This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 26 BELGRADE 000220 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE PASS TO USTR 
DEPT FOR EB/IFD/OIA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EINV EFIN ETRD KTDB PGOV SR MW USTR
SUBJECT: SERBIA AND MONTENEGRO: INVESTMENT CLIMATE 
STATEMENT 2006 
 
¶1.  The following is Post's submission for the 2006 
Investment Climate Statement: 
 
----------------------------------- 
A.1. Openness to Foreign Investment 
----------------------------------- 
 
Serbia and Montenegro is quickly establishing a liberal 
investment regime. Although the continuing transition has 
not yet eliminated all structural barriers, both republic 
governments, in Serbia and in Montenegro, recognize the 
need to remove impediments, reform the business environment 
and open the economy to foreign participation. For example, 
in June 2004 the Serbian government launched an Action Plan 
(together with the World Bank) identifying barriers and 
working with the business community to eliminate these 
barriers. Montenegro is implementing a comprehensive 
Economic Reform Agenda, led by the Prime Minister and 
supported by the USG and other international donors. The 
attitude towards foreign investors is generally favorable. 
Serbia and Montenegro has a long history of international 
commerce, even under communism, and it once attracted a 
sizeable foreign company presence. 
 
Already, the country has attracted considerable interest. 
Although cumulative levels of foreign direct investment 
(FDI) are still low compared to elsewhere in the region, 
Serbia and Montenegro could easily overtake other countries 
in Southeast Europe. In 2003 alone, foreign direct 
investment in Serbia and Montenegro amounted to around $1.3 
billion, outperforming other countries in Southeast Europe. 
FDI for 2004 was somewhat lower at an estimated $947 
million, primarily due to a slowdown in privatization in 
Serbia and political uncertainty following a change in 
government in Serbia in March 2004. But 2005 witnessed a 
rebound in investor interest, with FDI in Serbia estimated 
to have reached USD 1.5 billion, much of that banking 
sector. Serbian firms invested USD 59 million abroad in 
¶2005. 
 
Leading investor nations in Serbia and Montenegro include: 
the United States, Greece, Germany, Austria, Slovenia, 
Netherlands and Cyprus. The banking sector has attracted 
investment from Intesa (Italy), Credit Agricole (France), 
HVB Bank (Germany/Austria), Erste Bank (Austria), Nova 
Ljubljanska Banka (Slovenia), EFG Eurobank (Greece), 
Findomestic Bank (Italy), Pireus Bank (Greece), OTP Bank 
(Hungary), and others.  In the trade sector, France's 
Intermarche opened its first retail outlet in Nis and plans 
to develop operations throughout Serbia. German Metro Cash 
and Carry has invested some EUR 60 million in Serbia. 
Privatization of the two refineries owned by one of the 
largest state-owned companies, the Oil Industry of Serbia 
(NIS), and the government is placing other well-regarded 
industrial companies up for sale.  Privatization also is 
reaching the tourism industry, with the sale or attempted 
sale of several Belgrade hotels in 2005.   This trend 
should accelerate as the Agency for Privatization begins to 
sell off some 100 non-core assets, that were spun off by 
major state-owned companies during 2005, including many 
hotels.  For instance, the Agency just published the 
prospectus for sale of a 135-suite hotel at Serbia's 
premier ski resort that was owned by JAT Airways. 
 
So far, Montenegro has achieved greater relative success in 
attracting FDI.  In the five-year period from 2000-2004, 
inflows reached EUR 904 million, or USD 1,600 per capita, 
compared to USD 400 per capita for Serbia during the same 
period. To increase the inflow, the Government of 
Montenegro established the Montenegrin Investment Promotion 
Agency (MIPA) in 2005. According to MIPA, investment in 
2005 reached EUR 315 million, or three times more than the 
year before. 
 
Since 2003, the United States has emerged as the single 
largest investor nation in Serbia and Montenegro, 
accounting for approximately USD 1 billion. The largest US 
investors are: 
 
-Philip Morris International (a subsidiary of the U.S. 
diversified Atria Corporation), which purchased the Nis 
Tobacco Factory through privatization for EUR 518.5 million 
in 2003, becoming the largest foreign investor in Serbia; 
 
-U.S. Steel Serbia, which acquired Serbias only steel 
producer, Sartid, through bankruptcy in 2003, with 
investment to date exceeding USD 150 million; 
 
-Galaxy Tire, which purchased specialty tire producer Ruma 
Guma through privatization in February 2003 with a total 
investment of about USD 10 million; 
 
-Ball Corporation, which constructed a major greenfield 
production facility to manufacture beverage containers, 
with investment expected to reach USD 75 million in Phase I 
of the project; 
-Coca-Cola Co., which joined forces with Greek Coca-Cola 
Hellenic Bottling Co. (CCHBC) to acquire 100 percent of 
water bottler Vlasinka from Serbian furniture maker Simpo 
in February, 2005, for EUR 21.5 million. The estimated 
value of the entire transaction, which also includes 
investment for development projects, is expected to reach 
EUR 100 million. 
 
Other projects of interest include a planned USD 60 million 
air cargo and logistics terminal that Dyncorp International 
will build at Belgrade Airport, based on a USTDA 
feasibility study.  Microsoft opened a Development Center 
in Belgrade during 2005, its fifth of this type in the 
world, to continue expanding language support for 
handwriting recognizers within Microsoft Tablet PC 
technology and develop recognizers for the languages of 
Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). 
 
Serbia and Montenegro has enacted specific legislation 
outlining guarantees and safeguards for foreign investors. 
The former Yugoslav Law on Foreign Investments (January 
2002), amended and formally incorporated into Serbian law 
(2003), establishes the framework for investment in the 
republic. The law eliminates previous investment 
restrictions; extends national treatment to foreign 
investors; allows for the transfer/repatriation of profits 
and dividends; provides guarantees against expropriation; 
and allows customs duty waivers for equipment imported as 
capital-in-kind. In late 2002, the Government of Serbia 
promulgated new tax incentives for foreign investors. 
Montenegros Foreign Investment Law (November 2000) 
provides the same rights and protections for foreign 
investors. 
 
Neither Republic employs screening mechanisms, and foreign 
participation is welcomed in ongoing privatization 
campaigns.  However, a foreign investor or entity may not, 
alone or with another foreign investor, establish an 
enterprise in the production of and trade in armaments, or 
in areas defined as restricted zones by law. A foreign 
investor may establish an enterprise in the above-mentioned 
field and areas, or invest his capital in it together with 
a domestic entity, but without acquiring the majority 
rights in the management of such an enterprise and only 
with the consent of the Ministry of Defense of Serbia and 
Montenegro. 
The Republics' economic teams view foreign capital as vital 
to the restructuring of the real sector and, as a result, 
have fully expressed their commitment to remove barriers 
and facilitate investor interest. Thus, reform efforts have 
not been limited to the promulgation of the two foreign 
investment laws. Rather, the governments understand the 
need to reform a wide body of laws to improve the overall 
business regulatory environment and thereby enable private 
sector companies to grow and to compete. 
 
To promote investment, the two republics offer various 
resources. The Serbian Investment and Export Promotion 
Agency (SIEPA) was established to provide direct assistance 
to investors in Serbia.  SIEPA works closely with 
individual donors on various activities. In addition, the 
Agency for Privatization provides information and works 
with potential investors to educate them about the 
privatization program and its potential opportunities. 
Contact information for SIEPA is as follows: 
 
Serbian Investment & Export Promotion Agency (SIEPA) 
Vlajkoviceva 3/V 
11000 Belgrade Serbia 
Tel: (381)(11) 3398-510; 3398-550 
Fax: (381)(11) 3398-814 
[www.siepa.sr.gov.yu] 
 
The Agency of Montenegro for Economic Restructuring and 
Foreign Investments was established in 1990.  However, this 
agency's primary task was privatization and restructuring. 
To place a greater emphasis on investment promotion and 
fostering economic development, the Government of 
Montenegro established the Montenegrin Investment Promotion 
Agency (MIPA) in 2005. It seeks to bring Montenegro to the 
attention of the international community as a competitive 
investment destination by actively facilitating investments 
in the country. 
 
Inquiries on investment opportunities in Montenegro can be 
directed to: 
 
Petar Ivanovic, Director 
Montenegrin Investment Promotion Agency (MIPA) 
Atinska 36 
81000 Podgorica, Montenegro 
Tel/fax: +381 81 655 583, 655 584, 655 586, 655 479 
Website: www.mipa.cg.yu 
E-mail: info@mipa.cg.yu 
 
Montengrin Agency for Economic Restructuring 
Jovana Tomasevica bb 
81000 Podgorica Montenegro 
Tel: (381)(81) 242-640 or 246-411 
Fax: (381)(81) 245-756 
 
Both agencies are relatively small and lack resources to 
shepherd investors through the process from start to 
finish. Potential investors should discuss specific 
projects/interests with relevant line ministries to obtain 
the necessary support from the government. 
 
------------------------------------- 
A.2. Conversion and Transfer Policies 
------------------------------------- 
 
The republics foreign investment laws guarantee the right 
to transfer and repatriate profits in Serbia and 
Montenegro, respectively. 
 
Serbias Law on Foreign Exchange (enacted originally as a 
federal law in May 2002) establishes a foreign exchange 
market and provides for current account convertibility. In 
May 2002, the National Bank of Yugoslavia (now the National 
Bank of Serbia) notified the IMF that it accepts the 
obligations of Article VIII (2), (3) and (4) of the IMF 
Articles of Agreement. IMF members undertaking these 
obligations commit to refrain from restrictions on payments 
and transfers for current international transactions, and 
from engaging in discriminatory currency arrangements or 
multiple currency practices without IMF approval. The 
Foreign Exchange Law also permits local and foreign 
companies to hold a foreign exchange account in one or more 
banks authorized for international operations. These 
accounts can be used to make or receive payments in foreign 
currency. 
 
The National Bank of Serbia and the Ministry of Finance 
have proposed a new Law on Foreign Exchange that would ease 
restrictions on foreign transactions; it should be 
presented to Parliament early in 2006. Some of the major 
changes proposed: 1) Provisions on foreign credit 
transactions will be included, thereby nullifying  the 
existence of the separate 1992 Law on Foreign Capital 
Transactions, which is currently in force; 2) new forms of 
foreign trade financing will be introduced to assist 
companies in obtaining working capital; 3) the period by 
which exporters must repatriate export earnings and 
importers must proceed with importation after payment will 
be extended from 90 to 180 days; and 4) provisions for 
secured transactions are outlined more thoroughly to 
promote a modern financial market and to attract foreign 
investors. 
 
Montenegro uses the Euro as its domestic currency. There 
are no difficulties in the free transfer of funds exercised 
on the basis of profit, repayment of resources or residual 
assets. 
 
----------------------------------- 
A.3. Expropriation and Compensation 
----------------------------------- 
 
Serbia and Montenegro provides legal safeguards against 
expropriation. Protections are codified in laws adopted by 
the republic governments. There have been no cases of 
expropriation of foreign investments in either republic. 
 
