Studia I 2009 Tot - publicatii.uvvg.ropublicatii.uvvg.ro/docs/studiaeconomia/vol-I-IV-2009.pdf ·...

UNIVERSITATEA DE VEST „VASILE GOLDIŞ” din ARAD

STUDIA UNIVERSITATIS

„VASILE GOLDIŞ”

ARAD

SERIA ŞTIINłE ECONOMICE

Anul 19 2009

Partea I

Arad 2009

Studia Universitatis “Vasile Goldiş” Arad Seria ŞtiinŃe Economice Anul 19/2009 Partea I

II

CONSILIUL ŞTIINłIFIC Preşedinte:

- Prof. univ. dr. Ilie BăbăiŃă – Şef catedră, Facultatea de ŞtiinŃe Economice, Universitatea de Vest „Vasile Goldiş” Arad

Membrii: - Prof. doc. Ing. Maria Uramova, PhD – Decan, Facultatea de ştiinŃe

Economice, Universitatea Matej Bel, Banska Bystrica, Slovacia - Prof. dr. János Puskás – Rector, Universitatea Tessedik Sámuel,

Békéscsaba-Szarvas, Ungaria - Prof. dr. Pere Tumbas – Decan, Facultatea de ŞtiinŃe Economice

Subotica, Serbia - Prof. univ. dr. Corneliu Maior – Cancelar, Universitatea de Vest

„Vasile Goldiş” Arad - Prof. univ. dr. Dorel Mateş – Facultatea de ŞtiinŃe Economice,

Universitatea de Vest Timişoara

COLEGIUL DIRECTOR - Florin Dumescu - Dorina Ardelean - Cristian Haiduc - Marin Burtică - Ladislau Klein

COLEGIUL DE REDACłIE Redactor responsabil: Ladislau Klein Secretar de redacŃie: Daniela Popa Membrii: Florin Dumescu Dorina Ardelean Cristian Haiduc HoraŃiu Şoim Andrei Anghelina Eugen Remeş

Revistă evaluată de CNCSIS categoria B, cod CNCSIS 792

Adresa colectivului de redacŃie: 310426 Arad, Str. M. Eminescu, nr. 15, Tel: 0257213066, E-mail [email protected]

ISSN 1584-2339


III

CUPRINS

Ion Diaconescu, Nicoleta Cârjilă - CONSIDERAłII PRIVIND CERTIFICAREA ŞI CONTROLUL CALITĂłII PRODUSELOR AGROALIMENTARE ECOLOGICE ÎN ROMÂNIA ..................................

1

Iovan MarŃian - THE BUDGETARY POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IMPLICATIONS IN THE PROCESS OF PLANNING THE ROMANIAN BUDGET ……………………………………………………..

12 Constantin Trăistaru - SELECłIA RESURSELOR UMANE NECESARE ÎNVĂłĂMÂNTULUI PREUNIVERSITAR ……………………………….

31

Florin Dumescu, Dana Dănoiu - DESFĂŞURAREA ACTIVITĂłILOR ECONOMICE ÎN ARIILE NATURALE PROTEJATE ................................

44

Marin Burtică - MODALITĂłI DE SUSTENABILITATE A DEZVOLTĂRII ÎN PROFIL TERITORIAL CU AJUTORUL TEHNOLOGIEI INFORMAłIEI ŞI COMUNICĂRII (TIC) ........................

49 Marin Burtică, Viorel Pop - DEZVOLTAREA REGIONALĂ COMPONENTĂ MAJORĂ A STRATEGIEI NAłIONALE DE DEZVOLTARE DURABILĂ .........................................................................

59 Dorina Ardelean, Daniela Popa - MARKETINGUL PRODUSELOR FARMACEUTICE. STUDIU DE CAZ: FARMACIA GROZESCU ............

66

Ilie BăbăiŃă, Ion Imbrescu, Daciana Ienaga, Irina Voica - IMPACTUL FACTORILOR ECONOMICI ASUPRA MOBILITĂłII INTERNAłIONALE A FORłEI DE MUNCĂ .............................................

76 Ladislav Klement - INNOVATION PERFORMANCE OF SLOVAK REPUBLIC AND POSSIBILITIES OF ITS STRENGTHENING …………

84

Vladimíra Klementová - IMPLEMENTATION OF INTRADEPARTMENTAL MATERIAL STIMULATION TOOLS IN SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED ENTERPRISES ………………………….

91 Janka Petrovičová - EVALUATION OF THE BUSINESS ORIENTATION IN SLOVAK COMPANIES ………………………………………………...

98

Hussam Musa, Miroslav Škoda - REVALUATION AND IMPAIRMENT OF PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT ……………………………..

109

Hussam Musa, Saleh M. Obadi - ISLAMIC FINANCIAL SYSTEMS ……. 124 Zdenka Musová, Eva Poliačiková - CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN SLOVAK REPUBLIC ……………………………..

131

Miriam Martinkovičová, Veronika Balážová - RECULTIVATION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION ENVIRONMENT ………………………….

139

Ľubica Lesáková - FACTORS DETERMINING INNOVATION ACTIVITIES IN SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES – THE CASE OF SLOVAKIA ……………………………………………………………..

144 Radoslav Kožiak, Ľubica Švantnerová, Daniela Polubňáková - DIRECT FOREIGN INVESTMENTS AND THEIR EFFECT ON THE REGIONAL DISPARITIES IN SLOVAK REPUBLIC …………………………………..

152


IV

Vratislav Kozák - SUGGESTED CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT (CRM) IMPLEMENTATION FOR BUSINESSES …….

160

Ľubica Švantnerová, Stanislav Kološta - POSITION OF DEVELOPERS IN LAND DEVELOPMENT …………………………………………………...

166

Emília Zimková - SLOVAK ENTRANCE TO EUROZONE - RIGHT SCHEDULED AND WELL DONE ………………………………………...

172

Monika Hukkeľová - BENEFITS FOR EMPLOYEES – PART OF LABOUR RELATIONS …………………………………………………….

182

Ladislau Klein - SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, QUALITY AND GLOBALZATION – CORELATED CONCEPTS IN THE TODAY WORLD ECONOMY ……………………………………………………….

188 Anda Iosif, Ioan Ursachi - MANAGEMENTUL RELAłIILOR CU CLIENłII – ELEMENTE GENERALE ŞI CARACTERISTICI SPECIFICE ALE PIEłEI AUTOMOTIVE ROMÂNEŞTI ………………...

203 Eugeniu łurlea, Aurelia Ştefănescu, Mihai Păunică, Silviu Nicolaescu - PARTICULARITĂłI PRIVIND AUDITUL INTERN ÎN ENTITĂłILE SISTEMULUI PUBLIC DE SĂNĂTATE .....................................................

210 Aurelia Ştefănescu, Eugeniu łurlea, Mihai Păunică, Daniela Calu, Florina Nicolae - PERFORMANłA ŞI AUDITUL INTERN-O ABORDARE DUALĂ ÎN ENTITĂłILE SECTORULUI ADMINISTRAłIEI PUBLICE LOCALE .........................................................................................................

216 Luis-Raul Boroacă - THE DYNAMICS OF ECONOMIC EQUILIBRIUM IN ROMANIA ………………………………………………………………

227

Luis-Raul Boroacă - THE FISCAL-BUDGETARY INFLUENCES ON THE ECONOMIC EQUILIBRIUM OF ROMANIA ……………………….

241

Ramona Nicoleta Bundǎ - EQUITY AND ECONOMIC GROWTH: A CONTROVERSIAL RELATIONSHIP ……………………………………..

255

Ramona Nicoleta Bundă, Loredana Baciu - SCHIMBĂRI DE DIRECTIE IN TEORIA ECONOMICĂ ŞI POLITICILE PUBLICE SUB IMPERATIVUL DEZVOLTĂRII DURABILE .............................................

262 Daniela Artemisa Calu, Mădălina Dumitru, Viorel Avram, Cătălina Gorgan - REPERE PRIVIND NORMALIZAREA CONTABILITĂłII ÎN SECTORUL PUBLIC DIN ROMÂNIA .........................................................

270 Corina Grigorovici - DEZVOLTAREA UNUI INDICE A COMPETITIVITĂłII EXPORTURILOR ROMÂNEŞTI DE SERVICII .....

277

Grigorovici Corina - ANALIZA COMPARATIVĂ A STRATEGIEI DE STANDARDIZARE VS. ADAPTARE ÎN SECTORUL SERVICIILOR ….

282

Ionica (Holban) Oncioiu, Florin Razvan Oncioiu - THE EVOLUTION OF THE DEFINITION OF FAIR VALUE IN IFRS ……………………………

286

Valentina Diana Ignătescu - FINANłAREA I.M.M. –URILOR DIN ROMÂNIA DUPĂ INTEGRAREA ÎN UNIUNEA EUROPEANĂ ..............

293

Valentina Diana Ignătescu - INVESTITORII PE PIAłA DE CAPITAL ŞI STRATEGIILE CU OPłIUNI ........................................................................

304

Vichentie Maniov, HoraŃiu Şoim, Mihaela Alexa - COST BENEFIT


V

ANALYSIS FOR ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS. TRAFFIC - A BASIC ELEMENT ………………………………………………………….

320

Horatiu Florin Şoim, Mircea Teodoru, Vichentie Maniov, Dan Uşvat - GLOBALIZATION, DIFFERENT WAYS, THE SAME DESTINATION ..

331

Mariana Leontina Mureşan, Camelia Alis Ungureanu, Sorina Ciplea - METHODS OF COSTS OPTIMIZATION (METHODEN DER KOSTENOPTIMIERUNG) ............................................................................

