental organisations aimed at popularising this concept. In several instances CSR projects were realised by big companies. At the same time, initiatives jointly implemented by business and CSOs are rare. Consequently, the aim of the case study was to explore reasons behind this lack of cooperation. It was hypothesised that CSR is seen by managers as part of a company’s PR and advertisement strategies. The low level of legitimacy of civil society makes cooperation with those organisations less beneficial in terms of social respect and advertisement purposes.

 

Among the three big companies selected for the purpose of the research, two were recognised by business media outlets as champions in the CSR field. The following general questions guided the process of research: What is the level of awareness of top managers with regard to the concept of CSR? Which of the different forms of CSR are recognised by them? Which of these forms are implemented in Georgia? What is the attitude of managers toward civil society and how do they evaluate the possibility of cooperation with this sector?

 

Analysis of data shows that despite a clear understanding of the meaning of CSR as well as comprehensive knowledge of the different forms of its implementation, the range of activities in this direction is quite limited. Many existing initiatives serve a purpose of improving company images and/or developing their human resource bases. Correspondingly, many forms of CSR implementation are not even discussed by top managers. Also, the level of awareness about the nature and activities of the civil society sector is very low among managers. Managers do not see in the immediate future any possibility for cooperation between business and civil society. They see international donors as ‘natural’ sponsors and do not see overlapping interests between them, NGOs and big companies. The level of trust toward civil society is also low, with many of the respondents citing the ineffectiveness of the NGO sector as a main reason for this. It was concluded that a vicious circle emerges as a result of this situation - while CSOs do not pay sufficient attention to the interests and views of business, business abstains from supporting these organisations, with a consequent deepening of gap between the two. As a recommendation, it is suggested that measures aimed at intensifying dialogue between these two parties should be taken.

 

GREECE

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Charge on entrance to national parks and monuments

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are used for maintenance of the areas.

Other rate differentiation Depending on the area

 

2. Name of Instrument Charge on hunting licences

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Depends on geographical coverage (local, regional, national).

 

3. Name of Instrument Charge on irrigation water

Type Fee/Charge

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge on municipal waste collection / treatment

Type Fee/Charge

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge on waste disposal

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - The main purpose of this charge is to provide financing.

Other rate differentiation Industrial waste

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge to acquire grazing rights on public lands

Type Fee/Charge

 

7. Name of Instrument Mineral oil tax

Type Tax

Rate differentiation for sectors Reduced rate of duty when gas oil is used for agricultural purposes.

Other rate differentiation  By fuel type. A Winter period is each year defined in Greece (appr. 15 October. to 30 April) during which a reduced rate of duty is applied for kerosene for heating purposes.

 

8. Name of Instrument Tax on motor vehicle usage

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By cylinder volume

 

9. Name of Instrument Waste-water user charges

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Municipal and industrial waste-water

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

The role of environmental taxes has been decreasing over recent years in Greece: their share in terms of GDP has declined by a cumulative 0.5 percentage points since 2001. This decline was driven by shrinking revenues from energy taxation, for which Greece records the lowest value among the EU-27.

 

In 2009 the ratio of environmental taxation stood at 2.0 % of GDP, a value among the lowest in the Union (the EU-27 average is 2.6 %). The new tax law 3943 enacted on 31 March 2011 includes a specific provision for VAT applicable to GHG emission allowances under Directive 2003/87/EC.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Greece_Country_Report.pdf 

 

The concept of corporate social responsibility has started to develop in Greece over the last three to five years, mainly because of EU pressure. From the findings of the ‘MEDA Communications’ survey, six out of ten Greek citizens are not aware of even the existence of CSR. Those who are aware are mainly men in the 25-54 age group.

 

There are some activities within the Greek business sector to promote CSR. The Hellenic Network for Corporate Social Responsibility, based in Athens, was formed as a non-profit organisation in June 2000 by 13 companies and three business organisations. It is run by a board of seven member companies. Today, 54 companies and business institutions are members of the network. Its mission is to promote the meaning of CSR to both Greek businesses and Greek society with the goal of having a balance between profitability and sustainable development.

 

The aforementioned ‘MEDA Communications’ survey makes clear that sports, protection of children and the environment are the sectors in which Greek companies have initiated their CSR initiatives. The fact that sports come first on the list can be associated with the Athens Olympic Games of 2004. Generally, CSR is underdeveloped in Greece. In the framework of CSR certain banks offer the possibility of supporting NGOs through various programmes. For example, the Piraeus Bank has the ‘Winlife’ programme through which any VISA or MASTERCARD card holder can make an on-line donation to the NGO of his choice (out of a list of organisations which subscribe to the programme) free of charge. The Bank has also issued a credit card called ‘Winlife VISA’ which is a regular VISA card, but 50% of the annual subscription fee, plus 0,30% of the total spending made through this card are donated to one of three NGOs of the card holder’s choice. However, participants at the scoring workshop questioned whether current CSR activities by Greek companies should be seen as mere public relations exercise.

 

The CSI-SAT study showed that the concept of corporate social responsibility is in an early stage of development in Greece. This is also true for the concept of corporate philanthropy. While some private companies have funded cultural and sports activities organised by CSOs, in general, the relationship between civil society and the private sector leaves a lot to be desired.

 

HUNGARY

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air load charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2004

Year of last revision 2005

Revision Details New measure of water load charges

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type. The measure of the air load charges is determined by the basic of the heat charges (in natural measure determined mass of the whole amount of the air loading substance emitted yearly) and the

unit charges of the air loading substances.

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution levy

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 30. 01. 2009

Revision Details Requirements for content of a smog warning plan

Rate differentiation for products Different formulas are used in different cases.

Rate differentiation for regions The value of the respective formula depend on the characteristics of different settlements.

Other rate differentiation The value of the respective formula depends on the risk factor of the polluting material. The local governments have the right to establish stricter standards than the national standards.

 

3. Name of Instrument Charge on hazardous waste

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Disposal or Incineration

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge on municipal waste collection / treatment

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Waste collected inside / outside Budapest

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge on waste disposal

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Financing of waste collection firms.

Other rate differentiation Depending on volume of waste

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge on water abstraction

Type Fee/Charge

Rate differentiation for regions Varies by region

Other rate differentiation Varies by water source

 

7. Name of Instrument Noise abatement levy

Type Tax

Existing establishments exceeding the noise limit in force

New establishments exceeding the noise limit in force

New road, railroad or airport if exceeding the noise limit in force

 

8. Name of Instrument Product charge on batteries

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

Other rate differentiation Batteries filled / not filled with electrolyte

 

9. Name of Instrument Product charge on commercial printing paper

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

Other rate differentiation Commercial printing paper per kg.

 

10. Name of Instrument Product charge on electric and electronic products

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

Other rate differentiation Various products

 

11. Name of Instrument Product charge on other oils

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2006

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

 

12. Name of Instrument Product charge on packaging materials (based on basic material, except of beverage packaging and shopping bags)

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

13. Name of Instrument Product charge on packaging materials (commercial: beverages and shopping bags)

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 01.01.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

14. Name of Instrument Product charge on tyres

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 1.1.2008

Revision Details Improvement of implementation effectiveness: single authority for collection and control: The

Customs and Finance Guard.

 

15. Name of Instrument Soil load charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2004

Year of last revision 2005

Other rate differentiation Unit charge per m³ sewage and used water allocated on the soil/in the soil

 

16. Name of Instrument Tax on foreign registered vehicles

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Earmarking 100% - Maintenance and development of the public road network.

Other rate differentiation Lorries vs. passenger cars

 

17. Name of Instrument Toxic waste levy

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation Breaking the regulations about toxic waste

 

18. Name of Instrument Vehicle tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Other rate differentiation By age of vehicle

 

19. Name of Instrument Wastewater user charges

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Households vs. industrial use

 

20. Name of Instrument Water load charge

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2004

Year of last revision 1.1.2005

Revision Details New measure of water load charges

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

21. Name of Instrument Water pollution levy

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

Environmental taxes represented 2.6 % of GDP. This share is equal to the EU average and has remained roughly stable between 2003 and 2009. Taxes on energy account for the largest part of environmental tax revenues.

 

http://www.eucivis.eu/download/HungaryEN.pdf

 

Nearly two thirds of the Hungarian companies support the non-profit organisation in some way, but their donations are motivated by almost the same solidarity considerations as those of the private individuals. Though the concept of corporate social responsibility is gaining ground, it is put into practice almost exclusively in the form of traditional charity. It has not become generally accepted, yet, that private companies as stakeholders also have an interest in promoting local development and solving social problems in co-operation with civil organisations.

 

ISRAEL

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

1. Name of Instrument Annual registration fees on cars

Type Tax

Year of last revision 01.04.2010

Revision Details Tax rates and tax bands were increased. New increases are expected 01.04.2011.

General tax base Specific tax-base Tax rate

Other rate differentiation By price and age of vehicle

 

2. Name of Instrument Customs on imports of cars

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1950

Year of last revision

Revision Details

Other rate differentiation 0% if the car is imported from a country with a trade agreement (EU, USA and some other countries), 7% otherwise.

 

3. Name of Instrument Customs on imports of vehicles' spare parts

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1950

Other rate differentiation Varies

 

4. Name of Instrument Drink containers levy

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details An amendment to the Deposit Law on Beverage Containers.

Earmarking 100% - All revenues are earmarked for a non-budgetary fund.

 

5. Name of Instrument Electricity – Time- and load-differentiated tariffs for domestic consumers

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details Updating of tariffs

 

6. Name of Instrument Extra-consumption water levy (Drought levy)

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2009

Year of last revision 1.2010

Revision Details Levy suspension

 

7. Name of Instrument Fees for non-ionizing radiation permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details New non-ionizing radiations regulations.

 

8. Name of Instrument Fuel Tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1958

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

9. Name of Instrument Ionizing radiation permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1980

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details Price update

Other rate differentiation By activity type

 

10. Name of Instrument Landfill tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2007

Other rate differentiation By type of waste

 

11. Name of Instrument Levy for permits to handle and deliver hazardous materials (Poison Permit)

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details Tax rates updated according to consumers' price index.

Other rate differentiation By risk level

 

12. Name of Instrument Marine discharge permit for land-based sources emitting to the sea

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1988

Year of last revision 2001;2009

Revision Details 2001: new regulations, 2009: cost update

Other rate differentiation Based on discharge type

 

13. Name of Instrument Marine environment protection fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1979

Year of last revision 2008

Revision Details The fee collection method was changed.

Earmarking 100% - Extra-budgetary fund.

 

14. Name of Instrument Mining tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1950

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details Price update

Other rate differentiation Phosphate and potash mining

 

15. Name of Instrument Permit for dumping waste to the sea

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1984

 

16. Name of Instrument Pest control permit levy

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1975

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details Price update according to consumer index.

Other rate differentiation Various permits

 

17. Name of Instrument Purchase tax on cars

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1950

Year of last revision 01.01.2011

Revision Details The bonus system that was introduced from August 2009 is updated at the beginning of each year, in

accordance with changes in the consumer price index.

Other rate differentiation By emission standard

 

18. Name of Instrument Purchase tax on vehicle spare parts

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1950

 

19. Name of Instrument Sewage fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1962

Other rate differentiation Varies between local authorities

 

20. Name of Instrument The quarries rehabilitation tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1973

Year of last revision 1978

Revision Details The fund was established in 1978 according to an act from 1973

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for the Quarries rehabilitation fund.

Other rate differentiation Tax calculated as percentage of value of the material quarrying, 0.1% - 6% of the quarried substance value. From 0.1% for cement or lime to 6% for a basic landfill.

 

21. Name of Instrument Water extraction levy

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1959

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details Price update

Other rate differentiation Domestic and industrial

http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000630323&fid=1725

 

The Bank of Israel says that initial figures show that the Green Taxation reform has contributed to the reduction in air pollution without changing the tax burden.

 

In an excerpt from the Annual Report, which will be published on March 30, the Bank of Israel says, “The inelasticity in the use of private vehicles and insufficient public transport have made the environmentally related taxes on vehicles and fuel into a major source of tax revenue for the government.” The Bank of Israel notes that Israel has been levying a range of environmentally related taxes while cutting direct taxes. It says that a 2008 comparison with OECD countries found that revenues from environmental taxes accounted as a proportion of GDP in Israel above the OECD average, mainly due to Israel's high fuel excise and taxes on vehicles. Furthermore, Israel's public transportation is inadequate, forcing people to use private cars. In other words, the excise is a regressive tax that shifts the tax burden downwards onto the middle classes and poor.

 

However, the Bank of Israel cautions that the combination of a high purchase tax on vehicles and a high excise tax on fuel may limit the ability to use them to increase tax revenues in the future. It advises extending taxes that are not derived from fuel consumption and vehicles, in order to create incentives to use advanced methods for waste disposal and reducing pollution.

 

The Bank of Israel notes that the government raised the fuel excise by NIS 0.20 per litre in January 2011, but rescinded the tax hike on gasoline only a month later in the face of public protest at high fuel prices. Even after the excise hike, excise accounted for 43% of the consumer price of gasoline, similar the average in non-oil-producing developed countries.

 

The Green Taxation on motor vehicles, which came into effect in August 2009, differentiates the purchase tax on the basis of a vehicle's emissions. Tax credits on company cars were also changed to a fixed proportion of the value of the car. The Bank of Israel says that tax reduced air pollution without changing the tax burden by reducing purchases of high-emission vehicles in favour of low-emission vehicles. It adds that, conversely, the increase in the fuel excise has only a very small effect on demand.

 

As for other environmental taxes, Israel, like other countries, is in various stages of implementing reforms to increase these taxes and they are expected to account for a larger proportion of tax revenues in the future. Reforms include higher taxes on sewage, waste disposal and the restoration of abandoned quarries, as well as the introduction of congestion taxes and taxation of emissions of pollutants.

 

The tax on landfill for household waste is the most significant. The price of landfill in Israel has been very low until now relative to the developed countries and as a result there has been little incentive to shift to more advanced methods of waste disposal. In December 2010, the government decided to gradually raise the landfill tax for mixed household waste by NIS 10 per ton each year, up to NIS 90 per ton in 2015 (before VAT). In 2010, the Knesset passed the Packaging Law, which expands the scope of the Deposit Law, and the Tire Recycling Law, both of which impose the responsibility for recycling products on the manufacturers. The Bank of Israel expects waste disposal laws to increase the proportion of other environmental taxes in total environmental taxes, to 0.16% of GDP in 2015.

 

http://www.sviva.gov.il/bin/en.jsp?enPage=e_BlankPage&enDisplay=view&enDispWhat=Object&enDispWho=News^l4767&enZone=e_news

 

Israel's Green Tax reform went into effect on August 2, 2009. The reform sets tax incentives aimed at reducing vehicular air pollution. The reform comes in the wake of the recommendations of a Green Tax Committee, which included representatives of the Ministries of Finance, Transportation, National Infrastructure and Environmental Protection. The tax reform largely relates to changes in purchase taxes imposed on new motor vehicles weighing less than 3.5 tons. For the first time, tax rates on vehicles will be linked to the level of pollution emitted by these vehicles. Relatively clean vehicles will enjoy a significant tax benefit and lower sales prices while polluting vehicles will cost more in the wake of the reform.