However, both republics have outstanding claims related to 
property nationalized under the Socialist Federal Republic 
of Yugoslavia. On May 30, 2005, Serbia adopted the Law on 
Reporting and Registration of Nationalized Property that 
sets out two phases for restitution. The first allows 
citizens whose property was nationalized after March 9, 
1945 to register their claims by June 30, 2006.  Churches 
and religious organizations are not obligated to register 
their property claims because a separate law being drafted 
will address their claims. After the registration deadline, 
the Government of Serbia will then determine which 
compensation model to use to best address these claims, 
given budgetary constraints. The total value of 
nationalized property is estimated at between USD 60-150 
billion, according to Finance Minister Dinkic. 
 
In 2004, Montenegro's Law on Replacement and Settlement of 
Restitution Rights was ratified. In the last year, 
municipalities formed restitution committees, and the 
government established the Restitution Fund from which 
compensation is already being made to claimants. 
 
The Law on Foreign Investment provides safeguards against 
arbitrary government expropriation of foreign investments. 
Serbias Law on Expropriation (2001) defines justifications 
for possible expropriations and procedures that must be 
followed under law.  The law enumerates various economic 
and security circumstances affecting Serbias common 
interests in which expropriation is permitted: education, 
public health, social welfare, culture, water management, 
sports, transport, power and public utility infrastructure, 
national defense, local/national governments needs or 
 or 
territorial autonomy agencies, and the 
exploration/exploitation of mining and other resources. 
Special procedures are outlined for expropriations related 
to major natural disasters.  The Government of Serbia 
issues a determination on common interests; the law 
designates Serbias Supreme Court as the appellate 
mechanism. 
 
Following this determination, a proposal for expropriation 
may be filed with the competent local authorities. The 
authorities are obliged to hold proceedings and issue a 
decision. The Ministry of Finance is designated to resolve 
complaints filed against first-instance decisions. 
 
In the event of an expropriation, Serbian law requires that 
compensation be provided in the form of similar property or 
cash approximating the current market value of the 
expropriated property. The law stipulates various criteria 
for arriving at the amount of compensation with respect to 
different types of land (agricultural, vineyards, forests) 
or easements that affect the value of the land. If a 
 a 
compensation agreement is not reached within two months of 
the expropriation order, the local municipal court will 
intervene and decide the compensation. 
 
Republic of Montenegro 
---------------------- 
 
Montenegro provides safeguards from expropriation actions 
through its Foreign Investment Law. Article 29 states that 
the government cannot expropriate property of a foreign 
investor unless there is a compelling public purpose 
established by law or on the basis of the law. If an 
expropriation is executed, compensation must be provided at 
fair market value plus one basis point above the LIBOR rate 
for the period between the expropriation and the date of 
payment of compensation. 
 
----------------------- 
A.4. Dispute Settlement 
----------------------- 
 
Arbitration 
----------- 
 
The Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration (founded in 1947) is 
located within the Serbian Chamber of Economy. Arbitration 
is voluntary and conforms to the U.N. Commission on 
International Trade Law (UNICTRAL) model law. The court 
focuses on foreign trade or international commercial 
disputes (including investment) involving domestic and 
foreign parties. The courts arbitration rules promote a 
speedy and efficient process (no more than one year). 
Arbitration commences when the parties have mutually 
requested arbitration and accepted the courts 
jurisdiction. Its decision is final and binding. 
 
Once an issue has been decided, the arbitration award must 
be executed upon notice from the court to the losing party, 
which is given a deadline to comply. If no payment is made 
within the time allotted, then the party benefiting from 
the decision notifies the local commercial court. The 
commercial court then orders payment. The same procedure 
applies for decisions of foreign arbitration courts (as per 
the 1958 New York Convention). Complaints against the court 
of arbitration are not recognized unless a procedural flaw 
is alleged. 
 
Serbia and Montenegro is a signatory to the following 
g 
international conventions regulating the mutual acceptance 
and enforcement of foreign arbitration: the 1923 Geneva 
Protocol on Arbitration Clauses, the 1927 Geneva Convention 
on the Execution of Foreign Arbitration Decisions, the 1958 
New York Convention on the Acceptance and Execution of 
Foreign Arbitration Decisions; the 1961 European Convention 
on International Business Arbitration; and, the 1965 
Washington Convention on the International Center for the 
Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). 
 
Arbitration has not been employed to a large extent during 
the last 10 years given the absence of foreign companies 
from the market. Additionally, although the Courts 
arbitral decisions may be enforceable in Serbia, they may 
not be recognized in Montenegro. Consequently, many foreign 
companies include a clause in contracts that requires 
third-country arbitration if disputes arise. Foreign 
arbitral decisions would be enforceable in both the Serbian 
and Montenegrin court systems. 
 
 
A new Law on Arbitration is currently in the drafting 
process. A new working group has been formed and a second 
draft version is complete. The second version covers 
International and Domestic Arbitration. The draft is 
clearer and follows the UNCITRAL Model Law more closely. 
 
In November, 2004, the International Court of Arbitration 
in Paris issued a ruling in favor of U.S. company Valeant 
Pharmaceuticals (formerly ICN Pharmaceuticals), ordering 
that the U.S. company be permitted to repatriate USD 50 
million in the dissolution of a joint venture.  At this 
time, it appears that the Government of Serbia and Valeant 
are near a settlement. 
 
Legal System 
------------ 
 
The union and republic constitutions serve as the 
foundation of the legal system and create independent 
judiciaries in Serbia and Montenegro. Unlike the United 
States and the United Kingdom, which use common law, Serbia 
and Montenegro has adopted European civil law. However, 
higher court decisions can be used as guidance by lower 
r 
courts. 
 
Serbia and Montenegros judiciary historically lacked 
independence and was subjected routinely to political 
manipulation during the socialist and Milosevic periods. 
Judges were appointed based on party affiliation. During 
the Milosevic regime especially, the court system was 
severely undermined, with judges often rubber-stamping 
regime actions. Judges who challenged the regime were 
simply removed. Officials are now focusing on a range of 
issues to overhaul the court system: accountability, salary 
levels, training, selection/appointment process, 
execution/enforcement of judgments, budget, court 
organization and responsibilities, and ethics. The U.S. 
Government, through USAID, is providing assistance on 
reform of the court system, primarily commercial courts but 
also general jurisdiction courts and magistrates. 
 
Union Judicial System 
--------------------- 
 
There is only one court of the State Union, the Court of 
Serbia and Montenegro, and its jurisdiction is set forth in 
the Constitutional Charter: disputes between institutions 
of Serbia and Montenegro on questions on their jurisdiction 
pursuant to the Constitutional Charter, disputes between 
the state union and its member states regarding the 
question of their jurisdiction over citizens' complaints 
for violations of rights guaranteed by the Constitutional 
Charter, issues of consistency of member states 
Constitutions with the Constitutional Charter, and similar 
issues. 
 
The Constitutional Court is a separate court of the 
Republic of Serbia, with its jurisdiction set forth in the 
Constitution of the Republic of Serbia. It mainly decides 
the constitutionality of certain laws. Montenegro's 
Constitutional Court has a similar function. 
 
Republic of Montenegro Judicial System 
-------------------------------------- 
 
Montenegros Law on Courts defines a judicial system of 
three levels: basic courts, superior courts and the Supreme 
Court. It also establishes two courts with special 
jurisdiction for commercial matters. Two new courts were 
established in 2005: appellate and administrative Courts. 
While the administrative courts are operational, start-up 
of the appellate courts is awaiting appointment of judges. 
 
The basic courts exercise original jurisdiction over civil 
and criminal cases. There are 15 courts for 21 
municipalities. Two superior courts in Podgorica and Bijelo 
Polje have appellate review of municipal court decisions. 
Superior courts also decide on jurisdictional conflicts 
between the municipal courts. 
 
The two commercial courts (which also handle economic 
crimes) have been established in Podgorica and Bijelo 
Polje. Their jurisdiction: shipping, navigation, aircraft 
(except passenger transport), intellectual property rights, 
bankruptcy, and unfair trade practices. The superior courts 
hear appeals of commercial court decisions, and superior 
court decisions may be appealed to the Supreme Court.  The 
Supreme Court is the court of final judgment for all civil, 
criminal and administrative cases. 
 
The commercial court system faces challenges. Some reform 
proposals have suggested the creation of a High Commercial 
Court or dedicating a chamber of the Supreme Court to 
commercial cases. Some judges have also suggested 
designating a particular court with assigned competency for 
specific areas in order to streamline caseloads and develop 
specialized expertise for complicated economic 
crimes/matters. 
 
Republic of Serbia Judicial System 
---------------------------------- 
 
Serbia's court system consists of: municipal courts (138), 
district courts (30), commercial courts (17), the High 
Commercial Court (1), the Supreme Court (1) and the 
Constitutional Court (1). Municipal courts are the court of 
first instance for civil and criminal matters. District 
courts hear appeals from the municipal level but also serve 
as courts of first instance for serious civil and criminal 
cases. 
 
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the republic, 
with jurisdiction over all civil and criminal cases, 
uniform implementation of law, equal protection, questions 
pertaining to judiciary practice, and jurisdictional issues 
between lower courts. The court hears appeals from the 
District Courts and the High Commercial Court. The Supreme 
Court also has a division that reviews decisions of 
administrative bodies. The Constitutional Court, which is 
distinct from the Supreme Court, issues binding 
interpretations of the constitution and rules on challenges 
regarding the constitutionality of laws and regulations. 
 
The new Law on the Organization of Courts establishes 
(valid from January 1, 2007) new Courts of Appeals to 
review District Court decisions; decisions of those courts 
may be appealed to the Supreme Court.  The Courts of 
Appeals will be located in Belgrade and three other cities. 
The new law also establishes an additional court, the 
Administrative Court, with original jurisdiction in cases 
arising from decisions of administrative bodies. The 
Supreme Court will hear appeals from the Administrative 
Court's decisions. In addition, Courts for Misdemeanors and 
a High court for Misdemeanors of the Republic of Serbia 
will be established as of January, 2007. 
 
Most commercial cases are heard by 17 regional commercial 
courts of first instance.  The commercial court system has 
four divisions: litigation; commercial law offenses; 
bankruptcy/liquidation, and execution of decisions. 
Approximately 240 judges sit in the commercial courts, 65 
of them in Belgrade.  The High Commercial Court reviews 
decisions of the first instance commercial courts, and its 
rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court. 
 
Execution of Judgments 
---------------------- 
 
Serbia has a new Law on Execution, approved in November, 
2004, which establishes procedures for the execution of 
claims. Generally, to execute judgments, a final judgment 
is required so that the court can order payment, seizure of 
goods/property or direct that action be taken or cease. If 
a lower court's decision is confirmed on appeal, the case 
is returned to the first-instance court for the final 
judgment. The judgment holder must then proceed to the 
competent court and submit a petition for execution. The 
court order is actually carried out by officers of the 
court, who may seek police assistance in executing the writ 
(e.g., seizing property). A separate expedited enforcement 
procedure has been enacted that allows claimants to submit 
certain types of authenticated documents to the court and 
initiate the execution phase without a first instance court 
procedure to obtain a judgment. 
 
