The Greek tax code has long been a topic of intense discussion and scrutiny, both domestically and internationally. Greece’s financial landscape, marked by the aftermath of a severe debt crisis and stringent austerity measures, has been shaped significantly by its tax policies. This article aims to provide an overview of the Greek tax code and analyze the benefits of lowering taxes in Greece while also addressing the common arguments against doing so.

Overview of the Greek Tax Code

The Greek tax system is characterized by a mix of direct and indirect taxes, including income tax, corporate tax, value-added tax (VAT), property tax, and social security contributions. Here are the key elements:

1. Income Tax: Greece employs a progressive income tax system with rates ranging from 9% to 44% for individuals, depending on their income bracket.
2. Corporate Tax: The standard corporate tax rate is 24%, but small businesses benefit from a reduced rate of 22%.
3. Value-Added Tax (VAT): The standard VAT rate is 24%, with reduced rates of 13% and 6% for certain goods and services.
4. Property Tax: Property owners are subject to an annual property tax, known as ENFIA, which is based on the value of their real estate.
5. Social Security Contributions: Both employers and employees contribute to social security, with rates varying depending on the sector and type of employment.

Pros of Lowering Taxes in Greece

1. Stimulating Economic Growth: Lower taxes can increase disposable income for individuals and profitability for businesses, potentially leading to higher consumer spending and business investment. Enhanced spending and investment can drive economic growth, creating jobs and boosting overall economic activity.
2. Attracting Foreign Investment: A more favorable tax environment can make Greece a more attractive destination for foreign investors, bringing in capital, expertise, and technology. Additionally, increased foreign direct investment can lead to the development of new industries and enhance Greece’s global competitiveness.
3. Reducing Tax Evasion: High tax rates have historically been linked to higher levels of tax evasion in Greece. Lowering taxes could reduce the incentive to evade taxes, broadening the tax base and potentially increasing tax revenues.
4. Encouraging Business Expansion: Lower corporate taxes can provide businesses with more capital to reinvest in expansion, research and development, and hiring, fostering innovation and competitiveness.

KTE believes a lower tax rate is necessary for Greece, so its people can keep more of what they earn.

There are, of course, potential drawbacks to any change in fiscal policy. The following are the most commonly cited reasons to maintain the current tax code, as well as KTE’s counterpoints.

1. Impact on Public Finances: “Greece’s public finances are still recovering from the debt crisis. Lowering taxes would reduce government revenues, making it harder to meet fiscal targets and potentially leading to higher deficits and debt levels.”

KTE’s policy: While it is true that an immediate result of tax cuts in Greece would reduce government revenues, it is our estimation that this is neither a significant or permanent problem. For reasons discussed above, tax cuts will necessarily spur economic growth for Greece through an increase in disposable income and through the attraction of foreign investors.

Foreign interest to invest in Greece remains very high, however, these investors find themselves blocked entirely by both the Greek tax code and bureaucratic red tape, which we will discuss in detail in a future article. The quick growth in Greek GDP from a reduction in taxes will ultimately increase the amount of taxable income in Greece significantly, which will eventually increase government revenues after a short period of shrinking them.

It cannot be denied that tax cuts would immediately reduce government revenues. As such, it is necessary that government spending be either temporarily reduced, or further debt would need to be incurred for the interim years between the tax cuts – and the intended economic growth – in order to replace the lost government revenue. And yet, there are significant inefficiencies within the Greek government that simple reforms would improve dramatically. Some additional examples of commonly cited drawbacks to changing fiscal policy include:

2. Risk of Inequality: “Tax cuts, especially if not well-targeted, can disproportionately benefit higher-income individuals and businesses, exacerbating income inequality.” KTE’s policy: While this is likely true, we disagree that wealth inequality is necessarily a drawback. Many progressives point to the US as an example of an unfair growing gap between the rich and the poor as the American economy grows. What is often not stated, however, is that America’s comparatively lower taxes and regulations are gradually making everyone wealthier, both rich and poor alike. While the revenues of the rich are growing more quickly, the poor are also reaping the benefits of a more laissez-faire economy. The current deficiencies in the US are due to high inflation, which is notably a result of government overspending and currency printing. As such, it cannot be denied that Greeks would benefit from keeping more of what they earn and from living in a rapidly growing economy.
3. Risk of Losing Social Programs: “Ensuring that tax cuts do not undermine social welfare programs that support vulnerable populations is crucial.”

