Content uploaded by Aleksandar Trajkov
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Aleksandar Trajkov on Oct 07, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
Научно-практический журнал № 4 (10) * 2019
Учредитель и издатель
Государственное казенное образовательное учреждение высшего образования
«Российская таможенная академия»
Журнал выходит 4 раза в год
Редакционный совет
Председатель совета
В.Б. МАНТУСОВ, начальник Российской таможенной академии, почетный профессор Дипломатичес-
кой академии МИД России, генерал-майор таможенной службы, д-р экон. наук,
профессор
Заместитель председателя редакционного совета
И.В. Сергеев, декан факультета таможенного дела, канд. экон. наук
Члены редакционного совета:
А.А. Зыков, доцент кафедры таможенных операций и таможенного контроля, канд. экон. наук,
доцент;
М.В. Бойкова, заведующий кафедрой управления, канд. пед. наук, доцент;
Е.Е. Костик, заместитель декана (по учебной работе), канд. экон. наук, доцент;
Е.В. Красильникова, заведующий кафедрой товароведения и таможенной экспертизы, канд. техн. наук,
доцент;
И.И. Никитченко, заведующий кафедрой информатики и информационных таможенных технологий,
канд. техн. наук, доцент;
О.Б. Сокольникова, заведующий кафедрой таможенных доходов и тарифного регулирования, канд. экон.
наук, доцент;
О.В. Шишкина, и.о. заведующего кафедрой таможенных операций и таможенного контроля, канд.
экон. наук, доцент
Международный совет
В. Чижович, профессор кафедры административного и финансового права предприятий Колле-
гии наук о предприятиях Высшей коммерческой школы SGH г. Варшавы (Польша),
член Управленческого комитета Международной сети таможенных университетов,
д-р наук;
С. Коруновски, ректор Университета Св. Климента Охридского г. Битола (Македония), д-р наук,
профессор;
Ц. Андреевски, декан факультета туризма и гостеприимства Университета Св. Климента Охридс-
кого г. Битола (Македония), д-р наук, профессор;
В. Караджова, начальник департамента по страхованию факультета туризма и гостеприимства
Университета Св. Климента Охридского г. Битола (Македония), д-р наук, профессор;
А. Трайков, заместитель декана факультета туризма и гостеприимства Университета Св. Кли-
мента Охридского г. Битола (Македония), д-р наук, профессор;
Й. Бильян, профессор факультета туризма и гостеприимства Университета Св. Климента
Охридского г. Битола (Македония), д-р наук;
Т. Джукич, декан экономического факультета Университета г. Ниш (Сербия), д-р наук, профессор;
Я. Джурович-Тодорович, профессор экономического факультета Университета г. Ниш (Сербия), д-р наук;
Б. Клеменчич, ректор Высшей школы экономики г. Мурска-Собота (Словения), д-р наук;
Д. Пертовшек, профессор Высшей школы экономики г. Целье (Словения), магистр;
А. Ворина, профессор Высшей школы экономики г. Целье (Словения), д-р наук;
Г. Бровка, декан факультета технологий управления и гуманитаризации Белорусского нацио-
нального технического университета г. Минска (Белоруссия), канд. пед. наук, доцент
2ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL
РЕДАКЦИОННАЯ КОЛЛЕГИЯ
Главный редактор
И.В. Сергеев, канд. экон. наук
Заместитель главного редактора
А.А. Зыков, канд. экон. наук, доцент
Члены редакционной коллегии:
С.Д. Пивкин, д-р пед. наук, доцент;
М. Джорджевич, д-р техн. наук, профессор;
С.В. Гарник, д-р экон. наук, профессор;
В.В. Макрусев, д-р физ.-мат. наук, профессор;
Г.Я. Резго, д-р техн. наук, профессор;
Ю.Н. Самолаев, д-р техн. наук, профессор;
С.Я. Юсупова, д-р экон. наук, профессор;
Г.И. Немирова, д-р экон. наук, доцент;
Л.В. Кучинская, канд. экон. наук;
Л.А. Филиппова, канд. экон. наук, доцент;
Е.Б. Гайко, ст. преподаватель
Над номером работали:
Н.С. Трескова, дизайнер, верстальщик
Е.В. Лифанова, верстальщик
Материалы публикуются в авторской редакции.
