Russia: A short-term basic income experiment starts in Russia

Russia: A short-term basic income experiment starts in Russia

The Social movement “Basic Income Russia Tomorrow”, together with the charity foundation “Coordinates of Good”, were awarded the Wow Successful Awards 2019, in the Social Innovation chapter, on the 13th of March. This award means the movement will be able to make unconditional cash transfers for five recipients, for three months. The value transferred will be small – 6500 rubles/month (around 100 $/month) – and for a very short period of time, but such an amount can be significant for many Russians. The money involved in the experiment is the result of private donations.

This short-term unconditional cash transfer experiment starts now, in April 2019, and will be monitored by Vyacheslav Nikolaevich Bobkov, from the Institute of Social and Economic Studies of Population at the Russian Academy of Sciences.

Canada: Alberta Liberals propose transversal tax breaks, a basic income pilot, and investments fueled by oil revenues

Canada: Alberta Liberals propose transversal tax breaks, a basic income pilot, and investments fueled by oil revenues

David Khan. Picture credit to: Sylvan Lake News

This Monday, April 12th 2019, David Khan, leader of the Alberta Liberals, announced a series of fundamental changes to the way social policies are practiced in this Canadian province, if elected next Tuesday (Alberta Votes 2019). These changes include large investments in oil-related infrastructure, public and health services, eliminating or considerably reducing income tax, and setting up a basic income pilot test.

The party’s platform ranges a large number of issues, from finance, employment, poverty, energy, democratic reform, down to indigenous relations and drug possession. However, the Alberta Liberals are clear in their overall message: if elected, they are here to put the economy growing. That pervading principle of contemporary economics has been contested extensively, but (economic) growth still attracts strongly, and David Khan is focused on achieving it.

Khan boldly states: “I encourage all Albertans to read our policies because we have the best pro-growth fiscal strategies of any party in this election.” In this case, it means to move from a tax policy based on income tax, to another resting on an 8% Value Added Tax. Even though that number is 60% below the standard VAT rate of many European countries (generally above 20%), Khan is certain “it’s the least harmful way of collecting tax”. That would cumulate with a generalized income tax break, effectively exempting 70% of the Albertian population from paying income tax.

Revenues, then, for governmental investments such as mental health services, social health care, affordable housing and, the basic income pilot test, would mainly come from energy-related commerce, particularly oil, which if an expansion does happen, might lead to more professionals with experience in the oil industry, looking to Find Work in Canada or possibly find work in other similar projects. There might however be some possible backlash. That is professed at the same time as strictly defending the environment, where “we will not tolerate industry damaging our future and our children’s future” can be read on the party’s platform first text page. However, it seems to go unnoticed that the oil industry’s record on environmental protection has not been admirable, to say the least. The idea is to restart the Trans Mountain and the East pipeline projects, both stalled for a long time due to constitutional and environmental reasons. For some reason these projects have been kept waiting, or stored in place for later elimination, because, at put by Jon Biger Skjærseth and Tora Skodvin in their book on climate change and the oil industry, “these companies share the same core aim of selling as much oil and gas as possible at the highest possible price and the lowest possible cost within the same global market”. And, of course, eventually all that oil and gas gets burned, adding up to the already alarming CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

As for the basic income test pilot, the Alberta Liberals are invested in rolling it out, since they “support the creation of a Basic Income.” The arguments for such a belief come from reduced bureaucracy, financial security for all and the elimination of jobs through automation.

More information at:

Sarah Rieger, “Alberta Liberal platform promises basic income pilot project, no income taxes for most“, CBC News April 8th 2019

Damian Carrington, “‘Worrying’ rise in global CO2 forecast for 2019“, The Guardian, January 25th 2019

United States: After Stockton, Newark mayor announces the intention to test UBI

United States: After Stockton, Newark mayor announces the intention to test UBI

Ras Baraka (in Wikipedia)

Ras Baraka, present-day mayor of Newark, has announced the intention of rolling out a universal basic income (UBI) pilot program in the city. Newark, a city just outside Manhattan island, is plagued by poverty (around one third of its population lives under the poverty line), and that is the prime motivation for going through with the pilot.

Baraka has said that “We believe in universal basic income, especially in a time where studies have shown that families that have a crisis of just $400 a month may experience a setback that may be difficult, even impossible to recover from”. No specifics were put forward on how or when this pilot is going to be executed, but the idea is to test what happens when people are given an income, regardless of their employment status. Those specifics will be studied by his administration staff, as part of the pilot’s planning.

If Newark goes ahead with this UBI pilot program, it will be the second city in USA to carry on an experiment with unconditional cash stipends, after Stockton, California. The Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (SEED) had been planning the experiment for about 18 months, before it started in February 2019. Under the SEED pilot, 130 adults will receive 500 $/month, unconditionally, for 18 months, while monitored for spending and saving habits, their quality of life and financial stability.

More information at:

Alexandra Yoon-Hendricks, “Will ‘basic income’ become the California norm? Stockton starts $500 no-strings payments”, The Sacramento Bee, February 15th 2019

Sara Bizarro, “UNITED STATES: Stockton, California plans a Basic Income Demonstration”, Basic Income News, November 21th 2017

Jack Crowe, “Newark to Test Universal-Basic-Income Program”, Basic Income Today, March 18th 2019

South Africa: The “Purple Cow” party is proposing a Negative Income Tax form of basic income

South Africa: The “Purple Cow” party is proposing a Negative Income Tax form of basic income

“Innovation. Disruption. No BS – because we love our country.” That is the “Purple Cow” party power tag. The party is officially called “Capitalist Party of South Africa”, and is defending the basic income policy, particularly in the Negative Income Tax (NIT) form.