KTE’s policy: We believe it is worth discussing in detail precisely how both tax cuts and spending public spending reduction can be implemented without harming the important public infrastructure and social programs that Greeks clearly value. The following is a list of many practical measures that would reduce inefficiencies in government spending:

Streamlining Public Administration

Digitization of Services: Invest in technology to digitize public services, thereby reducing the need for physical infrastructure and bringing lower administrative costs.

Reduction of Bureaucracy: Simplify administrative procedures to reduce the number of employees required to manage them, consequently cutting payroll expenses.

Consolidation of Agencies: Merge overlapping government agencies and departments to eliminate redundancy and achieve economies of scale.

Healthcare Reforms

Efficiency in Procurement: Implement centralized procurement systems for medical supplies and pharmaceuticals to obtain better prices and reduce wastage.

Hospital Management: Improve hospital management practices to optimize resource use, reduce unnecessary procedures, and lower operational costs.

Pension System Reform

Gradual Increase in Retirement Age: Align the retirement age with life expectancy trends to reduce the financial burden on the pension system.

Stimulate Private Pensions: Encourage the growth of private pension plans to complement the state pension system, reducing long-term liabilities.

Education System Efficiency

Public School Consolidation: Merge underutilized public schools to optimize resource use and reduce maintenance costs.

Online Education: Expand online education options to reduce physical infrastructure costs and provide flexible learning solutions.

Performance-Based Funding: Implement performance-based funding for higher education institutions to incentivize efficiency and effectiveness.

Public Sector Wage Bill

Performance-Based Pay: Shift towards performance-based pay structures to align salaries with productivity and efficiency.

Voluntary Retirement Programs: Offer voluntary retirement programs with incentives for early retirement to reduce the number of public sector employees.

Freeze on Hiring: Implement a hiring freeze for non-essential positions and promote the reallocation of existing employees to critical areas.

Subsidy and Welfare Reforms

Targeted Subsidies: Ensure that subsidies and welfare benefits are targeted at the most vulnerable populations to avoid unnecessary expenditures.

Means Testing: Introduce means testing for welfare programs to ensure that benefits are provided only to those who genuinely need them.

Fraud Prevention: Strengthen mechanisms to prevent and detect fraud in welfare programs to reduce leakages.

Debt Management

Debt Restructuring: Negotiate with creditors to restructure existing debt to more favorable terms, thereby reducing interest payments and extending maturities.

Efficient Borrowing: Use low-interest periods to refinance high-interest debt to lower annual debt servicing costs.

Privatization and Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)

Privatization of State-Owned Enterprises: Privatize non-strategic, state-owned enterprises to reduce the financial burden on the government.

PPP Initiatives: Utilize PPPs for infrastructure projects to leverage private sector efficiency and investment, decreasing the need for public expenditure.

Energy Sector Reforms

Energy Efficiency Programs: Invest in energy efficiency programs for public buildings to reduce long-term energy costs.

Renewable Energy Projects: Promote renewable energy projects that can provide cost-effective energy solutions, such as nuclear, and reduce dependency on imported fuels.

---

By implementing only some of these practical and achievable measures, the Greek government can work towards reducing its spending in a sustainable manner. Once these reforms are accomplished, the dramatic reduction in spending will allow reasonable tax cuts to follow.

Of course, these reforms will require careful planning and execution. A Greek Parliament that is committed to Greece and improving the lives of her citizens is entirely capable of completing such work. KTE encourages Greek voters to support parties and politicians who are committed to the true economic benefit of Greece, and not those who put themselves and their ideologies before the wellbeing of their country.