 

The tax group of each vehicle model is based on the following:

Air pollution testing of each car model before it is approved for use in Israel, or in Europe or in the USA. The test results provide information on the following pollutant emissions: carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), nitrogen oxide (NOx), particulates (PM) and carbon dioxide (CO2).

l  Factoring of the emission data of each model by means of a “green grade.” The grades are divided into 15 groups of pollution that form the basis for tax credits, with group 1 representing the cleanest vehicle group and group 15 the most polluting.

l  Setting the tax benefit for each group according to its pollution level. The tax benefit is granted after uniform taxing of all vehicles at a rate of 90% (except hybrid cars and electric cars). The rate of benefit ranges from 15,000 shekels for relatively clean vehicles to 0 shekels for the most polluting group.

 

The new tax structure will make cleaner and smaller cars less expensive by thousands of shekels, while the cost of polluting cars will increase significantly in order to incentivize the public to purchase more environment friendly cars. Taxes will go down for most of the small family cars (up to 120,000 shekels) and it is therefore expected that the green tax will reduce the price to the consumer for these cars.

 

The Ministry of Environmental Protection has published regulations which require car or motorcycle advertisements to include data on the pollution level of the car by means of a colour scale and to provide data on the fuel consumption of the vehicle. In addition, the pollution level will also appear in the car registration. The objective of these regulations is to increase public awareness of the subject in order to allow consumers to choose the most appropriate car for them.

 

Other changes in the car tax reform include:

l  Switch to a linear method of calculating the value of use of a company car. The value of use of a company car is now calculated based on its book value, rather than according to value of usage groups that were previously used. Vehicle importers are expected to reduce the list prices of their cars in order to reduce its value of use and increase sales.

l  Grant of tax benefits for the import of a diesel vehicle which is equipped with a particulate trap at a rate of 1,500 shekels to 4,000 shekels, depending on the type of converter.

 

http://www.maala.org.il/en/company/about/main/Default.aspx?ContentID=750

 

Over the past decade, Israel's business community has focused its attention on social and community-based issues such as youth, education and health and welfare issues, as well as environmental issues such as waste, water resources and air quality, with the banking and communications sectors leading the way on CSR reporting.

 

More recently, as significant progress has been made on these fronts, emphasis has shifted to issues such as diversity in the workplace, equal opportunity for employment and protecting the rights of workers, including contract workers.

 

http://www.shukistauber.co.il/_Uploads/140CSR.pdf

 

In Israel, CSR is still in its infancy. While Israeli companies were late to adopt CSR compared with businesses in industrialized nations, they are catching up now with intensive CSR activity.

 

The slightly late entry of Israeli companies into the CSR arena is due to several reasons, mainly the comparatively small size and reach of Israeli companies. It has already been noted that the leaders in this field are global companies whose influence on other countries is broad in comparison with the limited impact of Israeli companies. In other words, Israeli companies, as relatively small players in the global market, have less need to lead in CSR, considering the resources investment required to attain this kind of positioning.

 

On the other hand, since the Israeli market is small and limited in size, many Israeli companies are looking to expand overseas. To become legitimate global players, they must play by the accepted rules of the game. In a world in which everyone does business with everyone, Israeli companies will be expected to comply with CSR principles. For this reason, CSR is now penetrating the Israeli market at an accelerated pace, with companies seeking to close the gap, especially versus other businesses in Western countries.

 

KAZAKHSTAN

 

http://www.eco.gov.kz/eng/cute/show_news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1224806401&archive=1287719691&template=

 

Special working group on implementation of the Environment Strategy of the countries of Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia (EECCA) held its sitting in “Duman” Hotel, Astana. The Kazakh side was represented by Vice Minister of Environmental Protection Zeinulla Sarsenbayev and member of the Sustainable Development Council under the Government of Kazakhstan Andrei Korchevsky.

 

A. Korchevsky informed of a proposal on introduction of environmental taxes in Kazakhstan prepared with the support of the working group. “This will allow to conform to positive international practice”, he added.

 

http://environment.practicallaw.com/8-503-3987?q=*&qp=&qo=&qe=

 

Required permits

Companies and individuals producing discharges into the environment (often called environmental users) must obtain special permits from the Ministry and executive authorities (Akimats). There are two types of environmental permits covering all types of emissions (Environmental Code):

 

l  Permits for environmental emissions. This type of permit is more common. Environmental users are divided into four categories, depending on their specific activities and scope of yearly discharges (Environmental Code). They are issued for a specific term from three to five years. The exact duration depends on the category of the environmental user.

l  Complex environmental permits. The permits are issued by the Ministry and can be revoked if the Ministry concludes (as a result of its ongoing monitoring) that the project no longer qualifies for the “best environmental use technology-implementing project”. They can be issued for an indefinite term to those environmental users that comply with the best available environmental technologies and only for certain projects pre-approved by the government.

 

Non-compliance with permitting requirements can result in administrative liability (mostly fines) or in certain cases, criminal liability. Administrative fines can be very substantial, reaching up to 1,000% of the cost of emissions discharged in excess of the limits set out in the permit.

 

Water pollution is regulated by the Environmental Code and Water Code. Permits for water pollution are issued within the integrated permitting regime. Limits for discharge of sewage are set out in permits for environmental emissions, issued by the Ministry and Akimats. National legislation relating to water use is based on the principle of water pollution prevention. Environmental users must perform activities aimed at the minimisation of water pollution, including mandatory water refinement before industrial discharge of sewage.

 

Discharge of sewage is prohibited in certain areas (for example, the northern part of the Caspian Sea and places of potable water intake). Discharge of certain dangerous pollutants, such as radioactive and toxic wastes, is also prohibited. Generally, causing water pollution without a permit can result in administrative penalties, including compensation proportionate to the environmental damage caused by the pollution.

 

Air pollution is regulated by the Environmental Code. Permits for air pollution are issued within the integrated permitting regime. Limits for discharge of pollutants into the air are defined in the permits for environmental emissions, issued by the Ministry and Akimats.

 

Discharge of pollutants into the air without a permit is prohibited and may result in administrative penalties. Certain types of activities which normally result in air pollution are also prohibited, including the flaring of associated gas in the process of oil extraction. The regulator can require the polluter to clean up or pay compensation for air pollution (Environmental Code). Depending on the circumstances, penalties can vary from several hundred US$ to 1,000% of the cost of emissions discharged in excess of the limits set out in the permit.

 

Climate change

Kazakhstan ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) on 4 May 1995 and the Kyoto Protocol on 26 March 2009 (after nearly ten years of debate).

 

The current status of Kazakhstan as a party of the UNFCCC has been defined as “a Party included in Annex 1 to the Convention for the purposes of the Protocol, while remaining a Party not included in Annex 1 for the purposes of the Convention”. Therefore, Kazakhstan is not actually listed in Annex I to the UNFCCC and has no Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) set to it. It is expected that if Kazakhstan meets the requirements applicable to an Annex I country, it could be included in Annex I with a quantified reduction commitment of 100% of the 1992 level by the next UNFCCC meeting, COP-16, in Cancun, Mexico.

 

The basic principles of the government's policy on climate change matters are set out in the Environmental Code and underlying regulations such as the Rules of Trade of Quotas and Undertakings for the Reduction of Emissions to the Environment 2008 and the Rules of Limitation, Suspension or Reduction of GHG Emissions to Atmosphere 2008.

 

At present, there are no existing emissions trading schemes in Kazakhstan. Related legislation is expected to be developed by Kazakhstan during 2010 to comply with the requirements applicable to Annex I countries established by COP-11 in Montreal. In addition, national authorities (as confirmed by statements of the Ministry's officials) believe that Kazakhstan must be included into Annex I before the creation of an internal market for trading allowances. Therefore, the system of allocation and trading of allowances will not start functioning before 2011.

 

The Ministry will allocate allowances on the basis of requests from environmental users and allowances will be traded through sale and purchase agreements. The allowances must be defined on the basis of inventorying GHG emissions, to be completed before the end of the year (with 2008 as a base year). Important questions that must still be resolved before the end of 2010 include the taxation and registration of these transactions, and correlation between existing permits for environmental emissions and GHG allowances to be set by the Ministry.

 

Law on Energy Efficiency 1997 provides general principles of energy efficiency. Construction of new buildings and reconstruction of existing buildings with estimated annual energy consumption equal to 500 tons of standard fuel is subject to mandatory review by energy efficiency experts. The experts must provide recommendations on improvements to energy efficiency. No special target has been fixed for the reduction of GHG emissions in general or for emissions from buildings.

 

The regulatory regime for waste is generally outlined in the Environmental Code. In addition, Kazakhstan is a party to the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal.

 

Waste falls into three general categories with different regulatory regimes:

 

l  Hazardous waste, which is waste containing hazardous (that is, radioactive, poisonous or toxic) materials or substances that threaten the environment and/or human health.

l  Non-hazardous waste. All waste not falling under the categories of hazardous or inactive waste is considered as non-hazardous waste.

l  Inactive waste, which is waste that does not undergo changes and does not threaten the environment and/or human health.

 

Generally, storing of waste outside specially allocated landfills is prohibited. Waste disposal can only be performed on the land plots approved by the Ministry, local municipality and Sanitary and Epidemiological authority. A special licence is required for the treatment and transportation of certain types of waste (such as radioactive waste).

 

Treatment of hazardous waste is highly regulated. Owners of facilities producing hazardous waste must develop and maintain a “passport of wastes”, which: outlines the types, contents, quantity and requirements for the treatment and transportation of waste and must be registered with the Ministry's local departments. No special permits or licenses are required for treatment of non-hazardous or inactive waste. However, rules of waste disposal apply equally to all types of waste including non-hazardous and inactive.

 

Companies operating landfills do not need to meet special criteria. Storing of waste outside specially allocated landfills can result in administrative fines in the amount of any environmental damage caused by non-compliance.

 

The regulatory regime for asbestos is set out in the Sanitary Rules of Kazakhstan on Working with Asbestos 1997 (Rules on Working with Asbestos) and several other regulations and standards.

 

It is prohibited to (Rules on Working with Asbestos):

 

l  Store asbestos in an open space.

l  Use asbestos in, among others, the construction of certain buildings (for example, hospitals and schools) and the production of certain consumer goods.

 

Employers have a general obligation to prevent asbestos-related risks and, to the extent possible, reduce the use of materials containing asbestos. Among other things, employers must: develop and maintain a risk management system; organise occupational safety training and examination; provide appropriate safety equipment to employees. Entities working with asbestos must obtain a preliminary conclusion of sanitary and epidemiological expertise organised by the Committee of Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision and its local departments.

 

Non-compliance with the requirements on working with asbestos can result in administrative fines and, in certain cases, criminal liability for the employer.

 

Land contamination is regulated by the Environmental Code and Land Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan 2003 (Land Code). The Ministry is the main regulator responsible for the protection of land from contamination. Limits of permitted polluting substances are set out in the permits for environmental emissions. The compliance with these limits is verified by compliance inspections carried out by the Ministry and other state authorities on a regular basis. On the basis of the results of the inspections, the authorities may order clean-up.

 

Release of substances into the soil can lead to:

 

l  Administrative fines of up to US$1,900 if the release has not caused death or substantial damage to the environment.

l  Criminal liability, including imprisonment for up to five years if the release causes extensive or hazardous contamination or death.

 

Kazakhstan has not yet implemented any special environmental or carbon tax. Existing environmental payments include:

 

l  Payments for emissions to the environment. These are payable by individuals and companies that produce harmful air emissions, as well as emissions of pollutants and discharges/industrial waste. The rate of the tax varies from three to 13,402 monthly calculation indices per one tonne of the relevant emissions (that is, between US$28 and US$128,820).

l  Payments for using land plots, water resources, forests and specially protected natural territories. These are payable by individuals and companies that use the relevant objects of natural resources, generally, on a temporary basis. The payments are calculated on the basis of the rates set by the Tax Code. The rates vary considerably depending on the category of the relevant objects. In certain circumstances (for example, for rural lands depending on their quality), corrective tax coefficients may be applicable.

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/kazakhstan%20acr%20final.pdf

 

A broader culture of philanthropy and corporate social responsibility among the private sector seems still to be embryonic. The social base of philanthropy and corporate social responsibility from which CSOs could potentially draw resources and support remains weak.

 

KOSOVO

 

http://archive.rec.org/REC/publications/CountryReports/Kosovo.pdf

 

Economic instruments in force in the FRY as of mid-1998 include:

1. Air emissions non-compliance fee

2. Water effluent charge

3. Water pollution non-compliance fee

4. Sewage charges

5. Municipal waste user charges

6. Waste non-compliance fee

7. Deposit refund on glass bottles (under a voluntary agreement reached with industry in the 1970s)

8. Nature protection non-compliance fee

9. Water extraction charges

10. Agricultural land exploitation charges

11. Turnover taxes from charges on land conversion from agricultural purposes

12. Forest exploitation charges

13. Soil non-compliance fee

14. Noise fine

15. Non-compliance fines for improper use of fertilizers or failure to take anti-erosion measures and soil protection/rehabilitation measures or failure to apply forest protection and protected area measures

16. Turnover tax exemption for solar power equipment and energy saving devices

17. 25% accelerated depreciation for energy saving equipment

18. Accelerated depreciation for forestation

19. Forest improvement or land/soil protection equipment

20. Turnover tax exemption for drinking water/biodiesel equipment and services aimed at decreasing air/water/noise pollution

21. Duty/tax allowance on the import of environmental technology

 

It is unclear how many of the above mentioned economic instruments were already included in the legislation of SFRY. Economic instruments as mentioned above are likely to be part of the future environmental legislation in Kosovo, once UNMIK begins an overview of existing legislation, implementing the appropriate parts and especially beginning to monitor and enforce the legislation.

 

http://www.amchamksv.org/news-1306313124.html

 

Seeing that Corporate Social Responsibility practices in Kosovo are mostly limited to charitable donations and projects, AmCham and the founding members of the CSR Network believe that it is of crucial importance that the private sector is engaged more actively in introducing ethical and responsible business practice through CSR. The main aims of the Kosovo CSR Network will be to embrace responsibility for the company's actions and the encouragement of a positive impact through our activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities, stakeholders, and the wide public.

 

The Network will focus its efforts on:

 

l  The identification - for as wide as possible a range of enterprises - of socially responsible programmes, of their philosophy, of their direction and methodology. 

l  The identification of new elements of social concern and the expansion of the Network membership to representatives from SMEs.

 

The main priorities of the Kosovo CSR Network will be transparency and ethics, elimination of child labour, the protection of the environment, and philanthropy.

 

AmCham had initially started its work with CSR with a number of projects with the United Nations Development Programme in Kosovo. As a result of a positive cooperation with the aforementioned, we have taken further steps to ensure that more businesses embrace CSR practices into their daily business.

 

LATVIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emission non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for the environmental protection projects financed through the national

Environmental Fund.

Other rate differentiation Emissions above the permitted level

 

2. Name of Instrument Air emissions charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures, funded through the national environmental fund (that receives 40% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 60% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

3. Name of Instrument Annual motor vehicle charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1994

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details Change of rates, classification, and refunding criteria

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are earmarked for the Traffic Road Fund, and are used for reconstruction of roads.

Revenues are shared between state road fund (70%) and municipal road funds (30%).

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type and weight

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge on imports of radioactive substances

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection projects, funded through the state environmental fund (receives70% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 30% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By hazardousness groups

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge on ozone depleting substances

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation By type of substance

 

6. Name of Instrument Environmentally harmful products charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation By product type

 

7. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2003, 2007

Revision Details increase in tax rates and introduction of electricity tax (2007)

 

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

8. Name of Instrument Materials extraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection and resource management projects, funded through the state environmental fund (receives 40% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 60% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By material extracted

 

9. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By container type and households vs. commercial use

 

10. Name of Instrument Packaging and disposable tableware charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures.

Other rate differentiation By material of which packaging is made of

 

11. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Households / Enterprises / Institutions

 

12. Name of Instrument Vehicle excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2001

Other rate differentiation By vehicle age and type

 

13. Name of Instrument Waste disposal charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures, funded through the national environmental fund (that receives 40% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 60% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By hazardousness

 

14. Name of Instrument Waste disposal non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the national Environmental Fund.

