Naitik Mandalia

Contemporary Country Structure(What and How) Developing countries gain more benefit from developed country partnership. Many Studies have been made for this kind of partnership and the results unveil both sides of the coin. One faces intangible benefits accrued by developed countries and other reveals to the innovations of a developing country that can potentially inform health systems, economical profits, ecological sustainability, and tax revenue dependencies. The major key areas where developed countries have the most to learn from the developing world are, rural health service delivery, skills substitution, decentralization of management, creative problem solving, education in disease control, local product manufacture and health financing. Combined developed- developed country learning processes can potentially generate effective solutions for global networks. By taking some of these small steps towards country development, international cooperation is developed and in the long run, profitable in not only economic but also beneficial in environmental and ecological sustainability. The emerging evidence has increasingly bought the conventional neoclassical theoretical view of business and development into some questions which need international support for Least Developed Countries (LDCs). 15 of the 45 countries have earnings lower than 15% of GDP. Moreover, countries rich in resources which are more volatile and lower than countries with poor resources, the government in sub- Saharan Africa averaged 23% of GDP compared with 31.4% in the middle-income countries and almost 39% in the advanced countries. Thus, in undeveloped, or developing countries the government sector is conventionally more important than all other sectors. Practically, for all underdeveloped countries it is now customary to have their development program, and economic policies. For governments to lend to the private investors without restoring deficit financing, the tax receipts should be ample. The economic problems in underdeveloped countries are similar to those in developed countries, but there are differences in weight and in importance. In developed countries taxation policies, and tax revenues, are geared to cover the amount of socially desired expenditures. Government expenditures are not determined by the amount of revenue. The underdeveloped countries find it difficult to enhance the level of taxation, and the amount of revenues collected. The taxation policies which have slightly different small scale objectives are relatively of greater importance in underdeveloped countries. So, governments which desire to promote their economic growth to maintain financial stability, have been forced to limit much-needed development expenditures. Developed countries also use tax measures, such as depreciation allowances, tax holidays, etc., to make hold of the business cycle. But this is not possible in underdeveloped countries because, the changes in final demand originate from the industrial countries, and rarely from domestic sources. Dependence on taxes on foreign trade The tax structure in most underdeveloped countries relies deliberately on taxes on foreign trade i.e, import duties, export duties, exchange taxes, etc. In many countries this category accounts for a quarter to a half of the total revenues. A comparison of tax revenues from foreign trade with total revenue shows a rough relationship between low per capita incomes and dependence on taxes on foreign trade. In the absence of knowledge and willingness to rely on other tax measures. Most underdeveloped countries have used taxes on foreign trade as an important source of revenue. Trade and development: Most underdeveloped countries have agricultural based economies, and many are tropical, causing them to rely deliberately upon the proceeds from export of one or two crops like coffee, sugar, etc. Such goods develop competitive conditions in the market i.e prices are extremely sensitive to every change in demand or supply. On the contrary manufacturing cost of such goods is much truncated then selling cost. This fluctuation occurs in the tropical country in it’s, “terms of trade,” and the ratio of export prices to import prices develop painful effects on the domestic economy. At present many efforts have been made for price stabilization and these efforts will continue to converge into a successful outcome. Trading between developed and under-developed countries has been the subject of great controversy. Especially after 1999, when trade talks were deranged by globalization, the work of the WTO came under increasing inquiry from its critics. These critics voiced a number of concerns about the power and scope of the WTO, with the profound criticisms clustering around issues such as the democratic nature of the WTO, environmental impact, health and safety, the rights of domestic workers, national sovereignty, and the long-term wisdom of endorsing commercialism and free trade to the neglect of other values. As the international community sets about defining a new set of development goals, it is important that countries have sufficient policy space to match the enhanced ambitions of any new agenda, UNCTAD(United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) insists in its Trade and Development Report, 2014 : Global governance and policy space for development. The recovery of global output remains weak as the expected growth is between 2.5 to 3 % in 2014. The policies supporting the recovery are still inadequate, as they do not address the rise of income inequality, the steady erosion of policy space along with the diminishing economic role of governments and the primacy of the financial sector of the economy, are the main causes of the crisis in 2008. With a new set of wide-ranging sustainable development goals already tabled in, a post-2015 development agenda will not be feasible without the availability of more instruments and greater flexibility in policy making. On trade, the new report argues that negotiations on rulemaking need to refocus on multilateral agreements which recognize the legitimate concerns of developing countries. Multilateral rules and disciplines check inward-looking national economic policies — such as mercantilism trade policies — through which influential countries can sway the economic performance of others. But multilateral agreements should not encourage