Dr Clive Thomas

Introduction In my two previous SN columns I have endeavoured to present to readers a basic, but relatively robust macroeconomic accounting framework, from which one could demonstrate how economists would seek, in principle, to account for, or decompose the slippage that has occurred in the government debt to GDP ratio for Guyana over the past five years.

Part 2 Introduction As promised last week, I shall conclude my effort to provide a basic accounting of those factors which the macroeconomic data suggest are responsible for the slippage in the government debt to GDP ratio for Guyana that has been observed since 2007.

Important next steps At this stage I alert readers to two tasks which remain to be tackled before I wrap up this discussion of the medium term macroeconomic outlook.

Agony and debt In last week’s column I sought to direct readers’ attention to the debt stress that is engaging our economy and the distress this portends.

The Budget 2012 reveals that despite the statistical benefit which is derived from using the rebased 2006 GDP series as the denominator (because this has led to an approximately two-thirds increase in its size) the debt stock to GDP ratio for Guyana has increased from its low of 60 per cent in both 2007 and 2008 to 70 per cent in 2011. 

As part of my continuing assessment of the 2012 National Budget I attempted two tasks in last week’s column. 

Introduction So far in assessing the challenges posed by the National Budget 2012 for the medium-term outlook and macroeconomic stability of the Guyana economy I have treated with four considerations. 

Introduction This week I shall continue my discussion of the threatening size of government spending (as a proportion of GDP) to the medium-term economic outlook and macroeconomic stability. 

Introduction The noise that surrounds the presentation and debates of annual national budgets in Guyana for decades now is legendary.

My last two Sunday columns elaborated on the proposal for a Budget Office to be established in the National Assembly (NABO). 

In last Sunday’s column I repeated the bold assertion, which I had made a year ago that a National Assembly Budget Office is “needed to restore trust in official economic data.” 

In last week’s Sunday column, I had indicated my plan is to link last year’s analysis of the 2011 National Budget with my evaluation of this year’s.

Introduction Today I start my usual extended commentary on the annual Budget.

Introduction For now this is my last column in the series considering tax reform, following President Ramotar’s appointment of a Tax Reform Committee ― the first significant policy initiative of his administration.

Introduction I trust that there is no ambiguity whatsoever in the minds of readers as regards my opinion of the four traditional or standard goals of taxation, which I introduced in last week’s column (raising revenue; reducing income and wealth inequalities; politically facilitating stakeholder representation in the tax regime; and altering relative prices of goods and services in order to reward-punish economic choices).

Introduction Among other things, in the previous eight Sunday columns of this series on tax reform I have sought to establish three broad propositions.

Introduction Last week I started a discussion on the notion of tax fairness and equity, which I indicated is an essential feature for all well-functioning tax systems and thus tax reform in Guyana.

Introduction So serious are the defects in our tax regime I do not believe that Guyanese will be fobbed with anaemic or banal recommendations from the Tax Reform Committee.

Introduction Last week’s column briefly examined four of the nuts and bolts considerations which inform tax reform, namely, tax expenditures; tax level and structure; tax buoyancy and elasticity; and tax volatility.

Introduction Last week I claimed the value of taxes not paid in 2010 but which ought to have been paid under the tax code was roughly equivalent to that actually paid ($102 billion).