 

15. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection and water management projects, funded through the state environmental fund (receives 40% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 60% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By water source

 

16. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Households / Enterprises / Institutions

 

17. Name of Instrument Water effluent charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection measures, funded through the national environmental fund (that receives 40% of the revenue) and municipal environmental funds organised within local governments (receive 60% of the revenue).

Other rate differentiation By hazardousness

 

18. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the national Environmental Fund, for financing the environmental

protection projects.

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

In comparison with the previous years, in 2009 the revenue from environmental taxes grew up and was 2.3 % of GDP. This is mostly related to the increase of the transport fuel taxes.

 

http://www.lm.gov.lv/upload/darba_devejiem/csr_060220_estonia_latvia_lithuania.pdf

 

Respondent companies have been asked what they understand by “socially responsible activities”. Approximately half of respondents link these activities to ethical conduct, environmentally friendly activities, and addressing stakeholders’ concerns. Approximately one third of respondent companies believe transparency in operations, compliance with existing operations, and establishing stakeholder partnerships are socially responsible activities. A smaller but still significant number of respondents believe that correcting social inequalities and public relations activities can be considered socially responsible activities.

 

Public companies are more likely than others to associate transparency in operations with CSR, and do not associate it at all with correction of social inequalities and public relations. Financial services companies are more likely than others to associate transparency in operations with CSR, but think the opposite of environmental friendly activities. Medium companies are the exact mirror image of financial services companies concerning transparency in operations and environmentally friendly activities. The correction of social inequalities is not an attribute of CSR according to small companies. CSR is a relatively more important PR issue for financial services companies and large companies.

 

Small companies seem to associate socially responsible activities primarily with respect for the environment. Very large companies tend to associate the concept of social responsibility with the correction of social inequalities more than the other companies, whereas only one of these very large companies believes that respect for the environment is related to the concept of social responsibility.

 

Every company believes that protecting the environment is one of its main duties in society.However, only half of these companies are absolutely committed to this role. Small and medium companies are more deeply committed than large and very large companies. Financial and non-financial services companies are less committed than production companies.

 

Over the past three years, 60 percent of Latvian companies engaged in environmental projects. Financial and, to a lesser extent, non-financial services companies, and small companies are least likely to engage in environmental projects. Of those that engage in environmental projects, more than half engage in projects linked to the company’s operations (internal), 14 percent engage in projects not linked to the company’s operations (external) and 33 percent supported both kinds of projects. No public company engages in both internal end external projects. Very large companies seem to engage relatively more than the others both in internal projects and in external projects.

 

Respondent companies appear rather non-committal about their plans for environmental projects over the next five years. The number of companies which plan to engage in environmental projects seems poised to remain virtually unchanged, however there would appear to be a future shift from engaging exclusively in internal or external projects to engagement in both. The number of companies which do not engage in environmental projects is expected to decrease, however the number of companies which do not know whether they will be engaging in such projects is expected to increase.

 

In order to implement their environmental projects, most companies collaborate with a number of institutions that can be categorized as: other businesses; municipal institutions; CSOs; governmental institutions; and community institutions.

 

Activities providing education and information on environmental issues (for example, school programs, community meetings, internal training, etc.) are not very popular in Latvia.The companies that develop these activities address them primarily to their employees, and secondarily to management, local communities, and company owners. Institutions, employees’ families, and other stakeholder are the addressees of these activities in 24 percent of instances.

 

Recycling programs are not very widespread. Only a third of respondents have one in place. Financial services companies, and, to a lesser extent non-financial services companies, trail others in the adoption of recycling programs.

 

A large majority of Latvian companies have no environmental certification. Of the 34 percent of companies that have an environmental certification, 36 percent obtained an ISO 14000 certificate. Seven percent of respondents do not know if they have an  environmental certification, and 10 percent of respondents have other certificates. Financial services companies understandably have no environmental certification, and only 6 percent of small companies are certified.

 

Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) of operations are relatively widespread in Latvia, and are conducted by 48 percent of respondent companies.

 

LITHUANIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emission non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 13/05/1999

Revision Details Air emission non compliance fee is payed only for the amount which exceeds set standards and limits.

Earmarking yes 100% - Revenue earmarked for the State Nature Protection Fund. Changed to Environment Protection Supporting Programme October 2000. They are used for measures to compensate damage, designing of environmental entities, increasing of natural resources

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge for air transport

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1999

Revision Details Exemptions introduced

Earmarking 100% - State and Municipal Environmental Support Programmes support (provide grants for) various environmental projects ranging from air and water protection, and remediation of past pollution, to public awareness raising and ecological education.

 

3. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge for mobile sources/fuels

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1999

Revision Details Exemptions introduced

Earmarking - State and Municipal Environmental Support Programmes support (provide grants for) various environmental projects ranging from air and water protection, and remediation of past pollution, to public awareness raising and ecological education.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

4. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge for stationary sources

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1999

Revision Details Pollutants (except SO2, NOX, solid particles, vanadium pentoxide) were grouped into 4 categories and individual charge rates and non-compliance fees were set.

Earmarking 100% - 30% of the revenue goes to the Lithuanian Environmental Investment Fund and 70% to Municipal Environmental Support Programmes (i.e. municipal funds). Both support (provide grants for) various environmental projects ranging from air and water protection, and remediation of past pollution, to public aware-ness raising and ecological education.

General tax base Specific tax-base Tax rate

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for hunting grounds use

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Changes in charge calculation and revenue distribution principles

Earmarking 100% - State and Municipal Environmental Support Programmes support (provide grants for) various environmental projects ranging from air and water protection, and remediation of past pollution, to public awareness raising and ecological education.

Other rate differentiation Per ha

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge on packaging

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2003

Earmarking yes 100% - Revenue earmarked for packaging/product waste management programme - support to investment projects for packaging waste collection, separation, recycling and/or energy recovery, and promotion of no-waste (low waste) technologies.

Other rate differentiation By packaging type

 

7. Name of Instrument Forest felling charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2001

Revision Details Change of rates/charge base

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for forest inventory and scientific works, organization and maintenance of state forest fire-fighting system, consultancy and training of private forest owners, and other forest management activities.

 

8. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1994

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details Revision of rates

Earmarking 62% - In 2003, 62% of total revenue allocated for Road Maintenance and Development Programme

(administered by Lithuanian Road Administration under Ministry of Transport) for maintenance and development of existing and new road infrastructure and road safety.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

9. Name of Instrument Heavy-duty vehicles tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1995

Year of last revision 2002

Revision Details

Earmarking 100% - Revenues allocated for Road Maintenance and Development Programme (administered by

Lithuanian Road Administration under Ministry of Transport), and used for maintenance and development of existing and new road infrastructure and road safety.

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type and weight

 

10. Name of Instrument Minerals extraction charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2002; 2006

Other rate differentiation By location and mineral extracted

 

11. Name of Instrument Motor vehicle import duty

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 1997

Other rate differentiation By vehicle age

 

12. Name of Instrument Municipal waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking yes - Cost recovery

Other rate differentiation Households / Enterprises / Institutions

 

13. Name of Instrument Nature protection non-compliance fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 11/12/2001

Revision Details Law on Responsibility for violation of Laws on wilde fauna and compensation of damage

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the State Nature Protection Fund. Changed to Environment Protection Supporting Programme October 2000. They are used for measures to compensate damage, designing of environmental entities, increasing of natural resources

Other rate differentiation Based on the level of damage and the species/habitats

 

14. Name of Instrument Sewage user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Earmarking - Effluent collection and treatment cost recovery

Other rate differentiation Households / Other users

 

15. Name of Instrument Tax on oil and natural gas resources

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Introduction of a more flexible taxation scheme, with differentiated tax rates (ranging from 2-20% of

the sales price)

Other rate differentiation By exploitation type

 

16. Name of Instrument Tree cutting non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 10/04/2001

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for the Special Programme to meet general forestry needs .

 

17. Name of Instrument Waste disposal non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 07/09/2000

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the State Nature Protection Fund. Changed to Environment Protection Supporting Programme October 2000. They are used for measures to compensate damage, designing of environmental entities, increasing of natural resources

Other rate differentiation By waste class

 

18. Name of Instrument Waste related product charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2003

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for packaging/product waste management programme - support to investment projects for waste collection, separation, recycling and/or energy recovery, and promotion of no-waste (low waste) technologies.

Other rate differentiation By product type

 

19. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

20. Name of Instrument Water effluent non-compliance fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 13/05/1999

Revision Details The fee is paid only for amount that exceeds set standards.

Earmarking 100% - Revenue earmarked for the State Nature Protection Fund. Changed to Environment Protection Supporting Programme October 2000. They are used for measures to compensate damage, designing of environmental entities, increasing of natural resources

 

21. Name of Instrument Water pollution charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1999

Revision Details Pollutants (BOD7, total P, total N, suspended solids, sulfates, chlorides) were grouped into 5

categories and individual charge rates and non-compliance fees were set.

Earmarking 100% - 30% of the revenue goes to the Lithuanian Environmental Investment Fund and 70% to Municipal Environmental Support Programmes (i.e. municipal funds).Both support (provide grants for) various environmental projects ranging from air and water protection, and remediation of past pollution, to public aware-ness raising and ecological education.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

22. Name of Instrument Water supply user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Earmarking - Water supply cost recovery

Other rate differentiation households / others

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

At 2.0 % of GDP, revenue from environmental taxation is the sixth lowest in the EU, due in particular to the very low revenue from transport taxes. Since 2003, environmental tax revenue, as a share of GDP, has fallen continuously till 2008. From 2008 to 2009 there has been an increase of 0.3 percentage points in revenue from environmental taxes.

 

http://www.lm.gov.lv/upload/darba_devejiem/csr_060220_estonia_latvia_lithuania.pdf

 

Respondent companies have been asked what they understand by “socially responsible activities”. An ample majority of respondents link these activities to ethical conduct, and transparency in operations. Approximately one third of respondents believe addressing stakeholders’ concerns, complying with existing operations, and protecting the environment are socially responsible activities. A smaller but non negligible number of respondents believe that public relations, correcting social inequalities, and establishing stakeholder partnerships can be considered socially responsible activities. Compliance with existing regulations is considered a socially responsible activity more often by large companies than by small companies. Small and medium companies, more often than large and very large companies, link ethical conduct to CSR. None of the small companies associate protection of the environment with socially responsible activities.

 

Only 39 percent of Lithuanian companies strongly agree on the protection of the environment being one of their main duties in society. Although virtually no company disagrees, 17 percent of respondents are undecided.

 

During the last three years, 68 percent of Lithuanian companies engaged in environmental projects, 25 percent did not, and 8 percent do not know. Higher percentages of companies which do not engage in environmental projects are found among small and medium companies and among non-financial services companies. Of those that engage in environmental projects, half engage in projects linked to the company’s operations (internal), 8 percent in projects not linked to company’s operations (external) and 11 percent in both kinds of projects. Engagement in purely internal projects increases along with a company’s size.

 

Respondent companies appear rather hesitant about their environmental projects plans for the next five years. The number of companies which plan to engage in environmental projects would remain virtually unchanged; however, there is expected to be a shift from engaging in exclusively internal and or external projects, to engagement in both. The percentage of companies which do not engage in environmental projects is expected decrease, while the number of those companies which do not know whether they will be engaging in such projects is expected to increase.

 

In order to implement their environmental projects, most companies collaborate with a number of institutions that can be categorized as: other businesses; municipal institutions; CSOs; governmental institutions; and community institutions. A vast majority of respondent companies collaborate with municipal institutions. The companies which prefer this type of partner are large companies, and possibly public and semi-public companies. There is a noticeable trend relating to collaboration with municipal institutions: companies tend to collaborate more as their size increases. Half of the companies collaborate with governmental institutions. Non-financial services, possibly together with small companies, collaborate with these institutions the most. One fourth of respondents collaborate with other businesses, and only 11 percent of companies collaborate with CSOs.

 

Activities providing education and information on environmental issues (for example, school programs, community meetings, internal training, etc.) are not very popular in Lithuania.Companies which develop these activities address them primarily to their employees, and secondarily to management, local communities, and company owners. Employees’ families are the addressees of 8 percent of these activities.

 

Recycling programs are relatively widespread. Half of respondents have one in place. Small companies and, to a lesser extent, non-financial services companies, are behind other companies in the adoption of recycling programs. Very large companies are ahead of the other subgroups.

 

A large majority of Lithuanian companies have no environmental certification. Of the 29 percent of companies that have an environmental certification, 66 percent obtained an ISO 14000 certificate. The incidence of environmental certification tends to increase with companies’ size.

 

Environmental impact assessments (EIA) of companies’ operations are relatively widespread in Lithuania, and are conducted by 59 percent of respondent companies. Non-financial services companies, small, and medium companies conduct fewer than the average number of EIAs. The incidence of EIAs tends to increase with companies’ size.

 

MALTA

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Annual Motor Vehicle Licence

Type Fee/Charge

 

2. Name of Instrument Annual Vessel Registration

Type Fee/Charge

 

3. Name of Instrument Bunkering licence

Type Fee/Charge

 

4. Name of Instrument Construction waste disposal charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of last revision 2005

Revision Details Removal of subsidies

 

5. Name of Instrument Dumping at Sea

Type Fee/Charge

 

6. Name of Instrument Eco-contribution

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2004

Revision Details Eco-tax was introduced in September 2004: the revenue for 2004 is for the period September-

December.

Other rate differentiation By product type

 

7. Name of Instrument Effluent Discharge Charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2005

 

8. Name of Instrument Electricity charges

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By consumer type

 

9. Name of Instrument Encroachment Charges

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By encroachment type

 

10. Name of Instrument Hunting licence fees

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By hunting area

 

11. Name of Instrument Landfill charges

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By facility and type of waste

 

12. Name of Instrument Licences for operation of activity relating to energy and water network services

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By activity type

 

13. Name of Instrument Local Council Fees

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By service type

 

14. Name of Instrument Parking Contribution

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By location

 

15. Name of Instrument Passenger Departure Tax – Air

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1998

Year of last revision 1st August 2005

 

16. Name of Instrument Passenger Departure Tax – Sea

Type Tax

Year of last revision 2006

 

17. Name of Instrument Quarry operating licence

Type Fee/Charge

 

18. Name of Instrument Swimming Pool Licence

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Several charges

 

19. Name of Instrument Use of airport

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By service type

 

20. Name of Instrument Vessel Berthing Fees

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation By vessel type

 

21. Name of Instrument Waste Water Charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1999

Revision Details Ref. Water Supply Regulations LN 58/1999

Other rate differentiation Several charges

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

Environmental taxes are relatively high (Malta 3.3 % of GDP, EU-27 2.6 % of GDP). The high level of environmental tax revenue is attributable to taxation on transport, which is the highest in the Union (1.6 % of GDP, EU-27 0.6 %), while revenue from taxation on energy is somewhat below the EU average (1.5 %, EU-27 1.9 %).

