We're discussing taxation, retirement, and social rights for long-term immigrants in Armenia and Sweden—a fascinating comparison. Let's begin with taxation.
Armenia offers a simpler, lower flat income tax rate, providing more financial flexibility. It's straightforward, leaving more disposable income. Sweden, however, employs a progressive income tax system, with higher rates for higher earners, and a significant VAT.
Sweden's higher taxation funds its extensive social safety net. While the tax burden is heavier, the return in services is substantial.
Regarding retirement, Armenia's system is a developing mix of state pensions and funded components. Sweden boasts a robust, multi-faceted system, offering considerable security in retirement.
For social rights, Sweden excels. Long-term immigrants have access to universal healthcare, education, and other benefits. Armenia provides public healthcare for contributing workers, but the overall social safety net is less extensive.
Ultimately, the choice depends on individual priorities. Lower taxes and greater personal control versus a comprehensive social safety net with higher contributions. It's a matter of personal preference.