Ответственность за содержание публикаций несут авторы.
Мнение редакции может не совпадать с мнением авторов.
Перепечатка материалов, опубликованных в журнале, допускается только с письменного разрешения ре-
дакции.
Рукописи авторам не возвращаются.
При перепечатке материалов ссылка на журнал «Зеленый коридор. Наука и образование в таможенном де-
ле» обязательна.
Материалы для опубликования в журнале можно направлять по электронной почте:
greenchannel@customs-academy.ru.
140015, Моск. обл., г. Люберцы, Комсомольский пр-т, д. 4.
Подписано в печать 30.12.2019 г. Формат 60×84/8. Гарнитура «Times New Roman».
Объем 11,16 усл. печ. л. Тираж 200 экз. Заказ № 079
© Российская таможенная академия, 2019
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL
3
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
GREEN CHANNEL
SCIENCE AND EDUCATION IN CUSTOMS
Scientifi c and practical journal № 4 (10) * 2019
Founder and publisher
State educational institution of higher education
"Russian Customs Academy"
The journal is published 4 times a year
Editorial Council
Chairman of the Council
V.B. MANTUSOV, Head of the Russian Customs Academy, Honorary Professor of the Diplomatic Academy
of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Major General of the Customs Service,
Grand Doctor of sciences, professor
Vice-Chairman of the Editorial Council
I.V. SERGEEV, Dean of the Customs faculty, Ph.D.
Editorial Council members:
A.A. Zykov, Associate professor of the Customs Operations and Customs Control chair, Ph.D.;
M.V. Boykova, Head of the Department of Management, Ph.D., associate professor;
E.Е. Kostik, Vice-Dean of the Customs faculty, Ph.D., associate professor;
Е.V. Krasilnikova, Head of the Department of Goods Science and Customs Expertise, Ds.C., associate
professor;
I.I. Nikitchenko, Head of the Department of Informatics and Information Customs Technologies, Ds.C.,
associate professor;
О.B. Sokolnikova, Head of the Department of Customs Revenues and Tariff Regulation, Ph.D., associate
professor;
О.V. Shishkina, Head of the Department of Customs Operations and Customs Control, Ph.D., associate
professor
International Editorial Council
V. Chizhovitch, Professor, Department of Administrative and Financial Law, Enterprises, College of En-
terprise Sciences, Higher Commercial School SGH, Warsaw (Poland), Member of the
Management Committee of the International Network of Customs Universities, Ph.D.;
S. Коrunovski, Rector of the University St. Kliment of Ohrid, Bitola (Macedonia), Ph.D., professor;
C. Аndreevski, Dean of the Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality of the University St. Kliment of Ohrid,
Bitola (Macedonia), Ph.D., professor;
V. Каradzhova, Head of scientifi c department in the sphere of insurance, of the Faculty of Tourism
and Hospitality of the University St. Kliment of Ohrid, Bitola (Macedonia), Ph.D.,
professor;
А. Тrajkov, Vice-Dean of the Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality of the University St. Kliment
of Ohrid, Bitola (Macedonia), Ph.D., professor;
J. Biljan, Professor of the Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality of the University St. Kliment
of Ohrid, Bitola (Macedonia), Ph.D.;
Т. Djukich, Dean of the Faculty of Economics, University of Nis (Serbia), Ph.D., рrofessor;
J. Djurovich-Todorovich, Professor of the Faculty of Economics, University of Nis (Serbia), Ph.D.;
B. Кlemenchich, Rector of the Higher School of Economics, Murska Sobota (Slovenia), Ph.D.;
D. Pertovshek, Professor, Higher School of Economics, Celje (Slovenia), M.A.;
А. Vorina, Professor, Higher School of Economics, Celje (Slovenia), Ph.D.;
G. Brovka, Dean of the Faculty of Management and Humanitarian Technologies of the Belarusian
National Technical University of Minsk (Belarus), Ph.D., associate professor
4ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL
EDITORIAL BOARD
Editor-in-chief
I.V. Sergeev, Ph.D.
