Infrastructure Funding & Delivery: A KwaZulu-Natal Case Study

Similar documents
THE KWAZULU NATAL ECONOMY A PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW 1 UPDATE 28

THE KWAZULU NATAL ECONOMY A PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW 1 UPDATE 27

THE KWAZULUNATAL ECONOMY A LEADS AND LAGS ANALYSIS 1 UPDATE 13

THE KWAZULUNATAL ECONOMY A LEADS AND LAGS ANALYSIS 1 UPDATE 17

THE KWAZULUNATAL ECONOMY A LEADS AND LAGS ANALYSIS 1 UPDATE 10

THE KWAZULU NATAL ECONOMY A PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW 1 UPDATE 14

THE KWAZULU NATAL ECONOMY A RISK AND CONDITIONS MONITOR 1 Update 16

Water Regulation and Pricing RSA EXPERIENCE

National Treasury. Modelling the infrastructure investment needs in South African metros: 2016 to FINAL version

KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Treasury

Financing Municipal Infrastructure. Urban Infrastructure Finance Workshop 2-3 June 2009

!!! Current account balance =!!!!!! + (!!!!!! ) Capital account balance =!!!!!!, which is also equal to current account balance when!! =!!!!

Performance reports. General report on the national and provincial audit outcomes for

An Overview of the City of Newcastle and the Challenges facing the Achievement of Intermediary City Status. Zimbali, Fairmont Hotel - KwaDukuza

Programme based budgeting: the health budget programme structure in South Africa

The cidb Quarterly Monitor. T h e C o n s t r u c t i o n I n d u s t r y D e v e l o p m e n t B o a r d Development Through Partnership

PROGRAM EXPENDITURE AND FINANCING ASSESSMENT

LABOUR MARKET PROVINCIAL 54.3 % 45.7 % Unemployed Discouraged work-seekers % 71.4 % QUARTERLY DATA SERIES

Prepared by cde Khwezi Mabasa ( FES Socio-economic Transformation Programme Manager) JANUARY 2016

IMPACT OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMMES USING ADMINISTRATIVE DATA SETS SOCIAL ASSISTANCE GRANTS

By 2030 ethekwini will be Africa s most caring and liveable city. ethekwini Municipality s Annual Report

OVERVIEW OF TRANSNET CAPITAL INVESTMENTS IN KZN & EMPOWERMENT OPPORTUNITIES EDTEA s Budget Speech Engagement Session in Richards Bay 16 May 2018

COSATU CONGRESS OF SOUTH AFRICAN TRADE UNIONS COSATU COMMENT ON ESKOM S MYPD3 FOR THE YEAR 2, 3, 4

Focus on Household and Economic Statistics. Insights from Stats SA publications. Nthambeleni Mukwevho Stats SA

Provincial Review 2016: KwaZulu-Natal

FINANCIAL VIABILITY OF MUNICIPALITIES

Financial and Fiscal Commission. Training Workshop

DOING BUSINESS IN. SOUTH AFRICA (KwaZulu-Natal)

Residential Property Indices. Date Published: August 2016

1st Quarter 2014 THE KWAZULU-NATAL QUARTERLY ECONOMIC AND STATISTICAL OVERVIEW EZOMNOTHO

Presentation to the Select Committee on Appropriations COMMUNITY LIBRARY SERVICES GRANT. 25 May 2011

NBR-EIB Conference: Investment in Romania. Overview of EIB Group activities in Romania

THE HOUSE FY 2014 BUDGET

LONDON CORPORATE ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN 2014

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 2007

Sessions 5 & 6: The Concept of Building blocks in Aviation Charges

Municipal Infrastructure Grant Baseline Study

EASY-TO-USE GUIDELINES TO APPLY THE WASH SDG COSTING TOOL.

Inaugural Gauteng Infrastructure Investment Conference

Pension Simulation Project Rockefeller Institute of Government

Province of Newfoundland and Labrador. Public Accounts Consolidated Summary Financial Statements

Media Press Release. Topic: Special Economic Zones and Building Manufacturing in KZN

KwaZulu-Natal Business Barometer

Is the Municipal Bond Market a Viable Option for KwaZulu- Natal Based Municipalities?

Electricity Markets and Principle Market Design Models

An Introduction to Financial Analysis

Draft Medium-Term Budget 2019/ /22 CITY OF JOHANNESBURG DRAFT MEDIUM-TERM BUDGET 2019/20 TO 2021/22

Portfolio Committee on Energy

Dr Willem J. De Beer, Chief Operations Officer, EDI Holdings (Pty) Ltd, South Africa 23November 2010

KZN medium mid-year population estimates by year (Coetzee 2011: KZN after Stats SA).

