Go to contents

Next year's budget set at 101 trillion won

Posted September. 26, 2000 19:13,   


The administration-proposed budget bill for next year was set at 101 trillion won, exceeding the 100-trillion won level for the first time. The figure represents an increase of nine percent or about 9 trillion won from the spending bill for the current year. The government disclosed Tuesday that it compiled the budget bill based on a tight-money policy with a 2-3 percent decrease in the ordinary growth rate from the current year's estimated growth rate of 8-9 percent. However, considering the rising demands for the correction of macroeconomic projections in view of soaring oil prices, the aftereffects of Ford's pullout from its purchase deal with Daewoo Motor and falling semiconductor chip prices, the 9-percent budget hike is expected to trigger controversy in the course of parliamentary deliberation of the bill.

In particular, the per capita tax burden was set to reach 2.52 million won, 20.6 percent higher than the current 2.08 million won. This means that a four-member family will be shouldered with 1.72 million won more than the present year. In addition, the tax burden ratio as a portion of the gross domestic product (GDP) is to increase from 18.7 percent to 20.7 percent. The government held a cabinet meeting Tuesday with President Kim Dae-Jung presiding in which it deliberated on the 2001 budget bill and confirmed it so that it will be submitted to the National Assembly before Oct. 2, the legal deadline for its submission.

According to the spending bill, general account expenditures were set at 94.9 trillion won, up 6.8 percent from the current supplementary budget. The special financial accounts budget revenue to be provided by deposits from annual funds or collections of principal and interest was set to fall by 6 percent to 6.1 trillion won. On the expenditure front, investment in social overhead capital was frozen at this year's level, while an increase in financial support to small- and medium-sized firms and agro-fishery sectors fell far below the average budgetary growth. Therefore, some point out that the government is overlooking the motive power of economic development.