Foreign judgments are recognized in Serbian and Montenegrin 
courts, based on an application for recognition/enforcement 
to the relevant SAM court. Enforcement of foreign judgments 
in both Serbia and Montenegro is governed by a single law, 
now applicable in the Union, which dates from the former 
Yugoslavia (Official Gazette no. 32/82 72/81 and 46/96, 
, 
Articles 86-101). Under this law, the court does not review 
the decision but decides on whether the requirements for 
recognition are fulfilled, based on the following issues: 
whether defendants were duly apprised of the complaint and 
allowed to present their case in the original proceeding; 
whether the same matter is neither pending nor has not been 
decided in local courts between the same parties; whether 
the foreign judgment pertains to matters that are the 
exclusive jurisdiction of SAM courts (e.g., real estate); 
whether execution of the foreign judgment contravenes SAM 
law; whether SAM decisions are recognized by the foreign 
country's court; whether the decision is final and 
conclusive, and whether the decision is clear. 
 
Law on Business Companies 
------------------------- 
 
On November 15, 2004 the Serbian Parliament adopted a new 
Law on Business Companies. The law provides greater clarity 
both in organizing and operating a company and in settling 
disputes in both small and large firms.   The law is more 
consistent with international business practices and adds 
modern provisions for corporate governance and protection 
of investors. 
 
Limited liability Company (LLC) provisions of the law were 
made more flexible, and a new provision for closely-held 
(closed) joint stock companies was added.  The minimum 
capital requirement for establishment of a Serbian LLC is 
only 500 Euro or its equivalent, which is much less than 
that required for large companies. 
 
The new law provides for two types of joint stock 
companies: closed and open. This is a change from the 
existing law, and it follows other European company laws. 
A closed joint stock company is much like an LLC, but it 
can be easily converted to an open joint stock company if 
it wishes to go public. 
 
The new Serbian closed joint stock company will have 
required minimum capital of 500 Euro equivalent (like an 
LLC), and it will be free to impose restrictions on 
transfer of its shares  for example, a requirement of 
board approval, or a right of first refusal in favor of 
other shareholders, whenever a shareholder wishes to sell 
to a third party. It may not, however, offer its shares 
publicly and it may not have more than 100 shareholders. 
In most other respects a closed company will resemble an 
open company, and a closed company may become an open 
company at any time so long as it adopts and agrees to 
follow the rules and requirements for an open company. 
 
An open company, by contrast, is subject to detailed 
capital maintenance requirements, may sell its shares to 
the public, and may not impose any restriction on the 
resale of its shares. 
 
Under the new law, a joint stock company is permitted to 
issue only one class of common stock, which may have only 
one vote per share. Preferred stock must be non-voting, 
with certain exceptions, and preferred stock always has 
preference over common stock with respect to dividends and 
distributions on liquidation of the company. 
 
A number of other changes encourage good corporate 
governance and protect investors, mirroring current 
international best practices: 
 
-A legal duty of care and duty of loyalty to the company, 
including provisions on personal conflict of interest, have 
been added. Changes also hold directors (and in some cases 
other control persons) more accountable to shareholders. 
 
-Directors can be elected only by shareholders. 
-Cumulative voting is specifically permitted and is 
required in large joint stock companies. 
 
-The structure of the board is simplified, making a 
supervisory board optional. The distinction between and 
roles of directors (who are elected by the shareholders) 
and the management team (who are appointed by the 
directors) is spelled out more clearly. 
 
-Directors will have only one-year terms and will always be 
up for election or re-election at each annual shareholder 
meeting. 
 
-Also, shareholders can remove a director at any time 
without proof of cause. 
 
Small and closely-held companies (whether partnerships, 
LLCs or joint stock companies) may be able to mix 
shareholding, directing and management. However, large 
joint stock companies are required by the new law to have a 
number of independent directors, and the new law contains a 
definition of the term independent director that follows 
current precedents in Europe and the United States. 
 
The changes also expand the rules for lawsuits against 
directors and other persons in control of a company of any 
type (partnership, LLC or joint stock company)  including 
controlling shareholders in some cases - based upon 
international models. Under the new law, a separate 
supervisory board is no longer required in a joint stock 
company. Instead, a company may have a supervisory board, 
internal auditor or audit committee that acts as an 
independent body with specific legal power to provide 
financial and legal oversight and supervision, including 
ding 
oversight of the companys outside audit firm and of the 
companys legal compliance. 
 
The changes add new detail to the procedural rules for 
convening and conducting shareholder meetings. More 
detailed restrictions are placed on proxies (voting 
representatives) to prevent the abuse of managers voting 
shares of employee-shareholders. Under the new law, a proxy 
must be in writing and can be revoked by the shareholder at 
any time including at the shareholder assembly.  The new 
law also expands the prohibition against managers voting 
employees shares. 
 
Regarding court action, the new law specifies the courts 
powers, and the types of orders it can issue, in more 
detail than is found in other laws. 
 
Finally, the new law contains a number of provisions to 
comply with requirements of the European Union Company Law 
Directives. 
 
------------------------------------------- 
A.5 Performance Requirements and Incentives 
------------------------------------------- 
 
--- 
 
Neither the union nor republic governments impose any 
performance requirements as a condition for establishing, 
maintaining or expanding an investment. 
 
Limited incentives are offered to foreign investors. In 
Serbia, tax holidays are available (based on size of 
investment and jobs generated) along with customs relief on 
in-kind imported equipment. In Montenegro, the government 
offers both duty exemptions for imported equipment. 
 
Law on Concessions 
------------------ 
 
The Law on Concessions was adopted by the Serbian 
Parliament in May 2003. It eases the process of obtaining 
and utilizing concession licenses. It also regulates the 
conditions and procedures for obtaining a concession to 
exploit natural resources, use property in the public 
domain and or conduct activities of general interest. 
 
The law defines a concession as the right to use natural 
resources, assets of general use or to perform activities 
of common interest, which a competent state body (Grantor) 
concedes to a domestic or foreign person (Grantee) for a 
limited period of time, under the terms prescribed by the 
law and upon the payment of a concession fee. 
 
The object of a concession may be: 1) researching and 
exploiting raw materials (minerals); 2) constructing, 
renovating, maintaining and utilizing of: various water 
supply facilities; roads; public railway infrastructure; 
air traffic facilities; river traffic facilities and ports; 
telecommunication facilities; oil pipelines, gas pipelines 
and other gas and oil facilities; public utilities; power- 
generating and heating facilities; river and lake banks; 
medical institutions; sports and recreation facilities, 
sports fields and areas; tourist facilities and 
infrastructure; 3) using thermal springs; 4) other 
activities specified by the law as activities of common 
interest. 
 
A foreign physical or legal person cannot be granted a 
concession for specific activities in Serbia where, in 
accordance with the law regulating foreign investments, a 
foreign entity may not establish a company. A concession is 
granted by a public tender. By exception, if a public 
tender could endanger national security, the government may 
proceed without a public tender. A concession may be 
granted for up to 30 years. The concession fee is 
determined depending on the type, quality, purpose and the 
market price of the natural resource or assets in question, 
i.e., depending on the type of activity, market terms, 
duration of the concession, estimated risk and expected 
profit. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
A.6. Right to Private Ownership and Establishment 
--------------------------------------------- ---- 
 
The union and republic constitutions guarantee the right to 
ownership and establishment, although private ownership of 
urban land is not yet permitted. A foreign physical or 
legal person incorporated pursuant to the laws of either 
republic is considered to be a legal person. Foreign 
investors may acquire property rights for buildings and 
rights for other immovable assets to be used for their 
business activities. They may acquire residential property, 
such as apartments, but not ownership rights over the land 
itself (unless the land is in rural areas). Foreign 
investors are permitted to hold land-use rights for up to 
99 years, and such rights can transfer with the sale of 
buildings on such sites. By law, urban lands are held by 
the municipal governments. Rural lands are regulated 
differently and investors may acquire the land rights. 
Serbia is now drafting a new constitution, but political 
developments could further delay the process. It is 
expected that the new constitution will permit ownership of 
urban lands. 
 
In Montenegro, a foreign investor, foreign legal person or 
foreign individual may acquire property. Article 12 of the 
Montenegrin Foreign Investment Law specifically permits 
foreign investors to purchase real estate through a 
contract. This right is explicitly reinforced by the Law on 
Property and Law Relation. The Act states that foreign 
natural and legal persons carrying out activities in 
Montenegro can, based on reciprocity, acquire real estate 
in order to perform the activities related to the 
investment. This same law also permits the acquisition of 
property (houses and apartments) by foreign persons even if 
they do not have any investment or business activity in 
Montenegro. 
 
---------------------------------- 
A.7. Protection of Property Rights 
---------------------------------- 
 
Mortgages/Secured Transactions 
------------------------------ 
 
The mortgaging property and chattels was formerly regulated 
by Chapter XXVIII of the Yugoslav Law on Contract and 
Torts. The two republics have now passed separate laws on 
secured transactions to establish a clear, transparent 
framework. 
 
In July 2002, Montenegro enacted its Law on Secured 
Transactions and established a collateral registry at the 
Commercial Court in May 2003. The registrys operational 
guidelines have been drafted and approved by the commercial 
court. 
 
In June 2003, Serbia passed a secured transactions law, the 
Law on Registered Charges on Movable Assets. A Business 
Services Agency was established in January 2005, which will 
maintain a collateral registry in addition to registering 
new businesses. 
In December 2005, Serbia adopted a new Law on Mortgages 
that will allow banks to mortgage buildings under 
construction. The previous law did not permit the entering 
of unfinished buildings into the land registries, making 
securing of loans during construction very difficult. In 
the event a debtor is unable to repay the loan, the new law 
permits sale of the mortgaged property within six months 
instead of the former three- to five-year period. This new 
law should provide incentives for housing construction, by 
ensuring better legal protections for creditors and 
debtors. The law also broadens the availability of 
mortgages through more flexible conditions for such loans, 
which are now permitted not only for completed construction 
but also for projects under construction, including 
subdivisions of a property, unregistered objects and land. 
The GOS hopes that this law will lower interest rates, by 
better protecting creditors. An owner who grants a mortgage 
to a lender will not be able to change the physical 
structure of the property without the creditors consent, 
but is allowed to rent it or sell it. If the pledged real 
estate is subject to bankruptcy, the law states that the 
creditor has priority in any distribution. The law also 
will permit establishment of a Central Mortgage Register. 
 
These laws substantially improve the inadequate scope of 
previous Yugoslav law. Unlike that law, these new laws 
address non-possessory pledges on moveable property. The 
law also prioritizes claims based on possession. With 
respect to land, central registries are typically not 
completely current. Both republic governments are making an 
effort to modernize their cadastral systems. The World Bank 
is providing assistance in this area. 
 