Deputy chief editor
А.А. Zykov, Ph.D., associate professor
Associate editors:
S.D. Pivkin, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, associate professor;
M. Djordjevic, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
S.V. Garnik, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
V.V. Makrusev, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
G.Y. Rjazgo, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
Y.N. Samolayev, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
S.Y. Yusupova, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, professor;
G.I. Nemirova, Grand Doctor of Sciencies, associate professor;
L.V. Kutchnskaya, Ph.D.;
L.А. Philippova, Ph.D., associate professor;
E.B. Gayko, senior lecturer
Technical support team:
N.S. Тreskova, designer, type-setter
Е.V. Liphanova, type-setter
The materials are published in the author's edition.
The authors are responsible for the content of the publications. The opinion of the editorial board may not coincide
with the opinion of the author.
Reprinting of the materials published in the journal is permitted only with the written permission of the editorial
board. Manuscripts are not returned to the authors.
When reprinting materials, the link to the journal “Green Channel. Science and Education in Customs” is mandatory.
Materials for publication in the journal can be sent by e-mail:
greenchannel@customs-academy.ru.
© Russian Customs Academy, 2019
5
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
СОДЕРЖАНИЕ
АКТУАЛЬНЫЕ ВОПРОСЫ ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ
ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЙ БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ
Курихин С.В. Статистический анализ правоохранительной
деятельности Федеральной таможенной службы
по линии административного производства за 2007–2018 гг. ........9
ЦИФРОВЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИИ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
Мозер С.В. Теоретические основы института цифровой таможни
на основе разработок Всемирной таможенной организации ........15
Агапова А.В., Анализ порядка информационного взаимодействия
Макеева Л.И. таможенных и налоговых органов при проведении
таможенного контроля после выпуска товаров ..............................33
ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ ТАМОЖЕННОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
Джурович-Тодорович Я., Уклонение от косвенных налогов
Джорджевич М., в Республике Сербия .........................................................................44
Ристич М.
Бильян Й., Отрицательная эффективность тарифной защиты
Трайков А. мясоперерабатывающей промышленности:
на примере Северной Македонии ....................................................57
ЭКОНОМИКА И УПРАВЛЕНИЕ ТАМОЖЕННОГО ДЕЛА
Самолаев Ю.Н. Концепция развития таможенной логистики .................................66
Кукушкина К.В. Совершенствование дисциплинарного производства
в таможенных органах Российской Федерации .............................75
ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНЫЕ КОММУНИКАЦИИ
В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
Пивкин С.Д. Подготовка переводчиков в сфере таможенной деятельности
как творческий процесс
в системе дополнительного образования ........................................79
Великова Л.Н. Современные тенденции в преподавании английского языка
для специальных целей (таможня) ..................................................86
Гайко Е.Б. Мобильные технологии,
используемые в изучении иностранных языков.............................92
6
ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL
CONTENTS
Kurihin S.V. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF LAW ENFORCEMENT
OF THE FEDERAL CUSTOMS SERVICE ON THE LINE
OF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFENCES FOR 2007–2018 ......................9
Mozer S.V. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE DIGITAL
CUSTOMS INSTITUTE BASED ON DEVELOPMENTS
OF THE WORLD CUSTOMS ORGANIZATION ............................15
Agapova A.V., ANALYSIS OF THE ORDER OF INFORMATION
Makeeva L.I. INTERACTION BETWEEN CUSTOMS
AND TAX AUTHORITIES DURING CUSTOMS CONTROL
AFTER THE RELEASE OF GOODS ................................................33
Đurović-Todorović J., EVASION OF INDIRECT TAXES IN THE REPUBLIC
Đorđević M., Ristić M. OF SERBIA .........................................................................................45
Biljan J., NEGATIVE EFFECTIVE TARIFF PROTECTION
Trajkov A. OF MEAT PROCESSING INDUSTRY
THE CASE OF NORTH MACEDONIA ............................................58
Samolaev Y.N. THE CONCEPT OF DEVELOPMENT
OF CUSTOMS LOGISTICS ..............................................................66
Kukushkina K.V. IMPROVEMENT OF DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CUSTOMS AUTHORITIES
OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ...................................................75
Pivkin S.D. TRAINING OF TRANSLATORS IN THE FIELD
OF CUSTOMS ACTIVITY AS A CREATIVE PROCESS
IN THE SYSTEM OF ADDITIONAL EDUCATION .......................79
Velikova L.N. MODERN TRENDS IN ESP TRAINING FOR CUSTOMS .............86
Gayko E.B. MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES USED
IN THE LANGUAGE LEARNING ...................................................92
58 ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL Й. Бильян, А. Трайков
J. Biljan
PhD, University St. Kliment Ohridski,
Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Ohrid,
Department of Customs and Freight Forwarding
e-mail: ftu@uklo.edu.mk
A. Trajkov
PhD, University St. Kliment Ohridski,
Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Ohrid,
Department of Customs and Freight Forwarding
e-mail: ftu@uklo.edu.mk
NEGATIVE EFFECTIVE TARIFF PROTECTION
OF MEAT PROCESSING INDUSTRY:
THE CASE OF NORTH MACEDONIA
Development of the meat industry, as one of the most important and most specifi c economic
sectors in North Macedonia is directly infl uenced by national trade and customs policies.
