Applying Fiscal Tools for Economic Development and Localization of CO VID‑ 19 Impacts on a Case Study of South America

The tax system of any country as a tool to fill the budget is never static, constantly subject to development and improvement, so it is relevant to study and apply its progressive elements used by different states. The subject of the study is the current tax transformation in Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and its task is to study and apply its results, since the pandemic particularly affected the economies of developing countries. Countries of South America have been actively pursuing tax reforms since the middle of the last century, but localizing the effects of COVID‑19 requires tax changes in this area at the present time. The tax transformation in Brazil has involved a tax on dividends, capitalization of accumulated profits and dividends paid in kind, corporate income tax and corporate reorganizations. The tax transformation in Argentina also takes place in terms of income tax (restrictions on depreciation payments, permanent establishment), but there are also areas, such as tax haven policy, capital gains tax on non-residents of Argentina, and taxation of controlled foreign companies. The author carried the research on using general scientific methods of analysis, comparison, and deduction. The results of the study of tax transformation in South American countries can, considering the specifics of our economy, find practical implementation in the tax’s improvement system in the Russian Federation. Thus, it is proposed to adapt the following tax instruments in order to localize the effects of COVID‑19: tax loss carryforwards, deduction of R&D expenses.

1. Kostuhin Y., Savon D. Improving steel market performance indicators in the fact of increased competition. Cherny metal. 2020;(4):68–72.

2. Tolstykh T. O., Shkarupeta E. V., Kostuhin Y. Y., Zhaglovskaya A. V., Garin A. P. Scenarios for the Development of Industrial Complexes in the Digital Economy. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems. 2020;(73):1255–1261.

3. Vostrikova K. A. Rental holidays during the coronavirus pandemic. Modern lawyer = Sovremennyj yurist. 2020;32(3):157–164. (In Russ.).

4. Beresneva A. Legal consequences of COVID‑19. Civilistics = Civilistika. 2020;(3):13–29. (In Russ.).

5. Swianiewicz P., Kurniewicz A., Kalcheva D. The Political Budget Cycle in Earmarked Taxes for Local Public Services: A Comparison of Poland and Bulgaria. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice. 2019;21(4):1– 18.

6. Doesum A. V., Nellen F. Economic Reality in EU VAT. EC Tax Review. 2020;(5):213–226

7. Mikuła P., Zawodsky F. S. EU VAT in Jeopardy: Clues from the Unitel Case (C‑653/18). Intertax. 2020;48(4):460–463.

8. Lamensch M. Key policy issues for the future of the EU VAT system (Book Chapter). Research Handbook on European Union Taxation Law. Edward Elgar publishing; 2020.

9. Speder Z., Murinkó L., Olah L. S. Cash support vs. tax incentives: The differential impact of policy interventions on third births in contemporary Hungary. Population studies. 2020;74(1):39–54.

10. Sultanova S., Zakirova G., Artikova R. Assessment of the tax burden of the enterprise in the conditions of reforms in the tax legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Journal of Critical Reviews. 2020;7(5):282–285.

11. Normatov B. A. Tax system of the republic of Uzbekistan. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems. 2020;12(2):317–327.

12. Dimitrakopoulos D. G., Passas A. G. Reforming Greece’s Tax Administration during the Financial Crisis: The Paradox of Power Asymmetry. South European Society and Politics. 2020;25(3):1–22.

13. Fotiadis K., Chatzoglou P. The tax morale of exhausted taxpayers. The case of Greece. Constitutional political economy. 2021.

14. Levina D. V., Klyushnik M. O. Features of tax policy in Argentina. Economy. Business. Finance = Ekonomika. Biznes. Finansy. 2019;(4):10–12. (In Russ.).