64
E D I S I 0 2 T A H U N X V I I 2 0 1 1 One of the biggest effects of the global financial crisis was
on the performance of the international trade. The falling of world economic growth shrunk the export market for almost
every countries. At the same time, the price of imported goods increased. Export and import around the world were drop. As
consequences, sectors in the first quadrant: Communication equipments, photographic equipments, electronic components,
footwear, other processing, clocks and other similiar products, electrical motor, other machineries, are the most vulnerable
sectors among all four quadrants.
Import duties subsidy in form of government paid import duties policy – BM-DTP was one of the policies used by the
government to help the industry to cope with the negative impact of the crisis. Stated in the fiscal stimulus documents,
sectors received the subsidy are heavy equipment, components for small size steam power plant, skim milk and full cream,
components of motor vehicle, electronic components, components of ships construction, and aeroplane. Based on
the scatter plot, the ideal sectors to receive tariff duties subsidy should be sectors with high percentage of imported goods,
sectors in the first and second quadrant. However among sectors given the subsidy, components of motor vehicle,
components of ships construction, and aeroplane are not fit into that category.
Moreover, others policy used by the government were not directly targeted to help the vulnerable sectors or help industry
to cope with the crisis. Some of the policy goals were for other purpose not directly related to the global financial crisis. For
example: VAT subsidy for oil and gas exploration. The goal for this policy was to improve the production of oil and gas in the
future. That goal has nothing to do with helping the industry coping with the global financial crisis.
Unemployment
One of government fiscal stimulus goals was helping the unemployment due to layoffs during the global financial
crisis. The main instrument used by the government was the infrastructure projects. Most of the projects were in
construction sectors, such as building road, bridge, or traditional market. However, data shows the layoffs occured during the
global financial crisis were not in construction sectors. Most of the layoffs are in textile, garment, beverage, furniture,
manufacture, plastics, transport, wood, and mining. There was a missmatch between unemployment due to layoffs during the
global financial crisis with the employment opportunity created by the government using fiscal stimulus.
4.3. Implementation
We find a lot of problems in the implementation of fiscal stimulus package. For starter, at least two of the fiscal stimulus
instruments are actually not a stimulus: tax cut and national program of community empowerment. Tax cut included in
fiscal stimulus package is part of amandment of tax law which has been designed since 2005 and agreed by the legislative in
2008. Since there was the global financial crisis, government put the tax cut as part of the fiscal stimulus package. However,
it did not design specifically to cope with the crisis and – it was merely a realization of mandate given by the law, regardless of
the crisis pantunru and zetha, 2010. Moreover, the allocation of community empowerment program in the fiscal stimulus
document is actually unabsorbed budget in the previous year, which carry over to the next year. Once again, it was not actually
design to cope with the impact of the global financial crisis.
Figure 4.5: People Awareness and Knowledge About Personal Income Tax Cut Policy
31,88 24,64
43,48
Do not know Know and understand
Know but do not understand
Source: National Development Planning AgencyBappenas, 2010
The other problems related to the implementation of the instrument of the fiscal stimulus. First, the personal income
tax cut. Because of lack of promotion and socialization of this
65
E D I S I 0 2 T A H U N X V I I 2 0 1 1 policy, only few people know about this policy. It can be seen
in the survey done by Bappenas. The survey asks whether the respondent know and understand about the personal income
tax cut policy. They are given three options: 1 know and understand; 2 do not know; 3 know but do not understand.
Only 24.64 per cent of the respondents choose option 1 and 43.48 percent of them never know about this policy.
Second, tax subsidy on act 21 income tax. In this policy, corporates can claim their employee income tax to the
government. However, since the corporates afraid that the employee will ask the same incentives in the next year when
this policy has stopped, most corporate decided not to use this incentives.Because of the problems in the implementation, the
realization of personal income tax incentives policy at the end of 2009 is only 79.70 per cent. Meanwhile the realization of
corporate income tax reacehs 100 per cent.
Third, the import duties. At the end of 2009, the realization of this policy is only 0.29 per cent. The low realization rate
was caused by relatively late implementation of this policy. Firm or corporate usually signs contract to buy input goods
in the beginning of the year, meanwhile the policy effectively implemented in the second semester of 2009. Furthermore,
this policy was not effective also due to the lower demand of imported goods, as a response of lower demand and increasing
price of imported goods due to the global financial crisis.
Fourth, the infrastructure projects. Problems in the implementation of infrastructures projects can be divided
into three parts: 1 the budgeting process, caused by lack of supporting regulation, complicated administration, and
accounting process; 2 problems in process of tender; 3 problems in the implementation. Because of the problems
occured in the implementation, the realization of fiscal stimulus package is only 83.84 per cent.
4.4. Multiplier Effect 4.4.1. Methodology