One of the main problems facing the meat industry in North Macedonia is the lack of raw
materials for processing. As a result, domestic producers are forced to import frozen pork meat
as raw material. The policy of tariff protection of this product resource increases the costs
of production of meat processing products and reduces the competitiveness of domestic
producers of processed meat on the domestic and foreign markets. Quantifying different
indicators of tariff protection of the meat industry in North Macedonia will help us to determine
the intensity of protection of this sector and to propose trade and/or customs policy measures
to increase and support competitiveness of Macedonian meat processing industry.
Keywords: meat industry, tariff protection, real tariff rate, effective tariff rate, customs
policy, processed meat production, North Macedonia.
Introduction
The food and agricultural sector is one of the most important sectors in North
Macedonia. It has an important contribution to country’s GDP and signifi cant share
in total international trade. According to the Food and Veterinary Agency data, there
were 49 registered meat producers in North Macedonia in 2017 and 12 of them are out
of work temporary. Total production capacity of meat producers is 45 000 tons of meat
per year in a single shift, but still total production of meat is far from the country’s potenti-
al [4]. One of the reasons for reduced production is sectorial trade policy which leads
to reduced competitiveness of the processed meat producing companies on national and
international level. Country faces lack of raw meat for production of dry and semi-dry
meat products. This problem is solved by importing frozen meat. Still, producers face
a problem of tariff protection of the raw materials which increases costs of production
and has a direct impact on production decline. It leaded to cutting down of some meat
production companies in the past few years which has deepened the crises in the sector.
59
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ ТАМОЖЕННОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
Reduced production also resulted with an increased import of processed meat products
from foreign companies from neighboring countries. The aim of the paper is to quantify
different indicators of tariff protection of the meat industry in North Macedonia that will
help to determine the intensity of protection of this sector and will lead to proposing
certain customs policy measures to increase and support competitiveness of Macedonian
meat processing industry.
Methodology
Tariff protection quantifi cation is made byidentifying and calculating average nominal
(simple and weighted), real (post-clearance) and effective tariff protection. Simple
nominal tariff rate is calculated as an arithmetic mean (average) of nominal tariff rates
in certain tariff section. Weighted nominal tariff rate is calculated as an arithmetic mean
(average) of tariff rates where realized import of the products in each tariff line is taken as
a ponder. Real tariff rate is calculated as a ratio of collected tariffs and realized import by
tariff number, multiplied by 100 [1]. Effective tariff rate indicate the level and structure
of protection of the domestic component, or the added value of the domestic industry.
Upgraded W.M. Corden model is used to a theoretical explanation and calculation
of effective tariff protection [1, 3]. The model takes into account imported products that
are used for production when calculating effective tariff protection.