337 Mariana Leontina Mureşan, Camelia Alis Ungureanu -CORPORATE DISCLOSURE (UNTERNEHMENSPUBLIZITÄT) ..............................................

351

Mircea Teodoru - ANALIZA DECIZIEI DE CUMPĂRARE A CONSUMATORULUI ...................................................................................

364

Mircea Adrian Tramontini, Dorel Vasile Ursu - INIDCATORI DE PERFORMANłĂ CALITATIVI PENTRU FINANłAREA ÎNVĂłĂMÂNTULUI MILITAR …………………………………………..

374 Dorel Vasile Ursu, Mircea Adrian Tramontini - PERFORMANłA MANAGEMENTULUI LOGISTIC ÎN UNITĂłILE MINISTERULUI APĂRĂRII NAłIONA LE .............................................................................

382 Felicia Sabou - STUDIU PRIVIND ACTIVITĂłILE DE PROMOVARE ÎN ÎNTREPRINDERILE MICI ŞI MIJLOCII DIN JUDEłUL MARAMUREŞ ...............................................................................................

392 Felicia Sabou - EVALUAREA ŞI CONTROLUL ACTIVITĂłILOR DE MARKETING .................................................................................................

403

Simon Sándor - SUSTAINABILITY IN THE INTEGRATED STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF BEKESCSABA MUNICIPALITY ……………………………………………………………

408 DomeNico Raguseo - A SIMULTANEOUS-MOVE QUANTITY-SETTING IN-CLASS GAME ………………………………………………

414

Ioan Alexandru Szabo - CONTABILITATEA DE GESTIUNE, BUGETELE ŞI TABLOURILE DE BORD – INSTRUMENTE MODERNE ALE CONTROLULUI DE GESTIUNE ………………………

421 Mihail Epuran, Nicoleta Carmen Ardelean - POSIBILITĂłI DE PERFECłIONARE A SISTEMULUI INFORMAłIONAL DE GESTIUNE FISCALĂ A OPERATORILOR ECONOMICI .............................................

431 Alina Teodora Ciuhureanu, Nicolae Balteş - ASPECTS REGARDING THE ACCOUNTING INFORMATION OFFER THROUGH THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ……………………………………………………………...

437 Alina Teodora Ciuhureanu, Nicolae Balteş - THE FINANCIAL-ACCOUNTING INVOLVEMENT IN FORMULATING THE STRATEGY AND GETTING THE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE …….

445 Gheorghe Crişan, Ioana Lia Crişan - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES - LIMITATIONS IN THEIR USE IN BUSINESS COMMUNICATION …...

452

Gheorghe Crişan, Suzana Adela ColŃa - CONSIDERATIONS ON THE CLOSENESS OF PUBLIC MANAGEMENT TO BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS MANAGEMENT ……………………………………..

458


VI

Lucia Daina, Claudia Sărmăşan - MANAGEMENTUL FINANCIAR AL UNITATILOR SPITALICESTI DIN JUDETUL BIHOR .............................

464

Lucia Daina, Claudia Sarmasan, Cristian Daina, Zoia Bitea, Caterina Laslau - MORTALITATEA INFANTILĂ – REFLECłIE A DEZVOLTĂRII SOCIO-ECONOMICE ....................................................................................

472 Ioana Duca, Rodica Gherghina - PIEłELE EMISIUNILOR DE EUROACłIUNI – CARACTERISTICI ŞI EVOLUłII .................................

479

Ioana Duca, Rodica Gherghina - CREŞTEREA ROLULUI INVESTITORILOR INSTITUłIONALI PE PIEłELE FINANCIARE INTERNAłIONALE ......................................................................................

484 Daniela Iosub - IMPLICAłII DE MARKETING ALE CREDIBILITAłII RECOMANDĂRILOR ONLINE PLĂTITE ………………………………..

491

Carmen-Mihaela Imbrescu - INFORMAłIA CONTABILĂ ÎN CAZUL REORGANIZĂRII JUDICIARE ....................................................................

502

Carmen-Mihaela Imbrescu - ORGANIZAREA JUDICIARĂ ŞI GESTIUNEA DEBITORULUI ÎN INSOLVENłĂ .......................................

515

Ionela-Mihaela Milutin - ETICA ŞI INTEGRITATEA ÎN MANAGEMENTUL PUBLIC ……………………………………………...

528

Imre Gurzó, István Molnár - PUBLIC WORK AS THE POSSIBLE WAY OF GETTING INCOME IN UNDERDEVELOPED SMALL REGIONS …

542

Laura Olteanu - ÎNVĂłĂMÂNTUL ROMÂNESC ÎN CADRUL ÎNVĂłĂMÂNTULUI EST EUROPEAN ......................................................

549

Laura Olteanu - EVOLUłIA SERVICIILOR DE SĂNĂTATE PUBLICĂ DIN ROMÂNIA, CA PARTE A SERVICIILOR DE SĂNĂTATE EUROPENE ....................................................................................................

557 Claudia – Mihaela Nicolau - PERSPECTIVES ON EFFECTS CAUSED BY THE FREE MOVEMENT OF PERSONS IN THE CONTEXT OF ROMANIA INTEGRATION IN UE – REMISES, „BRAIN MIGRATION” / EXODUS …………………………………………………………………..

567 Claudia – Mihaela Nicolau - MANAGEMENTUL EDUCAłIONAL ÎN CONTEXT ROMÂNESC – ORIENTARE TEORETIZATOARE ...............

575

Alexandra Patricia Braica - PLANUL DE CARIERĂ-FACTOR MOTIVAłIONAL PENTRU CADRELE DIDACTICE TINERE DIN ÎNVĂłĂMÂNTUL SUPERIOR ....................................................................

583 Alexandra Patricia Braica - MENTORATUL ÎN INSTITUłIILE DE ÎNVĂłĂMÂNT SUPERIOR - DEZIDERAT SAU REALITATE? ..............

596

Adriana Puşcaş - ROLUL CALCULAłIEI COSTURILOR ÎN PROCESUL DECIZIONAL .................................................................................................

602

Dorel Mateş, Adriana Puşcaş - MANAGEMENTUL DECIZIEI PRIN COSTURI LA ENTITATILE NON PROFIT …………………………….....

613

Mirela-Anca Postole - CARACTERISTICI ŞI EVOLUłII ALE DATORIEI EXTERNE A ROMÂNIEI ..............................................................................

619

Mirela-Anca Postole - MANAGEMENTUL DATORIEI EXTERNE STUDIU COMPARATIV ...............................................................................

624


VII

Cornelia Tomescu Dumitrescu - MODELAREA ECONOMETRICĂ A LEGĂTURII DINTRE INDUSTRIE ŞI AGRICULTURĂ – CAZUL ROMÂNIEI .....................................................................................................

630 Dorina Ardelean, Marius BoiŃă - COMERłUL ÎN UNIUNEA EUROPEANǍ .................................................................................................

635

Alina Irina Balan, Mihaela Bîrsan, Adrian Liviu Scutariu - ANALIZA ECONOMICĂ A PROCESULUI INVESTIłIONAL ŞI A RISCULUI INVESTIłIONAL ÎN ROMÂNIA .................................................................

640 Mihaela ŞteŃ - CONSIDERAłII PRIVIND PRESIUNILE SOCIALE, DE SECURITATE SI DE MEDIU ÎN TRANSPORTURI ...................................

647

Florin Tudor - FINANCIAL INCONVENIENCIES OF DECENTRALIZATION .................................................................................

654

Mihaela Tulvinschi, Mariana Vlad - IMPACT OF THE FINANCIAL ASSETS METHODS OF RECOGNITION ON THE FINANCIAL POSITION AND RESULTS OF FIRMS .......................................................

659 Florin Ştibli - WISSENSORIENTIERTEM MANAGEMENT UND DIE NEUE ECONOMY .........................................................................................

667

Ştibli Florin - INTANGIBLE RESSOURCEN DER ORGANIZATIONEN . 674 Imola Drigă, Dorina NiŃă - SISTEMUL INDICATORILOR DE COMENSURARE A RISCURILOR BANCARE ..........................................

680

Imola Drigă, Dorina NiŃă - SERVICII BANCARE DE TRANSFER DE FONDURI PE BAZA CONVENłIILOR DE PLATĂ ..................................

692

Cristina – Lucia Baban, Cristina – Elena Dumitru - CONTABILITATEA DE TREZORERIE ÎN MANAGEMENTUL RESURSELOR CONTROLATE – O ABORDARE IN PERIOADĂ DE RECESIUNE ........

697 Miclea Florina - PROBLEMATICA GESTIUNII INFORMAłIILOR, CUNOŞTINłELOR ŞI EXPERIENłELOR ..................................................

703

Andreea Avădanei - THE IMPACT OF THE SINGLE EURO PAYMENTS AREA ON THE ROMANIAN FINANCIAL SERVICES MARKET ...........

