Ukraine personal, social and cultural documents include personal possessions of the citizens of a country. The most important categories of documents include birth certificates, marriage contracts, death certificates, divorce decrees, birth and death records, and genealogical records. Ukraine personal, social and cultural documentation is generally referred as the post-factional state property inventory. Most properties are registered in the name of the individual or the family who holds the title. The inventory usually includes real estate, such as farms, residential houses, buildings and other structures, personal belongings, and other financial assets. In order to access these assets, the government prepares and registers the inventory as well as public register of the properties.
According to the latest available data, there are currently 6.7 million tax payers in Ukraine. The distribution of tax burden is dependent on several factors. Firstly, the size of the economy of a country is one of the key factors that determine the level of taxation required by the government. Secondly, the size of a country’s population is also one of the major factors that determine the level of taxation required by the government. Thirdly, the overall economic development of a country, along with changes in the government policy and the conditions of the market affect the behavior of tax payers.
The level of taxation varies according to the level of development of a country. The minimum wage that remains unchanged in all sectors of the economy is set at EUR 600 per month. In addition, a substantial proportion of the total gross domestic product (GDP) is still paid by employees. A significant proportion of employees earns a higher salary and hence does not see the need to pay the VAT.
There are several reasons as to why the Bulgarian and the Ukrian governments have not raised the minimum wage, despite calls by Brussels for an increase in the tax rate applicable to Bulgarian and Ukrian citizens. Firstly, the Bulgarian and UK governments do not view the two countries as ‘comfortable’, meaning that they face a ‘growth constraint’. Even in times of recession the Bulgarian and UK authorities do not feel that an increase in the taxation rate will be beneficial, given the weakness of the economies of both economies.
The lack of unified statehood has led to a situation where different units of taxation have developed within the country. The main units of taxation are the central and regional authorities of the country. The former implements tax collection policy, while the latter implements the personal income tax rate. The Central Bank of Ukraine has no powers to increase or reduce the unified statehood tax rate. As a result, the rates charged on the personal rate of VAT remain unchanged for the period of visa-free travel in the Union.
In line with these limitations of the Union, the Bulgarian and UK authorities have repeatedly put forward the argument that they would be open to the possibility of a harmonisation of the two countries’ taxation systems. However, they do not have the same objectives as the EU. As regards the case of Bulgaria and the UK, the Commission has repeatedly insisted that the Union’s restrictive policy on Bulgarian and UK property is a barrier to the free movement of people. The Commission sees this restrictive policy as hindering Bulgarian and UK access to the market for goods and services that are otherwise lawfully available in the Union. For example, the Commission refers to the fact that the restriction on the transfer of property by EU citizens to Bulgaria and the UK has led to a large number of investments being frozen in both countries. The Commission also claims that the restrictions on the free movement of capital between the Union and the UK are also hindering the free flow of goods and services in the Union.
On the other hand, the Bulgarian and UK authorities have repeatedly rejected the idea of any harmonisation or adjustment of the UK tax regime with that of Bulgaria. The Bulgarian and UK governments have maintained that the present UK legal entities cannot be made into legal entities in the eyes of the EU because they do not meet the legal criteria necessary for statehood. The representatives of the two states have also repeatedly insisted that the Union’s opt-out policy on the subject of the transfer of the property remains unchanged. In addition, the representatives of the two countries stated that the Commission’s latest proposal on the subject of the corporate tax burden is still unacceptable.
The European Commission has rejected the argument put forward by the Bulgarian and UK authorities that the transfer of property by EU citizens to Bulgaria and the UK remains illegal. The Commission has claimed that the application of Union law concerning the corporation tax rate and the establishment of new legal entities was rejected in line with the enlargement ambitions of the Union. The Commission pointed out that the enlargement of the Union would allow member states with a low corporate tax rate to invite more companies to establish outlets within their territory. Therefore, the Union’s member states have the right to approve investments in UK and Bulgaria in accordance with their own legal systems.