| Abstract [eng] |
The PIT system is an important component of every country's budget. This master thesis analyses the specifics, structure, structure, advantages and disadvantages of the EU, Lithuanian, Latvian and Estonian PIT systems. The comparison of the countries shows that Lithuania and Latvia apply a progressive model of the PIT, while Estonia applies a proportional one. The scope of work also revealed that the progressive model of PIT taxation is characterised by greater social justice in society, but is more complex to administer, while the proportional model of PIT taxation is simpler, but contributes less to the development of the welfare of the population and the economy. A comparison of countries in terms of the PIT revealed substantial differences between countries in terms of the amount of tax-free income applied, the presence and absence of an investment account and the differences in the rates applied. The results also suggest that the Lithuanian PIT system could be improved through an increase in the amount of tax-free income, a reduction in the administration-return timeframe and supervision of the shadow economy. The analysis of all aspects of the application of the three Baltic countries' PIT concluded that there is no single and correct system of PIT regulation, all of which have their own advantages and disadvantages, but all of which can be improved through regulation, by reducing the level of rates. As a tax on consumption, it is a tax on income, and is therefore hit hard by all sections of the working population, as its payment and changes are felt most by the ordinary population of the country. In the current geopolitical situation prevailing in the Baltic States, I believe that consumption taxes such as VAT should be increased, as an increase of a few percentage points in such a tax will not cause such a bold and painful feeling in society as a rise in the rate of PIT. |