or push developing countries to relinquish policies that support economic development. Even though existing multilateral agreements have maintained some flexibility for all World Trade Organization members and incorporated some special treatment for least developed countries, they have also come with restrictions on the conduct of a widening arrangements of trade and industrial policies. The report also argues that developing countries should carefully consider the loss of policy space when engaging in bilateral and regional trade and investment agreements as they can generate effective solutions for today’s global challenges. These specified agreements come up with stricter commitments in areas covered by multilateral agreements, requiring policymakers to forsake the use of instruments that have proved essentially effective in supporting industrialization. The report, variably suggests that while these commitments may provide short-term trade, and employment benefits, in the longer run they can trap producers into low-value niches of manufacturing. In addition to the lack of transparency and coherence often observed in the operations of those tribunals, this set-up follows a model developed for resolving disputes between private commercial actors, and thus the tribunals have no reason to consider the broader aspects of a host country, and its development strategy. Therefore, a multilateral approach to trade rules should allow room for proactive trade and industrial policies for sustained and inclusive growth. Maybe the time has come to look again at the inference of the structuralist perspective for international support, adapted for the contemporary era, and taking into account the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Recent attempts at synthesizing the insights of the neoclassical approach, with its emphasis on trade, and developing mentalist perspectives, can be seen in the contrasting work of Ocampo (2005), Lin (2012) Spence (2011) and others. What difference could it make? It may be necessary to design different international support mechanisms for different country groups. For instance, Cornia and Sognamillo (2016), suggest dividing LDC’s into six clusters, each of which should pursue different policy measures. Countries at war, small and remote countries come in this group category. Prospective and new graduates may even have excellent and dedicated support measures aimed at propelling them through and beyond graduation. Alongside inequality, LDC’s must take a more eminent role in support measures like Ecological sustainability. As international support for LDC’s has currently focused almost exclusively on economic growth. Climate financing has often been expressed concerning, mitigating the impact on environmental changes on economic output. Yet LDCs face the worst impact of climate change. Many of the emerging theories and evidence suggest that multiple goals in addition to aggregate economic welfare are desirable, compatible, and feasible. Yet many LDCs do not center around economic growth like Vanuatu and Bhutan has adopted the goal of life satisfaction and environmental sustainability. The location and size of many LDCs makes the conventional development path extremely difficult in any instance, and, whether we like it or not, many LDCs probably won’t reach the income levels of developed countries in upcoming decades. If any new international support measures were adopted, LDC policymakers, civil society and businesspeople also got to be consulted closely in their design. In the past, support measures have been conceived at the inter-governmental level or by developed countries together with international agencies; yet ownership is critical. A detailed and careful process of consultation must be undertaken, with sort of support measures tailored to specific situations. While the eventual outcome of any such consultation process is uncertain and it seems appropriate that any support measures should place greater emphasis on building domestic savings and investment and on stimulating domestic demand with a view to the event of environmentally-sustainable productive capacities which have an immediate pertaining to poverty reduction, additionally to global economic integration. New support measures applicable to one or more country clusters may include the following: ● International support via global governance mechanisms aiming a solution for the problem of tax havens or secrecy jurisdictions, which are the main source of capital outflows from LDCs and which facilitate a race to the bottom on taxation. ● Devoted assistance for LDCs seeking to benefit from international tax cooperation, with the aim of closing loopholes and limiting the ability of multinational enterprises to avoid paying taxes, as laid out in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. ● Measures to coordinate wages globally, similarly aimed at avoiding to attract the cheapest labour-intensive production. ● Devoted capacity-development assistance for domestic tax revenue mobilization in LDCs. ● Global tax incentives to promote domestic processing in LDCs. ● A program of united cash transfers targeting LDC populations. ● An LDC sustainable infrastructure fund, correlated with maintenance funding. ● Additional resources aiming technology transfer, such as via the new technology bank for LDCs. This may include the promotion of new, sustainable ‘fourth industrial revolution’ technologies such as, complementary currencies and artificial intelligence. ● Increase in support for institutions such as think tanks for south-south and triangular cooperation. ● Post-graduation capacity development support measures from UN entities, specifically aimed at to diminish the impact of the middle-income trap. References taken from: ● https://www.brookings.edu/blog/future-development/2019/02/20/4-lessons-for-developing -countries-from-advanced-economies-past/ ● https://www.un.org/ldcportal/international-support-for-the-least-developed-countries-a-diff erent-way/ ● https://www.elibrary.imf.org/view/IMF024/-/- /-_A006.xml?redirect=true&redirect=true ● https://ourworldindata.org/taxation ● https://unctad.org/en/pages/PressRelease.aspx?OriginalVersionID=200 ● https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-trade/Trade-between-developed-and-devel oping-countries ● https://globalizationandhealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/-