712


VIII

Index de autori

Alexa Mihaela 320 Ardelean Dorina 66, 635 Ardelean Nicoleta Carmen 431 Avădanei Andreea 712 Avram Viorel 270 BăbăiŃă Ilie 76 Băban Cristina-Lucia 697 Baciu Loredana 262 Balan Alina Irina 640 Balážová Veronika 139 Balteş Nicolae 437, 445 Bîrsan Mihaela 640 Bitea Zoia 472 BoiŃă Marius 635 Boroacă Luis-Raul 227, 241 Braica Alexandra Patricia 583, 596 Bundǎ Ramona Nicoleta 255, 262 Burtică Marin 49, 59 Calu Daniela 216, 270 Cârjilă Nicoleta 1 Ciplea Sorina 337 Ciuhureanu Alina Teodora 437, 445 ColŃa Suzana Adela 458 Crişan Gheorghe 452, 458 Crişan Ioana Lia 452 Daina Cristian 472 Daina Lucia 464, 472 Dănoiu Dana 44 Diaconescu Ion 1 Drigă Imola 680, 692 Duca Ioana 479, 484 Dumescu Florin 44 Dumitrescu Tomescu Cornelia 630 Dumitru Cristina-Elena 697 Dumitru Mădălina 270 Epuran Mihail 431 Gherghina Rodica 479, 484 Gorgan Cătălina 270 Grigorovici Corina 277, 282 Gurzó Imre 542 Hukkeľová Monika 182


IX

Ienaga Daciana 76 Ignătescu Valentina Diana 293, 304 Imbrescu Carmen-Mihaela 502, 515 Imbrescu Ion 76 Iosif Anda 204 Iosub Daniela 491 Klein Ladislau 188 Klement Ladislav 84 Klementová Vladimíra 91 Kološta Stanislav 166 Kozák Vratislav 160 Kožiak Radoslav 152 Laslau Caterina 472 Lesáková Ľubica 144 Maniov Vichentie 320, 331 MarŃian Iovan 12 Martinkovičová Miriam 139 Mateş Dorel 613 Miclea Florina 703 Milutin Ionela-Mihaela 528 Molnár István 542 Mureşan Mariana Leontina 337, 351 Musa Hussam 109, 124 Musová Zdenka 131 Nicolae Florina 216 Nicolaescu Silviu 210 Nicolau Claudia – Mihaela 567, 575 NiŃă Dorina 680, 692 Obadi Saleh M. 124 Olteanu Laura 549, 557 Oncioiu (Holban) Ionica 286 Oncioiu Florin Razvan 286 Păunică Mihai 210, 216 Petrovičová Janka 98 Poliačiková Eva 131 Polubňáková Daniela 152 Pop Viorel 59 Popa Daniela 66 Postole Mirela-Anca 619, 624 Puşcaş Adriana 602, 613 Raguseo DomeNico 414 Sabou Felicia 392, 403 Sándor Simon 408 Sarmasan Claudia 464, 472


X

Scutariu Adrian Liviu 640 Škoda Miroslav 109 Şoim HoraŃiu 320, 331 Ştefănescu Aurelia 210, 216 ŞteŃ Mihaela 647 Ştibli Florin 667, 674 Švantnerová Ľubica 152, 166 Szabo Ioan Alexandru 421 Teodoru Mircea 320, 364 Trăistaru Constantin 31 Tramontini Mircea Adrian 374, 382 Tudor Florin 654 Tulvinschi Mihaela 659 łurlea Eugeniu 210, 216 Ungureanu Camelia Alis 337, 351 Ursachi Ioan 203 Ursu Dorel Vasile 374, 382 Uşvat Dan 320 Vlad Mariana 659 Voica Irina 76 Zimková Emília 172


1

CONSIDERAłII PRIVIND CERTIFICAREA ŞI CONTROLUL CALITĂłII PRODUSELOR

AGROALIMENTARE ECOLOGICE ÎN ROMÂNIA

Ion Diaconescu,*, Nicoleta Cârjilă**

*Academia de Studii Eeconomice Bucureşti, Facultatea de ComerŃ, telefon 0740.78.72.49, [email protected]

**Universitatea Constantin Brâncoveanu Piteşti, Facultatea Management Marketing în Afaceri Economice Brăila, telefon 0722.572.574, [email protected]

Abstract Ecological agriculture relies on the firm engagement of farmers, producers and processors of working according to a series of standards and regulations which define the system of ecological production. In order to offer consumers safety and trust, ecological products are submitted to the certification system. Moreover, ecological agriculture relies on the transparence of the production system to make it understandable and appreciated; ecological agriculture needs consumer’s consideration to develop the market. In this context, the systems of accreditation and certification serve mainly as instruments for increasing production, commerce, retail and developing the market. Inspection and certification of ecological agro-alimentary products are accredited or at least supervised by governmental authorities as they are stated in regulation, even though the implementation systems are rather different. Control and supervision at all levels has to guarantee that inspectors and certificators are evaluated. Nowadays, statistics count a large number of certification organisms which certify according to private standards and/or regulations at world level. Keywords: ecological agricultural food, control, certifying, inspection, accreditation, accrediting authority 1. Introducere

Pe plan mondial, opŃiunea pentru practicarea agriculturii ecologice este una serioasă, în plină expansiune, motivată fiind prin argumente ecologice şi igienico-sanitare, impuse de schimbarea radicală a cererii consumatorilor şi de preocupările tot mai insistente pentru biosecuritatea alimentară. ProducŃia agroalimentară ecologică are ca scop realizarea unor sisteme agricole durabile, diversificate şi echilibrate, care asigură protejarea resurselor naturale şi sănătatea consumatorilor. Organismele modificate genetic şi derivatele lor nu sunt permise în producŃia agroalimentară ecologică. Modul de producŃie ecologic diferă de cel convenŃional prin faptul că evită utilizarea îngrăşămintelor chimice şi a pesticidelor, care constituie principala cauză a problemelor de poluare agricolă actuală şi de afectare a sănătăŃii consumatorilor. În agricultura ecologică, metodele de cultură biologice şi mecanice sunt utilizate, în măsura în care este posibil, în locul produselor chimice de sinteză, pentru a îndeplini toate funcŃiile specifice sistemului agricol, în


2

conformitate cu regulile şi principiile de producŃie ecologică stabilite şi care sunt certificate de un organism de inspecŃie şi certificare.

Agricultura ecologică se dezvoltă rapid şi se practică în peste 140 Ńări ale lumi, procentul de suprafaŃă ecologică din total suprafaŃă agricolă şi numărul operatorilor ecologici continuă să crească în multe Ńări. La nivel mondial, 32.221.311 hectare sunt organizate în sistem ecologic, ceea ce reprezintă 0,78 % din suprafaŃa agricolă totală la nivel mondial. Din analiza evoluŃiei suprafeŃelor ecologice din ultimii 6 ani, se constată în 2007, o creştere a acesteia cu aproximativ 39% faŃă de anul 2002, iar numărul operatorilor ecologici a crescut cu 164%, înregistrând astfel o creştere spectaculoasă a acestora cu aproape 70% faŃă de anul precedent (figura 1.1.). În România suprafaŃa cultivată în agricultura ecologică a crescut în anul 2007, de circa 11 ori faŃă de anul 2000, respectiv de la 17.438 ha la 190.129 ha (figura 1.2.).

Figura 1.1. EvoluŃia suprafeŃelor ecologice şi a fermelor ecologice la nivel mondial

în perioada 2002-2007 Sursa: prelucrat după studiile The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and Emerging Trends 2004-2009

Mecanismele acreditării şi certificării se dezvoltă rapid. Nu există aproape domeniu al vieŃii umane sau tehnologiei în care să nu fi fost introduse şi dezvoltate norme şi reglementări. Referitor la alimente, producŃia şi prelucrarea alimentelor ecologice au avut ca precedent industria convenŃională. În timp ce organizaŃiile private de fermieri au dezvoltat standarde pentru inspecŃia şi certificarea ecologică încă din anii 80, primele guverne au preluat această sarcină abia la începutul anilor 90. Codex Alimentarius la capitolul ecologic, defineşte cadrul comun internaŃional pentru guverne. Reglementările Uniunii Europene şi ale Statelor Unite referitoare la producŃia ecologică au fost adoptate şi implementate la nivel guvernamental sau supra-guvernamental. Guvernele, statale au adăugat cerinŃe specifice. Standardele


3

private sunt bazate pe standardele de bază IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements- FederaŃia InternaŃională a Mişcărilor de Agricultură Ecologică IFOAM), unde sunt referinŃe la reglementările guvernamentale ca şi în Codex Alimentarius.

Figura 1.2. EvoluŃia suprafeŃelor ecologice din România (ha) în 2000-2007

Sursa: www.madr.ro/agricultura ecologică 2. Sistemul de certificare şi control al produselor agroalimentare ecologice la nivel mondial

La nivelul anului 2006, aproape 69 Ńări aveau deja agricultură ecologică reglementată cu standarde naŃionale şi în plus recunoaşterea cerinŃelor legislative a organismelor de inspecŃie şi câteva proceduri de inspecŃie.

La nivelul anului 2007, erau înregistrate 468 de organizaŃii la nivel mondial care ofereau servicii de certificare. Cele mai multe organisme de certificare sunt în Europa (37%), urmată de Asia (31%) şi America de Nord (18%). Majoritatea organismelor de certificare sunt localizate în Uniunea Europeană, Statele Unite ale Americii, Japonia, Coreea de Sud, China şi Germania. Multe din aceste organisme de certificare operează de asemenea în afara Ńării. Mare parte dintre aceste organisme de certificare sunt din Ńările dezvoltate şi îşi oferă serviciile sale de certificare în Ńările în curs de dezvoltare şi nu există un organism de certificare localizat în Uniunea Europeană care să-şi ofere serviciile în SUA, unde au nevoie de acreditarea Programului Ecologic NaŃional. Multe Ńări din Africa şi chiar zone mari din Asia încă duc lipsă de furnizori de servicii locale de certificare. În 2005, existau doar 8 organisme de certificare în Africa (localizate în Africa de Sud, Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania şi Egipt). În Asia majoritatea organismelor de certificare sunt în China, India şi Japonia. Cea mai spectaculoasă creştere a organismelor de certificare se înregistrează în China, ca efect al introducerii legislaŃiei referitoare la agricultura ecologică (numărul organismelor de certificare a crescut de la 6 în 2004


4

la 26 în 2005). Numărul organismelor de certificare a scăzut în SUA, din momentul în care a fost aprobat Programul Ecologic NaŃional, (deşi la început organizaŃiile s-au grăbit să se înregistreze ca organisme de certificare, similar s-a întâmplat şi în Europa la mijlocul anilor 90). În Europa se înregistrează o creştere a organismelor de certificare de la an la an, mai ales în Spania, Italia şi ale Ńări noi membre ale UE.

