• Nargiza Yakubova Tashkent Institute of Finance
Keywords: Investments, tax, incentives, Uzbekistan, effectiveness


This article analyzes the trends in foreign capital inflows into selected CIS countries, using a documented analysis. The study revealed that despite  improved macroeconomic stability and economic growth capital inflow in CIS countries is  modest , reflecting a weak overall investment climate in the region. The study results show that private capital inflows into these countries consist mainly of direct investments, and concentrate in the few countries with big oil reserves. Lack of protection for property rights, with threats from corruption, crime, and excessive regulation, was the significant investment impediment cited most frequently in the research. Despite Uzbekistan shows strong growth comparing a weak performance in the broader Europe and Central Asia region, the level of efficiency of  using the incentives still remaining low. According the results of the study unconditional and irrevocable tax and customs exemptions are the main reasons for the low efficiency of the incentives. The paper subsequently suggests that fiscal stimulus are only marginally efficient in the absence of effective monetary, exchange-rate, and industrial policies.


Balco, T. (2013). Tax Incentives in Russia, Kazakhstan and Central Asia. KIMEP University. Central Asian Tax Research Center. Retrieved

Borensztein, E.,, De Gregorio, J., & Lee, J-W. (1998). How Does Foreign Direct Investment Affect Economic Growth? Journal of International Economics, 45(1), 115–35.

Broadman, H. G. (2002). Unleashing Russia’s Business Potential: Lessons from the Regions for Building Market Institutions, Washington, DC: World Bank. Retrieved from

Colin, J. (1998). State Keeps a Tight Rein: Market Reform in Uzbekistan. The Banker, 14(8), 47-50.

De Broeck, M., & Koen, V. (2000). The Great Contractions in Russia, the Baltics, and the Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union: A View from the Supply Side. Working Paper No. WP/00/32. Washington: IMF.

Elborgh–Woytek, K., & Lewis, M. (2002). Privatization in Ukraine: Challenges os Assessment and Coverage in Fund Conditionality. IMF Polisy discussion paper. Retrieved from


Gaybullaev, O. (2011). Fiscal incentives in Uzbekistan: Have they worked? Retrieved from


IMF. (2014, November 4). Замедление роста в РФ скажется на странах ЦА — МВФ [Slowing down of Russian growth will affect to the countries of Central Asia-IMF]. Retrieved from

Lankes, H-P., & Venables, A. J. (1996). Foreign Direct Investment in Economic Transition: the Changing Pattern of Investments. Economics of Transition, 4(2), 331–347.

Ministry for Foreign Economic Relations, Investments and Trade of the Republic of Uzbekistan. (2014). Retrieved from

Owen, D., and Robinson, D. O. (2003). Russia rebounds. Washington: IMF.

Peimani, H. (2009). Conflict and security in central Asia and Caucasus. Santa Barbara, California: ABC-CLIO.

Tsamenyi, M. & Tauringana, V. (2004). Capital budgeting and budgeting practices of foreign operations in Uzbekistan: an exploratory study. International Journal of Strategic Cost Management. (Spring), 20-36.

Shiells, C. R. (2003). FDI and the Investment Climate in the CIS Countries. IMF Policy Discussion Paper. (November). Retrieved from

World Bank Group, (2014, October). World Bank Group – Uzbekistan partnership: country program snapshot. Retrieved from

Vandycke, N. (2003). Economic Development and Private Sector Growth in the Low– Income CIS–7 Countries, Paper prepared for the Lucerne Conference of the CIS–7 Initiative, Retrieced from