The party is proposing an income top-up for all those earning less than the tax threshold in South Africa, which is adjusted for inflation and age. Below this level, working citizens do not pay (income) tax. If, for a given citizen, the tax paying threshold is 78000 Rands/year (5536 US$/year), the party is proposing to tax the difference between the person’s income and the threshold at a 50% rate, offering the rest as a top-up (NIT). In a numerical example, a person earning the minimum wage of 3500 Rand/month (248 US$/month), or 42000 Rand/year (2981 US$/year), would get an extra amount of 1500 Rands/month (106 US$/month) (the difference between 78000 Rands/year and 42000 Rand/year, divided by two, monthly). That amounts to a 43% increase in monthly income. The policy extends to all people below the threshold, including unemployed, in or out of social benefits. That means, in practice, that no one ever gets less than 3250 Rands/month (231 US$/month), which is close to the South African official minimum wage. To contextualize, social retirement grants from the South African government, presently goes only as far as 1700 Rand/month (121 US$/month) (around half the minimum wage).

In a short explicative video, the Capitalist Party refers that, due to the tax system rules, fewer and fewer people are paying taxes, since unemployment is growing faster than employment. This, of course, places great pressure on social security, in order to disburse social grants to around 17 million people (out of a 55 million country population). So, the way in which the NIT is financed gets to be crucially important.

To that end, and over the 78000 Rands/year income threshold, however, taxes would have to increase significantly. In the “Purple Cow” proposal, individuals earning 125000 Rand/month (8872 US$/month) or more would be taxed around 47%, or a 31% increase from what they are paying at the moment. Although this final tax value is not unprecedent, not even uncommon among, for example, north European countries, it may be hard to go for such an increase in one single step, within the South African context. To moderate the expected tax hike for the better off, the party’s coordinator Kanthan Pillay speaks of applying the NIT scheme to only those in paid employment. That, however, is contrary to the spirit of universality (professed in the proposition itself), and overlooks the fact that unemployment and near-unemployment rates as high as 40% in the country.

Pillay also explains that the party’s proposal aims at improving the labour force competitiveness with other countries, such as China. The question remaining might be to know if the “Purple Cow” party is proposing to give financial safety to all South Africans, or to help degrading the labour force’s human rights (both might not be possible).

Admittedly, as professed by Kanthan Pillay, the NIT proposal “is our riposte to the constant clamour for the Basic Income Grant”. However, and according to him, it should be a policy to “conquer unemployment”, given the path of jobs destruction created by automation, and to abolish the minimum wage, welfare, social security and government assisted programs. The “Capitalist Party of South Africa”, therefore, seems to adhere closely to the original principles set forth by Milton Friedman, when he first introduced the NIT concept in the United States.

More information at:

Reg Rumney, “The Purple Cow’s basic income plan is either genius or a bovine patty”, Business Maverick, 25th March 2019

The “Purple Cow” website

Valerija Korošec: “Unconditional Basic Individual Universal Child Grant for Belgium following the Slovenian approach”

Valerija Korošec: “Unconditional Basic Individual Universal Child Grant for Belgium following the Slovenian approach”

Valerija Korošec. Picture credit to: DNEVNIK.

Valerija Korošec, a known sociologist and social policy analyst in Slovenia, as well as ex-presidential candidate for that country, has presented a paper entitled “Unconditional Basic Individual Universal Child Grant for Belgium following the Slovenian approach”, at the International Conference on Universal Child Grants, which took place in Geneva from 6th through 8th of February 2019.

This paper’s abstract reads as follows:

This paper presents some evidence for developed countries suggesting that a universal, unconditional and uniform basic income (UBI) approach is more effective than a means-tested, conditional and targeted benefit system in addressing child poverty.

In accordance with the aim of the International conference (2019) on Universal Child Grants (UCGs) a policy design for Universal Child Benefit for Belgium is outlined. It follows the concept of Universal Basic Income Proposal for Slovenia (KOROŠEC, 2010), for which the simulation already showed that a UBI approach is more effective than means-tested, conditional and targeted benefits. The findings of KOROŠEC (2010) fit well with those of the OECD (2017) study ‘Basic Income as a Policy Option: Can it add up?’ and the IMF (2017) Fiscal Monitor ‘Tackling Inequality.’ Also, the most recent study Universal Basic Income: Debate and Impact Assessment (IMF, 2018) resembles KOROŠEC (2012) up to the point of similar outlining of the necessary steps in designing the UBI policy framework.

Certain consensus starts to emerge on circumstances in which a UBI system is better than the current means-tested system for all.

The affordability study for UBI UCG in Belgium presented here (i.e. SI_UBI UCG_BE) is simulated by MEFISTO, which is a micro-simulation model for Belgium based on EUROMOD. This simulation shows that with the same amount of money (no budget change) child poverty rate drops if the current 27 schemes are replaced with a universal flat-rate child grant (200 €/month) and a 400 €/month single parent supplement. Child poverty rates drop the most in the first and second income deciles. The majority of the population is either unaffected or benefits by the simulated reform, and the Gini is slightly lower, by 0.03.

We confirm, at least for two developed countries that already have quite universal and comprehensive social security systems, Slovenia and Belgium, that within the same fiscal envelope (budget neutral) and with UBI implemented on a level just above the current Guaranteed Minimum Income scheme (GMI) a UBI system is better than the current (means-tested) system.

Valerija is also a responsible at the Institute of Macroeconomic Analyses and Development at the Slovenian Government, and coordinator of the Slovenian Universal Basic Income Network affiliate.

More information at:

Kate McFarland, “SLOVENIA: Basic Income advocate Valerija Korosec makes bid for Presidency”, Basic Income News, August 17th 2017