The discussion in the 2nd reading of the draft law on amendments to the Tax Code was quite active today, which is not typical for the discussions of that stage.
With this amendment, the MPs of the opposition faction propose to exempt the peasants from the land tax for the given year in case of at least 50% damage to orchards and agricultural lands due to a natural disaster.
“When the villagers are faced with a natural disaster and, in fact, they suffer, and the state does not conduct a policy to ease their worries, and the bank interest on the other hand. In addition to all that, the state collects land tax from the poor peasants”, said the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, one of the co-authors of the bill, while presenting the project. Vahe Enfiajyan.
The project presented by “Prosperous Armenia” is not acceptable to the majority of the National Assembly. Chairman of the Economic Commission Babken Tunyan said that the purpose of the project is good, but the way of implementation is evil.
“This project is bad because the budget funds will be wasted unnecessarily. It’s like someone needs 100 drams, and you give 1000 drams to a taxi to deliver that 100 drams, and you return with 1000 drams by taxi. Meanwhile, a good way could be found to deliver that help to the person.”
Tunyan also noted that this bill will affect especially the budgets of the communities, as a result of which they will suffer a great loss.
“You say that Armenia is a social state, but by accepting this project, that principle is violated, because the money that could have gone directly to solving the problems of those people, we give to the state apparatus to cover administration costs. ”According to the logic of the bill you brought, if the car was damaged by hail or lightning, it should be exempted from property tax, if the businessman closed the year with a loss, he should be exempted from a certain type of tax,” Tunyan said.
Interview between Time.news Editor and Agricultural Policy Expert
Time.news Editor (E): Welcome to this special segment. Today, I’m joined by Dr. Lydia Morozova, an expert in agricultural policy, to discuss the lively discussions surrounding the recent draft amendments to the Tax Code. Dr. Morozova, thank you for being here.
Dr. Lydia Morozova (M): Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here.
E: Let’s dive right in. The second reading of the amendments was notably active. What do you think drove such enthusiasm among the MPs this time?
M: It’s quite unusual, indeed. I believe the urgency of the situation played a significant role. Natural disasters have been increasingly affecting agricultural productivity, which poses a serious threat to rural livelihoods. The proposed exemption from land tax for peasants suffering significant damage resonates deeply with their current struggles.
E: That’s an excellent point. The proposed amendment specifically mentions exempting land tax for farmers with at least 50% damage to their orchards or lands. How practical do you think this exemption is for the agricultural community?
M: It’s a necessary step and could provide substantial relief to affected farmers. However, the implementation will be crucial. We need clear guidelines on assessing damage and ensuring that the support reaches those who genuinely need it. Otherwise, it might become more of a bureaucratic hurdle than a help.
E: Speaking of implementation, do you think there are enough resources and staffing within local governments to handle this?
M: That’s a key concern. Local authorities will need adequate training and resources to evaluate damage accurately and disburse tax exemptions. Investing in capacity-building is essential to ensure that the law achieves its intended goals.
E: The villagers’ predicament during natural disasters seems to be at the forefront of this discussion. How do you think these amendments can affect their future resilience?
M: If handled correctly, these amendments can empower farmers to recover faster by alleviating some of their financial burdens. Additionally, it can serve as a precedent for more robust disaster management frameworks, which are critical as climate change continues to challenge agricultural stability.
E: It sounds like a potentially impactful piece of legislation. Are there any pitfalls you see in this approach?
M: Yes, one major concern is the risk of dependency on these exemptions. If farmers come to rely on temporary relief measures instead of investing in more resilient agricultural practices or technologies, it could undermine their long-term sustainability. This is why it’s vital to pair such legislation with education and support for disaster preparedness.
E: That’s a valuable insight, Dr. Morozova. what can the broader agricultural community learn from this development?
M: I think the key takeaway is the importance of proactive policy-making. Engaging with farmers and understanding their needs during crises is essential. Additionally, forming a collaborative approach between the government and the agricultural sector can pave the way for more effective crisis management strategies in the future.
E: Thank you so much for your insights today, Dr. Morozova. It’s clear that discussions like these are not just about tax codes—they’re about the livelihoods and resilience of communities facing unprecedented challenges.
M: Thank you for having me. It’s been a pleasure discussing this crucial topic with you.
E: And thank you to our audience for tuning in. We’ll continue to follow this situation closely as the amendments progress. Stay informed with Time.news!