 

In September 2004 the so-called eco-contribution was introduced in Malta mainly to finance the development of a waste water management system. It is chargeable on a number of white goods, containers, batteries, plastic bags, tyres and other specified products that are deemed to result in waste. Currently taxes on pollution yield 0.2 % of GDP, which is the fourth highest level in the EU. From 2011, registration taxes of commercial vehicles up to Euro Standard 3 have been increased in order to encourage the newer and cleaner vehicles (Euro Standard 4 & 5). Companies can also benefit from a reduction in company tax up to 125 % on the amounts spent on electric cars. An excise duty of € 9 was introduced on every tonne of cement.

 

http://www.internationallawoffice.com/newsletters/detail.aspx?g=d6d64c23-7aee-46dc-8afe-93cd6324669e

 

Increasingly, corporate social responsibility is evolving beyond philanthropy to an essential business function directly related to companies maintaining their social licence to operate. Companies' corporate social responsibility may take various forms and may be carried out through various institutes. The Maltese foundation, when set up as a voluntary organization, provides an ideal vehicle for corporate social responsibility. In recent years the Maltese legislature has responded to the growing social consciousness of both companies and individuals, and has created a framework for voluntary organizations.

 

Setting up a foundation is not expensive and its administration is not costly. The procedure is straightforward and quick. Therefore, contributing to and supporting corporate social responsibility need not be costly or time consuming, and increasing numbers of small businesses are seeing significant benefits from their involvement, such as improved reputation; increased business contacts;  improved staff morale;  improved relations with the local community and clients;  skills development;  innovation in processes, products and services and improved risk management.

 

A number of businesses have already recognized that a Maltese foundation is an ideal vehicle for corporate social responsibility and have chosen to establish a foundation in Malta in order to promote public interest. The Maltese voluntary sector is fully equipped for use as a platform for corporate social responsibility.

 

The government has placed considerable importance on the development of the voluntary sector. The national action plan aims to aid and encourage the sector to continue increasing its effectiveness and efficiency, and ultimately to deliver on its goals. The enactment of the Voluntary Organisations Act 2007, which deals solely with non-governmental organizations, further demonstrates this rationale while creating the certainty required for the functioning of foundations and other non-governmental organisations.

 

MOLDOVA

http://live.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/env/epr/epr_studies/moldova.pdf

 

The following economic instruments were in place in Moldova in 1998 to integrate environmental aspects in economic decisions:

 

l  Taxes on the use of natural resources (soil, water, minerals, flora, fauna)

l  Charges for environmental pollution and related services (discharge of polluting substances above the allowable limits and dumping waste)

l  Fees to compensate for damage to the environment

l  Excise duties on imported cars and fuels

l  Subsidies

l  Incentives to promote the rational use of natural resources, apply cleaner technologies, reduce waste, close water circuits, etc.

 

In addition some administrative penalties such as fines for the violation of environmental legislation

(standards) also have an economic character.

http://www.thegef.org/gef/node/4735

With funding from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the Republic of Moldova is about to begin a project to strengthen and develop sustainable financial mechanisms to improve targets under the three Rio Conventions.

 

Notwithstanding Moldova's set of environmental laws, the country remains challenged to fully integrate environmental priorities within sectoral policies and plans, and to allocate the sufficient level of resources for their effective and sustained implementation. Like many other economies in transition and developing nations, the Republic of Moldova's environmental sector budget is very limited, constituting about 0.1% of the total national budget.

 

In particular, the project will focus on the reform of environmentally harmful subsidies, develop green subsidies, and look at environmental charges in the agricultural and energy sectors. This will include improving the modalities for encouraging investments in eco-friendly technologies as well as improving targeted the regulation and operational management of Moldova's national and local ecological funds.

 

This project will take a pilot approach to environmental fiscal reform, targeting five towns in Moldova. This project is specifically structured to produce global environmental benefits by way of national environmental and development outcomes. For example, by reforming how ecological taxes and environmental charges are levied on polluting industries that produce smog, not only could this reduce local atmospheric pollution, but also make an important contribution to reducing transboundary pollution in the form of acid rain, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

 

Special consideration will be given to measuring the contribution of the project to meeting and sustaining Rio Convention objectives, measured through specific indicators, e.g., lower cost to using clean technologies, increased revenues through the removal of polluting subsidies are allocated to protected area management, and increased environmental charges for illegal waste disposal and landfill.

 

 

http://www.expert-grup.org/library_upld/d76.pdf

 

Experts maintain that both geography and history have a great explanatory power for the social responsibility of Moldovan companies. Analysis of the Soviet period is the most relevant as many factors influencing the way business is done in Moldova today are rooted in institutions and attitudes stemming from that time. Business analysts maintain that many local representatives of the Moldovan business community have been managing their companies and selling their products based on the managerial skills they learned while being “red directors”. (Though one should acknowledge that the number of Moldovan managers implementing modern approaches to business is rising steadily and this is a CSR-encouraging trend).

 

On the positive side of historical balance, Moldova, as a Soviet republic, received substantial investment from the “centre”. A sophisticated and universal system of social guarantees and state-support schemes was designed to address social needs. There was no open unemployment while wages were not strictly correlated with labour productivity. The labour-safety standards were generally observed. Workers enjoyed not only stable wages but also a number of non-monetary rewards. Elements of high social responsibility towards employees are still implemented by some Moldovan companies and most of the large foreign companies. However, these cases seem to be unique as sociological surveys suggest that most of the employees in Moldova do not have even a satisfactory basic wage leaving apart other “bonuses”.

 

On the negative side there are depleted national human resources, a result of forced emigration, political repressions, famine and deportations. Wealthy peasantry, bourgeois, merchants have been almost destroyed as social classes. This has influenced the attitudes towards private entrepreneurship which almost vanished. “Exhibiting” individual initiative was not only administratively punishable but also socially reproved.

 

In the pre-transition period many state-owned companies were responsible for large social infrastructures. It was a politically commendable practice for an enterprise to maximize its social presence. But the inadvertent result of this system was educating an acute sense of paternalist expectations to a significant part of the population. As our research tells, this paternalistic system of attitudes is still common in Moldovan society.

 

Moldovan society is a hierarchical one and is governed by a great deal of bureaucracy. Even in the private companies the decision making is much centralised and superiors are ultimately responsible for the decision. As the country is small and mostly rural, the kinship relations display a high density and represent permanent sources of corruption. As interviewees and other researches suggest, personal relations are frequently much more important than the formal side of the business relationship.

 

The business community is influenced also by Western business culture endorsed by European and American companies investing in Moldova and most of them are rather successful in CSR. However, not all foreign companies are equally successful in implementing the same standards of CSR as in their parent country. One part of explanation may the fact that there is little demand for CSR from the part of the Moldovan government and civil society. Another argument coming from the local business observers is that many affiliates coming to Moldova try to reap as many profits as possible and as rapidly as possible and overlook the ethics of the parent corporations.

 

As most of the social surveys show in Moldovan society trust in other people is weak. Confidence in basic public institutions is very much reduced too. Courts are among the institutions that the general public and business representatives trust the least. The judicial system is perceived as inefficient and opaque and the public believe that there are no mechanisms for monitoring the objectivity and lack of bias of the judges. Not surprisingly, many businessmen (especially the agri-businesses and the SMEs) prefer to solve commercial issues making use of extra-judicial ways.

 

The CSR can thrive only when proper legal conditions and confidence-building policy are in place. For Moldova this is a critical issue. According to most of the observers the Moldovan business is formally free of state interference but in reality it is overregulated in some sectors and under-regulated in others. Regulation setbacks arise in part because of absent dialogue between government, business and civil society.

 

A new version of the law on philanthropy and sponsorship was passed in 2002 for encouraging the business to support financially the development of the NGOs. It allows the private companies to deduct the value of donations from the tax base and up to 10% of the tax base.

 

Corruption is a very serious matter of concern in Moldova. This would be probably the most worrying issue as regards social responsibility of companies operating in Moldova. According to experts interviewed within this research more than half of Moldovan companies are corruption-prone and they disregard any social and economic impact that this behaviour engenders.

 

Economic performance of the private sector is expected to influence CSR heavily because it involves many elements which are costly to the company. Therefore, only when a reasonable degree of financial stability and economic profitability is achieved the company may start investing more in the community, providing highly-skilful training to employees or giving money to charities.

 

Foreign companies and companies with joint capital tend to be economically more efficient on average than others. Therefore, “costly” CSR elements normally are expected to be implemented in first place by foreign companies. However, comparing even to regional standards, in Moldova there are very few multinational corporations (MNC). In other words, global champions that would lead the trend of domestic CSR are scarce in Moldova. The business environment is influenced by the government and a relatively small number of domestic lobbies. This structure sets limits to the room for social responsibility strategies integrated into corporate strategies because an advanced approach to CSR is expected mainly on behalf of MNCs and national large entities.

 

MONTENEGRO

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emissions charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2000

Earmarking - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from eco-charges be paid into the special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not applied.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

2. Name of Instrument Annual vehicle charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking - Revenues are used for maintenance, protection, construction and reconstruction of local roads.

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type, engine power and weight

 

3. Name of Instrument CFC charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Earmarking - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from eco-charges should be paid into special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not enforced.

Other rate differentiation Charge per kg

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge for extraction of materials from watercourses

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

 

5. Name of Instrument Fees for the use of national parks

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2007

Revision Details Rates were changed.

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for national parks management.

Other rate differentiation By activity type

 

6. Name of Instrument Fishing permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation Period based

 

7. Name of Instrument Forest charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for projects aiming to improve management and condition of forests.

Other rate differentiation By activity type

 

8. Name of Instrument Fossil fuels charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2000

Earmarking yes - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from eco-charges should be paid into special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not enforced.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

9. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

10. Name of Instrument Hazardous waste charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Earmarking yes - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from eco-charges should be paid into special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not enforced.

Other rate differentiation Generation / disposal

 

11. Name of Instrument Investments fee

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Earmarking - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from investment fee should be paid into special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not enforced.

 

12. Name of Instrument National park entrance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2007

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for national parks management.

Other rate differentiation By person type

 

13. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised periodically, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals of local government assemblies.

Other rate differentiation households / legal persons

 

14. Name of Instrument Tax on the use of passenger motor vehicles, vessels and aircraft

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2004

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

15. Name of Instrument Turnover vehicles tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2003

Other rate differentiation Sales of used motor vehicles 5% of the vehicle value

 

16. Name of Instrument Vehicle eco-charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Earmarking yes - The 1996 Environment Law stipulates that revenues from eco-charges should be paid into special account of the Republican budget and be used for financing the environmental protection. In practice, however, this provision is not enforced.

Other rate differentiation All motor vehicles 10% of annual vehicle charge

 

17. Name of Instrument Waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised regularly, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals of local

government assemblies.

Other rate differentiation residential / commercial spaces

18. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Other rate differentiation By water abstraction purpose

 

19. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised periodically, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals of local government assemblies.

Other rate differentiation households / legal persons

 

20. Name of Instrument Water protection charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

 

http://www.gov.me/files/1213366818.pdf

 

The ECO-TAX  is the fee paid by all natural and legal persons to use road motor vehicles and their auxiliary vehicles on the territory of Montenegro. Citizens of Montenegro pay for the ECO-TAX when registering their vehicles, whereas foreign nationals pay the tax when entering Montenegro. The fee amounts are determined according to the make of motor and auxiliary vehicles used. The eco-sticker, obtained upon the payment of the ECO-TAX, shall be valid for the period of one year. ECO-TAX has been introduced based on the obligations arising from the implementation of multilateral agreements in the field of environmental protection, reforms in the context of the European Union accession process, as well as on the grounds of recommendations made by the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC), with the ultimate goal to allocate the gathered funds for the implementation of operative measures of preservation and improvement of natural potentials of the ecological state of Montenegro. Therefore, all funds gathered from charging the eco-tax are considered the earmarked income of the Budget of Montenegro, used only to finance the concrete projects aimed to protect and improve state of the environment.

 

http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/36837

 

Montenegrins already pay an annual eco-tax of five euros for their cars, which will be now raised. The government sees a total revenue of 20 million euros from the taxes and plans to use it to improve environmental protection. Prime Minister of Montenegro Igor Luksic announced in late July 2011 that the eco-tax is not paid from 1 January.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Montenegro_Country_Report.pdf

 

The concept of social responsibility of economic actors rests on three key components: responsible attitude toward the employees, the environment and the community in which the company works. In Montenegro, big companies show little concern for the social and environmental influence they exert. Big public companies that were the main source of pollution in the past (such as aluminium plants, steel factories, etc.) already have a tradition of not investing in environmental protection, which causes grave dangers to the environment. Few companies adopted any measures at all with respect to environmental protection standards.

 

POLAND

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Charge for bush and tree removals

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 01.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order -13.10.2004; in force 28.10.04. Announcement of Minister of Environment on charge rates for removals of trees and bush for 2011 (dated-15.10.2010), in force since 1.01.11

Earmarking 100% - Objectives related to environmental protection and water management at the municipal level.

Other rate differentiation By type of plant (tree, bush, flowers, etc)

 

2. Name of Instrument Charge for land use changes

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision

Revision Details

Earmarking 100% - Fees for changes in usage of agriculture production land constitute revenue of State Fund for

Protection of Agriculture Function of Land; fees for changes in usage of forest land constitute revenue of State Fund for Forest Protection.

Other rate differentiation Based on the land use type that is changed

 

3. Name of Instrument Charge for premature harvesting of forests

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Earmarking 100% - The charge is paid to the State Forest Fund.

Other rate differentiation The charge equals the estimated difference between market value of timber from a forest reaching cutting age and market value of timber from forest in question.

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge on air pollution

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 1.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order of 14.10.2008; in force since 1.01.2009 + Announcement of Minister of Environment on detailed charges rates for 2011 (dated 04.10.10)

Earmarking 100% - Financing different levels of ecological funds and local governments: 20% municipal government, 10% county government, 46% provincial level ecological fund and 24% National Ecological Fund. Local governments should use revenues only for objective of environment protection and water management

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge on industrial waste

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1989

Year of last revision 1.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order on tax rate of 14.10.2008 in force since 1.01.2009 + Announcement on charges rates for 2011(dated 4.10.2011)

Earmarking 100% - Financing different levels of ecological funds and local governments: 50% municipal government, 10% county government, 26% provincial ecological fund and 14% National Ecological Fund. Local governments should use revenues only for environmental objectives

Other rate differentiation By risk category

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge on municipal waste

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 01.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order - 14.10.2008 in force since 1.01.2009 + Announcement on charges rates for 2011

(dated 4.10.2010)

Earmarking 100% - 50% municipal government, 10% county government, 26% provisional ecological fund and 14% National Ecological Fund; Local governments should use revenues only for objective of environmental protection and water management.

Other rate differentiation By waste type

 

7. Name of Instrument Charge on water abstraction

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 1.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order of Council of Ministers of 14.10.2008 - in force since 1.01.2009 + Announcement

of Minister of Environment on detailed charges rates for 2011 (4.10.2010)

Earmarking 100% - Financing Local Governments and Funds for Environmental Protection and Water Management as follows: 20% for municipal government, 10% for county government, 46 % for provincial ecological fund and 24% for National Fund.

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

8. Name of Instrument Excise tax on energy products

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 01.01.2007

Revision Details Executive Order- 22.12.2004; in force since 1.01.2005,amended on 21 Dec 2006. Amendments in

force since 1.1.2007

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

9. Name of Instrument Hunting permits and fishing permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Other rate differentiation Different rate for members of the Polish Hunting Union and or commercial services.

