LEADER 03618 am  22006133u 450 
001 9910153744403321
005 20230621135828.0
010   $a9789616842693
024 7 $a10.4335/978-961-6842-69-3
035   $a(CKB)3880000000044323
035   $a(OAPEN)620459
035   $a(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/28628
035   $a(EXLCZ)993880000000044323
100   $a20161129d2016      uy              
101 0 $aeng
135   $aurmu#---auuuu
181   $ctxt$2rdacontent
182   $cc$2rdamedia
183   $acr$2rdacarrier
200 10$aFiscal Decentralisation and Local Government Financing in Serbia and Montenegro /$fSanja  Kmezi?, Ph.D,  Katarina  ?uli?,  Ph.D.,  Mijat  Jocovi?,  Ph.D.,  Jadranka Kalu?erovi?, Ph.D
210   $cInstitute for Local Self-Government and Public Procurement Maribor$d2016
210  1$a[Maribor, Slovenia] :$cInstitute for Local Self-Government and Public Procurement Maribor,$d2016.
215   $a1 online resource (402 pages)
225 1 $aIntergovernmental Fiscal Relations
311 08$a9616842692 
330   $aThis book focuses on the fiscal decentralisation processes and the systems of local government financing in Serbia and Montenegro in the period 2000-2015. The retrospective analysis of the decentralisation processes in both countries show that they have been moving back and forth between decentralisation and centralisation, constantly swinging the pendulum of political discourse and the legal framework on intergovernmental fiscal governance. During the observed period, the systems of local government financing in both countries have often undergone drastic changes. Thus, this study focuses on the analysis of the impact of the legal framework related to intergovernmental fiscal relations, fiscal decentralisation and local government financing in Serbia and Montenegro on local government budgets. By applying both normative and economic analyses, as well as both quantitative and qualitative research methods, the study evaluates the legal quality and economic and factual effects of relevant legislation on local government budgets and status in the period 2000-2015. The study is divided into four parts: 1) Introduction; 2) Case Study: Serbia; 3) Case Study: Montenegro (both case studies include normative, economic and empirical analyses of the fiscal decentralisation process and the system of local government financing); 4) Comparative conclusions and recommendations.
606   $aPolitical structure and processes$2bicssc
606   $aPolitics and government$2bicssc
606   $aSociety and social sciences Society and social sciences$2bicssc
610   $afiscal decentralisation
610   $alocal government financing
610   $amontenegro
610   $aserbia
610   $aintergovernmental fiscal relations
610   $ashared revenues
610   $atransfers and grants
610   $aown-source revenues
610   $aBelgrade
610   $aIncome tax
610   $aParacin
610   $aProperty tax
610   $aReal estate
615  7$aPolitical structure and processes.
615  7$aPolitics and government.
615  7$aSociety and social sciences Society and social sciences.
676   $a338.9
700   $aKmezic?$b Sanja$0917063
701   $aKmezi?$b Sanja$0917063
701   $a?uli?$b Katarina$0917064
701   $aJocovi?$b Mijat$0917065
801  2$bUkMaJRU
912   $a9910153744403321
996   $aFiscal Decentralisation and Local Government Financing in Serbia and Montenegro$92055878
997   $aUNINA