ib praveen

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    1/15

    VAZIM MAHAMOOD P

    Assignment

    3/22/2012

    1

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    2/15

    Exercise 1

    The top management of your company requested areport regarding the tax policies of the followingcountries: Argentina, Belgium, Bulgaria, China,

    Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Germany, Italyand the United Kingdom. Prepare a table includingthe corporate and individual income tax rates andthe value added tax rates (where applicable) for

    those countries.

    3/22/2012

    2

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    3/15

    Tax rate

    PROGRESSIVE TAX, PROPORTIONAL, OR REGRESSIVE.

    A progressive tax is one in which the percent paid as tax rises as theamount rises (for example, personal income tax in many countries).

    A proportional tax is one in which the percent paid as tax stays the sameas the amount rises (for example, sales tax, or corporate income tax in somecountries).

    A regressive tax is one in which the percent paid as tax falls as the amount

    rises (for example, value added tax in some cases).

    Thus, a person's applicable tax rate will depend on how much of each type oftax he/she pays as part of his/her total tax burden

    3/22/2012

    3

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    4/15

    corporate income tax rates

    S No Country Rates1 Argentina 35%

    2 Belgium 33.99%

    3 Bulgaria

    10%

    4 China, 25%

    5 Czech Republic 19%

    6 Denmark 25%

    7 Egypt 20%

    8 Germany 31.4%

    9 United Kingdom 28%

    3/22/2012

    4

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    5/15

    Individual income tax rates

    S No Country Rates1 Argentina

    35%

    2 Belgium50%

    3 Bulgaria10%

    4 China,45%

    5 Czech Republic15%

    6 Denmark51.5%

    7 Egypt20%

    8 Germany43%

    9 United Kingdom

    50%

    3/22/2012

    5

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    6/15

    Value added tax rates

    S No Country Rates

    1 Argentina 21%

    2 Belgium 21%

    3 Bulgaria 20%

    4 China, 17%

    5 Czech Republic 20%

    6 Denmark 25%

    7 Egypt 10%

    8 Germany 20%

    9 United Kingdom17.5%

    3/22/2012

    6

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    7/15

    Tax policies vary widely from country tocountry, OECD study shows

    12/10/2005 - The ways in which governments raise money throughtaxation continue to vary widely across the OECD, (organisation foreconomic co-operation and development) with Denmark collectingalmost 60% of its revenues from personal and corporate taxes andFrance less than 25%, according to data in the latest edition of theOECDs annual Revenue Statistics publication.

    In North America, Mexico collects more than half of its tax revenue fromtaxes on the sales of goods and services while the United States raisesless than a fifth of its revenue from this source (see Figure 1 and Table1).

    At regional and local level, different patterns are also visible. While mostcountries use a mix of state and local taxes to finance sub-nationalgovernment, Ireland and the United Kingdom rely exclusively on local

    property taxes and Sweden exclusively on local income tax 3/22/2012

    7

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    8/15

    Exercise 2

    One of the Marketing Potential Indicators forEmerging Markets is identified as country risk.

    Utilizing the ranking provided by the global EDGEwebsite, identify 5 emerging markets that exhibit theleast risk for foreign investors.

    3/22/2012

    8

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    9/15

    Market Potential Index (MPI) forEmerging Markets - 2011

    Global marketing is becoming more and more important along the years with theincreasing trend in internationalization. Having too many choices, marketers face thechallenge of determining which international markets to enter and the appropriatemarketing strategies for those countries.

    The focus of this study is ranking the market potential of countries identified as"Emerging Markets" byThe Economist magazine. These emerging economiescomprise more than half of the world's population, account for a large share of world

    output, and have very high growth rates; all indicators of enormous market potential.

    This indexing study is conducted byMSU-IBC (Michigan State UniversityInternational Business Centre) to help companies compare the EmergingMarkets with each other on several dimensions. Eight dimensions are chosen torepresent the market potential of a country over a scale of 1 to 100. Eachdimension is measured using various indicators, and are weighted in determiningtheir contribution to the Overall Market Potential Index.

    3/22/2012

    9

    http://www.economist.com/http://ciber.msu.edu/http://globaledge.msu.edu/Knowledge-Tools/MPIhttp://globaledge.msu.edu/Knowledge-Tools/MPIhttp://ciber.msu.edu/http://ciber.msu.edu/http://ciber.msu.edu/http://www.economist.com/
  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    10/15

    Market Potential Index For Emerging Market-2004

    OverallRank

    Country MarketSize

    MarketGrowthRate

    MarketConsumptionCapacity

    CountryRisk

    OverallScore

    1 HongKong

    1 80 54 88 100

    2 Singapore

    1 84 62 100 80

    3 South

    Korea

    12 78 99 62 74

    4 China 100 82 59 49 73

    5 Israel 1 75 82 57 69

    8 India 47 96 77 38 603/22/2012

    10

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    11/15

    Year to Year Comparison

    Country 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007

    Singapore 1 3 1 3 3

    HongKong

    2 1 3 1 2

    China 3 2 2 2 1

    SouthKorea

    4 4 4 5 6

    CzechRepublic

    5 5 5 6 7

    India 6 9 11 11 9

    3/22/2012

    11

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    12/15

    Graphical Representation

    20112010

    200920082007

    02

    46

    8

    10

    12

    20112010

    2009

    2008

    2007

    3/22/2012

    12

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    13/15

    Market Potential Index (MPI) forEmerging Markets - 2011

    OverallRank

    CountryMarketSize

    MarketGrowthRate

    MarketIntensity

    MarketConsumptionCapacity

    CommercialInfrastructure

    EconomicFreedom

    MarketReceptivity

    CountryRisk

    OverallScore

    1Singapore

    1 100 72 65 83 80 100 100 63

    2HongKong

    1 29 100 59 100 93 86 95 58

    3 China 100 93 1 67 36 7 4 55 55

    4 SouthKorea

    10 41 59 92 88 83 16 71 49

    5CzechRepublic

    1 18 45 100 92 89 14 76 45

    6 India 38 83 35 67 17 50 2 42 41

    3/22/2012

    13

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    14/15

    Year to Year Comparison

    Country

    2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1998 1997 1996

    Singapore

    1 3 1 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

    HongKong 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 4 2

    China 3 2 2 2 1 3 4 5 5 5 6 5 2 3

    SouthKorea

    4 4 4 5 6 4 3 3 3 2 10 3 9 5

    CzechRepublic

    5 5 5 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 19

    India 6 9 11 11 9 9 8 9 10 11 8 10 10 10

    3/22/2012

    14

  • 8/2/2019 ib praveen

    15/15

    3/22/2012

    15