“United in diversity” public sector financial, statistical and budgetary reporting in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (2/3) ◽  
pp. 265-283
Author(s):  
Adriana Tiron-Tudor ◽  
Cristina Silvia Nistor ◽  
Cristina Alexandrina Stefanescu

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to approach, both theoretically and empirically, public sector reporting at European Union (EU) level. It contributes to the accounting harmonisation literature by revealing the actual status of governmental reporting at the national level. Design/methodology/approach The paper carried out an exploratory data analysis of the harmonisation of statistical, budgetary and financial reporting at the EU level. A mapping visualisation offers a comprehensive overview of the current state of connections between these reporting systems. Findings The results reveal the complexity of governments’ reporting systems homogeneity, although all stakeholders recognise the struggle for the principles of performance and transparency in the public sector. Thus, these are following the EU Commission’s study, which concludes that there is significant heterogeneity in the accounting and reporting practices applied transversely throughout all Member States. Research limitations/implications The relevance of the study is comprehensive, from the economic environment to the practitioners, from the international regulatory bodies to the national ones, all can assess and quantify the significance of the past, present and future changes, considering their needs. The limitations of the research regard the documentation background because uniformly accessing some information presented by the EU Member States is relatively tricky. Future research might focus on the effects of these changes as they occur. Originality/value The study contributes to the scientific literature in the public sector through a comprehensive, well-supported and statistically grounded analysis performed at EU level, able to provide reliable results and to support valuable future recommendations towards harmonised reporting. Moreover, it supports and encourages all national and international efforts for improving the comparability of financial, budgetary and aggregated statistical reports.

2008 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 285-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin C. Williams

PurposeThis paper seeks to analyse the various approaches being used by the public sector across the European Union to tackle undeclared work and to evaluate the direction of change.Design/methodology/approachTo do this, the National Action Plans for Employment 2001 and 2003 (NAPs) and the National Reform Programmes 2005‐2008 (NRPs) are analysed, along with the data collected in international reviews conducted by the European Employment Observatory in Autumn 2004 and the European Industrial Relations Observatory (EIRO) in 2005 on undeclared work.FindingsIn parallel with public sector management in other realms, where it is accepted that positive reinforcement of “good” behaviour is more effective at eliciting change than negative reinforcement of “bad” behaviour, the finding is that the public sector in EU member states is moving away from solely a repressive approach that seeks to detect and penalise offenders and towards an approach that also seeks to stimulate good behaviour by rewarding compliance. Until now, however, these positive reinforcement measures appear to remain firmly entrenched in a bureaucratic management approach that uses externally imposed direct control systems to generate reactive behaviours, rather than an internalised post‐bureaucratic approach that seeks to generate constructive pro‐activity and commitment to tax morality on the part of populations.Originality/valueThis is one of the first attempts to evaluate how public sector management is tackling undeclared work in European member states.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dmytro S. Melnyk ◽  
Oleg A. Parfylo ◽  
Oleksii V. Butenko ◽  
Olena V. Tykhonova ◽  
Volodymyr O. Zarosylo

Purpose The experience of most European Union (EU) Member States has demonstrated effective anti-corruption practices, making the EU one of the leaders in this field, which can be used as an example to learn from in the field of anti-corruption. The purpose of this study is to analyze and identify the main features of anti-corruption legislation and strategies to prevent corruption at the national and supranational levels of the EU. Design/methodology/approach The following methods were used in the work: discourse and content analysis, method of system analysis, method of induction and deduction, historical-legal method, formal-legal method, comparative-legal method and others. Using the historical and legal method, the evolution of the formation of anti-corruption regulation at the supranational level was revealed. The comparative law method helped to compare the practices of the Member States of the EU in the field of anti-corruption regulation. The formal-legal method is used for generalization, classification and systematization of research results, as well as for the correct presentation of these results. Findings The main results, prospects for further research and the value of the material. The paper offers a critical review of key EU legal instruments on corruption, from the first initiatives taken in the mid-1990s to recent years. Originality/value In addition, the article analyzes the relevant anti-corruption legislation in the EU member states that are in the top 10 countries with the lowest level of corruption, namely: Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany and Luxembourg.


2015 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 324-348 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sebastian Godenhjelm ◽  
Rolf A. Lundin ◽  
Stefan Sjöblom

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to establish an understanding of what projectification means, how projectification is driven forward, as well as what the consequences of projectification are in an European Union (EU) context, and in the public sector in general. Design/methodology/approach – The research methods consist of a literature review as well as a meta-analysis of key EU policy documents related to the functioning of regional development and projects. The paper shows that structural developments brought forth by a projectification in a public sector context have significant consequences. Findings – Without contextually sensitive interlinking mechanisms between temporary and permanent structures projects risk losing their flexible and innovative qualities, and may fragment the ability of permanent organisations for maintaining coordination and continuity. The findings suggests that the proximity of permanent organisations, the discretion of entrepreneurship, the political priority of the task, the inclusion of competencies and interests, and the quality of transfer mechanisms are essential variables in explaining the outcome of temporary organisations in a politico-administrative context. Research limitations/implications – The paper contributes to the literature on projects in a public sector context and suggests that comparative research on the drivers and consequences of public sector projectification in supranational as well as national contexts is needed. Practical implications – The increasing requirements for applied project management skills and methods as criteria for project selection in the public sector highlight the importance of a broader theoretical and practical understanding of projectification. Originality/value – The paper adds a new dimension to the projectification debate by presenting a descriptive and conceptual discussion about the consequences of public sector projectification in an EU context. It complements an existing theory of the temporary organisation and takes the first steps towards a theory applicable to projectification in a public context.


Author(s):  
V. O. Tyumentsev

The subject of this article is the competence of the European Union (EU) in the public health field within the territory of the Member States of this organization. The purpose of this article is to analyze how the EU's competence is distributed in relation to the competence of the member states using the primary treaty of the organization as a source. The article examines the powers of the EU organization within both the main and additional competence and analyzes how the EU interacts with the member states in the framework of health protection in accordance with the legal provisions of the primary source. The main and additional competence of the EU is considered separately, and there is also an analysis of the features and possible prospects of the legal regulation of health protection within the relevant branch of the law of the European Union.


2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 61-83
Author(s):  
Mireille Van Eechoud

The EU Directive on Re-use of Public Sector Information of 2013 (the PSI Directive) is a key instrument for open data policies at all levels of government in Member States. It sets out a general framework for the conditions governing the right to re-use information resources held by public sector bodies. It includes provisions on non-discrimination, transparent licensing and the like. However, what the PSI Directive does not do is give businesses, civil society or citizens an actual claim to access. Access is of course a prerequisite to (re)use. It is largely a matter for individual Member States to regulate what information is in the public record. This article explores what the options for the EC are to promote alignment of rights to information and re-use policy. It also flags a number of important data protection problems that have not been given serious enough consideration, but have the potential to paralyze open data policies. 


2017 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-75
Author(s):  
Gediminas Valantiejus

AbstractIn 2016, the European Union has launched a new and ambitious project for the future regulation of international trade in the European Union and the rules of its taxation: since the 1 May 2016, the new Union Customs Code (UCC) has entered into force. It revokes the old Community Customs Code (CCC), which was applied since 1992, and passed in the form of EU regulation sets brand-new rules for the application of Common Customs Tariff and calculation of customs duties (tariffs) in all the EU Member States. It is oriented to the creation of the paperless environment for the formalisation of international trade operations (full electronic declaration of customs procedures) and ensuring of a more uniform administration of customs duties in the tax and customs authorities of the Member States in the European Union. Therefore, the article raises and seeks to answer the problematic question whether the Member States of the European Union themselves are ready to implement these ambitious goals and does the actual practice of the Member States support that (considering the practice of the Republic of Lithuania). The research, which is based on the analysis of case law in the Republic of Lithuania (case study of recent tax disputes between the taxpayers and customs authorities that arose immediately before and after the entry into force of the UCC), leads to the conclusion that many problematic areas that may negatively impact the functioning of the new Customs Code remain and must be improved, including an adoption of new legislative solutions.


Author(s):  
Hans Hofmann

AbstractThis chapter discusses how public administration in Germany is influenced by the making and implementation of law by the organs of the European Union (EU). Although the public administrations of the EU Member States are, in principle, responsible for enforcing the laws made by the EU, the EU’s influence on the public administration of Germany as EU Member State is constantly growing. This is true, not only of those areas in which the Member States have transferred to the EU the authority to make laws, but increasingly also of those areas in which the Member States have retained such authority. At the same time, however, there is no systematic codification of the law on administrative procedures at European level and no system of legal remedy for Union citizens equivalent to those at national level.


2020 ◽  
pp. 43-52

Money laundering and terrorism financing are serious and internationally emerging issues that must be approached and confronted at European Union level. The latest terrorist attacks and periodic banking scandals highlight the necessity for additional attention in this particular direction. In regard to the internal EU market, financial flows are integrated and trans-border by nature, thus funds can circulate rapidly, from one country to another, offering the possibility to perpetrators and terrorists to transfer money across Member State avoiding detection by authorities. This specific situation generates the necessity to identify and understand the particular ML/TF risks generated by services and products offered within the EU economic and financial ecosystem. In order to ensure an efficient mechanism for identifying the ML/TF risks associated with the products and services provided on the territory of European Union, the 4AMLD provides the obligation of the EU Commission to perform once in two years the so-called European Union Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Supranational Risk Assessment. Since 2017 two supra-national risk assessments were carried out and the final results are used by Member States to monitor the evolution of risks at Union level and to implement the necessary recommendation for ensuring a proper minimization of threats and vulnerabilities at the national level. This paper aims to analyze, understand and compare the main outcomes of the two assessments, namely the identified risks and their links with vulnerable sectors, as well as the evolution or devolution of certain risks as a result of mitigation measures applied by EU Member States. Another task of this article is to provide additional recommendations in terms of mitigating measures and efforts, which must be taken into account by Member States


Author(s):  
Simon Bulmer ◽  
Claudio M. Radaelli

This chapter examines the impact of Europeanization upon the public policy functions of European Union member states. It first explains why Europeanization of policy is a hot topic before describing types of Europeanization and characteristic patterns of governance in the EU. It then discusses the dynamics of Europeanization, focusing on the processes involved and the effects produced, and relates these processes and effects to categories of policy in order to map the Europeanization of public policy. It also analyses research considerations with respect to Europeanization and concludes with an assessment of the EU enlargement process as well as suggestions for conducting empirical studies to investigate the EU’s impact on member states.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document