Din totalul organismelor de certificare înregistrate la nivel mondial, 40% dintre acestea sunt aprobate de Uniunea Europeană, 32% au acreditare ISO 65 şi 28% sunt acreditate de Programul NaŃional Ecologic al Statelor Unite.

O importantă iniŃiativă pentru armonizarea internaŃională este programul de acreditare IFOAM, care evaluează organismele de certificare faŃă de Normele IFOAM. În mod curent, 36 de organisme de certificare care operează în peste 70 de Ńări în toată lumea, se supun procesului de acreditare IFOAM. O dezvoltare recentă este Serviciul InternaŃional de Armonizare şi EchivalenŃă în Agricultura Ecologică (International Task Force on Harmonization and Equivalence in Organic Agriculture - ITF), care ajută la consensul general pe armonizarea privată cu guvernele şi guvernele cu standardele guvernementale/reglementări. Acest Serviciu dezvoltă în prezent, un set de CerinŃe InternaŃionale ca bază pentru echivalenŃa şi armonizarea viitoare şi un ghid pentru a judeca echivalenŃa standardelor.

Sistemul de Garantare Ecologic IFOAM (The Organic Guarantee System - OGS) uneşte lumea ecologică într-un sistem comun de standarde, verificare şi identitate pe piaŃă. Acest sistem oferă posibilitatea certificatorilor să devină acreditaŃi IFOAM în conformitate cu Normele IFOAM şi operatorilor certificaŃi să-şi eticheteze produsele ecologice cu sigla IFOAM în plus faŃă de logo-ul organismului de certificare. Programul de acreditare IFOAM este un serviciu oferit organismelor de certificare în conformitate cu standardele de bază IFOAM (IFOAM Basic Standards), care trebuie să demonstreze conformitatea cu criterille de acreditare IFOAM (IFOAM Accreditation Criteria). Organismele implicate în Programul de Acreditare IFOAM sunt Serviciul InternaŃional de Acreditare Ecologică (International Organic Accreditation Service – IOAS) şi Organismele de Certificare Acreditate IFOAM (IFOAM Accredited Certification Bodies - ACBs). O iniŃiativă recentă este certificarea acvaculturii ecologice. De la mijlocul anilor 1990, un număr de agenŃii de certificare şi asociaŃii de crescători ecologici au început să dezvolte standarde specifice de acvacultură. În prezent, Comisia Europeană este în procesul de elaborare a unui proiect de regulament pentru acvacultura ecologică, în acelaşi proces se află şi Programul Ecologic NaŃional al Statelor Unite.

3. Sistemul de control şi certificare al produselor agroalimentare ecologice în România

În România, autoritatea responsabilă pentru agricultura ecologică este Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale, care prin compartimentul de specialitate, are următoarele atribuŃii principale (OrdonanŃa de UrgenŃă a Guvernului nr. 62/2006): a) elaborează politici, strategii şi planuri de acŃiune în domeniu;


5

b) iniŃiază proiecte de acte normative naŃionale privind agricultura ecologică; c) înregistrează, în fiecare an, solicitările de înscriere a operatorilor, persoane fizice şi/sau juridice, care produc, prepară, depozitează, comercializează sau importă din terŃe Ńări în Uniunea Europeană produsele ecologice şi elaborează în fiecare an lista operatorilor din agricultura ecologică; d) aprobă organismele de inspecŃie şi certificare din domeniu care fac dovada conformităŃii cu prevederile legislaŃiei în vigoare; e) controlează şi supraveghează activitatea organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare aprobate; f) acordă derogări privind prelungirea sau reducerea perioadei de conversie, la propunerea organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare; g) elaborează şi administrează baza de date pentru seminŃe sau material vegetativ săditor şi acordă derogări pentru utilizarea de seminŃe care nu provin din agricultura ecologică; h) autorizează importul produselor ecologice din terŃe Ńări în Uniunea Europeană; i) aprobă cererile solicitanŃilor pentru utilizarea siglei “ae”; j) asigură legătura cu organismele interne şi internaŃionale din domeniu; k) organizează programe de informare şi de pregătire cu părŃile interesate în vederea promovării conceptului de agricultură ecologică.

Înregistrarea producătorilor în agricultura ecologică, este obligatorie în fiecare an şi se face prin completarea Fişelor de înregistrare în agricultura ecologică, disponibile la DirecŃiile de Agricultură şi Dezvoltare Rurală (D.A.D.R.) judeŃene, în perimetrul căreia producătorul îşi desfăşoară activitatea. Informatiile privind completarea fişelor de înregistare sunt furnizate de responsabilii judeŃeni pentru agricultura ecologică. Fişele de înregistrare completate de producători şi vizate de Directorul executiv al D.A.D.R, sunt transmise spre aprobare la M.A.D.R - Compartimentul de agricultură ecologică. Fişele de înregistrare aprobate de M.A.D.R sunt returnate producătorului şi D.A.D.R.-ului şi pot fiind documente eligibile pentru acordarea de sprijin în agricultura ecologică şi pentru solicitarea siglei „ae”. În fiecare an M.A.D.R elaborează Lista operatorilor din agricultura ecologică care este pusă la dispoziŃia celor interesaŃi. Organizarea instituŃională a agriculturii ecologice (figura 3.1.) este făcută sub coordonarea Ministerului Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale şi cuprinde mai multe organizaŃii sau asociaŃii de profil care activează în domeniul agriculturii ecologice.

În România, controlul şi certificarea produselor obŃinute din agricultura ecologică sunt asigurate în prezent de organisme de inspecŃie şi certificare private. Potrivit legislaŃiei româneşti organismul de inspecŃie şi certificare reprezintă “persoana juridică din sectorul public sau privat, acreditată/aprobată în condiŃiile legii, cu atribuŃia de a verifica dacă un produs obŃinut, procesat, ambalat, manipulat, comercializat, etichetat cu referire la metodele de producŃie din agricultura ecologică este conform cu prevederile ordonanŃei de urgenŃă nr. 62/2006." Aceste organisme sunt aprobate de Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale, pe baza criteriilor de independenŃă, imparŃialitate şi competenŃă, de


6

Comisia pentru acreditarea organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare din sectorul de agricultură ecologică, compusă din cinci persoane (Ordinul 153/2006): 1. directorul general al direcŃiei generale în subordinea căreia se află Compartimentul de agricultură ecologică şi alte metode de producŃie cu impact redus asupra mediului - preşedinte; 2. un consilier din cadrul Compartimentului de agricultură ecologică şi alte metode de producŃie cu impact redus asupra mediului - membru; 3. un consilier juridic din cadrul direcŃiei generale în subordinea căreia se află Compartimentul de agricultură ecologică şi alte metode de producŃie cu impact redus asupra mediului - membru; 4. doi reprezentanŃi de la Autoritatea NaŃională Sanitară Veterinară şi pentru SiguranŃa Alimentelor - DirecŃia generală siguranŃa alimentelor - membri.


7

Figura 1.1. Schema organizării instituŃionale a agriculturii ecologice în România

Sursa: prelucrare originală Secretariatul tehnic al Comisiei va fi asigurat de Compartimentul de

agricultură ecologică şi alte metode de producŃie cu impact redus asupra mediului.


8

Organismele candidate la aprobarea ca organisme de inspecŃie şi certificare în agricultura ecologică trebuie să îndeplinească cumulativ cerinŃele prezentate în figura 3.2.

Figura 3.2. CerinŃele pentru organismele de inspecŃie şi certificare în vederea

acreditării, în România Sursa: Ordinul 688/2007

Organismele de inspecŃie şi certificare aprobate au o serie de atribuŃii

prezentate în figura 3.3. În prezent în România sunt acreditate 14 organisme de inspecŃie şi

certificare codificate cu simbolul RO-ECO (tabelul 3.1.). Aprobarea de către M.A.D.R a organismelor de control este precedată de

acreditarea în conformitate cu EN ISO 45011:2001, emisă de AsociaŃia ReŃelei NaŃionale de Acreditare din România – Renar (www.renar.ro). Potrivit statutului său, scopul asociaŃiei este să dezvolte acreditarea şi evaluarea conformităŃii şi să ofere încredere în imparŃialitatea, independenŃa şi competenŃa tehnică a organismelor acreditate care activează în domeniul evaluării conformităŃii din România, urmărind în principal: - să contribuie la creşterea competitivităŃii produselor şi serviciilor în contextul

globalizării pieŃelor şi integrării României în Uniunea Europeană;


9

- să contribuie la promovarea principilui liberei circulaŃii a mărfurilor şi serviciilor;

- să promoveze protecŃia vieŃii, a sănătăŃii şi securităŃii persoanelor fizice, precum şi a mediului.

