What will the corporate income tax system in Ukraine be by 2035? Delphi Method. Quantitative and qualitative data
This data are the result of scientific research relating to the evaluation of alternative scenarios of corporate income taxation in Ukraine by 2035, in the terms of their preferability and probability. For this research, the Delphi method was chosen. The results show 6 main points. 1. The experts are fully convinced that the corporate income tax will not be abolished by 2035. However, experts are not as confident whether the corporate income tax will remain unchanged. 2. All scenarios with strong and moderate consensus are undesirable and low probable. 3. After 4 evaluation rounds the most desirable scenario «Expanding the base through taxation of digital companies that have no physical presence in the country» remained moderately inconsistent. However, this is currently the most discussed scenario in the world, which is a part of OECD initiatives Pillar 1 and Pillar 2. 4. The most undesirable scenario with the strongest consensus was «Increasing the basic tax rate», although it is considered by Nobel Prize Laureate Joseph Stiglitz as one of the preferred scenarios for a particular group of countries. 5. The most discussed scenario in Ukraine since 2015 «Replacement of corporate income tax with tax on withdrawn capital» showed strong experts inconsistent on the desirability, as well as a moderate consensus on the low probability. And finally, 6. The results of the Delphi method research did not close the discussion about corporate income taxation future in Ukraine, but only highlighted new issues that need further investigations. Thus, conducting such research on a regular basis should be a good foundation for making informed decisions about the future of the taxation system in Ukraine. The generalizability of these results is subject to certain limitations: 1. The experts from Ukraine and The Commonwealth of Independent States could affect the breadth of views on the research problem. 2. The results of the study depend on the socio-economic and institutional conditions in Ukraine and cannot be fully extrapolated to the tax systems of the other countries. Data are available in Ukrainian and Russian only.
Steps to reproduce
14 taxation experts from Ukraine and The Commonwealth of Independent States were invited for this study. During 4 rounds, experts evaluated alternative scenarios of corporate income taxation in Ukraine by 2035 in the terms of their preferability and probability. The first round was devoted to approving scenarios of the corporate income taxation in Ukraine by 2035. All scenarios were divided into 4 general groups: Group A – The tax remains unchanged; Group B – The tax rate is changed; Group C – The tax base is changed; Group D – The tax is replaced or abolished. After the first round, 14 alternative scenarios were approved. In the second-round, experts evaluated all these alternative scenarios in the terms of their preferability and probability in Ukraine by 2035. The experts also were asked to formulate up to 3 arguments for their opinions. The experts used 2 scales for scenario evaluations. One scale was for evaluation of the scenario's desirability and second one was for evaluation of the scenario's probability. Both scales were from 1 to 5, where 1 meant that the expert had a strong conviction about the scenario's unpreferability and low probability, and 5 meant that the expert had a strong conviction about the scenario's preferability and high probability. After all the experts had evaluated all scenarios, the research group calculated the interquartile range and the median for each scenario. The interquartile range less than 1 meant that the experts reached a strong consensus in the scenario's evaluation. The interquartile range between 1 and 1.5 meant that the experts reached a moderate consensus. In both situations, medians presented results in the form of statistical group responses. The interquartile range more than 1.5 meant that the experts had an inconsistency in opinions for the scenario. In rounds 3 and 4, the experts reevaluated all scenarios to reach a consensus.