Analysis: The impact of covid19 on the economy of Azerbaijan

Azerbaijan's leading economic think-tank, the Centre for Economic and Social Development (CESD), has just published its preliminary assessment of the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the Azerbaijani economy. In its recommendations  CESD says the shadow economy has to be eliminated, while state-owned enterprises must be required to implement deeper reforms. The report concludes that "transition to a more liberal regime seems to be reasonable within this context."

The report says that from among the post-soviet countries, Azerbaijan allocated the largest share of GDP, in order to eliminate the economic consequences caused due to the outbreak of COVID-19. The report warns that providing favorable economic conditions in the post-pandemic period is going to be as crucial as supporting the economy during the period of the pandemic itself.

According to the official data provided by the State Statistics Committee, the gross domestic product (GDP) produced in the country between January-June 2020 was 2.7 % less in comparison with the same period last year. Value-added in the non-oil and gas sector of the economy decreased by 2.5 %, while the decrease in the oil and gas sector was of 2.9 %.Due to the restrictions on travel, the tourism sector was among the most severely hit sectors. Services, catering, and transportation were also significantly impacted incurring considerable losses. There was a considerable decrease in the volumes of exports and imports as well, mainly related to a decrease in oil exports.

There was also a decline in the industrial production in the first half of 2020. Demand for foreign currency rose steadily as consumers' concerns increased.

The report notes that the international rating agency Fitch has predicted Azerbaijan's long-term foreign-currency issuer default rating (IDR) at 'BB +' with a negative outlook.

The government had to implement particular measures aimed at the stabilization and maintenance of the economy.  

The report asseses the Action Plan of the Cabinet of Ministers that outlined the measures that were subsequently provided to allievate some of the economic consequences of the pandemic on business and economy. The amount of money allocated from the state budget to pay the salaries of workers, operating in the areas that were affected by the pandemic amounted to 69,119,000 manat ($ 40,658,235). 55,637,000 manat ($ 32,727,647) was allocated to support the owners of self-employed or micro entrepreneurship.

According to official data 35 million manat ($ 20,58 million) were paid to the Entrepreneurship Development Fund with the aim of providing state guarantees for bank loans and subsidized interest rates. The total sum of 159, 757,000 manat ($ 93,974,705) was paid in these areas on the basis of the order of the Ministry of Economy. The economic support program of the government also included tax benefits, some privileges and tax breaks for business entities. To be more coherent, the tax payers engaged in catering activities had tax reduction and exemption from income tax. At the same time, the import of some goods related to food and medical security, including the raw materials used in the production of these goods, was temporarily exempted from Value Added Tax (VAT). Meanwhile, depending on the method of taxation chosen, taxpayers were also provided with several tax breaks.

The report says that entrepreneurship ecosystem was devastatingly affected as a result of the situation that emerged from the pandemic and additional packages of support need to be considered.
The report recommends that tax benefits to businesses affected by the pandemic, should be extended for the existing beneficiaries till January 1, 2021. In the meantime, it says, there is a need in a sectoral assessment which may assist in specifying the areas most in need of assistance.

In conclusion the report says that  there was a need for new approaches in the process of reform currently ongoing, and the gradual re-opening of the economy should be based on new standards. There is a need to optimize the usage of the oil revenues whilst continuing to explore alternative sources for the budgetary since an increasing dependence on oil revenues contradicts to the diversification policy.

The report says that the shadow economy has to be eliminated, while state-owned enterprises (SOEs) must be required to implement deeper reforms. Transition to a more liberal regime seems to be reasonable within this context.

The report finally concludes by remarking that the economic strategy for the recovery in the post-pandemic period needs to be further considered and studied in detail.

You can read the report in full on the CESD website here

source: commonspace.eu with CESD, Baku.

photo: Baku Skyline (archive picture)

The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)