 

10. Name of Instrument Product charges for waste electric & electronic equipment

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2006

Other rate differentiation By equipment type

 

11. Name of Instrument Water effluent charges

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 1.01.2011

Revision Details Executive Order of the Council of Ministers issued (14.10.2008) on the basis of Environmental Law

(2001) in force since 1.01.2009+Announcement on charges rates for 2011(4.10.2010)

Earmarking 100% - Financing Local Governments and Funds for Environmental Protection and Water Management as follows: 20% for municipal government, 10% for county government, 46%% for provincial ecological fund and 24% for National Ecological Fund . Local governments should use revenues only for environmental objectives.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type and location

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

The ratio of environmental taxation to GDP was on a crawling upwards trend since 1995 and peaked in 2006 to start its equally steady decline. In 2009 it remained at its 2008 level (2.6 %), which equals the average value in the EU.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Poland_Country_Report.pdf

 

The concept of corporate responsibility was familiar to two-thirds of the representatives of the studied companies. The great majority of the respondents (77%) believed that the NGOs could contribute to the development of the social responsibility programmes. The promoters of ethical business were above all companies with foreign capital that, since used to work in the more developed civil societies of western countries, had introduced the same procedures in Poland. Socially responsible firms were mostly engaged in financial and material support; joint projects with NGOs were relatively uncommon (one-fourth of the companies were involved in such projects). At the same time, for two-thirds of the firms, cooperation with NGOs aiming at developing a social partnership was considered important or very important. However, one cannot expect to be able to draw conclusions about the general attitude of Polish companies towards NGOs and social responsibility only from the results of research on the largest companies – the larger the company, the more responsible it tends to be. Foreign companies are most experienced when it comes to ethical conduct. Public enterprises with national capital are worse in this regard. If companies act ethically or not, also depends on their line of business. Trust plays a central role in some businesses, e.g. in the financial. That is why banks declared the need to follow ethical norms.

 

In Poland, one of the main (albeit not the only) promoter of the idea of corporate responsibility is the Responsible Business Forum, which focuses its activity on four areas: promotion of corporate responsibility, support for firms in implementing the rules of corporate responsibility, development of joint actions on behalf of society, as well as analyses and development of corporate responsibility in Poland. It should be stressed that the participants are themselves business representatives, which makes it possible to act within the business environments, so to speak. The award “Benefactor of the Year” has been granted for eight years in a competition organized by the Academy for the Development of Philanthropy to express gratitude towards entrepreneurs that support organizations. At the same time, the award has a promotional function.

 

Corporate social responsibility is becoming a more commonly discussed concept and marketing campaigns appeal more frequently for social values. Also, non-financial forms of cooperation, such as volunteer work of employees, are becoming increasingly popular. Still, the pace of these changes is unsatisfactory.

 

ROMANIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emission non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Year of last revision 2005

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

2. Name of Instrument Air emissions charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2000

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection projects.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

3. Name of Instrument Airport use tax

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1992

 

4. Name of Instrument Annual vehicle tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 2002

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for particular waste streams

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 2005

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for environmental protection projects.

Other rate differentiation By waste stream type

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge for the use of hunting grounds

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2000; 2005

Earmarking yes - Revenues are earmarked for hunting management activities.

Other rate differentiation By hunting grounds type

 

7. Name of Instrument Fee for vehicles exceeding standard dimensions

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2003

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for Special Public Roads Fund.

 

8. Name of Instrument Fishing permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2000

Earmarking - Revenues are earmarked for fish stock management.

 

9. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1998

Year of last revision 2002; 2006 amended

Revision Details Excise duties were increased for all harmonised product categories and the definitions were reviewed, bringing them closer to the Acquis.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

10. Name of Instrument Fuel road charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for the Special Public Roads Fund, for maintenance and construction of roads. 65% of the revenue is used for national public roads, and 35% for counties roads.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

11. Name of Instrument National park entrance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1974

Year of last revision 2003

Revision Details Increase of fees

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for national parks and gardens management.

 

12. Name of Instrument Nature protection non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2001

Other rate differentiation Legal vs. physical person

 

13. Name of Instrument Noise non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2001

Other rate differentiation Vehicles / Air planes

 

14. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation Households / other entities

 

15. Name of Instrument Transit road charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2003

Earmarking - Revenues are earmarked for road maintenance.

 

16. Name of Instrument Vehicles excise tax

Type Tax

Other rate differentiation By engine characteristics and level of pollution

 

17. Name of Instrument Vehicles import duty

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2001

 

18. Name of Instrument Waste non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Other rate differentiation Violation of waste regulations and level of hazard Up to 2028€ per case

 

19. Name of Instrument Waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2001

Other rate differentiation Households vs Industy

 

20. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for management of water resources.

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

21. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation Households / others

 

22. Name of Instrument Water effluent charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2002, 2005

Earmarking - Revenues earmarked for water quality protection and monitoring.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

23. Name of Instrument Water pollution non-compliance fees

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1990

Year of last revision 2000,2002, 2005

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are earmarked for water quality protection and monitoring.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

Environmental tax revenue, at 1.9 % of GDP in 2009, lies well below the EU-27 average (2.6 %); in fact, this value is the second lowest in the EU. Most of this revenue is realised from energy, none from pollution and only 0.3% from transport (excluding fuel).However, the excise duty rates have been increased in 2010.

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Romania_Country_Report.pdf

 

A positive trend that has been seen at the level of the business sector in the last years is a growing interest in CSR, especially at the level of larger or international companies. Major companies are beginning to take the potential negative social and environmental impacts of their operations into account. The interest of the Romanian business sector for this field is expressed through the substantial popularity that an event like Gala “People for People” organized since 2003 by the ARC and the US Commerce Chamber in Romania (AmCham Romania). In June 2004, over 100 projects participated in a competition for the best corporate social responsibility initiatives. The total value of the projects was 6.4 million euro.

 

There is evidence that major companies in Romania have begun to develop CSR strategies. Some of the most important companies in Romania are those working in the oil, concrete and pharmaceutical industry. Due to their field of activity large companies like Lafarge Romcim, Carpatcement or Holcim have a particular interest in the field of environmental protection and try to build their corporate social responsibility identity mainly on this dimension. Companies in the oil industry have also developed CSR strategies, getting involved in supporting environmental protection initiatives. For example Rompetrol supported environmental NGOs in Constanta and their activities related to the Black Sea ecosystem. The same company was awarded a prize for the best corporate report in 2004. Companies from the pharmaceutical industry build their CSR identity by financing projects in the field of health care.

 

Although often engaged in offering sponsorships or small donations, smaller Romanian companies, especially those at the local level, show very little interest in CSR.

 

Corporate Social Responsibility is a relatively new, yet expanding concept in Romania. It was first imported from abroad through trans-national corporations, which established part of their operations in Romania. The acquisition of Romanian companies by foreign investors, and the management philosophy and practices they brought with them further contributed to the development of a broader basis for CSR. International donors aimed at strengthening Romanian CSOs’ sustainability have supported the development of CSR and the creation of closer relations of cooperation between the business sector and CSOs. In spite of visible progress and of successful examples, much remains to be done. Small Romanian companies, albeit involved in charity actions, remain largely ignorant of the concept of CSR. A study to research the extent and characteristics of indigenous philanthropy in Romania showed that only 39% of Romanian companies made a charity donation in 2001. Moreover, statistics produced revealed that only 5% of all companies in Romania have an annual budget for making donations. A quarter of them try to establish a strategy for donations and 70% take such decisions on ad-hoc and arbitrary basis.

 

Several difficulties emerged in trying to carry out a case study on Romanian CSR. First, most of the major and successful Romanian companies are actually former Romanian companies which have been privatized into strong trans-national corporations. They either completely merged with foreign companies (adopting the foreign company’s name) or are run by foreign (Western) executive management. A further difficulty was that exclusively Romanian owned and managed companies are generally not interested in producing high quality annual reports. Some are not listed on the stock exchanges; and, therefore, are not required to have annual reports at all. Also most of those legally required to have annual reports produce a very simplified standard report (containing only economic data and statistics), which is not suited for providing the kind of information needed for this study.

 

Multinational companies were the first to set an example with regard to corporate philanthropy and CSR, and are considered to have started corporate philanthropy and CSR initiatives in Romania in the mid 1990s. The strategies for donating seem to differ according to the size of the companies. While small companies seem to base their decisions on rather emotional reasons, larger firms, such as the multinational companies, have imported the concept of CSR as an element of their PR strategies. However, often no mechanisms for interaction have been set up for management level personnel to interact with their partners in the civil society. Another trend, which is becoming more common, is for Romanian companies to hire PR Agencies in order to get the support for the engagement in and the management of CSR initiatives.

 

As the lack of visibility for CSR initiatives was considered to negatively influence public perception and to discourage others potentially interested in getting involved in corporate philanthropy programs, some of the non-governmental, international and corporate players have become involved in promoting giving and CSR among businesses in Romania.

 

The European Commission launched a campaign for the promotion of CSR among SME in the EU, accession countries and Norway. In May 2005, the National Council of Small and Medium Sized Private Enterprises in Romania CNIPMMR (a umbrella organizations representing the interests of Romanian SMEs), organized in Bucharest a conference for introducing the concept of CSR to all interested SMEs, larger companies, NGOs, universities and public authorities.

 

RUSSIA

 

http://www.practicallaw.com/6-503-2842?q=*&qp=&qo=&qe=

 

Russian law does not provide for an integrated environmental permit. Companies must obtain separate permits, each aimed at either:

 

l  Protecting a specific environmental medium.

l  Regulating a specific type of environmental impact.

 

Companies must generally obtain permits for: air emissions, water use, waste water discharge, waste management or placement. In addition, most industrial facilities must arrange for a sanitary protection (that is, a buffer) zone and have it approved by the controlling public agency. Additional permits may be required subject to the nature of the specific industrial facility.

 

Water pollution

A waste water discharge permit must be obtained. The permit specifies the maximum volume and content of waste water to be discharged. The permit is issued for a period of five years and is not generally transferable. Any activities that do not comply with the waste water discharge permit are prohibited. These include:

 

l  Exceeding the maximum allowable concentrations in discharged volume of waste water.

l  Discharging waste water containing unpermitted pollutants.

l  Allowing pollutants in higher concentrations.

 

In the event of non-compliance, a company is liable to pay compensation for damage caused by unpermitted pollution of water resources. A specific calculation method determines the amount of compensation. The compensation must cover the cost of cleaning up the polluted water. It is rare for polluters to undertake clean-up activities themselves.

 

In addition to civil liability, fines of up to US$1,100 can be imposed on legal entities in breach. In addition, a facility's operations can be suspended for a period of 90 days. Payment of a fine or expiry of the 90-day suspension period does not remove the obligation to remedy the breach. If the breach is not remedied, criminal penalties can be imposed repeatedly under certain aggravating circumstances, such as causing death or serious health damage.

 

Air pollution

An air emission permit must be obtained. The permit stipulates the maximum volume and content of air emissions to be discharged. In relation to a newly-constructed facility, the permit is issued for two years. If air quality tests carried out during the two years prove that air emissions de facto comply with the levels and volumes stated in the permit, the permit is re-issued for a further period of five years. The permit is generally not transferable.

 

The following activities are prohibited: emitting unpermitted substances into the air and permitting substances in higher concentrations.

 

In the event of non-compliance, a company is liable to pay compensation for damage caused by unpermitted air pollution. A specific calculation method is used to determine the amount of compensation (which can constitute a significant amount). In addition to civil liability, fines of up to US$1,800 can be imposed on legal entities in breach.

 

Climate change

There are no national targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The law on energy efficiency prohibits the sale of 100 watt (or more) incandescent light bulbs. In addition, an electrical appliance must bear an energy label indicating its energy efficiency class.

 

Russia is party to both the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol. A number of regulations facilitating implementation of the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol were adopted in 2009 and 2010 after four and a half years of legislative silence on the issue. These regulations, among other things:

 

l  Appointed Sberbank, Russia's biggest state-owned bank, as the carbon units operator (emission reduction units).

l  Established a procedure for running the registry of projects implemented within Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol.

l  Implemented new tender participation procedures.

 

There is scope for substantial improvement of the national legislation to implement the UNFCCC provisions and the Kyoto Protocol.

 

Sberbank is authorised to participate in joint implementation projects. A joint implementation project must win a tender and be duly approved to launch. The maximum amount of emission reduction units to be generated by joint implementation projects at each tender cannot exceed 30 million metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent. Two tenders have taken place so far (approving 32 implementation projects in total).

 

A facility that generates waste must hold a waste management or placement permit. The permit typically consists of a set of documents describing the process of: waste generation, accumulation, placement and disposal. The permit is issued for five years subject to annual confirmation (the permit is subject to renewal every five years, however, the permit holder must confirm annually that the waste generation process remains unchanged). Certain types of waste management activity (for example, waste processing) also require a special permit or licence.

 

The following activities are prohibited:

 

l  Unpermitted types of waste generation or placement.

l  Permitted waste generation or placement in higher volumes.

l  Failure to separate waste or accumulate waste in accordance with the set requirements. For example, certain types of waste require specific waste accumulation containers (such as luminescent lamps) or compliance with other storage requirements. In addition, waste belonging to various classes must be accumulated separately (see below, Special rules for certain waste).

 

Operators of landfills must hold a valid waste management licence covering, among other things: waste storage, utilisation, recycling. The licence proves that a landfill operator has the necessary facilities and professional skills to perform waste management activities.

 

Russian law divides waste into five classes (the first four being hazardous and the fifth class being non-hazardous). For example, luminescent lamps belong to the first waste hazard class. Daily rubbish and used paper, for example, belong to the fifth waste class. Specific regulations apply to accumulation, storage, utilisation and general management of waste belonging to each hazardous class. In particular, there are regulations for specific types of waste containers to be used, specific measures to be undertaken during waste transportation, and so on. Fines of up to US$1,800 can be imposed on legal entities breaching waste management laws.

 

Asbestos

Any activities that violate prescribed sanitary or industrial safety requirements (which regulate the use of asbestos or asbestos-containing materials (AACM)) are prohibited. For example, use of AACM in buildings or facilities ventilation systems is strictly prohibited.

 

Buildings and facilities that contain asbestos or AACM must comply with project designs and the applicable sanitary requirements. These include:

 

l  Arranging a sufficient sanitary protection (buffer) zone.

l  Ensuring suitable air quality beyond boundaries.

l  Other industrial safety obligations and restrictions also apply.

 

Any products or goods containing AACM are subject to sanitary certification. The certificate must contain information on the percentage of asbestos fibre in either the products or goods under consideration. The general permitting and controlling regimes applicable to industrial and hazardous industrial facilities also apply. These include, among other things, requirements to:

 

l  Arrange a sanitary protection (buffer) zone.

l  Obtain all necessary environmental permits and industrial safety licences where applicable.

 

Fines of up to US$9,000 can be imposed on legal entities in breach.

 

Land contamination

The government is responsible for establishing the maximum permissible levels for land contamination. These permissible levels are established in relation to numerous separate contaminants. Sanitary rules and regulations generally specify the permissible levels for land contamination by including a list of the regulated contaminants and their maximum permissible contaminant levels. Public authorities are responsible for land contamination control. However, this is generally poorly carried out. The law imposes a general obligation on landowners or landholders to maintain land in compliance with the maximum permissible levels for land contamination. Investigation and clean-up of contaminated land is necessary if the permissible levels for land contamination are exceeded. In serious circumstances, the following can be imposed until remediation activities are complete: limitation of land use or overall suspension of land use. Fines of up to US$1,800 can be imposed on legal entities in breach.

