Fiscal Federalism and Intergovernmental Distribution of VAT in BRICS Countries
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2026-13-2-208-231
Abstract
The article suggests a comparative analysis of the legal framework for the distribution of value added tax between different levels of the budget in the BRICS states—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and the Republic of South Africa. The aim of the study is to identify general patterns and unique national models that have developed in the context of federal or decentralized state structures. Drawing on an analysis of the constitutional norms and the tax and budget legislation of these countries, the author identifies three main approaches. China demonstrates a centralized model where equal sharing of VAT revenues is combined with a system of strictly targeted redistribution of funds for the implementation of economic development plans. India exemplifies a cooperative model based on joint decision‑making by the centre and the states through a special council and an independent commission that set out detailed distribution formulas. Brazil and South Africa can be seen as opposite poles. The Brazilian system, owing to the detailed constitutional entrenchment of state rights, is characterized by internal contradictions and stagnation, whereas the South African system is marked by strong centralization and the passive dependence of provinces on grants. The article emphasizes that, despite the differences, all countries face similar problems: the need to bridge the gap between regional revenues and expenditures, reduce territorial inequality, and create effective incentives for the development of the local economy. The author using the comparative analysis makes contribution to the Russian model, i.e., to avoid extreme models, develop a system that combines stable regional revenues with nationwide oversight, and gradually transform financial assistance to territories into an instrument for stimulating specific socio‑economic development. The scientific contribution of the research lies in a comprehensive comparison of the legal frameworks for VAT distribution in the largest developing economies of the BRICS group, which makes it possible to identify strategic guidelines for improving intergovernmental fiscal relations.
Supporting agencies: The study was supported by a grant from the Russian Science Foundation No. 25-28-00172, project: “The Concept of Legal Regulation of Intergovernmental Distribution of VAT in the Russian Federation,” https://rscf.ru/project/25-28-00172/
About the Author
D. Bachurin
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Dmitry Bachurin – Leading Researcher, Laboratory “Functional Foundations of Social Behavior Modeling,” Center for Innovative Design and Applied Research
7a Krasina St., Tyumen, 625003
References
1. Bachurin, D. G. (2016). The impact of political and socio-economic factors on the formation of theoretical and methodological approaches to the legal regulation of the distribution of VAT revenues. Innovative Development of the Economy, 3(33), 155–160. (In Russian).
2. Bachurin, D. G. (2020). The current state of legal regulation of VAT in the Federative Republic of Brazil: On the threshold of tax reform. International Public and Private Law, 4, 30–35. https://doi.org/10.18572/1812-3910-2020-4-30-35. (In Russian).
3. Bachurin, D. G. (2021). Legal regulation of VAT in the Republic of South Africa: A comparative study. International Public and Private Law, 2, 35–39. (In Russian).
4. Berman, B., Eyoh, D., & Kymlicka, W. J. C. (Eds.). (2004). Ethnicity and democracy in Africa. Ohio University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781782049920
5. Cai, H., & Treisman, D. (2006). Did government decentralization cause China’s economic miracle? World Politics, 58(4), 505–535. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.2007.0005
6. Ebrill, L., et al. (2003). Modern VAT. Ves Mir. (In Russian).
7. Fessha, Y. T. (2010). Ethnic diversity and federalism: Constitution-making in South Africa and Ethiopia. Ashgate. https://doi.org/10.1093/publius/pjr028
8. Lin, J. Y., & Liu, Z. (2000). Fiscal decentralization and economic growth in China. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 49(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1086/452488
9. Lu, B., & Chen, Y. (2022). Fiscal incentive system and promotion: An institutional debate on the driving forces of growth. China Industrial Economics, 2022(6), 25–43. (In Chinese).
10. Montinola, G., Qian, Y., & Weingast, B. R. (1996). Federalism, Chinese style: The political basis for economic success. World Politics, 48(1), 50–81. https://doi.org/10.1353/wp.1995.0003
11. Qian, Y., & Weingast, B. R. (1997). Federalism as a commitment to preserving market incentives. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(4), 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.11.4.83
12. Simeon, R. (1998). Considerations on the design of federations: The South African Constitution in comparative context. Southern African Public Law, 13(1), 49–67.
13. Zorkin, V. (2009, April 10). Crisis of trust and the state. Rossiyskaya gazeta. (In Russian).
Review
For citations:
Bachurin D. Fiscal Federalism and Intergovernmental Distribution of VAT in BRICS Countries. BRICS Law Journal. 2026;13(2):208-231. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2026-13-2-208-231
Views:
28
JATS XML
Email this article 