Connect with us

Reports

Hungary must enforce its foreign bribery offence against companies

Published

on

The Working Group is concerned that Hungary has not commenced any foreign bribery investigations or prosecutions in over nine years since the Phase 3 evaluation of implementation of the OECD Anti-Bribery Convention. However, the companies operating in the country have significant exposure to export-related risks of the bribery of foreign public officials. This includes foreign subsidiaries of multinational enterprises (MNEs) that use Hungary as a manufacturing base and re-export goods to other markets. To avoid Hungary becoming a safe harbour for MNEs with subsidiaries in Hungary that commit bribery abroad, the authorities must overcome their reluctance to enforce relevant criminal legal provisions and assign responsibility to detect and investigate such bribery.

The OECD Working Group on Bribery has just completed its Phase 4 evaluation of Hungary’s implementation of the Convention. The resulting Report focuses on ways for Hungary to significantly enhance enforcement of its foreign bribery offence against corporate vehicles, including foreign subsidiaries, by taking steps including the following:

Significantly increase the resources to manage the current and forecasted foreign bribery case load and utilise investigative tools;

Improve the whistleblower system, and framework for detecting and reporting suspicions of foreign bribery by public officials, including the tax authorities;

Adopt measures to safeguard foreign bribery investigations and prosecutions from potential disruption due to the use of immunities for specific office holders;

Urgently extend the two-year investigation time-limit, due to the highly complex nature of foreign bribery cases;

Urgently raise the awareness of Hungarian companies, including foreign subsidiaries, of their foreign bribery risks in export activities, and the need to adopt effective measures for managing those risks; and

Strengthen its capacity to provide prompt and effective legal assistance to other Parties to the Convention that are investigating and prosecuting foreign bribery cases.  

Furthermore, the Working Group will follow-up on the impact of recent reforms on the ability of the Hungarian media and civil society to play a role in detecting foreign bribery cases.

The report also highlights that Hungary is in a transitional phase, having recently initiated important reforms that could impact on foreign bribery enforcement, such as a settlement procedure, a gradual system for encouraging confessions, and new covert investigative techniques. In addition, Hungary has successfully implemented a recommendation from its Phase 3 evaluation to compile statistics on investigative measures and reasons for discontinuing any foreign bribery investigations, and the Hungarian Export Promotion Agency has delivered a substantial number of trainings and courses to small and medium-sized enterprises. The Hungarian authorities welcomed insights from the Working Group on how to ensure that these reforms translate into more effective implementation of the Convention. 

The OECD Working Group on Bribery, which is composed of 44 countries, adopted the report on 27  June 2019, including recommendations made to Hungary on pages 53-56. In accordance with standard procedures, Hungary will be invited to submit a written report in two years (June 2021) to the Working Group on the steps taken to implement these recommendations. Additionally, Hungary will submit a written report to the Working Group in one year on specific recommendations on the detection and investigation of foreign bribery and use of corporate responsibility for such bribery.

This report, available at http://www.oecd.org/corruption/anti-bribery/OECD-Hungary-Phase-4-Report-ENG.pdf, is part of the OECD Working Group on Bribery’s fourth phase of monitoring implementation of the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions and related instruments, which was launched in 2016.  Phase 4 examines the evaluated country’s particular challenges and positive achievements. It also explores issues such as detection, enforcement, corporate liability, and international cooperation, as well as unresolved issues from prior Working Group evaluations.

Continue Reading
Comments

Reports

People are increasingly worried about inequalities but divided on how to address them

Published

on

Photo: Arno Senoner/Unsplash

For a recovery from the COVID-19 crisis that is strong, sustainable but also fair, it will be key to tackle inequalities and promote equal opportunities. Yet while there is growing consensus that inequality is a problem, people are increasingly divided about its extent and what to do about it, according to a new OECD report.

Does Inequality Matter? says that most people are concerned about inequality. Four in five people in the OECD feel income disparities are too large in their country. People care about inequality of both outcomes and opportunities, as they perceive high income and earnings disparities as well as low social mobility. Moreover, concern over income and earnings disparities has risen in the last three decades, in line with the increase in income inequality.

People’s perceptions are not disconnected from reality. Along the lines of observed trends in income inequality, people believed, on average, that top earners earned 5 times as much as bottom earners in the late 1980s/early 1990s, while this perceived top-to-bottom earnings ratio has increased to 8 today, after having reached a peak of 10 during the Great Recession. Tolerance for inequality has also increased, though by less. Today people believe, on average, that top earners should earn 4 times as much as the bottom earners, up from 3 times in the late 1980s.

More than 6 out of 10 OECD citizens believe their government should do more to reduce income differences between rich and poor with taxes and transfers. The more people are concerned about inequality and perceive low social mobility, the higher their demand for redistribution.

