:

: . . -

. . -, - . . -, -3 . . -, -

1996-2010, 2,6% 1,2%: ( ), 4 (2009 .) 64.043.332.0-2771.064.69.6-1572.565.99.562.456.69.150.844.312.5. . -, - - ( ). . -, - ; , 10% 6 (1) () : 1) ( ) ; 2)

. . -, -7 (2) : ; .

. . -, -8 : 1) 2) (pass-through effect) : -0.2 -0.4 ( ); Behar (2009), -0.24 -10; , -0.21 ( ) :

. . -, -This implies that a 10% decrease in the cost of labour would cause an increase of employment of between 2 to 4%. Pass-though 1 p.p. Reduction of tax wedge, % effect on employment

9 . . -, -% 50%67%100%167%.200644.339.240.241.02007*41.237.838.639.22008*40.736.837.538.0200737.638.439.239.7200634.127.928.929.8200838.140.144.4200740.044.050.0E-27200837.040.645.1E-15200838.142.447.6-12200835.638.542.0 /-12 (2008)1.2-1.0-4.010 Et = + 1lnWt + 2PITt + 3SCt + 4lnt + 5PTt + t . : ; 2009, .. . -, - : ( ) 11 : 1998:Q1-2010:Q3 ( 2004); ; ; . ; .

. . -, - : ( ) 12 (1). . -, -

: ( ) 13 (2) , ( ); ( ) (0.15-0.23 ..)

. . -, -14 (3) (1.8-3.0 ..) ( )

. . -, -15 ; , ; , , , .. . -, -16 : , ; , , . . . -, -17