Figura 3.3. AtribuŃiile specifice Organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare în România Sursa: Ordinul 688/2007


10

Tabelul 3.1. Lista organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare acreditate în România, în anul 2008

Nr. crt.

Denumirea Codul

1. BCS OKO-GARANTIE România S.R.L. RO-ECO-001 2. QC&I S.R.L. RO-ECO-002 3. SUOLO e SALUTE România S.R.L RO-ECO-003 4. ICEA România S.R.L RO-ECO-005 5. S.C. ECOCERT S.A. RO-ECO-007 6. S.C. Ecoinspect S.R.L. România RO-ECO-008 7. BIOS S.R.L. Italia Sucursala România RO-ECO-009 8. LACON S.R.L. Germania Sucursala România RO-ECO-010 9. BIOINSPECTA România S.R.L. RO-ECO-012 10. IMO CONTROL S.R.L. România RO-ECO-013 11. CERES HAPPURG GmbH Sucursala Iernut

România RO-ECO-014

12. Agreco R.F GÖDERZ GmbH Germania Sucursala România

RO-ECO-015

13. BIOAGRICERT ITALIA SRL SucursaLa România RO-ECO-016 14. Certification Services International CSI GmbH

Germania Sucursala Romania RO-ECO-017

4. Concluzii

La nivel mondial, este necesar să se obŃină o echivalenŃă minimă garantată peste tot, cu scopul de lăsa producŃia să circule liberă. Lipsa acceptării şi recunoaşterii dintre diferitele sisteme de certificare şi acreditare este în contradicŃie cu obiectivul de dezvoltare a comerŃului, a pieŃei şi de creştere a încrederii consumatorilor.

ExistenŃa sistemelor diferite crează o barieră tehnică producătorilor, multiplelor certificări, pentru operatorii lor, dacă produsele lor sunt accesibile diferitelor pieŃe cu diferite reglementări.

Oricum, este cert că dezvoltarea standardelor, a sistemelor de certificare şi acreditare în timpul ultimei decade, a dezvoltat încrederea şi transparenŃa sistemului ecologic, dar dintr-o perspectivă generală, momentan se încearcă revizuirea sistemelor, cu scopul de a le face mai cuprinzătoare şi de a reduce barierele pieŃii. DiferenŃele în sistemul ecologic sunt rezultatul mai mult sau mai puŃin a detaliilor minore şi a abordărilor diferite (culturale), deşi toate sistemele servesc ideii comune de a îmbunătăŃi credibilitatea sistemului ecologic.

Este timpul de a reconsidera că acreditarea şi certificarea reprezintă la bază un instrument pentru dezvoltarea ecologică. Ca rezultat al factorilor menŃionaŃi, certificarea inclusiv inspecŃia şi acreditarea trebuie proiectate să sprijine credibilitatea sistemului ecologic mai degrabă decât să pericliteze prin supraîncărcarea cu multe şi varii detalii.


11

Bibliografie Cârjilă N., 2006, ValenŃele valorii nutritive ale produselor agroalimentare

ecologice, Simpozion InternaŃional „PerfecŃionarea managementului micro şi macroeconomic în condiŃiile unei economii funcŃionale de piaŃă”, Piteşti;

Diaconescu I., Ardelean D., Diaconescu M., 2007, Merceologie alimentară – calitate şi siguranŃă, Editura Universitară, Bucureşti;

Diaconescu I. , 2002, Bazele merceologiei II, Editura Uranus, Bucureşti; Willer H., 2009, The World of Organic Agriculture. Statistics and

Emerging Trends 2004, IFOAM, FiBL; *** Ordinul MADR nr. 688/2007 pentru aprobarea Regulilor privind

organizarea sistemului de inspecŃie şi certificare, de aprobare a organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare şi de supraveghere a activităŃii organismelor de control, publicat în Monitorul Oficial al României nr 599 din 30 august 2007;

*** OrdonanŃa de UrgenŃă a Guvernului nr. 62/2006 pentru modificarea şi completarea OrdonanŃei de urgenŃă a Guvernului nr. 34/2000 privind produsele agroalimentare ecologice;

*** Ordinul 153/2006 privind aprobarea componenŃei Comisiei pentru acreditarea organismelor de inspecŃie şi certificare din sectorul de agricultură ecologică;

www.renar.ro


12

THE BUDGETARY POLICY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IMPLICATIONS IN THE PROCESS OF

PLANNING THE ROMANIAN BUDGET

Iovan MarŃian Western University „Vasile Goldiş” of Arad, Telephone / fax: 0257/284899, E-mail:

[email protected]

Abstract The author of the study makes an analysis of the genesis, evolution and principles on which the European Union’s budget is made, as a result of a budgetary policy which has been developed starting with the fifties and up until now. The budgets of the three communities (ECSC, CEE and EUROATOM) have evolved towards unification, towards applying equitable procedures regarding the capitalization of incomes and the allocation of expenses, for implementing a financial planning – starting with the year 1988. The budget of the Union is designed and adopted in the spirit of the European authorities cooperating with the member states and provides the necessary resources for accomplishing the objectives of the European development policies. In the analysis of the dynamics of the European Union’s budget, the author underlines the essential evolution markers, especially those regarding the structure of funds correlated with budgetary expenses and the priorities of the already covered stages, making use of illustrations and quantitative demonstrations. The following can be found among these evolution markers: substantiation of the budget according to rational and equity criteria, institutionalization of budgetary discipline, optimization of the procedure, subordination of the annual budget of the Union to a strategy conceived on a period of at least five years, for the purpose of ensuring political coherency in the field and for eliminating the symptoms that specific to the financial crisis. This evolution is demonstrated by the adopting of the multi - annual financial frame for 2007-2013, by the Council of the European Union. In this theoretical context, the author presents the correlations between the general Budget of the E.U. and that of Romania, as a member state, the main directions in the process of reforming European and Romanian budgetary policies. In the case of Romania, the conception and passage of the Law of budget and the annual budgetary term were subject to a perfecting process that was commenced in the year 2009, and was focused on adapting the methodology of elaborating the budget programme to the European norms in this field. Keywords: the European Union’s budget, the multi - annual financial frame, strategy.

The community financial system was created at the beginning of the 1950s, simultaneously to the other three communities. The budgetary policies marked the evolution of CECO, CEE, Euratom, ensuring the implementation and development of common policies, specific to the steps taken, as well as the creation of fund, starting with the EAGF (European Agricultural Guarantee Fund - in 1962) and the ERDF (European Regional Development Fund – in 1975). In the process of


13

European construction, several questions arose with regard to the budgetary policy, which included the following: where should the financial resources required for the realization of the various policies of the European Union come from? Who should elaborate the budget project and, eventually, adopt it? Which should be the basic principles on which the Union budget is built? What is the optimal procedure for establishing and approving the budget? How should the budgetary execution and discharge be carried out? What must be done to avoid fraud? Such issues have stirred multiple controversies throughout the decades but, at the same time, they had the role of having led to beneficial results on which the European integration was based. Thus, for instance, the budgets of the three communities have evolved towards unification, towards an increase in the financial autonomy, towards the application of equitable procedures regarding the capitalization of incomes and the allocation of expenses, the introduction of a financial planning, starting with the year 1988, by adopting „the multi-annual financial framework”, the improvement of the procedure of elaborating and adopting the European law of budget etc. A turning point in the history of the Communities was marked by the 1970 decision regarding the replacement of financial contribution by member states – a characteristic procedure, in the 1950s – 60s, of financing undertaken activities, with the employment of the Communities’ proper resources. In this way, a certain financial independence was created for each Community and, on the other hand, European Parliament was assigned certain budgetary powers.

At the moment, all revenues and expenditures of the European Union must be the object of provisions recorded in the budget for every financial year, which starts on January 1 and ends on December 31 of every year.

1. Principles of Constituting the Budget of the European Union The annual budget of the E.U. is established by a European law founded on

the following principles: • The principle of unity, according to which all revenues and expenses of the Union must be comprises in one document – annual budget of the Union. This ensures the coherence of the financial system of the E.U., the control on the mode of collecting revenues and of utilizing them in accordance with the priorities and the expense chapters approved by the European authorities. • The principle of balance, according to which the budget must be balanced in terms of income/expense ratio. From the moment when the European law of budget is adopted, there is a perfect balance between incomes and expenses. In the period of budgetary execution, it is possible for discrepancy to occur between expenses and incomes, such as the intervention of either a surplus (a positive balance) – which will be carried over to the next year, or a deficit (a negative balance) – which will be included in the next budget as an already-effectuated expense. In accordance with the Treaties, the law of European budget, the budget administration must ensure the balance between input and output, without resorting to loans for covering the expenses.


14

• The principle of annual terms, which signifies the idea that budgetary allocations or expenditures are authorized on the duration of the annual financial term, in compliance with the European law of budget. Derogation from this principle is possible only by carrying over exceeding expenses or revenues to the next fiscal year. • The principle of legitimacy, in the sense that the execution of expenses provided for in the budget requires the prior adoption of an obligatory act, from a judicial point of view, by which a legal groundwork is ensured a legal for the actions of the European authorities in the financial field, and in that of expense execution. • The principle of universality, in the sense that budgetary revenues constitute a value mass of the European Union, meant to serve the financing of established expenditures, the effective achievement not only of the Union’s priorities, but also of the satisfaction of any other category of needs or expenses. • The principle of the account unit signifies that the budget is conceived and executed in euro, accounts being also presented in euro. • The principle of ensuring budgetary discipline, in the sense that the European authorities make decisions with regard to the budget only to the extent where the latter can be applied through the capitalization of the Union’s proper financial resources and by observing the multi-annual financial framework. • The principle of good financial management, in the sense that, in executing the budget, the authorities of the European Union cooperate with member states in order to make possible the rational utilization of allocations provided for in the budget, the assurance of efficiency and effectiveness, while complying with the requirements of good financial management and, at the same time, combating both fraud and any other illegal activities causing damage to the Union’s financial interests. • The principle of specialization, according to which the budget is structured into sections, titles, chapters, articles and positions. Each credit / budgetary expense must have well-determined destination and a precise purpose; likewise, each new revenue to the budget must be identified accurately. • The principle of transparency, in the sense that the budget is thus conceived so as to ensure good information regarding the budgetary execution and accounts.