1.3 Prices, Supply, and Demand Compare how supply, demand, price, equilibrium, elasticity, and incentives affect the workings of a market.

VAT FOR THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR

Composition of the intergovernmental system Alignment between functional and fiscal assignments

Comparing $10/day flat fees with income tested child care fees Petr Varmuza 11/24/2013

UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU-NATAL

REPORT OF THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE ON THE PROVINCIAL TREASURIES EXPENDITURE REVIEW FOR THE 2014/15 FINANCIAL YEAR, DATED 14 OCTOBER 2015

The Aggregate Expenditures Model. A continuing look at Macroeconomics

Australian Market Phase Analysis

Applied Workshop on Preparing Infrastructure Projects 21 th - 25 th March Bangkok DAY 2

LABOUR MARKET PROVINCIAL 51.6 % 48.4 % Unemployed Discouraged work-seekers % 71.8 % QUARTERLY DATA SERIES

Evaluating the performance of Development Charges in financing municipal infrastructure investment. Discussion Paper. Second Draft 23 March 2009

Mick Law P.C. LLO Senior Housing Market Trends

Compulsory Health Insurance in Lithuania

CONSTRUCTION MONITOR Supply & Demand Q1 2018

Examiner s Report. December 2017 Session. Paper 4 Business Economics and Financial Mathematics

MFMA. Audit outcomes of municipalities

THE SOUTH AFRICAN ASSOCIATION OF FREIGHT FORWARDERS. Submission to the National Ports Regulator

Close: 3 July 2017 STATE OF CITY FINANCES 2018 DANGA MUGHOGHO 20 JUNE Danga Mughogho State of City Finances

2013 SURVEY. Economic Assumptions in Accounting for Pension and Other Post-Retirement Benefits. Highlights of our Annual Survey Results

Evaluating and Reporting: Accounting for Performance

CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF LENNOX AND ADDINGTON

University of Pretoria Department of Economics Working Paper Series

National Treasury. September SCOA Integrated Consultative Forum. A world class product brought to you by VESTA

Low-Income Customers and Role of the Regulator in Energy Affordability

IIROC FEE MODEL. Details of the current Dealer Member and Marketplace Member fee models are set out below.

THE HNS PROTOCOL. by Dr. Rosalie P. Balkin Director Legal Affairs and External Relations Division International Maritime Organization

National Health Insurance. SAPA Conference

MPFA submission to the Commission on Poverty s public consultation on retirement protection Media briefing 8 June 2016 Key points

OBSERVATION. TD Economics BANKING ON A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE BANK: SOME CONSIDERATIONS

The Fiscal Year 2012 Budget: General Appropriations Act (GAA) After the Governor s Vetoes

Capital Movement, Foreign Ownership and Dependence on "Foreign Investment 55 in Canada and British Columbia

Current Revenue Sharing Practices in Kenya: How Fair? John Kinuthia Research Analyst 20/09/2016

Compliance Monitor Register of Projects

香港女工商及專業人員聯會. Voluntary Health Insurance Scheme ( VHIS ) Consultation Response Paper

Thursday 27 October, New Zealand s structural economic problems will not fix themselves. Structural problems need structural solutions.

UNPACKING INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT SPENDING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT

I (E)nsuring Access to Healthcare

Economics of taxation

CORPORATION OF THE COUNTY OF LENNOX AND ADDINGTON

MYPD3 Application January 2013

Integrating climate risk assessment/management/drr into national policies, programmes and sectoral planning. G Midgley, South Africa

department of human settlements eastern cape, south africa

Taking accountability to improve audit outcomes

Understanding the New Zealand exchange rate

Sri Lanka s Schemes for Informal Sector Workers

Aerospace Industries Association of Canada (AIAC) 2018 Federal Budget Submission. FINA Committee. House of Commons

The Aggregate Demand/Aggregate Supply Model

REVIEW OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT EQUITABLE SHARE FORMULA

Fundamentals of Healthcare Valuation

Ariely ques+ons for Wednesday

Transcription:

Infrastructure Funding & Delivery: A KwaZulu-Natal Case Study Dr. Clive Coetzee General Manager: Infrastructure Management and Economic Services KZN Provincial Treasury

FUNDING MODELS FOR PROVINCIAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE Section 4 suggests that the current provincial public fiscal infrastructure allocations (gross capital fixed formation) will be insufficient and that the provincial public infrastructure gap will continue to increase over the following number of years. It is therefore reasonable to urge that the provincial public s ability to finance the infrastructure gap is very limited. This is already very evident given the costs pressure faced by the provincial departments of health, education and transport.