However, beliefs about effectiveness of policies and determinants of inequalities matter. People are less likely to demand more redistribution if they believe that benefits are mistargeted, and they are less in favour of progressive taxation if they believe that corruption is widespread among public officials, prompting the misuse and misallocation of public benefits.

Demand for more progressive taxation is also lower where people believe that disparities are justified by differences in personal effort, rather than to circumstances beyond people’s control. For example, in 2018 in Poland 25% of people believe poverty is due to lack of effort rather than injustice or bad luck and 54% demand more progressive taxation, while in Germany that figure is 4% and 77%, respectively.

Yet, despite most people being concerned about inequality, they have strongly different beliefs about its extent and what to do about it. Within the average OECD country, one fourth of people thinks that more than 70% of the national income goes to the 10% richest households, contrary to another fourth who think that less than 30% goes to the richest households.

Furthermore, the large heterogeneity of people’s views on inequalities has grown in the last three decades, even among people with similar socio-economic characteristics. There is evidence of growing polarization: in most OECD countries there is an increasing gap between those who believe inequality is high and those who believe it is low. More unequal countries have a more divided public opinion: in Chile and the United States – two among the most unequal OECD countries – the perceptions about the extent of the top richest 10% shares diverge the most.

Continue Reading

Reports

Data show how the COVID-19 pandemic has hit all aspects of people’s well-being

Published

on

The COVID-19 pandemic has not only had devastating effects on physical health and mortality but has touched every aspect of people’s well-being, with far-reaching consequences for how we live and work, according to a new study by the OECD.

 COVID-19 and well-being: life in the pandemic says the virus caused a 16% increase in the average number of deaths across 33 OECD countries between March 2020 and early May 2021, compared with same period over the previous four years. Over the same time frame, survey data in the report reveal rising levels of depression or anxiety and a growing sense among many people of loneliness and of feeling disconnected from society.

 Government support helped to sustain average household income levels in 2020 and stemmed the tide of job losses, even as average hours worked fell sharply. Although job retention schemes offered workers some protection, 14% of workers in 19 European OECD countries felt it was “likely they would lose their job” within three months, and nearly 1 in 3 people in 25 OECD countries reported financial difficulties.

 The report says experiences of the pandemic have varied widely depending on age, gender and ethnicity, as well as on the type of job people do and on their level of pay and skills. The crisis also aggravated existing social, economic and environmental challenges.

 In those countries with available data, workers from ethnic minorities have been more likely to lose their jobs during the pandemic. Mental health deteriorated for almost all population groups on average in 2020 but gaps in mental health by race and ethnicity are also visible. COVID-19 mortality rates for some ethnic minority communities have been more than twice those of other groups.

 Younger adults experienced some of the largest declines in mental health, social connectedness and life satisfaction in 2020 and 2021, as well as facing job disruption and insecurity.

 Launched on the first anniversary of the new OECD Centre for Well-being, Inclusion, Sustainability and Equal Opportunity (WISE), the report offers a primer for OECD recommendations on well-being. It assesses the impact of the pandemic across the 11 dimensions identified in the OECD’s Well-being Framework – income and wealth; work and job quality; housing; health; knowledge and skills; environment; subjective well-being; safety; work-life balance; social connections; and civil engagement. It features data on inclusion and equality of opportunity, and also considers how the stocks of economic, human, social and environmental resources that sustain well-being have fared.

 The report argues that as governments move from emergency support to stimulating the recovery, they need to refocus their action on what matters most to people’s well-being.

 A key objective must be to increase the job and financial security of households, and particularly those most affected by the crisis – with a focus on the most vulnerable, on youth, women and the low skilled.  Addressing the burden of poor physical and mental health and a cross-government approach to raising the well-being of the most disadvantaged children and youth must also be prioritised. The report also stresses that actions to raise living standards and equality of opportunity must take place within the context of greening the economy: the climate and biodiversity crises, like the pandemic, require a coordinated response across public policy.

 A well-being approach, the report explains, looks at government objectives as interconnected goals, focusing on how different policies can complement each other. Such an approach encourages decision-making that simultaneously considers impacts on current well-being, inclusion, and the sustainability of well-being over time. For instance, improving long-term economic opportunities through raising child well-being, or aligning efforts to combat climate change with social and economic objectives by increasing employment and mobility for people and places left behind.

 Natural, human and social capital will need rebuilding after the crisis, the report adds. Reducing inequalities in access to, and uptake of lifelong learning, for example, will help people – especially the disadvantaged – get high quality jobs by developing training programmes that address skills gaps and emphasise digital abilities.