Observing the above-stated principles, the budget of the European Union is shaped, finalized and adopted by means of the cooperation of European institutions, especially that of the Parliament, of the Council of the European Union and of the Commission, with the member states, thus ensuring the necessary resources for attaining the objectives and the practical realization of the Union’s policies. The budget of the Union is entirely financed from proper resources.

2. The Structure of the Budget of the European Union The Union’s budgetary project is structured into the two parts: revenues

(input) and budgetary expenses (output). Up until the year 1970, budgetary


15

revenues were conceived as direct contributions by member states. Subsequently, the budget resulted from revenues or proper resources of the Community, among which: customs fees applied on goods imported from outside the European Economic Community, drawing taxes from imports of agricultural products, percentage taxes applied to the VAT, charged by every member state ( the percentage being established annually around the value of 0,5 -1,5 % of the received VAT ) etc.

Today, the revenues to the Union’s budget include: agricultural tax drawings, customs fees resulted from revenues within the common organization of the market, memberships fees, rata quotas applied to the VAT received by member states, a percentage of each member state’s GDP, established, ever since 1988, according to the level of development / prosperity of each member country, and various other revenues. The Union budget increased tenfold; in 25 years, in the period between 1975-2000, it rose from 6, 4 billion euros to 89, 6 billion euros, in 2001 the total budget amounted to 92, 56 billion euro, and in its general structure, the largest share is held by revenues originating from contributions by member states – as a percentage of the GDP, which grew, over the same period, from 0, 2 % to 48, 3 % in the year 2000. Receipts from customs fees and VAT also hold a relevant share. It is illustrative, in this sense, to show the structure of budgetary incomes for the year 2008, which presents itself as follows: Allocation according to the type of income

Table 1. Structure of the budget with respect to the type of income


16

As for expenses from the European Budget, they are of an administrative and operative (functional) nature. Administrative expenses are intended for the good functioning of institutions and other bodies of the Union, including expenditures for personnel, whereas operational expenses are effectuated by the Commission for the financing the Union’s public policies. From another perspective, expenses are distributed into six sections: 1. The European Parliament; 2. The Council of the European Union; 3. The European Commission; 4. The Court of Justice; 5. The Court of Audit; 6. The Economic and Social Committee / The Committee of the Regions. The breakdown of expenses into subsections within the budget of for financing the achievement of the objectives of the policies comprised in the Treaties is as follows: the Agricultural Policy of the European Union (CAP) holds the largest share; policies in the field professional formation, youth, culture, audio-video mass media, social care, reduction in unemployment, consumer’s protection, development of the European single market, industry, transports, Trans-European networks, foreign policy and common security etc.

Figure 2. Share of revenues in the structure of budget for the fiscal year 2008 Expenses from the European Union budget are destined to the financing of:

• Agriculture, rural development and the achievement of the objectives of the environmental policy through the EAGF – the Guarantee section; • The coverage of investments and structural actions, through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion Fund (CF); • The coverage of expenses in the field of education (for example, the Socrates programme), professional formation (for instance, the Leonardo programme), youth, culture, audio-video mass media, social care etc.;


17

• The coverage of expenses for energy development, of the actions of the European Environment Agency; • The coverage of expenses for ensuring the observance of regulations regarding competition and the development of the European single market; • Research and technological development; • Actions of economic and financial cooperation with third countries, of foreign policy and common security, of pre-adhesion aids etc.

In the structure of the European Union budget for 2008, six types of expenses are stipulated as follows (Tab. 3):

Table 3. Types of expenses in the budget structure for 2008

Commitment credits

Budget 2007

Financial framework

2008

Budget 2008

Balance 2008/2007

Balance 2008-2007

(1) (2) (3) (3/1) (3-1) EUR EUR EUR % EUR

1. Durable economic growth Margin

54 854 332 015

57 275 000

000

57 963 941 445

- 188 941 445

5,7 %

3 109 609 430

- Competitiveness for economic growth and workforce occupation Margin

9 367 547 511

10 386 000

000

11 086 000 000

- 200 000 000

18,3%

1 718 452 489

- Cohesion for economic growth and workforce occupation Margin

45 486 784 504

46 889 000

000

46 877 941 445

11 058 555

3,1%

1 391 156 941

2.

Conservation and management of natural resources

55 850 230 036

42 311 661 000

58 800 000

000

46 217 000 000

55 041 123 496

40 876 490 000

3 758 876 504 4 077 510 000

- 1,4%

- 3,4%

- 809 106 540

- 1 435 171 000

out of which: market expenditures and direct payments Margin

1 443 632 099

1 362 000 000

1 342 877 000 19 123 000

- 7,0%

- 100 755 099

out of which: market expenditures and direct payments

623 833 000

819 799 099

747 000 000

615 000 000

728 034 000 18 966 000

614 843 000 157 000

16,7 %

- 25,0%

104 201 000

- 204 956 099


18

3.

Citizenship, freedom, security and justice Margin

6 812 460 000

7 002 000 000

7 311 218 000

- 70 000 000

7,3%

498 758 000

- Freedom, security and justice Margin

6 977 864 032

7 380 000 000

7 283 860 235 173 139 765

4,4 %

305 996 203

- Citizenship Margin

444 646 152

207 000 000

206 636 292 363 708

- 53,5%

- 238 009 860

4. The european union as a world partner Margin

126 383 164 334

132 026 000

000

129 149 656

468 3 692 561

532

2,2 %

2 766 492 134

5. Administration Margin

44 234 401 352

42 385 608 666

- 4,2 % - 1 848 792 686

6. Compensations Margin

82 148 762 982

86 764 047 802 5,6 % 4 615 284 820

Total commitment

credits Margin

1,05 %

1,05 %

1,03 %

Mandatory expenses Non-mandatory expenses Expenses for commitments as a percentage from GNI

113 845 815 415

129 681 000

000

120 346 758

612

9 650 459 388

5,7 %

6 500 943 197

Total credits for payments

Margin Mandatory expenses Non-mandatory expenses

44 124 503 852

69 721 311 563

42 393 833 666

77 952 924 946

- 3,9 %

11,8 %

- 1 730 670 186

8 231 613 383

Expenses for commitments as a percentage from the GNI

0,95 % 1,03 % 0,96 %

It results that the budget for the year 2008 amounts to 129, 1 billion

EURO, representing an increase by 2, 2 % in comparison with 2007. The largest part of the E.U. budget – 45 % from the total of the Union’s expenses, will be allocated for the stimulation of economic growth and a greater cohesion. The agriculture will continue to receive over 40 % of the total of E.U. funds. The


19

decision to spend a larger sum for competitiveness was based on the tendencies of world economy evolution. At the same time, expenditures are reserved to the conservation and management of the Union’s natural resources (55 billion EURO), to the development of a European space of freedom, security and justice, in the field of citizenship, public health, consumer’s protection, support for youth actions, culture and communication, foreign policies, administration etc.

The monitoring of the evolution of the European Union’s budgetary structure, the supervision of the dynamic of the budgetary situation of the public debt quantum of member states are the task of the Commission. The latter periodically examines whether the budgetary discipline has been observed and draws up reports to the Council when it deems that there is a „risk of excessive deficit” in one of the member states. The Council can make decisions of applying measures established by the European Law, by which the member state must comply with the norms of budgetary discipline and the principle of good financial management. With a view to discharging the Commission of the European Union on the budget execution, European Parliament examines the annual report presented by the Commission, regarding the accounts of the previous fiscal year and the financial balance referring to the Community’s asset and liability items. The Commission has the obligation to give the Parliament or the Council, on their request, any information required for making the decision of discharging the Commission on the budget execution.

An important step in establishing the Union budget, according to rationality and equity criteria is represented by the agreement that the Council of the European Union reached, in 1992, with regard to the financing resources for domestic and foreign policies, ensued, in 1999, by an Inter-institutional agreement on budgetary discipline and optimization of the budgetary procedure reached by the European Parliament, Council and Commission. By this agreement, a financial prospect for a longer term is provided, making use of the advantage of multi-annual planning of incomes and expenses. Thus, a premise was created for the elimination of inter-institutional disputes which the Communities have faced for decades and for the protection of the Union’s financial interests – implicitly by finding the appropriate means of fighting fraud, corruption and any other illegal activities. Over the last years, emphasis was increasingly laid on the multi-annual financial framework aiming at a period of at least 5 years, establishing the values of annual limits for commitment credits per expense categories. Expense categories correspond to the Union’s large activity sectors. The multi-annual financial framework proved to be useful for the good march of the annual budgetary procedure.