Intellectual Property Rights 
 
The acquisition and disposition of intellectual property 
rights are protected by laws at the Union level. It is the 
responsibility of the two member states (republics) to 
implement and enforce these laws. The legal regime for IPR 
protection has improved substantially in recent years as 
SAM has revised laws to meet WTO TRIPs standards. In 
practice, however, enforcement is weak and actual 
protection, insufficient. Sale of pirated optical media 
(DVDs, CDs, software) as well as counterfeit trademarked 
goods, particularly sneakers and clothing, is fairly 
widespread. Enforcement is slowly improving as customs, 
police and judicial authorities obtain the necessary tools, 
but institutional capacity is still limited. Strengthening 
IPR protection will continue to be a challenge. 
 
Intellectual property rights are covered by a series of six 
union laws that are enforced by the republic governments. 
The Law on Copyright and Related Rights, the Law on 
Patents, the Law on Trademarks, the Law on Legal Protection 
of Designs, and the Law on Protection of Integrated Circuit 
Topographies were passed in June and December 2004, and are 
fully WTO-TRIPs compliant. A new Law on Geographical 
Indications that is WTO-TRIPs compliant will replace the 
1995 law and should be adopted in early 2006. 
 
Enforcement 
----------- 
 
Complaints of IPR infringement must be brought before the 
relevant republic commercial or district courts (depending 
on the legal status of parties involved). Procedures for 
enforcement of intellectual property rights are governed in 
both Serbia and Montenegro by their respective Laws on 
Civil Procedures (recently enacted), based on the 
substantive Union-level laws for each area of intellectual 
property. 
 
Laws on Civil Procedures meet the procedural requirements 
of TRIPS Article 42 (written notification regarding a 
dispute and protections for evidence and the rights of the 
parties involved). With respect to providing evidence that 
is under the control of the opposing party (referenced in 
TRIPS Article 43), the laws allow the Court to compel 
production of documents or things within a given time 
limit. The laws regulating specific areas of intellectual 
property rights (Law on Copyright and Related Rights, 
Patent Law, Trade Mark Law, Law on Legal Protection of 
Designs, Law on Geographical Indications and Law on 
Protection of Topographies of Integrated Circuits), provide 
specific legal remedies to rights holders. 
 
Criminal sanctions, including in some cases imprisonment, 
may be imposed in cases where IPR infringement is found. In 
April, 2003, Serbia amended its Penal Code to improve 
enforcement efforts, instituting stiffer penalties, 
including prison sentences, for piracy. In June 2003, a 
subsequent amendment to the Criminal Code was adopted 
enabling the police to seize or destroy pirated goods and 
production equipment and materials. However, in practice, 
courts have typically imposed only weak penalties. 
 
The new Penal Code for Serbia, adopted by the Parliament in 
September, 2005, has a specific chapter on criminal 
offences committed by infringement of IP Laws; it provides 
adequate penalties for the infringement. It also provides 
for ex officio prosecution without the filing of a private 
complaint of a rights holder.  A new draft Law on the 
Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (adoption by 
the Serbian Parliament is expected by March 2006) will make 
legal entities, such as corporations, culpable for IPR 
violations and provide for fines up to three million dinars 
(approximately EUR 35,000). It also will provide ex officio 
authority for inspectors in areas such as trade, medicines 
and medical supplies, and electronic media and 
broadcasting, among others. 
 
Montenegro made progress in 2005 in strengthening its 
legislative framework. In July 2005, the Montenegrin 
Parliament passed a law similar to Serbias law on the 
enforcement of intellectual property rights that entered 
into force January 1, 2006. The law provides for fines for 
legal entities of up to EUR 30,000 for selling pirated 
and/or counterfeited goods. It also provides ex officio 
authority for market inspectors in the areas mentioned 
above. In April 2005, the Montenegrin Parliament adopted 
the Regulation on (TRIPs) Border Measures that provides 
powers to the customs authorities to suspend customs 
procedure and seize pirated and counterfeit goods. 
 
In early 2006, Montenegro's Parliament is expected to amend 
the Penal Code to include criminal offences with respect to 
infringement of all IP rights, ex officio prosecution and 
stricter criminal penalties. A new Law on Optical Disks 
also should be approved in both Serbia and Montenegro, 
which will regulate the production of optical disks, 
require the registration of the business activity of 
reproducing optical disks for commercial purposes, provide 
for surveillance of optical disk imports and exports and 
imports and exports of polycarbonates (the material used in 
production of optical disks) and production equipment for 
the production of optical disks. 
 
International Agreements 
------------------------ 
 
The following conventions and agreements in the field of 
intellectual property are binding on SAM and thus on the 
Republics: 
 
- Convention Establishing of the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (1967) (member since October 1, 
1973); 
- Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial 
Property (1883) (member since February 26, 1921); 
- Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and 
Artistic Works (1886) (member since June 17, 1930); 
- Madrid Agreement Concerning the International 
Registration of Marks (1891) (member since February 26, 
1921); 
- Protocol relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the 
International Registration of Marks (member since February 
19, 1997); 
- Patent Cooperation Treaty (1970) (member since February 
1, 1997); 
- Hague Agreement Concerning the International Deposit of 
Industrial Designs (1925) (member since December 30, 1993); 
- Universal Copyright Convention (1952) (member since 
1966); 
- Nice Agreement Concerning the International 
Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of 
the Registration of Marks (1957) (member since August 30, 
1966); 
- Locarno Agreement Establishing an International 
Classification for Industrial Designs (1968) (member since 
October 16, 1973); 
- Convention Relating to the Distribution of Program- 
Carrying Signals Transmitted by Satellite (1974) (member 
since August 25, 1979); 
- Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the 
Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of Patent 
Procedure (1977) (member since February 25, 1994); 
- Trademark Law Treaty (1994) (member since September 15, 
1998); 
- Lisbon Agreement for the Protection of Appellations of 
Origin and their International Registration (1958) (member 
since June 1, 1999); 
- Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive 
Indications of Source on Goods (1891) (member since May 18, 
2000); 
- Nairobi Treaty on the Protection of the Olympic Symbol 
(1981) (member since March 18, 2000); 
- Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated 
Circuits (1989) (signed, not ratified); 
- International Convention for the Protection of 
Performers, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting 
Organizations (member since December 20, 2002); 
- Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms 
Against Unauthorized Duplication of their Phonograms 
(member since December 20, 2002); 
- WIPO Copyright Treaty (member since December 20, 2002); 
- WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (member since 
December 20, 2002); 
 
WTO Accession 
------------- 
 
Serbia and Montenegro, as a successor in rights of the 
former FRY, has been in the process of accession to the 
World Trade Organization since 2001. Following the example 
of the EU's twin track approach, both Serbia and 
d 
Montenegro withdrew their joint application and submitted 
separate applications for WTO accession in December, 2004. 
 
At the February 15, 2005 meeting, the General Council 
accepted separate membership applications from the 
Republics of Serbia and  Montenegro and agreed to establish 
independent working parties to continue the accession 
process. The first independent meetings of the countries' 
working parties were held in October, 2005. 
 
The U.S. Government, through USAID, has been providing 
technical assistance to Serbia and Montenegro on 
preparation for the WTO accession process. 
 
-------------------------------------- 
A.8. Transparency of Regulatory System 
-------------------------------------- 
 
Commercial Code & Contract Law 
------------------------------ 
 
The former Federal Law on Contracts and Torts (1978) 
embodies contract law in Serbia and Montenegro. No laws 
have been passed in either Serbia or Montenegro that 
replace or amend this law because, on the whole, experts 
view the law as essentially sound. Still, some problems 
have been noted. In contract disputes, the law provides 
judges with the discretion to reduce damages. This law, for 
instance, also addressed secured transactions; new secured 
transactions laws have been enacted in both republics that 
correct weaknesses in the 1978 law. Additionally, in May 
2003, the Republic of Serbia adopted a new Law on Financial 
Leasing, which has provided the framework for significant 
development of leasing arrangements and contracts. The law 
establishes a public register in the form of an integrated 
electronic database that documents leasing contracts. 
 
The permitting processes that control both the acquisition 
of land (rights of use, in municipalities) in Serbia and 
subsequent decisions related to use of such land generally 
are considered a significant barrier to foreign investors. 
 
Bankruptcy Law 
-------------- 
 
For the most part, bankruptcy legislation has never been 
enforced in Serbia and Montenegro, and the courts have 
little or no experience in adjudicating bankruptcy cases. 
Bankruptcy was always equated with liquidation and 
consequently avoided. During previous governments, 
socially-owned companies were not permitted to fail. That 
situation is changing. The faltering economy has left many 
insolvent companies. The governments are moving to overhaul 
legislation and practices so that these companies can be 
restructured or liquidated. New bankruptcy practices should 
also spur companies to pay more attention to sound 
financial practice to avoid insolvency. 
 
The former Federal Bankruptcy Law regulated bankruptcy 
actions in Serbia. This law was deficient in many respects; 
most notably it provided excessive protections for debtors. 
Another feature is the lack of a reorganization clause 
(e.g., U.S. Chapter 11). The law was rarely applied. 
In July 2004, the Serbian parliament adopted a new 
bankruptcy law that incorporates international concepts and 
practices. USAID and the World Bank assisted in drafting 
the law. The government will also receive international 
assistance in training trustees and judges and the 
establishment of an agency to regulate bankruptcy trustees. 
 
Serbia's new law contains modern provisions similar to 
those that have been adopted by other countries seeking to 
modernize their bankruptcy systems. It provides enhanced 
creditor involvement; improved debtor eligibility criteria 
to filter inappropriate petitions; an improved claim 
resolution procedure and penalties for submitting false 
documents and claims. It also expands the role of private 
bankruptcy trustee-administrators. The new law provides 
greater flexibility in developing a plan of reorganization, 
but also requires adherence to strict deadlines and the 
affirmative vote of creditors for acceptance. The new law 
also features international bankruptcy provisions, 
incorporating the UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-border 
Insolvency. 
 
Montenegros Law on Business Organization Insolvency 
(February 2002) provides the regulatory framework for the 
bankruptcy process. Insolvency exists and bankruptcy may be 
initiated if various conditions are met: an entity has 
stopped payments for 30 days; the debt exceeds a 
statutorily defined amount; the debt is not contingent; 
and, the debtor has an established pattern of non-payment. 
 
The Commercial Court has exclusive jurisdiction over 
bankruptcy matters. A written petition must be submitted. 
The court decides on acceptance of the petition, acceptance 
of the petition, selects an administrator (trustee), 
reviews creditor complaints, approves the settlement for 
creditors, and decides on the closing of proceedings. The 
bankruptcy judge supervises the administrator. The trustee 
represents the debtor, managing assets subject to the 
bankruptcy and preparing requisite information for the 
bankruptcy proceedings. 
 
