The process of universal income declaration for individuals in Armenia has become a subject of significant discontent. The key question is whether this initiative can genuinely serve the goals of justice and transparency, or whether it is merely turning into another bureaucratic tool.
According to Davit Ananyan, the former head of the State Revenue Committee (SRC), the income declaration system was originally intended to be part of a comprehensive strategic transformation. He notes that it was designed to be implemented alongside a series of other reforms.
“The reform was meant to align with the regulation of joint-stock companies, the establishment of mandatory listing requirements, institutional support for the development of the securities market, clarification of the legal status of companies of public interest, the introduction of new corporate taxation systems, and the establishment of declaration regimes for individual shareholders. All of this was supposed to function as a cohesive whole,” Ananyan emphasizes.
However, he argues that in the absence of this holistic approach, the declaration reform was detached from its strategic context and reduced to a self-serving administrative practice. Ananyan points out that it was implemented without sufficient institutional preparation or public awareness, which led to significant social-psychological resistance.
“Citizens did not perceive the declaration requirement as a tool for justice and transparency but rather as a manifestation of control and suppression. The lack of explanatory efforts, vulnerabilities in digital platforms, and the limited capacity of state institutions only deepened public distrust and resistance,” he stresses.
As a result, according to the former official, the authorities achieved not a strengthening of fiscal discipline but a new crisis of public trust. He is convinced that cosmetic adjustments may lead to some technical improvements, but without reconstructing the strategic framework, the outcome will remain the same: technical improvements can never substitute for systemic justice.
In Ananyan’s view, instead of patching up individual fragments, it is necessary to return to the principle of integrity. This requires honest and open discussions with society about a new economic mindset and structural reforms.
“Armenia today needs not partially borrowed and piecemeal mechanisms but genuine systemic economic reforms. The foundation for such changes must be political honesty and institutional courage. This will only be possible in a new political environment—after a change of power,” Davit Ananyan concludes.