3. The necessity and role of the multi-annual financial framework The observance of the principles of annual terms and balance of the Union

budget was questioned in the 1980s, owing to the fact that the realization of objectives of the European institutions’ policies are materialized on medium and long terms (longer than the duration of an annual financial term), and to the fact


20

that budgetary expenses have often exceeded the estimated values. Thus, specific symptoms of a financial recession have emerged, caused by several factors, among which: � The forecast on budgetary expenses, especially in the field of agriculture

financing, durable rural development, fishing orientation or the attainment of environmental objectives targeted an annual increase, whereas revenues to the Union budget had a slower tendency of increase. � The objective need for increase in the expenses was marked by the

expansion of structural funds, by the adoption of new programmes for financing scientific research, by the fishing orientation, by the development of education etc., whereas some budgetary resources remained constant or even declined. � The expenses of pre-adhesion and support for the integration of new

members into the European Union increased. � The receipts of customs fees had a downward tendency, due to the

diminution in the Union’s commercial exchanges with third countries. � As a consequence of the Union’s public agricultural policy, internal

necessities were covered by the states’ proper agricultural output and, in some cases, there was even a surplus for numerous agricultural products – which led to a reduction in importations and, implicitly, to a decrease in the volume of import taxes. � The revenues provided by the VAT had a slower rate of increase than the

member states’ GDP, and consequently, than the consumption within their economies. � The annual budgetary procedure has generated some inter-institutional

difficulties (among the Parliament, the European Council, the Commission, the Court of Audit) in terms of compliance with the budgetary discipline corresponding to the attainment of strategic objectives of Union.

All these causes have led to the idea of realizing a community framework of financial prospects of the Union, a medium/long-term anticipation of the budget structure, especially of the Union’s expense structure. This is how one can explain the signing of inter-institutional agreements among the Parliament, Council and Commission – beginning with the year 1988, by which these institutions agree upon the budgetary priorities of the following period, established according to the strategic objectives of the European Union policies. Consequently, the volume of revenues to the Union budget has increased proportionally to the expansion of needs and the emergence of new priorities, connected, in particular, to infrastructure, adhesion aids for new members etc. In the year 1999, the three European institutions (Parliament, Council and Commission) signed the Inter-institutional agreement for the period 2000-2006, as part of the Agenda 2000, aiming at the assurance of optimal conditions for the promotion and consolidation of the Union’s policies. In this sense, financing was provided for the realization of the reform of the common agricultural policy and rural development, for structural and cohesion action, for the development of internal policies in the field of Trans-European networks, for scientific research and innovation, education, culture,


21

professional formation, environment, sustenance for small and medium-sized enterprises etc., as well as the increase in expenses intended for external and common security policies, the limitation of administrative expenses and the assurance of reserves – especially for imports and for emergency situation, the setting-up of an expense limit in the Pre-adhesion aid section. The largest share in the general structure of budgetary expenses is held by those that are allocated for agricultural policies and structural operations of the Union.

In order to illustrate the facts presented above, one can exemplify the mode of building up the budget, of planning the expenses, by displaying multi-annual financial framework for the period of 2007-2013:

Figure 4. Multi-annual financial framework in current prices

From the tabular presentation of financial prospects for the period of 2007-

2013 (table 5) result the shares of the guideline standards of European Union’s budgetary policies for this lapse of time: 1. Durable economic growth; this section includes structural funds, research, innovation and education, with a budget of 433 billion euros;

2. Conservation and management of natural resources; this section contains the financing of the common agricultural policy and environmental policies, with a budget of 418,12 billion euros;

3. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice; this section includes activities in the field of justice and internal affairs, programmes promoting European citizenship (interculturalism, town unions, youth exchanges, the European dimension of press and culture), with a budget of 12,21 billion euros;

4. The European Union as a global actor; this section includes foreign affairs and common security policies, the promotion of human rights, sustenance given to populations with the highest degree of vulnerability in the world, peacekeeping, with a budget of 55,9 billion euros;


22

5. Administration and compensations, for which 57, 8 billion euros are allocated. Durable economic growth; this section includes structural funds, research, innovation and education, with a budget of 433 billion euros;

6. Conservation and management of natural resources; this section contains the financing of the common agricultural policy and environmental policies, with a budget of 418,12 billion euros;

7. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice; this section includes activities in the field of justice and internal affairs, programmes promoting European citizenship (interculturalism, town unions, youth exchanges, the European dimension of press and culture), with a budget of 12,21 billion euros;

8. The European Union as a global actor; this section includes foreign affairs and common security policies, the promotion of human rights, sustenance given to populations with the highest degree of vulnerability in the world, peacekeeping, with a budget of 55,9 billion euros;

9. Administration and compensations, for which 57, 8 billion euros are allocated. From the tabular presentation of financial prospects for the period of 2007-

2013 result the shares of the guideline standards of European Union’s budgetary policies for this lapse of time (Table 5).

In conclusion, the Union’s multi-annual financial framework is aimed at ensuring the organized evolution of budgetary expenses within the limit of proper resources, establishing the values of annual limitations for allocations for expense categories. The Union’s annual budget observes the multi-annual financial framework established by the Council of the European Union by means of a European law, after having been approved by the Parliament. In this context, in the period 2008-2009, a revision process for the European Union’s budgetary policy was applied, as a servomotor element of European constructions. The initiatives were taken by member states of the European Council ever since 2005, and their effects are expected to become visible starting with the year 2014. The European Commission launched, in September 2008, the process of revising the budget, by consulting the public, the actors involved in European construction, as well as national, regional and local institutions concerned being invited to intervene. Public debates on the topic of reform of community budget revenues and expenses, the improvement of budget execution efficiency, the strengthening of transparency and responsibility towards the community budget are correlated with the main community policies. The focus is placed, from the perspective of allocated resources, on the control of the function of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Cohesion Policy.


23

Table 5. Tabular structure of the multi-annual financial framework in current prices

COMMITMENT CREDITS NTE

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Total 2007-2013

1. Durable economic growth Competitiveness for economic growth and workforce occupation Cohesion for economic growth and workforce occupation 2. Conservation and

management of natural resources of which: Market expenses and direct payments 3. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice - Freedom, security and justice - Citizenship 4. The European Union as a world partner 5. Administration 6. Compensations

54 405 8 918 45 487 58 351 45 759 1 273 637 636 6 578 7 039 445

57 275 10 386 46 889 58 800 46 217 1 362 747 615 7 002 7 380 207

59 700 11 272 48 428 59 252 46 679 1 523 872 651 7 440 7 699 210

61 782 12 388 49 394 59 726 47 146 1 693 1 025 668 7 893 8 008

63 614 12 987 50 627 60 191 47 617 1 889 1 206 683 8 430 8 334

66 6212 14 203 2 401 60 663 48 093 2 105 1 406 699 8 997 8 670

69 621 15 433 54 188 61 142 48 093 2 376 1661 715 9 595 9 095

433 001 85 857 347 414 418 125 330 085 12 221 7 554 4 667 55 935 56 225 862

Total commitment credits as a percentage from the din GNI

126 491 1,06 %

132 026 1,06%

135 824 1,05 %

139 102 1,03 %

142 458 1,01%

147 039 1,00 %

151 829 1,00 %

974 769 1,03 %

Total commitment credits as a percentage from the GNI

122 190 1,02 %

129 681 1,04%

123 858 0,95 %

133 505 0,99 %

133 452 0,95%

140 200 0,96 %

142 408 0,94 %

925 294 0,98 %

Available margin Proper resource limit as a percentage from the GNI

0,22 % 1,24 %

0,20% 1,24%

0,29 % 1,24 %

0,25 % 1,24 %

0,29% 1,24%

0,28 % 1,24 %

0,30 % 1,24 %

0,26 % 1,24 %

The work on perfecting the budget is correlated with the priorities of

developing the European Union, with the guideline standards comprised in the multi-annual financial framework, which facilitates the adoption of the annual


24

budget and the control on the evolution of expenses, of the effectiveness and efficiency of the budgetary term.

4. The priorities of the European Union’s budgetary policy; implications in the process of establishing Romania’s budget

The European Union budget for 2009 was adopted on December 18, 2008 by the European Parliament, reaching a level of 133,8 billion euros (authorized expenses) – which represents an increase by 2,51 % in comparison with 2008 and the equivalent of 1,03 % from the GNI of the E.U. The budget is published in two volumes, with a structure that is based on the implementation of the European Union’s public policies (30, approximately) – each of them being presented in a specific title, which results in a tight connection between the Union’s policies and the resources allocated to them. Thus, the cost of implementing any policy results from the specific budgetary chapter. The objectives established by the Commission for each policy are sustained by annual management plans, integrated into the multi-annual financial framework (2007-2013).

In the year 2009, the resources and payment credits from the European Union’s general budget are as follows (Table 6).

From the analysis of data in the table, and of the other information in European Union Budget, one can draw the conclusion that, on the background of the current economic and financial recession, the E.U. allocates 60 billion euros (45,9 % of the budget ) to scientific research programmes, innovation, jobs and regional development. The increase by 11 %, as compared to 2008, of research expenses and by 22 % of those intended for innovation programmes is focused on sustaining the competitiveness of the European Union, as a world actor and partner. For the development of agriculture, expenses of 40 % of the budget are allocated. For the protection of the environment and rural development, there is an increase by 2, 9 %, as compared to 2008. Over 1 billion euros is granted to professional qualification and lifelong formation programmes (an increase by 6, 5 % from 2008). One can remark an increase in the financing assigned to the regions of Europe, 48, 5 billion euros being allocated in favour of cohesion. The financing of structural funds, in the year 2009, has among its objectives the support of the population of member states facing the effects of the financial crisis, of small and medium-sized enterprises, of the integration process of the 12 countries having entered the Union during its latest wave of enlargement.