The creditors committee consists of up to nine unsecured 
d 
or partially-secured creditors. The committee is convened 
to protect the interests of all creditors during the 
proceedings, to oversee the administrators work and to 
report to the creditors on the proceedings. Creditors must 
declare all claims by a fixed deadline. The law establishes 
the priority of creditor claims, assigning higher priority 
to taxes and other revenues of both the central and local 
governments. 
 
Chapter VIII of the Law addresses reorganization, an 
alternative to liquidation whereby attempts are made to 
maximize asset recovery and provide for fair and equitable 
distribution among all creditors. Article 66 lists various 
methods of reorganization. Either the trustee or debtor may 
file a reorganization plan. 
 
In 2005, two new agencies were created to foster 
implementation of the new bankruptcy law in Serbia: the 
Bankruptcy Unit within the Privatization Agency, which acts 
as the bankruptcy administrator for all majority state or 
socially-owned companies in bankruptcy proceedings; and the 
Bankruptcy Licensing Agency, which exercises regulatory 
power over bankruptcy administrators, including the conduct 
of professional examinations and the issuance of licenses 
to practice. Two licensing examinations, containing both 
written and oral components, were conducted in 2005, 
and more than 180 administrators are now licensed to 
practice in Serbia. 
 
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) - Mediation Law 
--------------------------------------------- -------------- 
 
A new Law on Mediation was adopted February 24, 2005 and 
came into force on May 26, 2005. This Law introduced 
mediation as a new practice in the Serbian legal system. It 
presents a mechanism for alternative dispute resolution, 
and it is expected that its implementation will decrease 
the backlog of court cases. According to this Law, 
mediation is voluntary, and may be initiated prior to or 
during a proceeding before the court or other body. 
 
Law on Competition/Anti-Monopoly 
-------------------------------- 
 
Serbia's Parliament approved a new competition law on 
September 16, 2005. The law contains a pre-merger 
notification turnover threshold of alternatively 10 million 
Euros in Serbia or 50 million Euros worldwide. This low 
threshold likely will be problematic for foreign investors. 
Most foreign companies buying even a small company in 
Serbia will be forced to obtain approval from the Antitrust 
Commission prior to the purchase, which can take as long as 
four months. Another problem is the penalty provision, 
which permits low-level courts to impose severe penalties 
(up to 10 percent of total worldwide turnover). In 
addition, the deadline for the nomination of Commission 
members already passed, without Government action. It also 
is unclear how this law and the existing takeover rules 
will interact. 
 
The Montenegrin Parliament also has adopted a competition 
law, which went into force January 1, 2006. This law is 
regarded as an improvement to the investment climate in 
Montenegro. 
 
On May 23, 2005 the Parliament of Serbia established  an 
Energy Regulatory Agency by appointing the first members of 
the Council. The Agency Council consists of the president 
and four members nominated by the GoS and appointed by the 
Parliament.  The Council is accountable only to the 
Parliament for the Agency's work. This Agency will have 
authority over the electricity, gas, oil and heating energy 
sectors. Its main tasks are approval of pricing, 
development of a model for determining allowable business 
costs for energy sector entities, issuance of operating 
licenses for energy companies and for construction in the 
energy sector, and monitoring of public tenders. The energy 
law prescribes that in those energy sectors where prices 
are affected by the monopoly positions of some 
participants, business costs will be set at levels approved 
by the Agency.  In those areas deemed to function 
competitively, the market will determine prices. 
 
The Regulatory Agency for Telecommunications was formed 
according to the Serbian Telecommunications Law adopted in 
April 2003. Serbias Parliament elected the President and 
the members of the Agency's Management Board in May 2005. 
The agencys mission is to raise the efficiency of existing 
providers, introduce new and improve old services to 
modernize the telecom infrastructure, and create conditions 
for the sectors further development. 
 
The regulatory function of the Agency is to set rules for 
participants on the open market. Issuance of licenses is 
one of the main competencies of the Agency. The license 
gives the individuals or legal entities the right to 
operate on the telecommunication market. Other competencies 
of the Agency are interconnection or mutual connection of 
networks of the different operators; responsibility for 
overall network service, its maintenance and financing; and 
line leasing, which means that the public operator with 
th 
dominant market share has the obligation to offer its lines 
for leasing under certain conditions.  In those 
telecommunications sectors where prices are affected by the 
monopoly positions of certain participants, prices will be 
set at levels approved by the Agency.  In those areas 
deemed to function competitively, the market will determine 
prices. 
 
In addition to its regulatory function, the Agency has 
controlling and monitoring functions. It is responsible for 
implementing relevant laws and has the authority to issue 
penalties according to the law. 
 
Taxation 
-------- 
 
Republic of Serbia 
 
The Ministry of Finance has implemented three phases of 
reform to modernize Serbias tax system in an attempt to 
simplify taxation and increase revenues. The components of 
the Serbian tax system are: Value Added Tax (VAT), personal 
income tax, corporate profit tax, excise duties, property 
taxes, payroll tax and taxes on use of goods and on 
permission to use goods. 
 
 
The standard VAT rate on most goods and services is 18 
percent, with a limited list of staple foods, medicines and 
other products assessed a lower 8 percent rate. 
Humanitarian aid, grants, and orthopedic equipment for 
persons with disabilities are exempted from VAT, while 
traditional religious organizations are entitled to VAT 
refunds. 
The applicable personal income tax rate is 14 percent for 
salaries and 10 percent for net income from self- 
employment. Other personal income is primarily taxed at a 
rate of 20 percent, although deductions are allowed for 
some types of income. The taxable base is equal to gross 
income without deductions for income taxes and social 
contributions. Foreign residents are subject to an 
additional tax at the rate of 10 percent if their income 
from salary exceeds 10 times the average annual salary in 
Serbia.  (Serbian residents are subject to an additional 
tax at the rate of 10 percent if their total income exceeds 
four times the average annual salary in Serbia.) 
 
In 2004, the government lowered the corporate profit tax 
rate from 14 percent to 10 percent, making it one of the 
lowest in all of Europe. Tax credits and holidays of up to 
10 years are available for investment in fixed assets and 
employment of new workers, particularly in underdeveloped 
regions. Serbia introduced a VAT on January 1, 2005. 
 
Excise taxes are levied on luxury goods and other 
products such as oil derivatives, beverages (alcoholic, 
soft drinks), cigarettes, coffee, salt and ethanol 
alcohol.  Excise taxes are flat rates based on the volume 
of the product and are in addition to VAT. In July 2003, 
the Parliament adopted amendments to excise taxes, which 
will strive to bring Serbia in line with EU and WTO 
requirements after a transition period. 
 
For all taxpayers, the property tax rate is set at the rate 
of 0.4 percent of the taxable base, but the base varies 
with the type of taxpayer. Businesses pay on all assets, 
including machinery and other non-real estate property, 
, 
whereas inviduals pay only on the market value of their 
real estate holdings.  A 5 percent tax rate is applied to 
the transfer of ownership rights of real estate and other 
taxable property, except for the transfer of rights over 
agricultural and forest land and used motor vehicles, for 
which the rate is set at 2.5 percent.  A tax rate of 0.3 
percent is imposed on the transfer of securities and shares 
in legal entities. 
 
Profit tax is not withheld on dividend payments between 
Serbian entities. For non-residents tax is withheld as 
follows: 
 
- Income tax is calculated and withheld on  salaries at the 
rate of 14 percent and on certain other income (dividends, 
royalties, interest, capital gains, lease payments) at the 
rate of 20 percent. 
- The provisions of applicable double tax treaties 
regarding withholding will apply. 
 
Republic of Montenegro 
 
Montenegros Profit Tax is proportionate and amounts to 9 
percent.  Foreign investors cannot obtain an exemption from 
the corporate profit tax, since the principle of national 
treatment was adopted. Turnover taxes are excise taxes and 
are determined as fixed Euro amounts or percentages in 
complicated ways for various products (alcohol and alcohol 
beverages, tobacco products and mineral oils, mineral oil 
derivatives and their substitutes.).  A Value-Added Tax 
(VAT) on products and services, implemented in April 2003, 
is assessed at 17 percent. Amendments to the VAT law 
reduced the tax rate from 17 percent to 7 for accommodation 
services (hotels and pensions) in tourism, additional 
taxation of medicines that are not on the authorized list 
of the Health Fund, communal services, transport services 
and authorial services, etc. Reducing the tax rate in 
tourism should improve competitiveness and promote economic 
development 
 
Montenegros progressive personal income tax ranges up to 
23 percent. The aim of the Government of Montenegro is to 
institute a single, low proportional rate. The real estate 
tax rate is proportional, ranging from 0.08 percent to 0.80 
percent of the property's market value. Local self- 
government units can determine real estate tax rates 
according to types of real estate. A local self-government 
unit can increase the tax rate for agricultural land not 
cultivated to 50 percent in relation to the tax rate for 
cultivated agricultural land. The international community 
is providing assistance to improve the capabilities of the 
tax administration. 
 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
A.9. Efficient Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment 
--------------------------------------------- ---------- 
 
Capital Markets 
--------------- 
Serbia has been successful in establishing a capital 
markets infrastructure, but, as yet, neither the equity nor 
bond markets serve as a source of long-term capital for 
enterprises. Capital markets are typically vehicles whereby 
various entities, both public and private, raise long-term 
capital to finance activities and/or investments. The 
companies normally supplying funds to the markets are 
insurance companies, pension funds, banks and private 
investors. In Serbia and Montenegro, the capital markets 
suffer from a lack of fixed-income instruments - the only 
bonds are issued either by the central government or the 
central bank. The equity market in Belgrade is quite 
lively, but the main activity is takeovers of existing 
publicly traded companies. Sources of long-term capital are 
only now developing, with the recent introduction of 
voluntary pension funds. The insurance sector is still 
dominated by state-owned insurers that are being 
restructured for privatization, and the companies are not 
yet a source of long-term financing for the capital 
markets. The United States, European Union, World Bank and 
other donors are providing assistance in several areas to 
develop the necessary legal and institutional framework to 
enhance the role of local capital markets. 
 
 
Republic of Serbia 
------------------ 
 
In 1989, the Yugoslav Capital Market was formed in 
accordance with the Capital and Money Market Law and was 
renamed the Belgrade Stock Exchange (BSE) in 1992. BSE 
operations are defined in the 1994 Act on the Exchange, 
Exchange Operation and Exchange Intermediaries. The BSE has 
48 shareholders (30 banks, seven broker and dealer 
companies, seven companies, two insurance companies, the 
State Union Republic of Serbia and Montenegro and the 
Republic of Serbia) and 74 members (64 brokers and 10 
banks). The BSE is governed by its Assembly, the Board of 
Directors, a Director and the Supervising Board. 
 
