On April 12, Genadi Kondarev of the Natura 2000 initiative committee, together with other environmental activists, stood in front of the Cabinet office building in Sofia for a fifth time, in a protest against the Cabinets decision on the Natura 2000 European ecological conservation network.
Kondarev drew for journalists a graphic presenting the cost-benefit analysis of incomes and losses for the national budget that could be caused by the current Cabinet proposals on Natura 2000. He drew a simplified theoretical model to show how big the potential fine could be for Bulgaria, not merged in the huge incomes from constructions and tourism but on the background of a separate field depositing money into the budget. The construction and tourism fields pay money into the same budget from which the fine would be paid.
Kondarev estimated the amount of income to the Budget from tourism to have been between 200 and 300 million euro for 2006, calculated on the basis of data for every quarter of 2004. These figures were used because statistics for 2005 and 2006 could not be obtained, and the growth established, Kondarev said. Year 2007 tourism income growth is expected to be six to seven per cent and average annual growth will be about four per cent by 2016. If in 2008 Bulgaria is sentenced to pay a fine of 100 000 to 150 000 euro a day, Bulgaria will need three to seven years to reach the same budget benefit as that expected for 2008.
The countrys tax policy could change by 2008, Kondarev said. According to him, payments of concession taxes of concessionaires such as Ulen in Bansko were under question and it could not be established whether they had paid anything at all towards the budget.
Kondarev said that the impact of the penalty would include the nominal amount of the fine plus the forfeited structural funds.
When a small-scale landowner starts an eco-tourism or other own business, he receives income over a long period of time and also makes a contribution to the budget. If such a landowner sells his land to an investor, he gets an one-off large sum, and the investor is able to implement a big project but while on paper the second number could mean a bigger benefit to Bulgaria, in reality the money earned is spent on luxury motor vehicles, yachts and luxury imported goods, which is not beneficial for the country, but deepens the trade deficit, Kondarev said. This is something that no one gives an account of in Bulgaria and is another important point when analysing the cost-benefit analysis in valuing the sense of (Natura 2000), he said.