 

There are no specific environmental taxes. However, companies make payments for “any adverse environmental impact on the environment” that their activities cause, which can be viewed, under certain circumstances, as an environmental tax. This includes:

 

l  Emissions into the air.

l  Discharges of waste water, noise and waste disposal.

 

The polluter is the main party liable to pay environmental taxes. Tax rates depend on the type of adverse impact on the environment. Different calculation methods also apply. In addition, it is important to determine whether the adverse impact on the environment is either within or above the levels stipulated by the company's environmental permits. If levels are exceeded, an increasing multiplier of five applies. If the maximum permissible levels of environmental pollution and contamination are exceeded, a multiplier of five applies. Levels are established separately in relation to all contaminants exposed to air, water and soil.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/civicis%20russia%20eng.pdf

 

There are a lot of practical examples of social investments made by Russian businesses. They can be categorised according to the following five main directions: personnel development investments; health care programs; resource saving programs; conscientious business practice and local community development. However, only the big businesses (Russian corporations and transnational companies) and familiar with the notion of CSR may afford to have CSR in place and only a handful of companies are able to work in the the sphere of local community development.

 

Despite the unfavourable legislative environment and difficult provision of the Tax Code hundreds of thousands of commercial companies find “holes” in the legislation in order to carry out charity activity. Of the interviewed heads of enterprises, 64.2% provide charity assistance in the same amount as before the new Tax Code was adopted irrespective of tax exemptions. Charity is perceived as a personal course, which cannot be used to obtain profits. However, the mindset of the heads of companies in relation to charity is increasingly becoming more pragmatic In the year 2002 67% of top manager interviewed considered charity a pure altruism, and only 7% thought it will allow the company to advance its work with the target markets. The 2003 research showed that top managers evaluate the effectiveness of their charity costs against a better marketing strategy (the indicator was named by 7.8% managers interviewed) and a higher return on the capital invested (2.3%). Before 2003 there was no consideration of economic indicators when taking about charity. The overall environment for charity in Russia is considered as unsatisfactory by 76 % of companies’ top managers.

 

The expert opinion poll among businessmen, carried out in 2004 showed that the Russian business community prioritises the following types of CSR: following social obligations (paying taxes, salaries, social packages for employees) by 25% of respondents; “internal” charity in combination with social assistance to low-income and marginalised groups (50%); implementation of social projects (25%).

 

The negative side of the otherwise rather positive picture of CSR above is that substantial social investments are made by large companies in the small towns and areas of their operations. Where social investments are made on a wider scale (and also locally), the areas of concern are strongly pointed out to the companies by the authorities. In other words, companies find themselves obliged by authorities to fund certain projects and invest in certain social infrastructure. This pattern cannot be called a genuine CSR.

 

2004 Annual Report on Social Investments in Russia: the Role of Businesses in Civil Development concludes that at present, Russia is going through a transition period: the burden of social expenditures is divided inequitably, largely falling on the ‘heavy’ industries; and companies’ social investments are mainly allocated for ‘internal’ programs – companies’ own personnel development.

 

There are a lot of practical examples of social investments made by Russian businesses. They can be categorised according to the following 5 main directions:

- personnel development investments (e.g. Procter & Gamble’s retraining program for the fired personnel; retirement programs of the ‘Norilsk Nickel’ company, etc.);

- health care (e.g. the system for corporate health care at the ‘RUSAL’ company and the ‘Severstal’ medical care program);

- resource saving (e.g., the “Sakhalin Energy’ company’s environment and social development assessment);

- conscientious business practice (e.g., the Social Code of the ‘Lukoil’ corporation; the Chart of Corporate and Business Ethics of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs);

- local community development (personal stipend program of the ‘System’ company; national art support program of the ‘Alpha Bank’; and the competition in support of social infrastructure development projects held by the ‘Ukos’ oil corporation).

 

SERBIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air emissions charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution non-compliance fine

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2004

 

3. Name of Instrument Annual vehicle registration charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2002

Earmarking yes - Road maintenance

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge for extraction of materials from watercourses

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2006

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for ozone depleting substances

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge for use and trade with wild flora and fauna

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2005

 

7. Name of Instrument Fees for national parks use

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1995

Earmarking yes - Revenues earmarked for national parks management.

Other rate differentiation By activity carried out in the park

 

8. Name of Instrument Fishing permits

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1994

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation Daily / weekly / yearly

 

9. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2001

Year of last revision 2005

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

10. Name of Instrument Local environmental charge

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking yes - Revenues are earmarked for environmental protection and improvement of living conditions.

Other rate differentiation Commercial / residential space

 

11. Name of Instrument Motor vehicles charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

12. Name of Instrument Sewage charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised periodically, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals by local governments

Other rate differentiation Enterprises / Houses

 

13. Name of Instrument Tree cutting charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 1996

Earmarking yes - Revenues are earmarked for forest management purposes.

 

14. Name of Instrument Waste management charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2005

Other rate differentiation Hazardous / Non - hazardous

15. Name of Instrument Waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised regularly, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals of local

government assemblies

Other rate differentiation Households / others

 

16. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1991

Year of last revision 2006

Other rate differentiation By abstraction purpose

 

17. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Revision Details Charge rates are revised periodically, based on Public Companies’ suggestions and approvals of local government assemblies.

Other rate differentiation Enterprises / households

 

18. Name of Instrument Water protection charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2006

Other rate differentiation By type of waste water

 

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Serbia_Country_Report.pdf

 

The opinion of one third of the Regional Stakeholders (36%) is that the social responsibility of companies in Serbia is limited, one quarter that it is moderate (25%), and 12% judge that the responsibility of companies is insignificant. Nine percent of the Stakeholders do not have an opinion on this topic. That the social responsibility of large companies in Serbia is significant is an opinion held by only 17% of the Stakeholders.

 

South Serbia has the largest number of respondents, (19%) who believe that the social responsibility of large companies is insignificant. This data should be interpreted in the context of the towns where the survey was conducted, in which two big domestic companies were privatized; Zdravlje in Leskovac and the Tobacco Industry in Niš. In Vojvodina a very high percentage of respondents (43%) see the social responsibility of companies as significant, while such a view is the least common in Belgrade and Eastern Serbia, where it is held by only 7% of the respondents.

 

Although the attitudes towards socially responsible business in Serbia survey did not directly address issue of holding companies responsible for the potential negative effects of their operations, the conclusions of the survey are:

 

awareness of the importance of a topic certainly does not also imply readiness for personal engagement – this is indicated by the fact that conservation of the environment (the topic most often associated with Corporate Social Responsibility), is at the same time also assessed as the most neglected topic, i.e. the area in the worst condition in Serbia,

l  most of the representatives of companies expressed the opinion that topics such as rights of women, minorities and vulnerable groups should be the concern of socially responsible business operations (CSR), however, the absence of social discrimination as a topic of the CSR was spontaneously mentioned only by 5% of domestic and 14% of international companies,

l  as an institution, which should be responsible for public welfare, the Republic Assembly and Republic Government (96%) were most often identified, while large international companies and NGOs are placed on the bottom of the list (76% and 51%),

l  Topics stated as being the most pressing for Serbia (in field of CSR) at the moment are: business ethics, laws, safety of products, and relations with consumers. It is interesting that the companies state these topics as being the most important, but they do not state the activities which they carry out in practice in this field.

 

A group of individuals (The Initiative Board), institutions and economic entities named itself the Responsible Business Initiative (RBI) and initiated the namesake project. The main goal of the project is to promote and standardize the area of Corporate Social Responsibility in Serbia and to initiate various activities involving cooperation across several sectors. RBI is a project of instigating and institutionalizing the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility in Serbia. RBI tends to engage the private sector in meeting the complex social challenges which our present society faces. Promoting and developing new modes of cross-sectoral cooperation in order to discover perspectives for sustainable development of communities, civic initiatives and civil society, stated in the RBI leaflet, Belgrade, 20.05.2005.

 

SLOVAKIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge – large and medium sources

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 2003

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

2. Name of Instrument Air pollution charge - small sources

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1967

Year of last revision 2003

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are earmarked for support of collection, separation, utilization and treating of the waste

Other rate differentiation There is no fixed rate. Municipalities determines an annual flat amount of charge to specific operators of small sources according to the amount and structure of produced emissions.

 

3. Name of Instrument Charge for deposition of waste to landfills

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1996

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for protection of environment in the particular municipality.

Other rate differentiation By waste type

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge for deposition of waste to sludge basins

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Revision Details Adjustments of charge rates

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for protection of environment in the particular municipality.

Other rate differentiation Hazardous / other / special

 

5. Name of Instrument Charge for discharging of waste-water

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1966

Revision Details The charge rates and list of polluting substances were adjusted.

Earmarking 100% - Revenues are earmarked for investments of water treatment plants, waste water collection systems and other investment measures related to water protection.

Other rate differentiation By pollutant type

 

6. Name of Instrument Charge for ozone depleting substances

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1992

Year of last revision 2004

Revision Details Charges were cancelled this year.

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for measures in the sector of air protection.

Other rate differentiation By type of substance

 

7. Name of Instrument Excise duty on coal

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Charge per tonne

 

8. Name of Instrument Excise duty on electricity

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Charge per MWh

 

9. Name of Instrument Excise duty on natural gas

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2008

Other rate differentiation Charge per MWh

 

10. Name of Instrument Excises on mineral oils

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 01.03.2004

Revision Details An amendment of the law on excise duty on mineral oils was adopted

Other rate differentiation By mineral oil type

 

11. Name of Instrument Local charge for management of municipal waste

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for supporting the system of management of municipal waste.

Other rate differentiation The amount of charge depends on decision of each municipality

 

12. Name of Instrument Product charge for recycling and waste management

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1998

Year of last revision Jan 1 2001 12:00AM

Revision Details The EC Regulation N.2037/2000 about ozone depleting substances was transposed and the changes

and adjustments consequent to the adoption of the Peking amendment to the Montreal protocol were included.

Earmarking 100% - The revenues are earmarked for measures to protect the ozone layer.

Other rate differentiation By waste type

 

13. Name of Instrument Road tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 01.11.2004

Revision Details The previous Law on Road tax was replaced by Law on local taxes and local fees for municipal waste and small construction wastes. The previous road tax was replaced by motor vehicle tax. The beneficiaries of revenues raised by this tax became High territorial units (self-governing regions).

Earmarking -

Other rate differentiation Tax rates are set individually by each High territorial unit .

 

14. Name of Instrument Tax on installing nuclear equipment (or nuclear facility tax)

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 1.11.2004

Revision Details During the process of implementing fiscal decentralization in 2004 the new system of financing

municipalities was adopted and previous local fee on installing nuclear equipment was replaced by local tax on installing nuclear equipment. This tax is effective as from 1 November 2004 and treated under No. 582/2004 Coll. of Acts on local taxes and local fees for municipal waste and small construction wastes.

Other rate differentiation By distance

 

15. Name of Instrument Tax on permits to enter historical city district with motor vehicle

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 01.11.2004

Revision Details The new Law on local taxes and local fees for municipal waste and small construction wastes was

adopted.

Other rate differentiation The tax rate is set individually by each municipality (city).

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

As of 2009, the ratio of environmental taxation stood at 1.9 % of GDP, the third lowest value in the EU, 0.7 percentage points below the EU-27 average (2.6 %). Revenues from environmental taxation have been declining from 2004 mainly due to shrinking receipts from energy taxation.

 

http://www.acceleratingcsr.eu/uploads/docs/200809/strategy/Slovakia_CSR%20Strategy.pdf

 

CSR in Slovakia is relatively new. International companies and non-governmental organizations have been its main proponents. They have striven to create conditions and initiatives to motivate businesses to apply CSR principles.

 

Selected departmental ministries have also taken some steps to employ CSR principles. But they have not always received enough support. They have largely served to boost the work of academia and the media.

 

The current status of CSR in Slovakia is summarized in the ‘Initial study of the application of socially responsible business in Slovakia’, which is a result of the CSR survey initiated by the Bratislava Regional Centre of the UN Development Programme for Europe and Commonwealth of Independent States.

 

The principal findings of the survey are:

CSR in Slovakia is still rather undeveloped;

l  Further investment is needed to boost knowledge and expertise in CSR;

l  Information about CSR should be spread so that it influences the general public;

l  CSR issues should be included in training programmes for future managers and economists;

l  CSR principles should be conveyed so as to provide services and support to business subjects;

l  CSR requires support from the government, which should become a leader in the promotion of CSR by properly stimulating the business environment and by creating suitable support mechanisms.

 

http://europeandcis.undp.org/home/cst/show/A0B61EF3-F203-1EE9-B5E45052F826FA5B

 

In Slovakia, it is largely major companies with foreign capital that are familiar with the term corporate social responsibility. For the wider public and Slovak businesses, however, CSR is a term that is still virtually unknown. That is not to say that Slovak companies do not act responsibly; in fact, there is a tradition of corporate social stewardship. Many firms financially support various charity and/or community projects; they communicate with the public and have strong employee protection policies. They thus practice various elements of corporate social responsibility, even though they do not call it as such.

 

CSR in Slovakia is conducted and promoted predominantly by NGOs capable of defining CSR in all its dimensions. These specialized NGOs have clear vision of how corporate entities and various stakeholders should develop CSR principles and activities.

 

Civil society in Slovakia remains one of the most vibrant in Central Europe. In 2006, the Ministry of Interior listed more than 22,000 non-governmental organizations. According to the data from the Slovak Statistical Office, NGOs employ more than 1 percent of the working population and are contributing approximately 1.5 percent to the GDP of the country. Opinion polls show that Slovak citizens’ involvement in voluntarism and  charities is systematically increasing, with donating even more popular than volunteering. Moreover, the image of NGOs in public opinion is prevailingly positive. Financial assistance from Western democracies to both private and public NGOs has been instrumental in developing a vital civil society in Slovakia since 1989.

 

However, 2003 brought unprecedented changes to legislation impacting civil society. According to an amendment to the law on income taxes (561/ 2001), tax-payers in Slovakia could dedicate 1 percent of their income tax to non-profits. In 2003, parliament approved an increase of the possible tax dedication to 2 percent. In 2004, a further amendment gave companies permission to dedicate 2 percent of their tax to civil society organizations, consequently opening new possibilities for sustainable development of Slovak civil society sector.

 

Understanding of CSR in Slovakia is often reduced to philanthropy or charity for several reasons. Philanthropy as a concept has existed in Slovakia for longer than that of CSR. Moreover, philanthropy is less complex and diverse, making it more easily understood and implemented. Philanthropic activities are also more visible to the public than CSR activities, making it easier to generate support for it.

 

CSR awareness is relatively low within the local business community. Some companies are not aware of the term but in fact practice CSR. Other companies recognize the term and even claim to practice CSR, but in reality they are engaged in philanthropy or charity, or they have simply assigned their 2 percent tax dividend to an NGO. Few companies can claim activities in the field of CSR, and what they are doing is actually CSR in  its broadest sense.