Average Nominal Tariff Rate
,
where, Tna = Simple average nominal tariff rate, Ti = nominal tariff rate for a certain tariff line,
n = number of tariff lines
Weighted Average Nominal Tariff Rate
,
where Tpna = Weighted Average Nominal Tariff Rate, Ti = nominal tariff rate for a certain tariff
number, Ii = Realized import in certain tariff line
Real Tariff Rate
,
where Tr = Real Tariff Rate, Tp = collected tariffs, Ii = Realized import in certain tariff line
Effective Tariff Rate
,
where ej – Effective tariff rate of sector ј; tj – Nominal tariff rate of the fi nal product in sector ј;
ti – nominal tariff rate of imported production resources in sector ј; aij – share of imported production
resources into sector production expenses (per unit of product) in conditions without tariff protection.
60 ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL Й. Бильян, А. Трайков
The Law on Tariff Schedule is used as a data source for estimation of nominal tariff
rate [6]. The estimation of average pondered nominal rate and the real tariff rate is based
on the data from the Customs Administration of North Macedonia [7].
Data used for sectorial analysis are taken from 12 meat processing companies that
are involved in 90% of total pork meat processing in North Macedonia. Analyze is based
on the offi cial data and reports that these companies deliver to relevant institutions like
reports given to the Food and Veterinary Agency of North Macedonia, fi nancial reports’
data from the Central Register of North Macedonia, statistical reports from the State
Statistical Offi ce of North Macedonia and other relevant sources.
Overview of the MEAT PROCESSING sector
The sectorial analysis of the meat processing sector in North Macedonia is partial
one and is based on collected data from 12 meat processing companies that represent
almost 90% of total pork meat processing in the country. The main points of the analysis
are processed meat production, turnover and exports, and the employment level.
According to the data from the analyzed 12 companies, pork meat products have most
signifi cant share in their total processed meat production with around 60% (graph 1).
It is clear that the successful work of these companies is in direct compliance with trade
policy referring on import of frozen pork meat.
Graph 1. Production structure by meat category (%) [4]
Meat processing companies faced with production decline in the period 2014–2017,
with smaller annual volume of meat production compared to 2018. Average rate of installed
capacity usage was about 28%.
Several reasons for production decline in that period can be identifi ed:
– Trade liberalization of the processed meat products based on CEFTA 2006 agreement;
– High tariff protection (high nominal tariffs – specifi c or ad valorem) on raw and
frozen pork meat products.
Production decline had negative consequences in the analyzed period and had
a multiplying effect deepening the sector crises which leaded to shutting down of some
of processed meat producing companies and increased the import of processed meat
products from neighboring countries.
61
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ ТАМОЖЕННОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
National government adopted a regulation for implementation of autonomous measure
as tariff quota for tariff free import of limited quantity of frozen pork meat in June 2018.
Positive effects of this measure on meat production were immediate. Annual growth
rates of meat production in the period 2014–2017 show negative or low positive effect.
On the other hand, 2018 was a year with high growth rate of processed meat production
comparing to 2017 in total and by meat categories as well (graph 2).
Graph 2. Annual growth rate of meat production, total and by meat category
(n – 1 = 100) [4]
Total processed meat production in 2018 increased for 20.27% compared to the
previous year. Approximately, growth rate of pork meat production was 19.95%
in 2018 compared to 2017. It indicates that tariff free import of frozen raw pork meat
has multiplying positive effects on processed meat production in total.
Graph 3. Annual growth rate of total income and export income
of processed meat production (n – 1 = 100) [2]
Annual growth rate of total income of processed meat production was negative
in the fi rst years of the analyzed period. This indicator refers to achieved turnover
in meat processing. Still, companies had a positive growth of 6.69% in 2018 compared
to the previous year. More intense tendencies can be identifi ed when analyzing growth
rate of the export income of processed meat production. As for illustration, there was
a huge decline of 11.59% of export income in 2015 compared to 2014 and even higher
growth of 23.88% of export income in 2018 compared to 2017 (graph 3). Although
62 ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL Й. Бильян, А. Трайков
the share of export incomes in total incomes of processed meat production has a constant
growth (13% in 2014, 16% in 2018), it is still on a low level. In 2015, only 5 of the
analyzed meat processing companies have exported meat processed products compared
to 3 companies that were exporters in 2018. There was one company with dominant
share of 98% of meat export in 2018. Long-term tariff free import of frozen raw pork
meat is expected to increase the number of companies to export processed pork meat
in the future.