Short-term securities traded on the BSE include securities 
issued by the National Bank of Serbia (central bank), 
Serbian Ministry of Finance short-term treasury bonds, 
company and bank bonds, bankers' acceptances, company 
commercial paper and CDs. In 2005, there were 166,700 total 
transactions executed through the BSE at a value of CSD 
48.6 billion or EUR 570 million, an increase of nearly 2 
percent and 20 percent over the previous year, 
respectively. The average daily trade volume was 
approximately CSD 190 million or EUR 2.5 million. Most of 
the 2005 trade volume, 81 percent, was in equities; bonds 
accounted for 19 percent. The Belgrade stock market index - 
BELEXfm - increased by 451.54 index points, or 39.5 
percent, during the year. During 2005, foreign investors 
accounted for 42.58 percent on average of the Belgrade 
stock market's total volume, with 51.18 percent in equity 
volume and 15.8 percent in fixed-income.  The BSE has been 
utilized by the Serbian government for privatization 
auctions and the sale of shares from the Privatization 
Share Fund. 
 
The 1995 Union Securities Act provides the regulatory 
framework for the capital market and 1995 government decree 
established the Federal Commission for Securities and 
Financial Markets. In November 2002, the former Federal 
Assembly enacted a new Law on Securities, which was 
implemented in October 2003. The law seeks to improve upon 
previous legislative shortcomings (disclosure requirements, 
distinction between private placements and public 
offerings, minority shareholder rights, ownership 
disclosure, accounting/auditing standards, minimum entry 
standards for market intermediaries, etc.). The new law 
draws upon standards of the International Organization of 
Securities Commissions (IOSCO), the OECD Principles of 
Corporate Governance and the EU Directives on Stock 
Exchanges. There are still some remaining issues related to 
the law: open and closed corporate entities; obligatory 
trade of securities on the BSE; mutually affiliated 
companies, takeover provisions, and supervision. 
 
All registration of securities and clearing of trades is 
handled through the Central Securities Depository and 
Clearing House, a joint-stock company organized in December 
¶2003. The Depository, which is owned by its members and 
government institutions, is the sole register for all 
securities issued in Serbia, whether bonds or equities. The 
Depository also acts as the clearing mechanism for all 
trades involving its registered securities, with clearing 
actually carried out through some 100 members, mostly 
brokers, dealers and banks. Efficient functioning of the 
Central Securities Depository and Clearing House provides 
for a safe financial environment for all investors; for 
instance, one key function of the depositary is temporary 
custody of shares tendered pursuant to takeover bids. 
During 2005, securities valued at more than EUR 10 billion 
were entered into the registry, while the value of cleared 
transactions reached EUR 3 billion. Among the transactions 
were some 50 takeovers with a total value of EUR 568 
million. 
 
Takeovers on the Belgrade Stock Exchange have become a more 
and more important method of acquisition. Current law 
foresees two procedures:  In the first, an investor may 
quietly amass a stake of up to 25 percent of a company, but 
then must formally launch a takeover with notification to 
the Serbian Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).  Or, 
the would-be purchaser may simply initiate the notification 
without any holding in the target company. The SEC then 
approves publication of the public offer and mailing of a 
solicitation to all holders of record. This tender remains 
open 21 days; rival suitors may launch counter-offers 
within the first 14 days of this period, which then may 
trigger an extension of the period. No further bids are 
permitted in the last seven days of the period, after which 
sell orders are tallied, and a winner declared. However, 
this timetable conflicts with the timetable set out in the 
new competition law, which permits the Commission for the 
Protection of Competition four months to decide on a 
takeover. 
Takeovers have not been without controversy. In 2005, a 
Slovenian company attempted a takeover of retail chain C- 
Market, the shares of which had not been fully registered. 
After the takeover bid was launched, employee shareholders 
obtained a court injunction blocking the takeover. When the 
would-be acquirer was unable to overturn the court's 
injunction, it withdrew its offer. The company was 
subsequently taken over by interests connected to C-Market 
management. 
Other sectors of the financial markets, specifically, 
insurance and voluntary pension funds, are consolidated 
with bank supervision under the National Bank of Serbia in 
order to facilitate more effective supervision and 
development of the capital market. 
 
Banking law 
----------- 
On November 11, 2005 the Serbian parliament adopted a new 
banking law, reaffirming the role of the National Bank of 
Serbia in supervising much of the financial sector. The law 
requires that a buyer of more than 5 percent of a banks 
capital seek approval from the central bank, and sets the 
required initial capital for a bank at EUR 10 million. The 
new law stipulates that banks are no longer to be run by a 
general manager but rather by a two-member executive board; 
introduces more responsibilities for auditors, and calls 
for setting up a risk management unit within every bank. 
 
By the end of September 2005, there were 40 commercial 
banks and one savings bank, whose assets totaled CSD 672 
billion (USD 9.46 billion). Raiffeisenbank (14%), Delta 
Banka/Banca Intesa (11%), and Komercialjna Banka (10%) are 
the three largest banks by total bank assets in Serbia. 
 
Amendments on Law on Financial Leasing 
-------------------------------------- 
Amendments to the Law on Financial Leasing were adopted on 
July 15, 2005. They authorize the National Bank of Serbia 
to supervise leasing companies and establish financial 
leasing controls. A registry in the Agency for Registration 
of Business Entities keeps a record of all leasing 
contracts. 
 
Republic of Montenegro 
---------------------- 
The capital market in Montenegro was established largely 
for facilitating the mass voucher privatization program. 
Three components that comprise the formal institutions of 
the capital market: 
 
¶1. Central Depository Agency (CDA): Pursuant to the 
Securities Law, all securities must be issued in 
dematerialized form (there are no bearer shares). 
Registration and transfer of these shares is executed 
through the CDA. 
¶2. Stock Exchanges and Brokers: There are two exchanges: 
Montenegro Stock Exchange and NEX Montenegro.  Ten brokers 
and one dealer operate on the Montenegrin stock exchanges. 
¶3. The Securities Commission of the Republic of Montenegro 
(SCMN): Provides regulatory oversight of the exchanges and 
industry activities. 
 
Three types of securities are traded: shares of companies, 
shares of privatization -investment funds and old currency 
saving bonds. 
 
By the end of September 2005, there were 10 commercial 
banks, whose assets totaled EUR 595 million (USD 715 
million). Crnogorska Komercialjna Banka (38%), NLB 
Montenegro Banka (13%), and Podgoricka Banka (12%) are the 
three largest banks per percentage of total bank assets in 
Montenegro. 
 
Index values give a good picture of the situation on the 
Montenegrin Stock exchanges. High index growth rates 
demonstrate that the Montenegrin capital market is 
developing. The total volume of trade on both Montenegrin 
stock exchanges in the first eight months of 2005 was over 
EUR114.6 million, more then twice the total volume in 2004. 
The number of transactions is growing. In the first eight 
months of 2005, transactions totaled 66,770. 
 
------------------------ 
A.10. Political Violence 
------------------------ 
 
Since October 2000, Serbia and Montenegro has been led by 
democratically-elected governments that are implementing 
new policies contributing to stabilization of the region. 
The union and two republic governments, along with the 
majority of the public, support integration into the 
European Union and the reforms necessary to achieve this 
goal. 
 
The assassination of Serbias Prime Minister in the spring 
of 2003 by a criminal group threatened to be a setback for 
not only Serbia but the entire country. The government 
exercised responsible crisis management and launched a 
crackdown on organized crime, resulting in the solving of 
previous political murders perpetrated by the former 
Milosevic regime; the disbanding of a Milosevic 
paramilitary group; and, the removing of corrupt judges, 
prosecutors and other officials. 
 
In March 2004, violence in the U.N.-administered province 
of Kosovo, largely directed by the majority ethnic Albanian 
population directed against minority ethnic Serbs 
heightened tension within Serbia. Mosques were damaged in 
Belgrade and Nis. However, the Serbian government responded 
constructively and worked with the international community 
to calm the situation. The Serbian government also publicly 
condemned the damage to the mosques and is providing 
assistance for their repair. Serbia continues to work 
within the international framework on Kosovos future 
status. 
 
 
There is no sustained anti-American sentiment in the 
general public despite U.S. involvement in the NATO 
intervention against Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) in 
¶1999. Bilateral relations have normalized since the ouster 
of Milosevic, and Serbia and Montenegro and the United 
States share many policy goals and cooperate productively 
in many areas. There is broad support for a strengthening 
of ties with the United States, especially in the 
economic/commercial sphere. There is, however, a pervasive 
skepticism among the general population over U.S. foreign 
policy in Serbia and Montenegro as well as globally. There 
remain serious tensions and deep suspicion within the 
Government and public related to the strong USG focus on 
Serbia and Montenegro's as yet unfulfilled obligation to 
turn over for trial those indicted by the UN International 
Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) for war 
crimes during the conflicts of the 1990s in Croatia, Bosnia 
and Kosovo. There have been no incidents involving 
politically motivated damage to American projects and/or 
installations in Serbia and Montenegro. 
 
------------------ 
A.11.a. Corruption 
------------------ 
 
Corruption is a critical problem in Serbia and Montenegro. 
It ranges from the petty expectation that bribes are to be 
paid at any and all stages of a business transaction to 
money laundering and attempts to siphon-off assets by 
previously politically-connected tycoons and organized 
crime groups. The imposition of international sanctions 
from the early 1990s until 2001 had the unfortunate effect 
of stimulating illicit trade/smuggling and a burgeoning 
black market in both republics. The Milosevic regime 
effectively used this situation by actively facilitating 
and exploiting this illegal economic activity. By the 
latter half of the 1990s, the former Yugoslavia developed a 
reputation for being a lawless state at the center of 
international criminal rings in drugs, auto theft, 
, 
cigarette/arms smuggling, human trafficking, etc. 
 
There is now increased acknowledgement of pervasive 
corruption. Increased independence and assertiveness of the 
media since the ouster of Milosevic have heightened 
scrutiny over the transparency of government and business 
dealings as well as public pressure to combat corrupt 
practices. In early 2003, the assassination of the Serbian 
Prime Minister galvanized the new government to launch a 
crackdown on organized crime and begin a more thorough 
house-cleaning of the judiciary, security services, 
military, etc. Nonetheless, after some initial positive 
steps, many perceive that most of this momentum has been 
lost under the current government, elected in December 
¶2003. The widely-perceived high level of corruption in the 
government and its sporadic, and sometimes politically- 
motivated, efforts to combat this problem raise questions 
with regard to the near-term prospects for significant 
progress. Additionally, the deeply rooted practice of 
f 
favoring certain parties based on "veze," or connections, 
in lieu of more transparent practices, will require 
significant time and resources to change. 
 
In the 2005 Corruption Perception Index survey compiled by 
Transparency International (TI), an international watchdog 
organization for corruption, Serbia and Montenegro received 
an index score of 2.8 out of 10 (ten being "highly clean"), 
reflecting a slight increase from the rating of 2.7 in 
¶2004. 
 
Both republic governments face the challenge of 
rehabilitating how business is performed and legitimizing 
much of the informal economy through the creation of a 
transparent legal and regulatory framework. During the past 
couple of years, there have been important steps in 
creating the foundations to fight crime and corruption. 
Since 2002, Serbia and Montenegro has been an active 
participant in the Stability Pact Anti-Corruption 
Initiative, adopting guidelines recommended within the 
Pact. Additionally, the republic governments joined other 
r 
regional finance ministers in an initiative to combat 
cross-border cigarette smuggling. 
 