25

Table 6. Payment credits to be covered during the financial year 2009 Description Budget 2009 Budget 2008 Variation

(%)

1. Durable growth 45 999 519 679 45 731 716 659 + 0,59

2. Conservation and management of natural resources

52 566 129 680 53 217 088 053 - 1,22

3. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice 1 296 400 000 1 488 945 648 - 12,93

4. The EU as a world partner 8 324 169 158 7 847 128 400 + 6,08

5. Administration 7 700 730 900 7 279 767 193 + 5,78

6. Compensations 209 112 912 206 636 292 + 1,20

Total expenses 116 096 062 329 115 771 282 245 + 0,28

Tab. nr. 7.

Proper resources required for financing the E.U. budget in 2009 Title

Chapter Resources for financing the budget Budget 2009 Budget 2008

1 0 Agricultural taxes established by the institutions of the european communities with regard to the commerce with third countries, as part of the common agricultural policy [articl 2 paragraph (1) lettter (a) in the decision 2000/597/ce, euratom]

1 403 500 000 1 282 800 000

1 1 Membership fees and other taxes provided for within the frame of the common organization of markets in the sector of sugar [article 2 paragraph (1) letter (a) in the decision 2000/597/ce, euratom]

146 800 000 707 800 000

1 2 Customs fees and other rights referred in article 2 paragraph (1) letter (b) in the decision 2000/597/ce, euratom

17 655 800 000 14 945 700 000

1 3 Proper resources originating from the value-added tax, on grounds of article 2 paragraph (1) letter (c) in the decision 2000/597/ce, euratom

19 616 117 308 18 096 756 274

1 4 Proper resources based on the gross national income, on grounds of article 2 paragraph (1) letter (d) in the decision 2000/597/ce, euratom

75 914 122 532 73 290 311 931

1 5 Correction of budgetary imbalances 0 0

Remaining stable in 2009, as compared to 2008, agricultural expenses are

oriented in the direction of rural development, environment protection and combating climate changes. The LIFE + environment protection programme benefits from an increase by 19 %, reaching 317 million euros. The E.U.'s budgetary efforts in the field of security and justice, of promoting active


26

citizenship, are concretized in the allocation of 864 million euros (18 % more than in 2008). At the same time, E.U. offers support to populations with the highest degree of vulnerability on the planet, through alimentary facilities financed with 1 billion euros, and for the performance of its role as a world partner, the E.U. reserves over 8 billions euros to its foreign policy (7 % more than in 2008).

The budgetary improvement and construction of the European Union depend upon the budgetary policies of its member states. Romania, as a member country, contributes to the formation of the Union’s budget and, at the same time, is a beneficiary of annual allocation. Thus, the contribution of Romania to the E.U. budget, in the period of the current multi-annual financial framework, is the following:

• 1,1 billion euros in 2007; • 1,36 billion euros in 2008; • 1,5 billion euros in 2009; • 1,7 billion euros in 2010; • 1,9 billion euros in 2011; • 2,1 billion euros in 2012; • 2, 3 billion euros in 2013. The total contribution of Romania to the European Union budget, for the

years 2007-2013, is of 11, 9 billion euros, being the 16th country, after Portugal, according to this criterion. The contribution of Romania to the European Union budget is made from six sources: agricultural taxes; taxes drawn from imports of agricultural products; customs fees; membership fees on the production of sugar and isoglucose; VAT-drawn resources; GNI-drawn resources; the financing of the United Kingdom correction. Member states deposit their contributions to the E.U. budget with the European Commission on the first day of each month. At the same time, Romania will receive a net benefit, over the 2007-2013 period, in European structural funds amounting to 19, 2 billion euros.

Evidently, there are structural connections between the European Union’s budgetary policies and those of member states, according to the systemic pattern (whole-part/function-structure relationships) – which is reflected in the methodology of elaborating the Romanian budget plan for 2009 and the estimations for the years 2010-2012. Thus, the budget programmes of the main credit accountants were put in relation to the macroeconomic context, to the internal and international objective constraints and, implicitly, to the manifestations of the global economic – financial crisis.

In the process of planning / elaborating the budget of Romania for 2009 three major alterations were adopted and implemented, as follows: 1. For external / internal credits, in the budgets of the main credit accountants, sums allocated from external / internal credits, budgetary credits for covering the public debt service corresponding to those loans that were taken over by the Ministry of Public Finances are no longer included, starting with the year 2009. The sums required by projects financed as part of loan agreements, taken over by the


27

Ministry of Finances, will be emphasised in a distinct title of expenses, bearing the denomination of „expenses associated to reimbursable financing programmes” and will be detailed per programmes. 2. For post-accession non-reimbursable external funds, the budgets of the main credit accountants – credit beneficiaries will include, starting with 2009, the sums intended for financing projects within the frame of programmes associated to the European Union’s Cohesion Policy, to the Common Agricultural and Fishing Policies, as well as other post-accession facilities and instruments, functioning on the principle of reimbursing expenses to beneficiaries, with full coverage from the state budget, the budget of state social insurances, the budget of unemployment insurances, as the case may be. 3. In order to provide budgetary programming with coherence and predictability, the multi-annual framework was taken into consideration, being aimed at budgetary crediting on a two-year basis – i.e. the years 2009 and 2010. Multi-annual actions (programmes finances from non-reimbursable external funds, public investment programmes, projects financed within the frame of loan agreements taken over from the Ministry of Finances etc.) lead to the emergence of commitment credits budgetary credits, being considered as an essential part in the of a main credit accountant for the years 2009-2010.

At the same time, starting with 2009, budget projects will present all of the public funds allocated to a main credit accountant, originated from: • State budget, including the ones for European-financed projects. • External credits. • Internal credits. • Proper revenues. • Pre-accession non-reimbursable external funds and other donors.

The improvement of the budget planning, from 2009 on, is aimed at realizing and implementing a budget focused on priorities, policies and results, and integrating the annual budget into the institutional strategic plan elaborated by the ministries. The main credit accountants „will dimension the budgetary proposals for the years 2009-2012, by taking into account: the realization of structural reforms, the directing of public funds towards priority domains determined by the requirements of this period, the commitments assumed by Romania for the reference time period of 2009-2012, the priority in utilizing post-accession non-reimbursable external funds for the realization of proper projects, as well as the necessity for fitting into the budgetary deficit target.” Likewise, they are obliged to observe the acquis communautaire in the field of competition and, implicitly, the European welfare norms.

As for the establishment of expense limits for main credits accountants in 2009 and the control of expenses and estimations for the prospect of 2010-2012, these are made by taking into consideration: • Macroeconomic indicators.


28

• The financing of priority public policies – selected by main credit accountants in accordance with the commitments assumed by Romania at the moment of its integration.

• The priority in ensuring the financing of projects pertaining to programmes associated to the European Union’s Cohesion Policy, and to Common Agricultural and Fishing Policies.

• The estimation of revenues to the general consolidated budget, in accordance with the legislation in force on January 1, 2009.

• The assumption of the target for the deficit of the general consolidated budget of 2 % from the GDP, correlated with the forecasted evolution of the other macroeconomic indicators.

In accordance with methodological norms regarding the reformation of the budget’s construction for 2009, three major priorities are set, as follows: 1. Large investments in the development of infrastructure (20 % of the resources – approximately 20 billion euros are allocated from the state budget).

2. Absorption of European funds. 3. Protection of underprivileged social categories.

To this is added the exertion of a rigorous control in order to prevent the established expenses from being exceeded, the fitting into the budgetary deficit target of 2 % from the GDP, in the conditions of implementing anti-crisis policies, as well as policies preventing the amplification of macroeconomic imbalances in the system. The budgetary programme for the year 2009 is part of a multi-annual financial framework and of a strategy that provides a real structural reform of the Romanian economy, aiming at the prospect of ensuring financial stability and a transparent revenue/expense framework.

In conclusion, the reformation and improvement of the construction of the Romanian budget, launched in 2009, targets the application of European norms comprised in the acquis communautaire in the field, starting with the observance of the underlying principles in drawing up and executing the general Budget of the European Union and continuing with the allocation of expenses per objective and clear policies in a multi-annual financial framework. The connections and adjustments that are necessary for achieving compatibility between the European Union budget and the budgets of member states, including Romania, are focused especially on the management, limitation and control of expenses in applying public policies, of the assumed priorities – as concretized in results. In the case of Romania, it is necessary to undertake political and administrative interventions, and implicitly legislative changes in the field of budgetary resources. These measures should lead to the enlargement of the taxing base, and to the increase in budgetary incomes. In today’s Romania there are 558 taxes, of which 484 non-fiscals, which encumbers the collection, monitoring and evaluation of „entries” to the budget. The action required in this case is to simplify the tax system, to cut down on the number of fees and taxes, in the context where a coherent, effective and transparent multi-annual financial planning is ensured.


29

Bibliography Bibere O., 1999, Uniunea Europeană – Între virtual şi real (The European

Union – Between Virtual and Real), All Publishing, Bucharest; Bîrzea C., 2001, Politicile şi instituŃiile Uniunii Europene (The Policies

and Institutions of the European Union), Corint Publishing, Bucharest; Blanc, Didier, Boissard, Béatrice (coordonateurs), 2008,

Studia I 2009 Tot - publicatii.uvvg.ropublicatii.uvvg.ro/docs/studiaeconomia/vol-I-IV-2009.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of Studia I 2009 Tot - publicatii.uvvg.ropublicatii.uvvg.ro/docs/studiaeconomia/vol-I-IV-2009.pdf ·...