WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 8 | 9 || 11 | 12 |   ...   | 14 |

83.28

131.25

164.97

1980

70.73

78.29

54.67

124.13

149.94

1985

66.20

69.10

65.83

121.97

170.07

1990

85.66

91.75

41.48

139.05

184.86

1993

78.64

29.97

31.48

92.42

24.60

87.22

12.5.32

167.00

1995

78.34

45.76

38.84

91.55

38.67

92.20

130.06

167.93

Source: Author's calculation using data fromSlatistiches Jahrhuch. Various Editions.

TableB.7(c) State Governments Per Capita Revenues, including Shared Tax Revenues andTransfers, as a Percentage of German Average

Year

Baden-
Wurttemberg

Bayern

Brandenburg

Hessen

Mecklenburg-Vorpommern

Niedersachsen

Nordrhein-
Westfalen

Rheinland-
Pfalz

1975

102.91

97.22

102.78

93.33

92.46

95.47

1980

106.82

97.48

101.19

95.06

90.94

93.18

1985

104.19

98.50

103.76

94.40

S9.77

91.15

1990

103.48

98.27

105.55

93.36

93.30

88.40

1992

102.14

101.32

91.61

107.20

98.10

95.19

95.15

88.59

1993

101.96

100.97

95.33

107.57

101.21

93.14

94.40

87.04

1994

99.86

101.75

98.39

105.82

103.42

92.S2

92.86

85.34

1995

98.03

103.20

106.45

101.92

109.24

90.15

94.58

84.63

1996

98.38

101.12

108.57

107.44

1 12.85

91.92

95.28

87.0S

1997

98.16

99.85

111.57

102.77

113.15

90.01

92.87

84.83

Year

Saarland

Sachsen

Sachsen-
Anhalt

Schieswig-Holstein

Thuringen

Berlin

Bremen

Hamburg

1975

88.28

95.24

195.18

120.58

141.26

1980

89.62

95.68

195.68

123.05

133.82

1985

91.31

91.70

209.01

125.58

141.73

1990

93.98

96.96

176.96

135.10

133.98

1992

94.11

92.14

91.00

98.74

93.06

149.61

141.63

135.62

1993

92.08

97.81

97.24

97.72

98.60

144.98

132.86

125.30

1994

108.01

101.16

99.20

98.09

100.27

137.47

167.49

125.08

1995

104.31

111.63

107.61

97.35

106.65

133.18

158.43

130.09

1996

106.58

113.64

109.18

95.50

106.93

124.03

156.86

126.38

1997

106.97

106.27

109.89

95.91

108.71

148.41

160.26

135.49

Source: Author's calculations using datafrom Statistiches Jahrbuch 1998, tables 20.1.3

C. System of IntergovernmentalTransfers

The German system of intergovernmentaltransfers involves both federal-state transfers and state-state transfers.Federal-state transfers include both conditional grants and unconditionalgrants. Of these, some are focused on vertical imbalances, especially directedat constitutionally mandated areas of joint responsibility. Others are focusedon horizontal imbalance, especially directed at the former east German states,but generally on states with below average fiscal capacities after VATdistribution and after interstate equalization.

Interstate transfers are constitutionallymandated and are both implicit and explicit. 75% of the states’ share of VAT is distributed on anequal per capita basis, resulting in implicit transfers from those states withabove average VAT yields to those with below average VAT yields. In addition,explicit interstate equalization is an important component of the allocation ofincome, corporate, and local taxation.

Nature of Programs Focusedon Vertical Imbalances

Specific-PurposeGrants

Conditional grants form the Federation tothe states are made in areas of so-called joint tasks and in the form ofgrants-in-aid. Joint responsibilities are listed under Chapter VIIIa of theBasic Law. Article 91a is prefaced as follows:

(1) In the following areas the Federationshall participate in the discharge of responsibilitiesof the Länder providedthat such responsibilities are important to society as a whole and that federalparticipation is necessary for the improvement of living conditions (jointtasks).

The items listed are:

  1. extension and construction of institutions of higher educationincluding university clinics;
  2. improvement of regional economic structures;
  3. improvement of the agrarian structure and of coastalpreservation.

Such joint tasks are constitutionallymandated, involving joint planning and decision-making, as well as sharing ofresponsibility and financing. Grants-in-aid are directed at correcting forregional disparities, stabilization motives, and promoting economicgrowth.

Article 91a continues:

(2) Joint responsibilities shall be definedin detail by a federal law requiring the consent of the Bundesrat. This lawshall include general principles governing the performance of suchtasks.

(3) The law shall provide for the procedureand institutions required for joint overall planning. The inclusion of aproject in the overall plan shall require the consent of the Land in whoseterritory it is to be carried out.

Finally, Article 91a has language thatspecifies cost-sharing in areas of joint responsibility:

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 8 | 9 || 11 | 12 |   ...   | 14 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .