1. Impact of the developments implemented in the framework of the Cohesion Policy on Hungarian government revenues PREPARED BY ISTVAN ZUBEK

2. The structure of the presentation 1.The aim of the analysis, important definitions, methodological issues 2.Results

3. The aim of the analysis 8 200 Mrd Ft grant for cohesion development purposes in the 2007-2013 cycle The Hungarian GDP in 2013 is 29 000 Mrd Ft The grants exceed 3% of GDP in yearly avarage 15% national co-financing The relationship between cohesion developments and government revenues

4. Basic definitions Beneficiaries (divided into different types by profit objectives) Government incomes Government expenses Direct vs. Indirect effects Central government revenues and general government revenues Direct impact of the developments implemented in the framework of the Cohesion Policy on Hungarian government revenues

5. The results Types of the beneficiaries The examined period: 2007-2013 Amount of accepted payments on projects 5 778 Mrd Ft (EU contribution, national co-financing, own contribution)

6. Government incomes and expenses Components of the income side (VAT, tax content of the material costs, tax contant of wage costs, company tax, local business tax) Component of the expense side (national co- financing)

7. Direct impact of government revenues

8. Breakdown by years 90% of the estimated impact concerns the last 4 years of the examined period.

9. Breakdown by OP-s 50% of the estimated impact in 3 OP-s – TOP, EDOP, EEOP

10. Breakdown by industrial sectors 90% of the estimated impact concerns the last 4 years of the examined period.

11. Main findings The estimated impact of the implementation of cohesion developments on Hungarian government revenues between 2007 and 2013 is 1180 Mrd Ft. Due to the gradual acceleration of the implementation system the impacts in the first three years of the examined period were behind the values realised in the second part of the cycle. Construction industry with almost 40% of total estimated direct impact overtop among the industrial sectors. We did not identify regiospecific differencies in regard of estimated direct impact.

12. Thank you for your attention.