2025-05-13-世界银行-税收和转移支付对巴基斯坦不平等和贫困的影响（英）_106页_1mb

Summary of The Effects of Taxes and Transfers on Inequality and Poverty in Pakistan

Core Content

This study analyzes the impact of fiscal policy on poverty and inequality in Pakistan using the Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Methodology for the fiscal year 2019 (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019). It evaluates the distributional effects of taxes, social expenditures, and subsidies on households and highlights the effectiveness of various fiscal instruments in reducing poverty and inequality.

Main Findings

• Fiscal Policy Impact on Poverty and Inequality:
  The fiscal system in Pakistan increased the national poverty headcount by approximately 2.3 percentage points while leaving inequality largely unchanged. The Gini coefficient slightly decreased from 29.0 to 28.6, indicating a minor reduction in inequality.

• Net Payers vs. Net Receivers:
  Most households are net payers into the fiscal system, meaning they pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits. Only the poorest decile is a net receiver, with a net cash gain of about 1.2% of their pre-fiscal income. Other deciles experience cash losses ranging from -1.8% (decile 2) to -5.5% (decile 10).

• Effectiveness of Fiscal Instruments:

  • BISP (Benazir Income Support Program): The most effective expenditure-side instrument for reducing inequality.
  • Personal Income Tax (PIT): The most effective revenue-side instrument for reducing inequality.
  • Indirect Taxes and Subsidies: Less effective in reducing poverty and inequality. They are more concentrated among richer households and do not significantly benefit the poor and vulnerable.
  • In-Kind Transfers: Have an insignificant impact on inequality.

• Subsidy Concentration:
  The two richest deciles captured 34% of total subsidy expenditure and 29% of in-kind education benefits, while the two poorest deciles received 53% of total direct transfer spending.

• Marginal Contributions:

  • The General Sales Tax (GST) had the largest negative impact on poverty.
  • The BISP Unconditional Cash Transfer (UCT) had the largest positive impact on inequality reduction.
  • Pre-primary and primary education expenditures also contributed positively to inequality reduction.

• Cost-Effectiveness:
  BISP transfers and direct taxes are the most cost-effective tools for reducing inequality and protecting poor households. Indirect subsidies are relatively ineffective in poverty reduction.

• International Comparison:
  Among middle-income countries, Pakistan has the highest poverty increase and the lowest inequality reduction, as measured by the Gini coefficient. This is attributed to low tax and social expenditure levels, limited progressivity, and inefficient subsidy programs.

• Fiscal Challenges:
  Pakistan faces significant fiscal challenges, including a high public deficit, increasing public debt, and low tax revenues. These are mostly used for rigid expenditures such as salaries, pensions, and subsidies, limiting fiscal space for social investments.

• Policy Implications:

  • Improve domestic revenue mobilization and public expenditure efficiency to create more fiscal space.
  • Prioritize expanding social expenditure and targeted transfers to enhance fiscal equity.
  • Consider using revenue from GST harmonization to fund well-targeted cash transfers for poor and vulnerable households.
  • Shift from generalized subsidies to targeted social transfers to improve fiscal sustainability and equity.
  • Invest in public health and education services to improve long-term poverty and inequality outcomes.

Key Instruments and Policies

• Taxes:

  • General Sales Tax (GST): Largest negative impact on poverty.
  • Personal Income Tax (PIT): Most effective at reducing inequality.
  • Urban Property Tax: Effective at shielding poor households.
  • Withholding Tax on Salaries and Telecommunications: Part of the tax structure.

• Social Expenditures:

  • BISP: Largest positive impact on inequality reduction.
  • Conditional and Unconditional Cash Transfers: Part of BISP.
  • In-Kind Benefits: Health and education services, but have limited impact on inequality.

• Subsidies:

  • Indirect Subsidies: Include electricity, natural gas, and agricultural inputs.
  • Direct Subsidies: Mostly ineffective in reducing poverty or inequality.

Methodology and Data

• The study uses the Commitment to Equity (CEQ) Methodology.
• Data sources include the Pakistan Household Integrated Economic Survey (HIES) 2018–19 and fiscal, budgetary, and administrative data from federal and provincial governments.
• The analysis covers 61% of federal tax revenues and 45% of provincial tax revenues.
• It also includes zakat (religious taxes and transfers) and models informality in household consumption.

Conclusion

The study emphasizes the importance of fiscal equity in Pakistan's development strategy. It recommends a shift toward progressive taxation, targeted social transfers, and efficient public expenditure to reduce poverty and inequality. These recommendations align with the World Bank's Poverty and Shared Prosperity Report (2022) and support the country's efforts to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 10.4.2, which focuses on the redistributive impact of fiscal systems on inequality reduction.

Annexes Overview

• Annex I: Fiscal Parameters of the Model
• Annex II: Methodology for Estimating Public Sector Employees and Labor Informality in the HIES
• Annex III: Methodology for Estimating Indirect Effects Based on the IO Matrix
• Annex IV: Detailed Relative and Absolute Incidence
• Annex V: Fiscal Interventions Excluded from the Model
• Annex VI: Data Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research