Abstract
Ukraine's economy, as compared to other European countries, is lagging behind. An unstable political situation, significant tax pressure, various administrative barriers, complexity of tax administration and with obtaining permits, technical regulation, certification and standardization, frequent sudden inspections by state control bodies, limited opportunities for the use of financial and credit resources, weakness of material, technical, financial, managerial, and personnel components of business entities – all these factors do not promote the entrepreneurial initiative in this country. The key precondition for raising the prosperity level and effective social and economic development is strengthening the competitiveness of the national economy through the coordinated work of the state and its budget and fiscal institutions. This study reveals the theory and the methodology of the formation and implementation of fiscal policy in Ukraine. Peculiarities in the development of the entrepreneurial environment in Ukraine are analyzed, and fiscal mechanisms are defined with the purpose of activating further entrepreneurship development.
TopLiterature Review
There is no consensus among researchers concerning the definition of “tax competition”. R. Teaser (2005), T. Field (2003), C. Pinto (2003) and D. Rohas (2006) all considered international tax competition in the broad sense and treated it as inconsistent tax-setting by an independent state, the use of low effective tax rates, and the reduction of tax burden in order to increase the competitiveness of national business, boost business activity in the country and attract foreign investments.
In a narrower sense, tax competition is considered as the impact of the tax system of one state on the tax system of the other, based on the ability of taxpayers to choose between jurisdictions with different levels of taxation and transfer part of the gross national product to another territory, with a certain impact of tax policy on the distribution of income from taxation between state budgets. This opinion has been supported by T. Goodspider (2015), P. Genschel (2001), J. Wilson (2015), D. Wildasin (2004) and some Ukrainian researchers (Krysovatyi, 2000; Bazylevych, 2004; Sidelnikova, 2010).