 

SLOVENIA

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument CO2 tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1997

Year of last revision 2003, 2005, 2008, 2010, 2011

Revision Details Decree amending Decree on environmental tax for the pollution of the air with emission from carbon

dioxide (Official Journal of the RS, No. 39/2010,13/2011)

Other rate differentiation By fuel and waste type

 

2. Name of Instrument End-of-life vehicles tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2003

Year of last revision 2004, 2005

Revision Details Decree on environmental tax for environmental pollution caused by the generation of end-of-life

vehicles (Official Journal of the RS, No. 6/2005)

 

3. Name of Instrument Energy efficiency tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2010

Revision Details Decree on the provision of energy savings of the final customers (Of. Gaz. nr. 114/2009)

Earmarking The revenues of the tax are fully earmarked for the energy efficiency programmes.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

4. Name of Instrument Fuel excise tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details The scheme for refund of a part of excise duty for gas oil, used for propelling of vehicles for commercial purposes was introduced in July 2009.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

5. Name of Instrument Landfill tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details Decree on environmental tax for environmental pollution caused by waste disposal; Official Journal

of the RS, No. 70/2010

Earmarking - Co-financing infrastructure investments (waste management); 100% of the tax levied on public landfills operators is earmarked for investments.

 

6. Name of Instrument Motor Vehicle Tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1999

Year of last revision 2010

Revision Details The main changes to this law were adopted in 2010. From the 1 March, the tax rates depend on the

environmental criteria (CO2 and Euro emission standards). Motor vehicles which are taxed are beside passenger cars also motorcycles and camper vans. There is no tax on supply of used motor vehicles within Slovenia.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type and CO2 emissions

 

7. Name of Instrument Payment for water rights

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2008

Revision Details Water Act (Official Journal of the RS, nr. 57/2008)

Earmarking 100% - Payments payed state budget are earmarked: For investing in water infrastructure including

the purchase of land needed for its construction.

Other rate differentiation By purpose

 

8. Name of Instrument Tax on lubricating oils

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 2005

Revision Details Decree on environmental tax for environmental pollution on the use of lubricating oils and fluids

(Official Journal of the RS, No. 53/2005)

 

9. Name of Instrument Tax on packaging waste

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2006

Year of last revision 23.6.2006, 30.7.2008

Revision Details Extension of the definition of the packaging waste to funeral candles.

Other rate differentiation Unit of pollution from packaging waste per unit of pollution.

 

10. Name of Instrument Tax on waste electrical and electronic equipment

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2006

Year of last revision 30.7.2008

Revision Details Extension of the definition of the electrical equipment to accumulators and batteries.

Other rate differentiation Unit of pollution from waste electrical and electronic equipment per unit of pollution.

 

11. Name of Instrument Tax on waste pneumatic tyres

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2006

Other rate differentiation Unit of pollution from waste pneumatic tires per unit of pollution

 

12. Name of Instrument Volatile Organic Compounds Tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2007

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details Decree on environmental tax for environmental pollution due to use of volatile organic compounds (Official Journal of the RS, No.16/2009)

 

13. Name of Instrument Waste user charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2004, 2009

Revision Details Environment Protection Act (ZVO-1) (Official Journal of the RS, No. 41/2004), Rules of tariff system for public service on the environmental field (Official Journal of the RS, nr. 63/2009)

Other rate differentiation Varies between municipal councils

 

14. Name of Instrument Waste-water collection and treatment charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2004, 2009

Revision Details Environment Protection Act (ZVO-1) (Official Journal of the RS, No. 41/2004), Rules of tariff system for public service on the environmental field (Official Journal of the RS, nr. 63/2009)

Other rate differentiation Varies between municipalities

 

15. Name of Instrument Wastewater pollution tax

Type Tax

Year of introduction 1996

Year of last revision 2009, (Act on Local Finances), 2010

Revision Details Decree on environmental tax for environmental pollution caused by waste water discharge, Act on

Local Finances (Official Journal of the RS, No. 104/09, 14/10)

Earmarking 100% - Municipalities are according to Act on Local Finances ( since 2009) bound to use the collecetd tax for: 1. construction of infrastructure for implementation of mandatory community public service of environmental protection in accordance with national operational programs adopted the rules of environmental protection in the field treatment and discharge of waste water, waste -and disposal of waste, and 2. ensuring supply of standards, technical, maintenance, organizational and other measures required for implementation of mandatory municipal utilities protection environment.

 

16. Name of Instrument Water abstraction charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2002, 2007

Revision Details Decree on the water fee (Official Journal of the RS, No. 103/2002, 122/07)

Earmarking 100% - Revenues earmarked for investments in water infrastructure.

Other rate differentiation By purpose of abstraction

 

17. Name of Instrument Water consumption charge

Type Fee/Charge

Year of introduction 1993

Year of last revision 2009

Revision Details Rules of tariff system for public service on the environmental field (Official Journal of the RS, nr. 63/2009)

Earmarking The rent for the use of public infrastructure is an earmarked revenue of the local community. - It is used for the purpose of investment and investment maintenance work on those public infrastructure, for which it was charged.

Other rate differentiation Varies between municipal councils

 

http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-DU-11-001/EN/KS-DU-11-001-EN.PDF

 

Slovenia, where a CO2 tax is applied on all energy products since 1997.

 

In 2009, environmental taxes represented 3.6 % of GDP, the third highest in the EU. This share rose by 0.6 percentage points from a 3.0 % value in 2006–2008 mainly due to increasing revenues from excise duties on mineral oil and gas. As in most countries, taxes on energy account for the lion's share of environmental tax revenues, which are high also in the international comparison as Slovenia ranks first in the Union in this respect. Despite their lower absolute revenue, pollution/resource taxes, too, are well developed in Slovenia, taking the seventh highest level in the EU.

 

A motor vehicle tax must be paid for passenger motor vehicles which are put into circulation in Slovenia for the first time. Till 1 March 2010, the tax rate was 1–13 % of the selling price of the vehicle and 5 % for transfer of used passenger cars. As of 1 March 2010, the tax is paid only at the first registration and the rate depends on the environmental criteria (CO2 and Euro emission standards) ranging from 0.5 % to 28 % for petrol cars and from 1 % to 31 % for diesel cars. There is also a water vessel tax, which is based on the length of the vessel and its engine power.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/slovenia%20acr.pdf

 

The Corporate Social Responsibility Study, based on CSI methodology, showed that out of the ten biggest companies in the country companies, nine publish their annual reports on the internet and majority of them included a chapter on CSR in one form. All of them were either donors or sponsors of other organisations or individuals. Sponsorship is most common in the field of sports and culture, while donations are often given to organisations helping children, poor people and those dealing with educational issues.

 

According to the companies’ annual reports, all of them offer their employees education and take care of their health and safety at the workplace. In addition, four out of ten companies offer their employees different opportunities for their free time, some through the provision of sport grounds or by organising cultural events. Half of these companies have already acquired recognition from International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) for their environmental protection achievements. Moreover, they are quite active in the local communities, making donations when opening new branch offices or supporting local sport groups.

 

Approach to environmental care was described in details in eight cases. In general this issue is also always present in annual reports, if not in separate environmental protection on sustainability development report (four cases). When describing environmental care as value suitability development is mentioned quite often. The term includes different categories of careful approach to environment, such as energy saving technologies, economic treatment with raw materials, lowering quantity of waste and recycling.

 

As far as smaller companies are concerned, 67% were involved in a social responsibility action at least once. They mainly support sport and cultural activities or events, which was also found with the larger companies. The lack of external motivation, such as support from the government, was mentioned as one of the obstacles to further involvement in socially responsible activities, for example, through sponsorships, based on the assumption that the private sector would support CSOs more if government would show some support as well.

 

Social responsibility appears to be more and more important for the largest companies, as they are increasing the number of their social responsibility activities, promoting them in the media and working to improve their image among consumers and business partners. This conclusion was supported by the findings of the Regional Stakeholder Survey, where two thirds of respondents estimated that major companies are aware of their social responsibility (not yet fully but in a limited way).

 

The issue of corporate social responsibility has been gaining importance and is especially visible when it comes to sport and cultural activities. It is usually present on the local level. However, CSOs working in a broader field of work, outside sports and cultural activities are not typically the beneficiaries of corporate social responsibility. With regard to current accounting standards and official records of the Agency for Public Records and Service (AJPES) such donations or sponsorship are generally not visible. Members also emphasised the existence of tax burdens imposed on the private sector, which makes them unable to be more socially responsible and donate more to CSOs. Some members explained that most companies would offer more help to local CSOs, if the government did the same. It was also noticed that the level of corporate social responsibility could decrease once the process of privatisation in the country is completed.

 

A positive step has been taken with regards to corporate social responsibility, and the largest companies are becoming more aware of their responsibility in relations to the environment, their employees and local communities.

 

TURKEY

 

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

Environmental taxes according to OECD – EEA Economic Instruments database:

 

1. Name of Instrument Aircraft noise charges

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Financing Environmental Pollution Prevention Fund.

 

2. Name of Instrument Charge on air pollution

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - The main purpose of this charge is to provide financing for the Environmental Pollution Prevention Fund.

 

3. Name of Instrument Charge on fisheries

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking - The main purpose of this charge is incentive to prevent water pollution.

 

4. Name of Instrument Charge on water pollution

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - Financing of municipalities.

 

5. Name of Instrument Motor vehicles tax

Type Tax

Year of last revision 01.01.2011

Revision Details Tax rates were increased.

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type, age and engine capacity

 

6. Name of Instrument Special consumption tax on fuels

Type Tax

Year of introduction 2002

Year of last revision 01.01.2010.

Revision Details The tax rates were increased.

Other rate differentiation By fuel type

 

7. Name of Instrument Special consumption tax on motor vehicles

Type Tax

Year of last revision 01.08.2011

Revision Details Reduced tax rates for electrical vehicles

Other rate differentiation By vehicle type

 

8. Name of Instrument Wastewater user charges

Type Fee/Charge

Earmarking 100% - The revenues go to the public utility.

Other rate differentiation Varies by municipality

 

 

http://www.allaboutturkey.com/tax.htm

 

Municipalities are authorized to collect an Environmental Tax as a contribution towards the financing of certain services such as garbage collection. This tax is levied at scheduled fixed amounts that vary according to the location of the house or office. This tax is paid through water bill of the property by the person who lives or occupies that house or office.

 

http://www.civicus.org/images/stories/csi/csi_phase2/analytical%20country%20report%20for%20turkey.pdf

 

CSO survey participants find that private sector is generally uninterested in civil society actors (67%). Major companies show limited concern about the social and environmental impacts of their operations and CSR activities (48%), and only a very limited range of CSOs benefit from CSR activities (75%). On the other hand, external stakeholders have a somewhat more positive perception of private sector–civil society relations.

 

In the study, CSR and its positive influence on society and environment are discussed by providing CSO and corporate perspectives on partnerships in exemplary CSR projects. The examples show that there are firms and CSOs in Turkey which integrate CSR initiatives into their daily operations and fulfil CSR’s key ideas and principles.

 

CSO stakeholders taking part in regional and national focus group discussions agree on the trend that companies are taking a more active role in supporting CSOs, yet concerns remain about the lack of strategies and mechanisms. CSO partners and projects are selected and supported on an ad-hoc basis, generally with the advice of public relations/corporate communications consultants, commonly funded from the companies’ PR or marketing budgets. Decisions are rarely made according to any set guidelines and the practice is often treated as a ‘sponsorship’ rather than a ‘grant’. As such, corporate funds are accessible only for small and selective groups of CSOs. The unfavourable fiscal framework for donations and grant giving appears as another factor affecting CSR and corporate philanthropy negatively.

 

The study is based primarily on interviews with managers of five firms and five CSOs, and secondarily on information provided by organisational websites. Firms were chosen from ‘Turkey’s Social Responsibility Leaders’ study, which is conducted annually by Capital (a Turkish business magazine) and represents the opinions of Turkish citizens. CSOs are five leading civic organisations that have close relations with corporate Turkey.

 

It was seen that all these organisations, under the scope of the study, abide by the law and general ethical principles. They live up to international human rights and environmental standards in their business practices. The expectations of both  internal and external stakeholders are taken into account and CSR is integrated into corporate strategy. With high level management initiative and motivation, corporate resources are allocated to CSR practices which in turn are put into action both at the employee and societal level. A multiplier effect is highly sought after to communicate the good practices so that CSR becomes widespread and effective throughout the business world. This can also be understood from the fact that most managers contacted for the study work under the corporate communication departments of their organisations. The interviews also suggested that measurement and reporting of CSR practices have become systematised over time and that exemplary CSOs and firms publish their financial statements and annual reports on their websites.

 

Signing the UN Global Compact and providing the required communications on progress are becoming widely adopted practices. Moreover, partnerships with local and international organisations are being developed. All these indicators show that the organisations discussed within this case study seem to take CSR “seriously”. As best practices are adopted by the business and CSO community as a whole, the base of donors will be broadened and thus the flow of resources to CSOs will increase.

 

This analysis does not attempt to offer a  comprehensive picture and further studies would be required. However, these examples show that there are firms and CSOs in Turkey which integrate CSR initiatives into their daily operations and fulfil CSR’s notion in line with globally accepted principles. As best practices are communicated at different platforms, they will inspire and act as role models for further business and civil sector partnerships, which will be beneficial for both parties.

 

UKRAINE

 

http://arzinger.ua/file_collection/2_Tax_Code_Adopted_Final_Dec02_2010e.pdf - 2010

 

Taxable Persons

Taxable persons shall be business entities, legal entities that do not exercise business (entrepreneurial) activities, budget-funded institutions, public and other enterprises, institutions and organisations, permanent representative offices of non-residents, including those that perform agency (representative) functions in respect of such non-residents or founders thereof, if the following takes place during the exercise of their business on the territory of Ukraine and within its continental shelf and exclusive (maritime) economic zone:

emissions of contaminants by stationary sources into the atmospheric air;

l  the discharge of contaminants directly into the water objects;

l  the placement of the waste into specifically designated places or facilities, other than the placement of specific types of waste as secondary raw materials;

l  the generation of the radioactive waste (including the waste already accumulated);

l  the temporary storage of the radioactive waste by the producers thereof in excess of the period specified in the special licence conditions.

 

Taxable persons shall be business entities legal entities that do not exercise business (entrepreneurial) activities, budget-funded institutions, public and other enterprises, institutions and organisations, permanent representative offices of non-residents, including those that perform agency (representative) functions in respect of such non-residents or founders thereof, as well as citizens of Ukraine, foreigners and stateless individuals that discharge contaminants into the atmosphere from mobile contamination sources during the utilisation of the fuel by them.

 

The nuclear energy utilisation entities shall not be payers of the tax for the generation of the radioactive waste (including the waste already accumulated), if:

l  they have entered into a contract for the return of the spent closed ionising radiation source outside Ukraine to the manufacturer before (and including) the last calendar day of the reporting quarter of the acquisition of the ionising radiation source;

l  manage the radioactive waste generated as a result of the Chernobyl Disaster in respect of activities associated with such waste.

 

State-owned specialised radioactive waste management enterprises whose core business is the storage, processing and disposal of the radioactive waste, which is owned by the state, and the deactivation of the radiation-contaminated facilities shall not be payers of the tax charged for the generation of the radioactive waste (including the accumulated waste) and/or the temporary storage of the radioactive waste during the period exceeding the period specified in the special licence conditions

.

Business entities that are in possession of a licence for the collection and the procurement of the waste as secondary raw materials, exercise their chartered business of the collection and the procurement of such waste placed in their own premises (facilities) and provide services in the relevant area shall not be payers of the tax for the placement of the waste in the specifically designated areas or facilities.

 

Tax Agents

The tax charged for the emission of contaminants into the atmospheric air from mobile contamination sources in case of the utilisation of the fuel shall be charged and paid to the budget by tax agents during the sale of such fuel.

 

Business entities shall be the tax agents, if they:

l  exercise wholesale trade in fuel;

l  exercise retail trade in fuel (other than those selling fuel purchased from business entities referred to previously).

