Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/4081 
Kompletter Metadatensatz
DublinCore-FeldWertSprache
dc.contributor.authorLanghammer, Rolf J.en
dc.date.accessioned2009-01-28T14:37:29Z-
dc.date.available2009-01-28T14:37:29Z-
dc.date.issued2007-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10419/4081-
dc.description.abstractRecent empirical research on efficiency gains for Russia from WTO membership concludes that service trade liberalization especially through allowing foreign suppliers to invest in Russian service industries promises the largest gains. This points to sizable efficiency deficits in the Russian service sector. This paper departs from the question whether both the Russian sectoral protection structure and the effective rates of protection (ERPs) differ from structures and rates in benchmark countries if tax equivalents for intermediate services are taken into account. The result is that almost all Russian service industries get effectively taxed and not protected once not only tax equivalents of intermediate goods but also those of intermediate services are included in ERP calculation. Variance among industries and peak taxes in service industries are significantly higher than in a median emerging country taken as benchmark. These findings support the key role of intermediate services liberalization for the expansion of a viable Russian service sector. Results from comparing Russian effective rates of protection with those of the EU accession countries Bulgaria and Romania are not inclusive. Tax levels of the two accession countries are also high and variant and thus cannot serve as a proxy for the 'economic distance of Russia to Brussels'. Lessons for European Neighborhood Policy point to the requirement for the EU to liberalize bilateral service trade (through mode 3 supply: commercial presence ) on a quid pro quo base: without opening EU markets for Russian companies in specific services (i.e., energy distribution), Russia will probably not open its service sector for EU suppliers more than is required in order to comply with minimum WTO accession prerequisites.en
dc.language.isoengen
dc.publisher|aKiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW) |cKielen
dc.relation.ispartofseries|aKiel Working Paper |x1385en
dc.subject.jelF15en
dc.subject.jelF13en
dc.subject.ddc330en
dc.subject.keywordLiberalizationen
dc.subject.keywordRussiaen
dc.subject.keywordEuropean Neighborhooden
dc.subject.keywordService Tradeen
dc.subject.stwDienstleistungssektoren
dc.subject.stwProtektionismusen
dc.subject.stwInternationaler Dienstleistungsverkehren
dc.subject.stwAußenhandelsliberalisierungen
dc.subject.stwWTO-Beitritten
dc.subject.stwVergleichen
dc.subject.stwRusslanden
dc.subject.stwSchwellenländeren
dc.subject.stwBulgarienen
dc.subject.stwRumänienen
dc.titleSectoral distortions and service protection in Russia: A comparison with benchmark emerging markets and EU accession candidates-
dc.typeWorking Paperen
dc.identifier.ppn54759156Xen
dc.rightshttp://www.econstor.eu/dspace/Nutzungsbedingungenen
dc.identifier.repecRePEc:zbw:ifwkwp:1385en

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
125.51 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.