 Social capital – the norms, shared values and institutions that foster co-operation – has shaped communities’ responses to the pandemic. Data from across OECD countries shows that both trust in institutions and interpersonal trust influenced the effectiveness of pandemic containment. Although it has recently shown signs of weakening, institutional trust in 2020 in most OECD countries was at its highest since records began in 2006.

 The report says reinforcing trust is key to reconnecting people to their societies, and to the institutions that are meant to support them. By doing so, the well-being of citizens is improved both today and in a post-pandemic future.

Continue Reading

Reports

Inflation Concerns Push Up Emerging East Asia Bond Yields

Published

on

Emerging East Asia’s bond market grew 3.4% in the third quarter to $21.7 trillion, although rising global inflation and a shift in the United States (US) monetary stance weakened regional financial conditions, according to the latest issue of the Asia Bond Monitor.

Bond yields rose, currencies weakened, and risk premiums edged up amid increased global inflation and the US Federal Reserve’s announcement that it would limit bond purchases starting in November, according to the report, released today by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

“The encouraging macroeconomic outlook and accommodative policy stances are supporting the region’s financial conditions,” said ADB Acting Chief Economist Joseph Zveglich, Jr. “However, central banks in the region may find they need to be less accommodative to keep inflation in check and to keep in step with US monetary policy changes. That said, the chance of another ‘taper tantrum’ is limited as the direction of the Federal Reserve’s stance is clearly communicated and the region’s economic fundamentals remain strong.”

Emerging East Asia comprises the People’s Republic of China (PRC); Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; the Republic of Korea; Malaysia; the Philippines; Singapore; Thailand; and Viet Nam. 

Government bonds remained the dominant segment, increasing 3.9% from the previous quarter to $13.6 trillion. The bond markets of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) members—many of which suffered from the coronavirus disease’s (COVID-19) Delta variant outbreak—grew 14.4% from a year earlier to $1.9 trillion in the third quarter, compared with 12.6% and 7.6% growth in the PRC and the Republic of Korea, respectively.

ASEAN bond markets showed sound market capacity during the pandemic, evident in low bond yields amid rapid market expansion. Domestic financial institutions, particularly banks, anchored bond market functioning. At the same time, a few ASEAN central banks facilitated market liquidity and government financing via asset purchasing programs. Mid- and long-term bonds account for a majority of outstanding bonds in ASEAN bond markets, implying a relatively stable financing structure.

Sustainable bond markets in the ASEAN region plus the PRC; Hong Kong, China; Japan; and the Republic of Korea totaled $388.7 billion, remaining the largest regional sustainable bond market after Europe and accounting for 19.2% of global sustainable bond markets at the end of September. Green, social, and sustainability bonds accounted for 71.6%, 13.0%, and 15.3% of the region’s sustainable bonds outstanding, respectively. As this regional market develops, the issuer base is also diversifying from just the financial sector to other business sectors.

The latest issue of the Asia Bond Monitor analyzes the price and yield differences between labeled and unlabeled green bonds. Recent research finds that investors would pay more for labeled or certified green bonds that have better information disclosure and lower reputational risk.

The report also discusses how the Delta variant outbreak and uneven vaccination progress slowed and caused divergences in regional economic recovery; the likelihood of a “taper tantrum” repeat; and risks to the current outlook, including continuing pandemic-induced uncertainty, slow vaccination rollouts in developing countries, and supply chain disruptions.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

china india pakistan china india pakistan
East Asia37 mins ago

U.S.- China Strategic Competition in The East Asia

East Asia has been the most dynamic region where development has been internationally recognized. The regional politics of the region...

Arts & Culture49 mins ago

UN Geneva open exhibition “The World In Faces”

On November 24, United Nations Geneva hosts “The World in Faces”, an exhibition of photos by the renowned Russian photographer...

Economy3 hours ago

A Good Transport System Supercharges the Economic Engine

The infrastructure bill in the U.S. has been signed into law.  At the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), they...

Science & Technology5 hours ago

Digital Child’s Play: protecting children from the impacts of AI

Artificial intelligence has been used in products targeting children for several years, but legislation protecting them from the potential impacts...

Middle East7 hours ago

Testing the waters: Russia explores reconfiguring Gulf security

Russia hopes to blow new life into a proposal for a multilateral security architecture in the Gulf, with the tacit...

Reports9 hours ago

People are increasingly worried about inequalities but divided on how to address them

For a recovery from the COVID-19 crisis that is strong, sustainable but also fair, it will be key to tackle...

business-technology business-technology
Tech News11 hours ago

Industrial innovation to accelerate transitions towards greener and digital economies

In the context of the 8th European Conference on Corporate R&D and Innovation (CONCORDI), 2021 – Industrial innovation for competitive sustainability,...

Trending