 

Object of Taxation and Taxable Amount

The following shall be the object of taxation and the taxable amount:

l  volumes and types of contaminants emitted into the atmospheric air from stationary sources;

l  volumes and types of contaminants discharged directly into water objects;

l  volumes and types (classes) of the waste placed in specifically designated places or facilities during a reporting quarter, except for volumes and types (classes) of the certain waste categorised as secondary raw materials placed in own premises (facilities) of business entities being in possession of a licence for the collection and the procurement of specific types of waste as secondary raw materials and exercising their chartered business of the collection and the procurement of such waste;

l  volumes and types of the fuel sold by tax agents;

l  volumes and categories of the radioactive waste generated as a result of activities of business entities and/or stored temporarily by the producers thereof in excess of the period specified in the special licence conditions;

l  volumes of electric energy generated by operating organizations of nuclear installations (nuclear power stations).

 

Rates of the tax for the emissions of specific contaminants from stationary sources into the atmospheric air are applicable for a list of 24 contaminants.

 

Tax rates for the emissions of specific contaminants (compounds) that are not included in the previous list of contaminants and for which hazard classes are established, from stationary sources into the atmospheric air are applicable for 4 hazard classes (from I - extremely hazardous to IV -  slightly hazardous).

 

Tax rates in case of contaminants (compounds) not covered by the previous list of contaminants and for which no hazard class is specified (other than carbon dioxide) shall be applied depending on the specified tentatively safe levels of impact of such contaminants (compounds) in the atmospheric air of settlements according to 5 classes of tentatively safe level of contaminant impact (in milligrams per cubic metre).

 

The tax rate for discharges of the carbon dioxide shall be UAH 0.2 per 1 tonne.

 

Rates of the tax for contaminant emissions into the atmospheric air by mobile contamination sources in case of the fuel utilisation shall be differentiated according to 13 categories.

 

Rates of the tax for discharges of specific contaminants into water objects shall be differentiated according to a list of 9 contaminants.

 

Rates of the tax for discharges of contaminants that are not included in the above list and for which ultimate permissible concentration is established will be applicable for 5 classes of ultimate permissible contaminant concentration (in milligrams per litre).

 

The tax rates specified in the above 2 paragraphs shall be multiplied by a factor of 1.5 for the discharge of contaminants into ponds and lakes.

 

The rates of the tax for the placement of specific types of the extremely hazardous waste shall be as follows:

l  the equipment and devices that contain mercury or elements with the ionising radiation – UAH 431 per piece;

l  fluorescent lamps – UAH 7.5 per piece.

 

The rates of the tax for the waste disposal set depending on the hazard class and the waste hazard level shall be as follows: 4 hazard classes (I extremely hazardous to IV slightly hazardous) plus a special category for slightly hazardous non-toxic mining industry waste. The rate of the tax set for the disposal of the hazard class I waste shall be applied in case of the disposal of the waste, for which no hazard class is specified.

 

All the above rates of the tax shall be tripled in case of the placement of the waste in disposal facilities that do not rule out completely the contamination of the atmospheric air or water objects.

 

The tax rate adjustment factor depending on the location (zone) of the placement of the waste in the environment shall be as follows: within administrative boundaries of a populated area or at the distance of fewer than 3 kilometres from administrative boundaries of the nearest populated area – 3; at the distance of more than 3 kilometres from administrative boundaries of the nearest populated area – 1.

 

The rate of the tax for the generation of the radioactive waste by electrical energy generators being operators of nuclear installations (nuclear power plants), including that already accumulated, shall amount to UAH 0.0063 per 1 kWh of the generated electrical energy. The adjustment factor to be set for the entities operating nuclear power installations (nuclear power plants) subject to radioactive waste activity: highly active – 50; of medium and low activity – 2.

 

The rates of the tax for the temporary storage of the radioactive waste by the producers thereof in excess of the period specified in the special licence conditions shall be as follows:

 

Waste category Rate of the tax for the temporary storage of the radioactive waste (except waste in the form of ionising radiation sources), UAH per cubic metre Rate of the tax for the temporary storage of the radioactive waste in the form of ionising radiation sources, UAH per cubic centimetre
highly active  300,000 10,000
medium active and low active  5,600  2,000

 

http://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Ukraine_Country_Report.pdf

 

In today’s Ukraine business does not understand the essence of social responsibility as the activity directed to protect against social and environmental consequences of their activity. This is very typical for Ukrainian companies (not international). The notion is limited to charitable activity or philanthropy. Even so, not many companies are interested in the long-term social responsibility strategy; the most interested are companies with the large number of clients. Here social responsibility is directly connected with the attitude of clients, who consider companies that are doing good for society as trustful. This determines their choice of company’s products. In the underdeveloped market this reason is not a priority for achieving competitive advantage. Very often socially important activity depends on the preferences of top management of the company. The most visible and recognised social priorities of business deal with the quality of output, solving legal problems, minimization of corruption, care about staff and raising their professional skills. Eighty percent of respondents to the Regional stakeholders survey rated the work of major companies in Ukraine in taking into account the social and environmental consequences of their activity as either insignificant or limited. Only 15% of people think that it is moderate. Eighty-eight percent of respondents indicated that business associations participate in broader civil society initiatives either rarely or sometimes. Ukrainian business is mostly concerned with own survival in the current economic environment although there are efforts to declare social responsibility as a principle of activity were made by several companies, like mobile companies “UMC” and “Kyivstar”.

 

The private sector maintains an indifferent attitude towards CSOs, while establishing their own bodies to donate to social causes. The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is very new for Ukraine. The perception of CSR is limited to charitable activities and assistance to state maintained institutions.

 

 

BANGLADESH

 

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=159117

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=145076

 

Experience in Bangladesh shows regulatory instruments are not functioning as expected, because of lack of effective enforcement, for many different reasons. But economic instruments – fiscal or financial – are more effective, as is evident in other countries. State Minister for Environment and Forests Hasan Mahmud has said the government seriously plans to revise the existing taxation laws to levy more taxes on those who will add excessive carbon to the air, and pollute environment.

 

www.tulips.tsukuba.ac.jp/limedio/dlam/B27/B2782934/1.pdf

 

The highest cooperation between civil society organizations is with the local government, as most of the CSOs surveyed are active at the local level, they have high interaction with local governments which is in charge of the administrative affair of these small groups and cooperatives. However, 2nd (Welfare Organizations, NGO) 3rd (Agricultural Organization), 4th (Consumer Organization ) are all social actors. The most influential political actor—political party, has been ranked at the 5th place in relation to formal cooperation, based on the rating of CSOs. Another noteworthy feature is that the market actors have hardly any cooperation with the CSOs which goes with the low contribution from private enterprises to civil society groups. Particularly, with market actors the cooperation is lowest and most cooperation exists with the social actors, among political actors the cooperation is significant with local government and political parties however, not aweinspiring.

 

Corporate giving is not yet a common practice in Bangladesh, though they may consider it as an implicit responsibility. In another study it has been claimed that big business houses gives more to political organizations than to social organizations and small houses give more to community organizations as ‘protection’ money.

 

INDIA

http://www2.oecd.org/ecoinst/queries/index.htm

 

1. Name of Instrument Andhra Pradesh – Green tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2006 

 

2. Name of Instrument Andhra Pradesh – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1963

 

3. Name of Instrument Arunachal Pradesh – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1984 

 

4. Name of Instrument Assam – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988

 

5. Name of Instrument Bihar – Motor vehicles registration fee 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988

 

6. Name of Instrument Bihar – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988 

 

7. Name of Instrument Bihar – Road tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988 

 

8. Name of Instrument Delhi – Motor vehicle tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1962

 

9. Name of Instrument Goa – Green tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2005 

 

10. Name of Instrument Goa – Motor vehicle tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1974

 

11. Name of Instrument Gujarat – Additional tax on electrical energy (Green cess) 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2011

Type of Exemption Product or Activity

Exemption Details Solar energy, Wind energy, bio-energy, geo-thermal, energy, tidal energy and hydal energy under 1000 KW of installed capacity have been exempted from this cess.

 

12. Name of Instrument Gujarat – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1989 

Year of last revision 02.12.2006 

 

13. Name of Instrument Gujarat – The Bombay electricity duty  

Type Tax 

 

14. Name of Instrument Haryana – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988

 

15. Name of Instrument Himachal Pradesh – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1977 

 

16. Name of Instrument Jammu and Kashmir – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1957

 

17. Name of Instrument Jharkhand – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2001

 

18. Name of Instrument Karnataka – Additional motor vehicles tax (cess) 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1984 

Year of last revision 01.04.2011

 

19. Name of Instrument Karnataka – Green tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2002   

 

20. Name of Instrument Karnataka – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1957 

Year of last revision 31.03.2010 

Revision Details Tax rates for several categories of goods vehicles were increased.

 

21. Name of Instrument Kerala – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1976

 

22. Name of Instrument Maharashtra – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1958 

Exemptions for Public Services 100% exemption: To all the vehicles belonging (owned) by the state 

Exemption for Product or Activity 100% - Ambulances working on no loss no profit basis 

Exemption for Sector of the Economy 100% - Tractors and trailors used for agricultural purpose  

Exemption for Product or Activity 66.67% - 1. Vehicles solely used for transportation of school children and owned by school or private person 2. Vehicles belonging to Orchestra, Tamasha Mandal, Drama Theatre, etc.

 

23. Name of Instrument Mandhya Pradesh – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988 

 

24. Name of Instrument Mizoram – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1996 

 

25. Name of Instrument Mizoram – Road tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1996

 

26. Name of Instrument Nagaland – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1967

 

27. Name of Instrument Odisha – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1975

 

28. Name of Instrument Punjab – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1988   

 

29. Name of Instrument Rajasthan – Green tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2011

 

30. Name of Instrument Sikkim – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1982

 

31. Name of Instrument Tamil Nadu – Green tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2003 

Year of last revision 10.06.2005 

Revision Details The tax rate on auto-richskaws (transport / non-passenger 3-wheeler) was reduced from INR 500 to 200

 

32. Name of Instrument Tamil Nadu – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1974 

Year of last revision 01.08.2009 

Revision Details Introduction of the Tamil Nadu Road safety tax

 

33. Name of Instrument Tamil Nadu – Road safety tax (Additional motor vehicles tax) 

Type Tax  

Year of introduction 2009

 

34. Name of Instrument Tax for prevention and control of pollution – Water cess 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1977 

Year of last revision 2011 

Revision Details Revision (increase) of cess applicable on the purpose for which water is consumed

 

35. Name of Instrument Tax on raw coal, raw peat and raw lignite – Clean energy cess 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2010

 

36. Name of Instrument Uttar Pradesh – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1974

 

37. Name of Instrument Uttarakhand – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 2003 

 

38. Name of Instrument West Bengal – Dealer tax on motor vehicles 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1979 

 

39 Name of Instrument West Bengal – Motor vehicles tax 

Type Tax 

Year of introduction 1979

 

https://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Orissa_Country_Report.pdf

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a grey area among the business organisations operating in Orissa. There are not enough CSR initiatives by the business community and there is limited civil society initiative to bring in required changes in the corporate strategies.

 

Civil society’s opinion of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Orissa is not very positive. The RSC findings show that it is either insignificant (46.01%), moderate (12.27%) or limited (38.65%). Only 3.07% of the respondents feel that the CSR status was significant.

 

However, the opinions of the industries contradict the above findings. A survey conducted among 12 large private manufacturing companies indicates that in most of the cases, industries view themselves as socially responsible. Content analyses of annual reports provided by five industries that have been surveyed reveal that, while only one industry has a social responsibility mission statement, another three have reports on corporate governance. The analyses further show that there have been no separate expenditure statements on CSR in the annual reports or in the balance sheets of these firms.

 

The question of business organisations supporting initiatives undertaken by the CSOs does not evoke a good response from the RSC participants in Orissa. While nearly 17% of the RSC respondents believe that business associations never participate in any of the civil society initiatives, 47% feel it to be a rare event. Only 4% believe that such participation is frequent. The RSC survey shows that surveyed CSOs receive only 1% of their funds from corporate sources (Figure III.1.9). This indicates a low level of corporate philanthropy practiced in Orissa.

 

That no media coverage on this subject matter was found during the media review reflects the limited importance attached to such activities by the business organisations. Even the business organisations admit that, in general, they are not philanthropists. In the survey on ‘Status of CSR in Industries in Orissa’ (Annex 5), 8.5% of the respondent industries opine that helping the community through charitable donations, educational and cultural contribution is not on their agenda. Similarly, one-third of the firms clearly state that the issue of direct support for thirdparty social and sustainable development related initiatives is not applicable to their organisations.

 

The firms, however, do invest in some form of peripheral development activities either through charities promoted by their organisations or directly through the organisation under a peripheral development expenditure head or some other heads of expenditure created for the purpose. Two of the surveyed firms have set up charitable trusts to carry out peripheral development activities, but the rest undertake such activities through various departments within the organisation. Generally, the human resource development department, communications department or peripheral development department are assigned the responsibility of such activities. Barring two firms who do not have any monetary provisions for such activities, the rest of the firms are engaged in various peripheral development activities (Refer Annex 5 for detials). However, these firms admit that there is no definite allocated amount for this purpose and the amount allocated is very low in comparison to the gross/net profits of the firm.

 

NEPAL

https://www.civicus.org/media/CSI_Nepal_Country_Report.pdf

 

Corporate social responsibility. As reflected below, there are few corporations which espouse the concept of social responsibility. A study on the status of corporate social responsibility in Nepal conducted by FNCCI, Action Aid and Lotus Holding Pvt. Ltd. in 2003 revealed that “the business cannot create wealth and thrive in an island of poverty.” CSR is defined as the responsibility of the business community towards the well-being of the society and the overall development of the nation.

 

The study, which examined 100 companies, presented an unclear image of CSR, and highlighted diverse perceptions of CSR among key players, such as corporations, CSOs and government, and also highlights the importance of CSR within the industrial sector.

 

The role of industries in CSR is increasing and many more companies are becoming keen to fulfil their social roles and responsibilities. FNCCI has established a separate unit to promote CSR activities in the country.

 

Similar findings emerge from the regional stakeholder consultations, where respondents stated that corporate social responsibility in Nepal is mainly limited (44%) and even moderate (18%). Another 14% found it insignificant, while 9% judged it to be significant.

 

There are few corporate organisations that contribute financial support to civil society. Corporations such as Dugar Group, Golcha Organisation, Kedia Group, Jyoti Group and Mercantile have established hospitals, supported schools and colleges, or launched environmental improvement programmes as charity activities. Corporate philanthropy in Nepal is allied with their commercial interests. The regional stakeholder consultations reveal that 21% of funding comes from individual donations, 21% from foreign donors, 19% from indigenous corporate funding and 16% from individual membership. While 15% of financial resources come from the government, 79% of CSO respondents stated that more than 10% of their funding came from corporate sources.

 

PAKISTAN

http://aysps.gsu.edu/isp/files/ispwp0808.pdf

 

There are excise taxes in place for 17 categories of oil and fuel products. There are no “green” taxes in place.

 

https://www.civicus.org/new/media/pakistan.pdf

 

In terms of financial support, the role of the corporate sector merits attention. A National Survey on Corporate Giving revealed that the corporate sector is heavily involved in social development activities in Pakistan.14 Ninety-three percent of the companies surveyed undertook some kind of philanthropic activity. By contrast, a majority of civil society knowledge bearers disagreed with the proposition that businesses were actively engaged in philanthropic programmes in Pakistan.

 

info_on_corporate_policy_in_the_countries.txt · Last modified: 2012/10/10 21:26 by sandra