There is also permanent increase of the number of employed in the sector in the analyzed
period. Employment growth rate in 2018 was 12.18% compared to the 2014 [5]. Necessity
of new employments is closely connected with the increased volume of production and
it is expected to be extended in the following period.
International trade in processed pork meat products
International trade in processed pork meat products is characterized with a positive
balance (surplus), i.e. higher export than import, in the period 2012–2014. Negative
business environment for processed meat production, uttered with high nominal tariff
rates on frozen pork meat, resulted with a permanent drop of the trade balance surplus
(graph 4). Export – import coverage ratio has dropped out of 1.75 in 2012 to 1.20 in 2014.
Graph 4. International trade of processed pork meat [5]
Note: Analyze is based on data by tariff lines that include processed pork meat products.
Beginning from 2015, trade balance of processed pork meat is negative, with
a tendency to increase the defi cit value. The lowest level of export – import coverage
ratio of processed pork meat was reached in 2016 when every 100 euros of import were
covered with only 68 euros of export. From net exporter, the country has become a net
importer of meat processed products. It resulted with outfl ow of foreign currency assets,
loosingCEFTA 2006 markets, collapse of processed meat production companies, losing
jobs and positions etc.
Adoption of the governmental decision for tariff free import of frozen pork meat
as a production input in the domestic meat processing industry resulted with a positive
tendencies in 2018. Export growth rate in 2018 was 33.36% in 2018 compared to the
63
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ ТАМОЖЕННОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
previous year. Import growth in 2018 was only 4.16% compared to 2017. As a result, trade
defi cit dropped out of 3.5 million euros to 0.8 million euros. Export – import coverage
ratio has reached 0.94 in 2018 compared to 0.74 in 2017, i.e. 100 euros of import were
covered with 94 euros of export.
According to the given data and calculations it is clear that the cutting of the tariff
protection for the import of the frozen pork meat had immediate positive effects for
the meat processing industry. Positive tendencies are expected to continue in the future
which will result with a positive balance in international trade of meat products.
Tari protection of meat PROCESSING industry in NORTH Macedonia
Meat processing industry in North Macedonia is highly dependable on import
of new technologies and “know – how” as well as production resources (raw materials
and intermediate goods). Therefore, the level and structure of tariff protection plays
a crucial roll in the development of this industry.
Average nominal tariff rate for import of frozen pork meat was 26.5% which
is 54% more than average nominal tariff rate of all types of meat which is 17.2%. More
resonant is the example with real tariff protection revealing the tariff rates at which the
corresponded import is actually cleared. Real tariff rate of import of frozen pork meat
is 13.3% which is 77% more than the real tariff protection of all types of meat which
is 7.5% (table 1).
Table 1
Nominal (simple and pondered pre-clearance rate)
and real (post-clearance) tariff protection of meet
and meet processing productsin N. Macedonia (2017) [5, 6, 7]
Nominal tariff rate Pondered nominal tariff rate Real tariff rate
Chapter 02 17.2 20.8 7.5
Frozen pork meat* 26.5 21.4 13.3‘
Chapter 16 7.3 16.6 0.4
Processed pork meat** 29.1 36.6 0.6‘‘
Notes:
* – data refer to tariff numbers 0203 and 0209;
** – data refer to tariff numbers 1601 and 1602 + 9
The situation with tariff protection of processed meat indicates that it is higher than
the tariff protections of raw meat which contradicts the fundamentals of the theory
of tariff protection where production inputs should have zero or very low tariff protection,
semi – products a little higher and the highest protection for the products with higher
level of fi nalization. Real tariff rate for processed meat products is only 0.4%, and for the
processed pork products is 0.6%,
These circumstances lead to a negative effective tariff protection of processed
meat and processed pork meat (table 2). Effective tariff rates indicate the level and the
64 ЗЕЛЕНЫЙ КОРИДОР № 4 (10)
ǵdzǹdzǻȉǷ ǸǼǾǶDzǼǾ
GREEN CHANNEL Й. Бильян, А. Трайков
structure of protection of the domestic component, particularly the value that is added
in the production by domestic industry.
The effective tariff rate of –6.7% for meat industry in total and –12.1% for processed
pork meat products point out that implemented tariff protection does not protect domestic
productions and need to be corrected.