The provincial government therefore essentially faces two options, i.e., the infrastructure gap are allowed to continue or alternative models are developed to finance the infrastructure gap. Given the social pressures and the need to growth the economy at above 4 percent levels per annum, option one seems undesirable and counterproductive. The provincial government thus has only one option and that is to develop and implement alternative funding models to address the infrastructure gap.

Dr John Dube Memorial Hospital. The hospital is planned to be located in the ethekwini (Durban) metropolitan region with a capacity of 450 beds. The construction period is estimated at 5 years with a total construction cost at R1.8 billion. This hospital is in the design phase, but will most probably not continue into the implementation phase because of the lack of funds. The projected budget per year is displayed in the graph below.

Millions Millions Estimated Total Budget for the Hospital (25 years) 700 600 Costs (Capex + Opex) 500 400 300 200 100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 150016 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 Disounted Total Costs 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

Supply of the Hospital (25 years) Private Sector Model

Supply of the Hospital (25 years) Public Sector Model

Public Model Private Model Total Costs Government Fund Government Fund Users Pay Capex and Opex Capex and Opex Users Pay 1 18 230 000 18 230 000 0 0 18 230 000 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 76 270 000 76 270 000 0 0 76 270 000 4 500 000 000 500 000 000 0 0 500 000 000 5 600 000 000 600 000 000 0 0 600 000 000 6 320 000 000 320 000 000 0 0 320 000 000 7 285 500 000 285 500 000 0 0 285 500 000 8 171 300 000 171 300 000 0 0 171 300 000 9 270 000 000 270 000 000 0 0 270 000 000 10 180 000 000 180 000 000 0 0 180 000 000 11 180 000 000 180 000 000 0 0 180 000 000 12 180 000 000 180 000 000 0 0 180 000 000 13 180 000 000 180 000 000 0 0 180 000 000 14 180 000 000 180 000 000 0 0 180 000 000 15 216 000 000 216 000 000 0 0 216 000 000 16 234 000 000 234 000 000 0 0 234 000 000 17 252 000 000 252 000 000 0 0 252 000 000 18 270 000 000 270 000 000 0 0 270 000 000 19 288 000 000 288 000 000 0 0 288 000 000 20 306 000 000 306 000 000 0 0 306 000 000 21 324 000 000 324 000 000 0 0 324 000 000 22 360 000 000 360 000 000 0 0 360 000 000 23 396 000 000 396 000 000 0 0 396 000 000 24 432 000 000 432 000 000 0 0 432 000 000 25 468 000 000 468 000 000 0 0 468 000 000 Total 6 687 300 000 6 687 300 000 0 0 6 687 300 000

In the private model the capex and opex costs are carried by the private sector. With the private model the fees payable by the users are sufficient to offset the capital expenditure (capex) or investment and the operational expenditure over the 25 years, i.e., revenue > capex + opex over the 25 years. However with the public model the fees payable by the users are insufficient to offset the capital expenditure (capex) or investment and the operational expenditure over the 25 years, i.e., revenue < capex + opex over the 25 years.

Therefore the public (provincial government) has two options, i.e., to finance the capex and opex from taxes so that the costs to the users are zero or close to zero (capex + opex to the users = 0, tax payers pay) or to finance the users directly so that the fees payable increases to the market rate (revenue > o, tax payers pay). In both instances the tax payers pay, however in the first option the capex and opex is financed compared to the second option where the users are directly financed. In the second option the private sector will be responsible to build, operate etc the facility so the capex and opex to the public is zero.

Supply of the Hospital (25 years) Hybrid Sector Model - Subsidy

Hybrid model relying on the private sector to build and operate the facility in the name of efficiency, i.e., capex and opex will be lower than if public build and operate. However the users will not be able to pay the marker rate and therefore will pay a rate close to zero. The public will subsidized the zero rate to a market rate so that revenue > capex and opex. In theory the public sets up a medical insurance entity that will be responsible to finance the users through taxes. The public then uses it collective power to negotiate a lower market price per individual than if the users individually had to negotiate a market price.

Supply of the Hospital (25 years) Hybrid Sector Model - Lease

Hybrid model relying on the private sector to build and maintain the facility in the name of efficiency, i.e., capex and maintenance will be lower than if public build and maintain. The users will not pay the marker rate and therefore will pay a rate close to zero. The public will operate and lease the hospital such that lease > capex and maintenance. In theory the facility is privately owned, the public operates and lease the hospital through taxes.