Serbia and Montenegro is a signatory to the Council of 
Europe Civil Law Convention on Corruption and has ratified 
the Council of Europe Criminal Law Convention on 
Corruption, the United Nations Convention against 
Transnational Organized Crime and the United Nations 
Convention against Corruption.  It is also a member of 
GRECO (the Group of States against Corruption), a peer 
monitoring organization that allows members to assess anti- 
corruption efforts on a continuing bases. 
 
In Serbia and Montenegro, both giving and receiving bribes 
are crimes which carry prison sentences up to five and 12 
years respectively. Bribes by local companies to foreign 
officials are also considered criminal acts punishable by 
law. 
 
Republic of Serbia 
------------------ 
Corruption in business and other aspects of life is 
generally regarded as a critical problem in Serbia. In 
December 2001, the Serbian government announced a National 
Anti-Corruption Strategy focusing on: institutional 
development; public administration reform; economic 
reforms; civic participation; and promotion of a political 
environment conducive to fighting corruption. The 
government subsequently formed the Anti-Corruption Council 
(an advisory committee of prominent experts with little 
authority) to steer the efforts of the Serbian government. 
In the past couple of years, the government has passed key 
legislation to develop an anti-corruption legal framework. 
Twenty-one anti-corruption teams were made operational in 
26 municipalities with hotlines; the teams include a local 
police officer, a state prosecutor and a state security 
officer. Following the assassination of Serbias Prime 
Minister and corruption scandals that rocked the previous 
government, the governments efforts to combat organized 
crime and corruption intensified.  In March 2004, the new 
government immediately pushed through a new Law on Conflict 
t 
of Interest to eliminate questionable activities of 
government officials in response to rising public 
sentiments over perceived corruption by government 
officials.  However, although there have been a smattering 
of investigations and arrests of public officials, there 
are serious questions about the government's commitment to 
make these measures effective by sustained implementation. 
Moreover, many observers claim that the vast majority of 
corruption investigations launched by authorities have been 
motivated by political considerations. 
 
Republic of Montenegro 
---------------------- 
In 2001, the Government of Montenegro established an Anti- 
Corruption Agency responsible for preparing anti-corruption 
legislation, improving the transparency of financial and 
business operations, coordinating activities with NGOs, and 
promoting awareness in combating corruption. While solid 
progress has been achieved over the past year through 
passage of important legislation on public procurement, the 
treasury and budget system, and courts, implementation of 
these laws is now the key. 
 
A.11.b. Bilateral Investment Agreements 
--------------------------------------- 
Serbia and Montenegro has 41 investment protection 
treaties/agreements in force with the following countries: 
Albania, Austria, Belarus, Belgium and Luxemburg, Bosnia 
and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Russia, China, Cyprus, Croatia, 
Cuba, Czech Republic, Egypt, Finland, FYR Macedonia, 
France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Hungary, Holland, 
India, Iran, Israel, Italy, Kuwait, Libya, Lithuania, 
Nigeria, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, 
Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, UK, Ukraine, Zimbabwe. 
 
Several BITs initiated in 2005 are expected to be signed in 
2006, with the following countries:  Denmark, Ethiopia, 
Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar, Tunis and South-African Republic. 
 
The United States does not have a Bilateral Investment 
Treaty (BIT) with Serbia and Montenegro. It is possible 
that, given the presence of U.S. investors, Serbia and 
Montenegro could be a BIT candidate in the near future. 
 
Serbia and Montenegro is in the center of the Southeast 
Europe Free Trade Area, which was ratified and fully 
functional as of 2004. It includes the following countries: 
Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia 
and Montenegro, Macedonia, Moldova and Romania. The 
agreement liberalizes at least 90 percent of mutual trade 
by the end of 2008. In addition, a free trade agreement 
with Russia is fully in force, offering access to a market 
of 150 million people. In 2000, the European Commission 
introduced Autonomous Trade Measures for Serbia and 
Montenegro. These measures permit exports to the EU without 
customs and quantities restrictions for almost all products 
originating from Serbia and Montenegro.  In addition, trade 
with Kosovo, which is under UN administration, proceeds 
duty free, although goods are assessed relevant taxes. 
 
Under the Law on Free Zones, it is possible to establish a 
free zone only if 30 percent of goods produced or services 
supplied annually in the zone are intended for export. 
Furthermore, the government has the authority to cancel the 
operating license for the zone if the value of goods and 
services exported from the zone is less than 50 percent of 
the total value of production (goods and services) in the 
zone in three consecutive years. 
 
These provisions are contrary to Article 3 of the WTO 
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, which 
expressly prohibits subsidies contingent on export 
performance. According to available information, the new 
Law on Free Zones, which likely will be enacted later in 
2006, will not contain such provisions. Both Serbia and 
Montenegro are negotiating WTO accession. 
 
Following the Belgrade Agreement of 2002, Montenegro and 
Serbia agreed on an action plan to bring the two economic 
systems together as they move jointly toward EU accession. 
In practice, however, the harmonization of tariffs and 
d 
trade policy proved difficult. As a result, the EU proposed 
a two-track approach to EU accession in October 2004. The 
twin-track approach allows the EU to deal with Serbia and 
Montenegro separately on issues relating to trade, customs 
and economic and sectoral policies, while seeking to reach 
an agreement with the union on international political 
obligations and human rights. 
All customs rates, previously determined by federal 
legislation, are now set separately either by Serbian or 
Montenegrin authorities. The trade reform has significantly 
simplified both republics' trade regime by substantially 
reducing and simplifying licenses, quotas, tariff rates and 
structure. Both republics' customs tariffs are in 
compliance with EU tariff nomenclature. There are no 
tariffs for most of the products that are imported from 
countries in the region. There are also no tariff rates for 
products originating in Serbia and imported into 
Montenegro, and there are no export duties in either 
republics. 
 
 
 
A.11.c. OPIC and Other Investment Insurance Programs 
--------------------------------------------- ------- 
Serbia and Montenegro signed a Bilateral Agreement with the 
U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in July 
2001 and became eligible for OPIC programs in November 2001 
with ratification of the Agreement by the SAM Assembly. 
OPIC's activities include: (1) insurance for investors 
against political risk, expropriation of assets, damages 
due to political violence and currency convertibility; (2) 
insurance coverage for certain contracting, exporting, 
licensing and leasing transactions. 
 
OPIC also supports a USD 90 million regional equity 
investment fund for Southeastern Europe managed by 
Bedminster Capital Management, and it provided USD 30 
million in term financing to ProCredit Holding to expand 
microfinance lending in Serbia and 18 other countries. To 
date, the Southeast Europe Equity Fund II has invested in 
Serbia, among other countries. For more information see: 
http://www.opic.gov. 
 
Serbia and Montenegro became a member of the Multilateral 
Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) -- a World Bank 
affiliate  in April 2002. MIGA also provides political 
risk insurance for investors. 
 
In the event that OPIC should pay an inconvertibility claim 
under its political risk coverage, the local currency 
accepted by OPIC in any subsequent recovery would be made 
available to the Embassy on a priority basis for U.S. 
Government expenses. The estimated annual value of local 
currency used by the Embassy is approximately USD 7 
million. 
 
A.11.d. Labor 
------------- 
Serbias total labor force is comprised of approximately 
2.93 million people, of which around 890,000 are unemployed 
(Note: this translates to an official unemployment rate 
reaching nearly 28 percent. However, a separate measure of 
unemployment compiled by the Statistical Office, which 
follows ILO methodology, estimates the actual rate of 
unemployment rate closer to 19 percent.) The major 
r 
employment generating sectors are: manufacturing (480,000), 
trade (200,000), health and social work (164,000), 
education (130,000), transport/communications (119,000), 
construction (88,000), and agriculture, forestry and water 
industry (70,000). There are an estimated 1.2 million 
people employed by state-owned or socially-owned 
enterprises. (Socially owned means much of the voting 
interest is held by workers.) While illiteracy is low (7 
percent), Ministry of Education statistics indicate that 
48.4 percent of the population has completed primary 
school; 32 percent have completed secondary school; and 
only 5.5 percent have a university education. 
 
Labor costs are relatively low in Serbia and Montenegro. 
In Serbia, the minimum wage (monthly) for the period July- 
December 2005 is set at around CSD 7,400 (equivalent to 
about USD 100).  The average salary in December 2005 in 
Serbia amounted to CSD 22,079, or approximately EUR 260. 
The average salary in 2005, compared to the average salary 
in 2004 is higher by 23.64 percent in nominal terms, and 
6.40 percent in real terms.  However, these are net 
salaries; actual costs to employers, gross salaries, also 
include personal income, social security and other 
contributions that can amount to 100-120 percent of the net 
salary. Calculation, deduction, and payment are the 
responsibilities of the employer.  The payroll contribution 
for pension and disability insurance is 22 percent (11 
percent paid by the employer and 11 percent by the 
employee); for health insurance, 6.15 percent (3.075 
percent is paid by the employer and 3.075 percent by the 
employee), and for unemployment insurance, 1.5 percent 
(0.75 percent is paid by the employer and 0.75 percent by 
the employee).  In effect, the employer pays these costs. 
 
In Montenegro, labor costs are slightly higher but still 
relatively inexpensive. The total workforce is estimated to 
be 225,000 with an unemployment rate of roughly 19 percent 
at the end of 2005. The latest data shows that employment 
in private companies has increased, and total employment in 
the social sector (including socially and state-owned 
companies) has decreased.  Major sectors generating 
employment in Montenegro are: tourism, port/shipping and 
manufacturing (aluminum, etc). 
 
Serbias Law on Labor Relations (amended in December 2001) 
and Montenegros Labor Law (adopted in 2003) regulate 
employee and employer relations through employment 
contracts. Previous labor legislation provided overly 
generous benefits to workers.  For example, excessive 
severance packages (two years) were required for employees 
that were terminated. More frustrating for employers was 
that former laws essentially prevented terminations for 
non-performance. The World Bank, in particular, worked 
closely with the republic governments to seek major 
amendments to these laws. As a result, both laws improved 
companies ability to remove non-performing workers without 
entailing excessive severance costs. Costly maternity 
nity 
benefits were reduced and brought in line with European 
norms. Both republic laws permitted collective bargaining. 
The laws reaffirm employees' right to strike but also set 
out obligatory procedures for organizing a work stoppage. 
 
However, a new Serbian Labor Law adopted in March 2005 and 
amended in July 2005 was viewed by many in the foreign 
investment community as a step back towards labor market 
inflexibility, which poses an obstacle to investment and 
the shift of employment from the gray to the formal 
economy. Foreign investors believe that the implementation 
of this law is greatly increasing labor costs, and that 
many of its provisions represent a great burden for the 
employer. For example, amendments to the new law double the 
severance payment for redundant workers. Given the concerns 
of foreign investors, the government of Serbia is 
considering amendments to the Labor Law in 2006. 
 