Table 2
Effective tariff protection
of the meat processing industry
in North Macedonia (2017) [5, 6, 7]
Year Effective tariff rate
Total –6.7
Processed pork meat products –12.1
Negative effective tariff rate means that meat processing sector is not protected.
Namely, tariff structure embodied in high real tariff protection of frozen pork meat
(production input) on one side, and low real tariff protection of processed meat products
(production output) on the other side, means additional taxation and additional cost for
the producers. This only highlights the necessity for dropping tariff protection for the
production inputs in order to increase competitiveness of domestic companies on foreign
markets.
The negative ERPs imply the necessity of a new tariff structure to be implemented.
The new tariff structure should take into account the needs for trade protection of both
producers and processors of pork meat, i.e. pork farmers, on one, and the meat processing
companies, on the other hand.
Due to the actual regulation, the application of “end use” customs procedure is the
best solution.
Implementation of the “end use” customs procedure means amending of the
nomenclature of goods in the Law of Tariff Schedule by adding new tariff lines with
0 (zero) tariff rate for frozen pork meat that will be used for processing purposes only.
“End use” customs procedure enables domestic meat processors to import frozen
pork meat tariff free, but with obligation to use that meat in their premises for production
purposes. As the domestic farmers cannot supply pork meat for domestic processors, this
measure will not have negative effects on their businesses.
Conclusions and suggested measures
– Meat industry was facing diffi cult times and declining of production, especially
in the part of export of frozen pork meat.
– Data show that domestic production of pork meat does not meet the requirements
of the domestic pork meat processors in quantity as well as in assortment. The defi cit
of domestic pork meat supply is covered by imports.
– High nominal tariff rates (specifi c and ad-valorem) on frozen pork meat gave a poor
results and did not increase domestic production of pork meat.
65
НАУКА И ОБРАЗОВАНИЕ В ТАМОЖЕННОМ ДЕЛЕ
ЗАРУБЕЖНЫЙ ОПЫТ ТАМОЖЕННОГО АДМИНИСТРИРОВАНИЯ
– Current conditions in the industry highly requires improvement of competitiveness
by long – term full liberalization of the import of frozen pork meat as a main processing
resource.
– The main recommendation of the paper is implementation of a new tariff structure
that will take into account the producers and processors of pork meat, i.e. pork farmers
and slaughters, on one, and the meat processing companies, on the other hand. Having
in mind the national customs regulation, our recommendation is application of “end use”
customs procedure that means to amend the nomenclature of goods in the Law of Tariff
Schedule by adding new tariff lines with 0 (zero) tariff rate for frozen pork meat that will
be used for processing purposes only.
– By liberalization of pork meat import for processing purposes only, the cluster
estimation for increasing production is for 16.000 tones which will lead to 10% export
increase of dry and semi-dry meat processed products.
– Reduced production costs and increased production will have a positive impact
on the companies’ income.
– Positive economy effects for the country:
• Increased VAT collection on base of increased domestic market sales.
• Increased VAT collection on base of increased import of production resources.
• Increased personal income tax collection caused by new employments and extension
of working hours.
• Other fi scal effects of suggested customs policy measures.
• Improving competitiveness and stimulating small companies that will not handle
current situation.
• Stimulating domestic importers of meat meat as intermediates to small meat
processors.
• Restarting of the closed capacities and new employments.
LITERATURE OVERVIEW
1. Билјан Јованка. 2010. Меѓународна трговија. ФТУ – Охрид.
2. Central Register of North Macedonia, database.
3. Corden W. Max 1966. The Structure of a Tariff System and the Effective Protective Rate,
The Journal of Political Economy,Vol.LXXIV, June 1966.
4. Food and Veterinary Agency of North Macedonia, database.
5. State Statistical Offi ce. MAKSTAT database.
6. Law on Tariff Schedule. URL: http://customs.gov.mk/index.php/mk/za-nas-mk/carinska-
regulativa/zakon-za-carinska-tarifa retrieved on 30.06.2019.
7. Никлески Љубе. 2018. Царинска заштита на земјоделско прехранбениот сектор во Ре-
публика Македонија. Докторска дисертација. ФТУ–Охрид.