Supply of the Hospital (25 years) Hybrid Sector Model KZN Infrastructure Bank

Hybrid model relying on the private sector to build the facility in the name of efficiency, i.e., capex will be lower than if public build and maintain. The users will not pay the marker rate and therefore will pay a rate close to zero. The public will operate the hospital. The KZN Infrastructure Bank will finance the Capex. In theory the facility is publicly owned, the public operates the hospital through taxes. The CAPEX is financed through the Infrastructure Bank

The KZN Infrastructure Bank is based on the stockvel principle. It s a collective scheme with both the public and the various private sector companies contributing X amount every year to the Bank. The private sector is incentivized through tax incentives, CSI incentives and guaranteed work to participate in the Bank. Bank is managed via a PPP. Bank commission the hospital on behalf of the public and allocate the work to one or more of the participating private entities on a rotational basis.

Summarized Funding Models Funding Model Model Type Who Finance Who Pay Probability Borrowing - Bonds Borrowing - Corporate PPP - Equity On budget Provincial Government Savers Low On budget Provincial Government Savers Low On and Off Budget Owner Entity and Provincial Shareholders and Tax Medium Government payers PPP - BOOT On and Off Budget Owner Entity and Provincial Shareholders and Tax Medium Government payers PPP - Lease On and Off Budget Provincial Government Shareholders and Tax payers High Asset Sales Off Budget Provincial Government Buyers High Finance the Users On Budget Provincial Government Tax payers High Investment On and Off Budget Provincial Government Tax payers and Savers Medium

FUNDING MODELS FOR MUNICIPAL PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE The majority of local government infrastructure in SA and KZN is financed by national government grants most notable the Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG). The MIG is specifically designed to finance infrastructure delivery at a local government level. MIG is a capital grant from national governmentmig provides grant finance to cover capital costs of basic infrastructure for the poor. The funds are determined by formula, and are paid into the bank account of the municipality according to a MIG schedule agreed to with the municipality.

A second funding and financing model is the use of local tax revenue for infrastructure delivery. Local Government has a number of tax powers, i.e., they derive revenue from implementing local government taxes, most notable property taxes. Property taxes are a stable form of revenue since it allows only limited tax exportation. It acts as a rough form of benefit charge as wel. Property rates are calculated on the value of the land and of any improvements or buildings.

A third funding and financing model is the use of user chargers or fees. Local Governments provides services to their customers, i.e., residents and in return the customers must pay for the services they receive, for example water and electricity. User charges differ from taxes in two important ways. First, user charges are a charge to people and businesses for benefits they receive specifically; taxes are general charges for services that benefit everyone in roughly equal shares. Second, user charges are to some extent voluntary and avoidable, while taxes are compulsory.

The above three models focuses on the various sources of municipal income, i.e., funding is generated/collected by the municipality either from national government (MIG) or from its residents and businesses (taxes and charges). There are various sources of income (Education and Training Trust, http://www.etu.org.za/) that can be used by municipalities to finance their expenditure for example:

External loans. Internal loans. Contributions from revenue. Government grants. Property Rates. Service Charges / Tariffs. Fines. Equitable share.

National Government will have to increase the size of the MIG or the equitable share, i.e., allocate more funding to the MIG and/or equitable share. This can be done by either increasing the revenue sources of the national government (increase taxes etc) or through the re-allocating of funds (move funds from one or more commitments to the MIG and/or equitable share).

Local Government can increase their current property and other taxes, expanding the tax base to new payers and/or implement new taxes. Local Government can increase their charges and fees, expanding the base to new payers and/or implement new charges and fees.

A fourth options looks at the possibility of private funded and financed, i.e., the private sector fund and finance the local government infrastructure delivery. In the private funded and financed model the private sector allocate funds through either retained profits or borrowings towards the infrastructure delivery. The developer therefore funds and finance the project based on some estimated future rate of return percentage. The return on the infrastructure delivery is derived from user charges or some payment or discount agreement with the municipality.

The difference between the public and private model is essentially the financing mechanisms of the infrastructure delivery and not the funding. The funding mechanism is private (consumers and businesses) irrespective whether the model uses the public or private financing mechanism. Given the constraint ability by local government to increase and expand taxes and charges it seems fairly obvious that the use of first three models will continue to be of limited value to expand on the delivery of public infrastructure.

A fourth options looks at the possibility of private funded and financed, i.e., the private sector fund and finance the local government infrastructure delivery. In the private funded and financed model the private sector allocate funds through either retained profits or borrowings towards the infrastructure delivery. The developer therefore funds and finance the project based on some estimated future rate of return percentage. The return on the infrastructure delivery is derived from user charges or some payment or discount agreement with the municipality.

Its time for innovative and practical solutions to finance the growing public infrastructure gap. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The analysis support the argument of a long run public infrastructure gap. On the other hand the provision of public infrastructure is economically and socially desirable and needed. The current model of on-budget finance is inadequate and outdated New and innovative models of public infrastructure finance is needed. How do the private sector pay for public infrastructure? Various options are practiced internationally. These and other models have to be further studied and interrogated.