SCPR Discusses Fiscal Justice and the State’s Developmental Role in Syria’s Economic Recovery
Damascus, Syria – 13–14 September 2026
The Syrian Center for Policy Research participated in the first panel discussion of the workshop “The Future of the Syrian Economy 2026: A Compass for Recovery and Shaping the Future,” organized by the Syrian Economic Sciences Association at the National Library in Damascus on 13–14 September 2026.
The panel, titled “Reforming Fiscal and Monetary Policies to Achieve Economic Stability,” featured an SCPR intervention based on its study Public Budgeting in Transitional Syria Surpluses in the Accounts, Deficits in Development, and the Reproduction of Inequality, published in April 2026.
The intervention examined fiscal policy through the lens of justice. Rather than focusing solely on revenue, expenditure, and deficit figures, it considered how the burdens and benefits of fiscal policy are distributed across social groups, economic sectors, and regions.
It noted that public revenue relies heavily on customs duties, consumption taxes, and rent-based revenues rather than progressive taxation requiring those with high incomes, profits, and wealth to contribute according to their ability to pay. Indirect taxes may be relatively easy to collect, but consumers bear much of their cost through higher prices. Customs duties on machinery, raw materials, and production inputs also raise the costs of agriculture and industry, weakening production and employment prospects.
The intervention stressed that the state’s need for revenue does not justify treating small enterprises and wage earners in the same way as large corporations, monopolistic businesses, and those with substantial profits and wealth. It called for genuinely progressive taxes on income, profits, capital income, rents, and high-value property; improved collection from large taxpayers; and investment exemptions and incentives tied to clear outcomes in production, employment, training, and exports.
The intervention also addressed selective wage increases granted only to specific groups or institutions. Such increases may widen disparities within the public sector and undermine the principle of equal pay for work of equal value, while most workers’ wages remain insufficient to cover basic needs. Addressing the deterioration in wages therefore requires a coherent public policy based on an adequate and equitable minimum wage, a unified and transparent pay scale, and publicly stated criteria that reflect the nature of the work, competence, and responsibility, rather than fragmented exceptions and privileges.
It further discussed the effects of subsidy removal and higher energy prices on household livelihoods and the costs of production and transport. Fuel is not an ordinary consumer good; it is an essential input in agriculture, industry, transport, and service delivery. Price increases therefore spread throughout the economy, with the greatest impact falling on low-income households and small enterprises.
The intervention warned against equating successful fiscal policy with deficit reduction when that reduction is achieved by raising fees and prices, cutting subsidies and services, or reducing transfers and public investment. Treasury figures may temporarily improve, while society bears the cost through greater poverty and declining real wages, demand, and production.
It emphasized that wages, healthcare, education, and social protection are not burdens separate from recovery. They protect human capital and sustain the ability of society and the economy to function. Public investment in electricity, water, irrigation, transport, schools, and hospitals is likewise a core responsibility of the state and a prerequisite for restarting the economy. It cannot be left entirely to the logic of commercial profit.
The intervention concluded that the central question is not only how much revenue.
SCPR Discusses Fiscal Justice and the State’s Developmental Role in Syria’s Economic Recovery
Damascus, Syria – 13–14 September 2026
SCPR Discusses Fiscal Justice and the State’s Developmental Role in Syria’s Economic Recovery
Damascus, Syria – 13–14 September 2026
The Syrian Center for Policy Research participated in the first panel discussion of the workshop “The Future of the Syrian Economy 2026: A Compass for Recovery and Shaping the Future,” organized by the Syrian Economic Sciences Association at the National Library in Damascus on 13–14 September 2026.
The panel, titled “Reforming Fiscal and Monetary Policies to Achieve Economic Stability,” featured an SCPR intervention based on its study Public Budgeting in Transitional Syria Surpluses in the Accounts, Deficits in Development, and the Reproduction of Inequality, published in April 2026.
The intervention examined fiscal policy through the lens of justice. Rather than focusing solely on revenue, expenditure, and deficit figures, it considered how the burdens and benefits of fiscal policy are distributed across social groups, economic sectors, and regions.
It noted that public revenue relies heavily on customs duties, consumption taxes, and rent-based revenues rather than progressive taxation requiring those with high incomes, profits, and wealth to contribute according to their ability to pay. Indirect taxes may be relatively easy to collect, but consumers bear much of their cost through higher prices. Customs duties on machinery, raw materials, and production inputs also raise the costs of agriculture and industry, weakening production and employment prospects.
The intervention stressed that the state’s need for revenue does not justify treating small enterprises and wage earners in the same way as large corporations, monopolistic businesses, and those with substantial profits and wealth. It called for genuinely progressive taxes on income, profits, capital income, rents, and high-value property; improved collection from large taxpayers; and investment exemptions and incentives tied to clear outcomes in production, employment, training, and exports.
The intervention also addressed selective wage increases granted only to specific groups or institutions. Such increases may widen disparities within the public sector and undermine the principle of equal pay for work of equal value, while most workers’ wages remain insufficient to cover basic needs. Addressing the deterioration in wages therefore requires a coherent public policy based on an adequate and equitable minimum wage, a unified and transparent pay scale, and publicly stated criteria that reflect the nature of the work, competence, and responsibility, rather than fragmented exceptions and privileges.
It further discussed the effects of subsidy removal and higher energy prices on household livelihoods and the costs of production and transport. Fuel is not an ordinary consumer good; it is an essential input in agriculture, industry, transport, and service delivery. Price increases therefore spread throughout the economy, with the greatest impact falling on low-income households and small enterprises.
The intervention warned against equating successful fiscal policy with deficit reduction when that reduction is achieved by raising fees and prices, cutting subsidies and services, or reducing transfers and public investment. Treasury figures may temporarily improve, while society bears the cost through greater poverty and declining real wages, demand, and production.
It emphasized that wages, healthcare, education, and social protection are not burdens separate from recovery. They protect human capital and sustain the ability of society and the economy to function. Public investment in electricity, water, irrigation, transport, schools, and hospitals is likewise a core responsibility of the state and a prerequisite for restarting the economy. It cannot be left entirely to the logic of commercial profit.
The intervention concluded that the central question is not only how much revenue.
