Over time it is recurring that when the shares received by states and municipalities drop, there are those who point out that it was “a cut” made by the authorities of the central or federal power in our daily language, when what it is about is a reflection of the System, which varies depending on the collection of taxes at the central level. It would be useful to go deeper into the subject, to understand what the National Fiscal Coordination System is.
The precedents are vast, for example, in 1953 the first Fiscal Coordination Law was promulgated; In 1973 a new system of ISIM participations was born with which all the entities are coordinated. In 1979, the participable federal taxes by federal declaration included topics such as tires and rubber tubes, bottled water and soft drinks, electronic items, carpets and rugs, glass and glass. There was a multiplicity of state and federal taxes.
This is how the SNCF system was created in order to reduce regional inequalities, increase collection efficiency and increase the income of states and municipalities and facilitate the payment of taxes to citizens. Disappearing or repealing more than 40 federal taxes and more than 400 state and municipal taxes.
Additionally, the new Fiscal Coordination Law that is created as of 1980 is presided over by an adhesion agreement through which the States suspend some federal taxes that, since the Constitution does not prohibit them, could be implemented by receiving participations in exchange, that is, a percentage of the participatory federal revenue (RFP).
Until 1989, the formula for the distribution of shares presented an inertial tendency, that is, the status that was held in the participation for specific taxes, however, these formulas coincided in defects, the distribution presented a great inequity for 26 federal entities and for the same that year in practically 12 meetings of the working group of the share distribution formula and of the permanent commission of fiscal officials, reforms to the formula were discussed and approved, eliminating terrible differences between one entity to another, being the extreme 9 to 1, formula promoted by Oaxaca and approved by consensus by the CPFF.
The next change occurred in 2007 to 2008 where, suggested by an international organization, participations began to be paid based on the domiciled population, which even generated a Constitutional Controversy presented by CDMX that did not go to court “because I did not center the fund of the problem, only to the form” which had two important actors the main beneficiary the State of Mexico that today receives approximately 14%, followed by CDMX with more than 8.5%, Veracruz with 8.2% and Jalisco 6.6%, that is its population percentage.
Since 2006, the Stabilization Fund for the Income of the Federative Entities (FEIEF) has been created, which operated at times when federal income fell below estimates. Twice when the Mexican Petroleum Fund was created as the origin of its participation in the participatory collection, the dynamics of the FEIEF increase has been slower, for this reason it has been resorted to (enhancing it).
He has held various professional and academic positions, including: Head of the Regional Coordination and Institutional Relations Unit of the Federal Authority for the Development of Special Economic Zones, Internal Comptroller, Federal Court of Fiscal and Administrative Justice, Auditor Special Federalized Expenditure, in the Superior Audit of the Federation, Head of the Coordination Unit with Federative Entities (of the SHCP Member of the Governing Board of the SAT General Coordinator of the work of the National Tax Convention held in 2004 representing the Secretary of Finance Secretary of Finance of Oaxaca President of the National College of Economists Professor of Economic Policy, Public Sector Economics and State Finance at the Faculty of Economics of the UNAM, since 1978. Due to his outstanding experience as a public servant, as well as in In the academic field, the Superior Auditor has several publications, among which are: Equity and fiscal effort, the Mexican experience (2006) Citizen participation and social control (1994) Fiscal federalism in Mexico 1989-1994 (1994) Social factors and Economics of Corruption (1993).
Since 1979 he has collaborated for various local and national print media. Currently, he participates with opinion columns in important media such as El Financiero and the weekly Eje Central.
#Fiscal #relations #federal #country