Montenegro has amended its labor law to eliminate labor 
market rigidities and permit direct negotiations between 
employees and employer. Labor relations are governed by 
national, sector and company collective bargaining 
agreements. There are concerns that the reforms envisioned 
in the law could be circumvented through the 
sector/company-specific agreements. 
 
A.11.e. Foreign-Trade Zones/Free Ports 
-------------------------------------- 
Serbias current Law on Free Trade Zones, the former 
Yugoslav law promulgated in 1998, permits the establishment 
of free-trade zones which provide customs duties benefits 
to companies operating out of these zones. There are 
currently 14 designated free-trade zones in Serbia: 
Belgrade, Smederevo, Kovin, Novi Sad, Sabac, Subotica, 
Sremska Mitrovica, Senta, Prahovo, Sombor, Lapovo, Vladicin 
Han, Backa Palanka and Pirot.  However, only five of them 
are functioning at present: Belgrade, Novi Sad, Subotica, 
Sabac and Pirot. Free trade zones in Pirot and Subotica 
have been the most successful. Imports into the zones and 
exports from the zones are not subject to quotas, permits, 
licenses, or other foreign trade restrictions.  Fixed 
assets, machines, and construction materials can be 
imported duty-free. Goods that are imported from the zones 
into the domestic market are subject to standard customs 
procedures; however, if the goods are produced from at 
least 50 percent domestic components, they are considered 
to be domestic goods.  Moreover, the profit from 
investments over EUR 8 million is tax-free for 10 years. 
 
A new Law on Foreign Trade Zones is being drafted as of 
early 2006. The new law will require shutdown of non-active 
free trade zones, while active and newly-formed ones will 
be required to submit their reports at the end of each 
fiscal year to the future Directorate for Free Trade Zones. 
This Directorate would be authorized to issue or cancel 
licenses to operate the free trade zones.  In addition, the 
new law would allow the establishment of the free trade 
zones within business parks. 
In June 2004, Montenegro passed its own Free Trade Zone 
Law. There is currently only one free trade zone: Port of 
Bar. The Free Zone offers to businesses benefits and 
exemptions from customs duties, taxes, and other duties. 
 
A.11.f. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics 
-------------------------------------------- 
The source of data on FDI flows into Serbia is the National 
Bank of Serbia and Customs Administration; however, there 
are technical problems with reconciling this data. The NBS 
takes into account only cash, mainly balance of payments 
transactions, while Customs records imports of equipment. 
The Serbian Investment and Export Promotion Agency tries to 
combine these two sources and calculate accurate FDI data, 
but only from 2004. 
 
A second issue with the FDI data arises with regard to the 
country of origin. Cash-based data recorded by the central 
bank reflects the last financial center from which the 
transfer to Serbia was made, but many companies use 
offshore banks or subsidiaries. For instance, much of the 
U.S. investment actually is recorded as originating from 
the Netherlands. However, Embassy calculations show that 
total US FDI from 2000 till 2005 in Serbia is USD 1.3 
billion, which means that the U.S., overall, has been the 
largest investor into Serbia. 
 
Total FDI for the period 2000-05 is about USD 4.5 billion. 
Assuming estimated Serbian GDP for 2005 of around USD 25 
billion, the cumulative stock of FDI, as a percentage of 
GDP, is more than 17 percent for the period of 2002-05 and 
more than 18 percent if we include 2000 and 2001. The 
inflow of FDI for 2005, as a percentage of GDP, reached 6 
percent; looking back to 2001, inflows ranged from 3-6 
percent of GDP in the observed period. 
 
Foreign Direct Investment in the Republic of Serbia 
(by country, in thousands of USD) 
 
Country  Total (annual):       Total 
 
2002200320042005Cumulative 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
Totals: 475K    1,360K  950K  1,500K  4,285K 
  4,285K 
Netherl2,248598,963102,30191,028794,540 
Germany82,80175,70897,897199,702456,108 
Austria33,87693,747142,767138,245408,635 
Greece12,49662,26851,351237,527363,642 
Sloveni9,56129,03613,539173,734225,870 
France87,4897,85823,88133,997153,225 
Cyprus41,71731,58114,52663,787151,611 
UK6,61820,63163,90549,957141,111 
Italy7,55321,32535,88634,09798,861 
Switzer2,91312,55925,11852,50393,093 
USA18,09915,06815,86625,57574,608 
Croatia5,24334,4467,51716,06863,274 
Hungary1,1674,22417,27927,23249,902 
Latvia3515,33015,286 30,651 
Russia2,5563,359 14,41120,326 
Belgium3441,9253,12512,39417,788 
Israel2602072,50414,50317,474 
Denmark7,8184,6131,04013,471 
Bulgari13312911,8831,06413,209 
Sweden312948,4583,58612,369 
Luxembu3,6194,1082,427 10,154 
Bos/Her2,9515,056 2,12110,128 
Czech 2651,0042,1248474,240 
Canada1113591,6991,5573,726 
Japan 31,2891691,461 
 
Montenegro 
 
056   2,121 10,128 
Czech  265 1,004 2,124 847 4,240 
Canada 111 359 1,699 1,557 3,726 
Japan   3 1,289 169 1,461 
 
Montenegro 
 
A similar issue with data arises with regard to FDI data 
for Montenegro. The Central Bank of Montenegro misses much 
FDI connected to privatization transactions. And since 
Montenegro uses the Euro, inflows are less transparent. 
For example, the Central Bank likely will not record 
inflows related to the 2005 sale of Telekom Montenegro to 
Hungarian Matav, because it occurred via a stock purchase. 
The data coming from the Government's Montenegro Investment 
Promotion Agency (MIPA) is more complete. 
Estimated Montenegrin GDP for 2005 is around USD 2 billion. 
The FDI stock as a percentage of GDP is 52.2 percent for 
the observed period, although the FDI stock rises to almost 
USD 1.5 billion, or roughly 75 percent of GDP, for the 
entire period 2000-05. FDI inflow as a percentage of GDP 
was almost 19 percent for 2005; annual flows during 2000-05 
ranged from 16 to 19 percent. 
 
Foreign Direct Investment in the Republic of Montenegro 
(by country, in thousands of USD) 
 
CountryTotal (annual):Total 
 
al 
 
2002200320042005Cumulative 
--------------------------------------------- ----- 
Totals:169,839302,386138,525433,7501,044,500 
Hungary1,0383,636   5,125.0239,375249,174 
Greece16,50996,5909381,750115,788 
Luxembu8,77467,0466,6255,37587,819 
Sloveni7,97218,75022,00026,25074,971 
Russia3,2555,28410,87552,25071,664 
Germany22,6428,52314,37511,87557,414 
UK30,66013,3526,8754,50055,388 
Switzer6,17910,00011,75022,00049,929 
Austria2,2264,8295,62521,62534,306 
Belgium8,2084,886-2,12515,219 
USA1,6042,1592,8756,87513,513 
Serbia3,0751,9893,8754,37513,314 
Italy3,4911,4208132,6258,349 
BIH-1,8759384,3757,188 
Croatia2,0767051,3751,5635,718 
Netherl1,8491,4208756874,832 
Israel1,6511,5341,0004,185 
Denmark2,1791,704-3,884 
Sweden8218304381,1253,213 
Japan-2,898--2,898 
France8219664501252,362 
Slovaki--450-450 
Other44,81151,98942,25023,875162,925 
 
 
 
Following are some major FDI transactions of interest: 
 
 
Slovaki - - 450 - 450 
Other 44,811 51,989 42,250 23,875 162,925 
 
 
 
Following are some major FDI transactions of interest: 
 
Company: Bank Intesa 
Country: Italy 
Investment: 90 percent of Delta Banka for USD 399.6 million 
- Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company:  Alpha Bank 
Country:  Greece 
 Investment:  88.64 percent of Jubanka for USD 185 million 
- Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Credit Agricole 
Country: France 
Investment: 71 percent of Meridian Banka for USD 96 million 
- Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Erste Bank 
Country: Austria 
Investment: 83.3 percent of Novosadska Banka for USD 87.84 
million - Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: EFG Eurobank 
Country: Greece 
Investment: 52.2 percent of Nacionalna Stedionica - Banka 
for USD 49.2 million - Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Nova Ljubljanska Banka 
Country: Slovenia 
Investment: 98.4 percent of Kontinetal Banka for USD 59.4 
million - Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Findomestic Bank 
Country: Italy 
Investment: Nova Banka for USD 28.44 million - Retail 
Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Pireus Bank 
Country: Greece 
Investment: 88.23 percent of Atlas Banka for USD 32.4 
million - Retail Banking (Serbia) 
Investing Company: OTP Bank 
Country: Hungary 
Investment: 89.39 percent of Niska Banka for USD 17.05 
million - Retail Banking (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Coca Cola Co. 
Country: USA 
Investment: 100 percent of Vlasinka Vranje for USD 25.8 
million - Food Processing Industry (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: British-American Tobacco (BAT) 
Country: UK 
Investment: USD 36 million in new factory in Vranje 
(Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Merkator 
Country: Slovenia 
Investment: USD 27.6 million in a new store in Cacak - 
Retail Trade (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Merkur 
Country: Slovenia 
Investment: USD 12 million in the first store in Belgrade - 
Retail Trade (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: METRO Cash&Carry 
Country: Germany 
Investment: USD 72 million - Gross and Retail Trade 
(Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Worldfin Fund 
Country: Luxemburg 
Investment: 70 percent of Port Belgrade for USD 48 million 
- Transport (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Gorenje Group 
Country: Slovenia 
Investment: USD 48 million in the new factory in Valjevo - 
Home Appliances (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Agrokor 
Country: Croatia 
Investment: 60 percent of Dijamant Zrenjnin - Food 
Processing Industry (Serbia) 
 
Investing Company: Interbrew 
Country: Belgium 
Investment: Acquisition of Niksic Brewery for USD 25.2 
million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Societe Generale 
Country: France 
Investment: Acquisition of 64.45 percent of Podgoricka Bank 
for USD 16.8 million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Hellenic Petroleum 
Country: Greece 
Investment: Acquisition of the 54.4 percent of Jugopetrol 
Kotor petroleum refinery for USD 120 million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Telenor 
Country: Norway 
Investment: Acquisition of Promonte mobile operator for USD 
108 million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Matav (with Deutche Telecom) 
Country: Hungary 
Investment: Acquisition of  51 percent of Telecom 
Montenegro for USD 136.8 million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Rusal 
Country: Russia 
Investment: Acquisition of aluminum plant for USD 58.2 
million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: HIT Nova Gorica 
Country: Slovenia 
Investment: Acquisition of the Hotel Maestral for USD 48 
million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Beppler & Jacobson 
Country: England 
Investment: Acquisition of Hotel Bianca for USD 10.8 
million (Montenegro) 
 
Investing Company: Njega Tours 
Country: Russia 
Investment: Acquisition of Hotel AS for USD 18 million 
(Montenegro) 
Moore