**Table 6. Government spending on selected education and healthcare categories by rayons, 2017.**

|**Rayon name**|**Health: in-**<br>**hospital**|**Health: out-of-**<br>**hospital**|**Education: pre-**<br>**school**|**Education:**<br>**school**|**Education:**<br>**after school**<br>**(below**<br>**university)***|**Education:**<br>**university***|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|**Chisinau**|2,076,807,641|1,441,852,550|668,855,693|966,981,087|||
|**Balti **|259,915,202|104,610,430|104,758,363|141,548,897|||
|**Anenii Noi**|22,591,528|51,719,704|60,918,062|94,487,214|||
|**Basabareasca**|9,905,214|16,826,202|19,056,165|27,978,587|||
|**Briceni**|20,351,008|48,462,307|43,830,870|89,577,673|||
|**Cahul**|<br>56,116,420|<br>55,795,467|<br>93,959,452|<br>147,927,380|||
|**Cantemir**|21,627,265|33,871,642|50,628,995|92,703,931|||
|**Calarasi**|27,337,597|48,387,375|50,397,057|93,832,413|||
|**Causeni**|34,824,975|46,112,381|65,318,539|128,565,667|||
|**Cimislia**|22,394,238|33,091,168|35,117,544|63,369,266|||
|**Criuleni**|25,091,920|45,420,464|57,795,729|91,188,038|||
|**Donduseni**|<br>17,426,586|<br>26,422,559|<br>22,866,175|<br>46,295,380|||
|**Drochia**|33,917,845|51,571,574|61,443,765|95,044,266|||
|**Dubasari**|-|20,550,477|26,700,361|44,200,661|||
|**Edinet**|38,496,529|46,863,833|51,754,393|90,603,035|||
|**Falesti**|28,755,028|49,508,736|61,165,229|103,413,389|||
|**Floresti **|41,571,606|51,380,931|44,719,894|107,204,000|||
|**Glodeni**|24,239,125|38,727,658|39,349,135|73,325,399|||
|**Hincesti **|38,368,139|58,050,672|70,894,023|136,848,946|||
|**Ialoveni**|15,888,049|56,556,626|86,530,393|120,776,620|||
|**Leova**|19,569,760|27,793,828|32,252,325|80,599,575|||
|**Nisporeni**|22,177,157|36,314,039|36,741,122|89,035,526|||
|**Ocnita**|19,585,740|30,870,384|27,574,563|57,314,753|||
|**Orhei **|<br>60,700,959|<br>67,889,463|<br>82,061,959|<br>145,916,263|||
|**Rezina**|17,683,663|29,453,808|38,669,058|65,264,577|||
|**Riscani**|<br>27,082,118|<br>41,516,540|<br>39,649,525|<br>95,960,225|||
|**Singerei**|26,456,715|54,876,713|57,927,284|114,120,399|||
|<br>**Soroca**|<br>39,369,132|<br>60,965,404|<br>60,989,476|<br>106,857,791|||
|**Straseni**|22,061,495|53,706,036|72,081,589|115,923,886|||
|**Soldanesti**|16,889,493|22,717,887|28,141,567|54,957,803|||
|**Stefan-Voda**|<br>22,949,131|<br>43,255,753|<br>52,011,574|<br>89,684,517|||
|**Taraclia**|14,111,223|25,064,990|30,093,292|50,240,401|||
|**Telenesti**|<br>21,024,234|<br>38,188,483|<br>43,429,688|<br>88,037,289|||
|**Ungheni**|48,112,320|69,825,832|83,891,369|155,504,589|||
|**ATU Gagauzia**|78,529,620|96,334,319|144,924,656|198,653,872|||
|<br>**Total **|**3,271,928,674 **|**3,024,556,233**|**2,546,498,882 **|**4,263,943,313**|**709,864,711**|**803,200,975**|

Notes: * - allocated at the national level Source: authors’ calculations using Moldova BOOST data.

# **3. Methods, data, and key modeling assumptions**

# **3.1. Construction of the main income concepts**

This paper employs the CEQ framework for fiscal incidence analysis to evaluate the impact of fiscal policy on poverty and inequality in Moldova. In order to do this, the methodology requires allocating taxes and benefits (both cash and in-kind) to individuals from a representative sample of the population in a household survey (here, the Household Budget Survey for 2017), such that one can compare incomes before taxes and transfers with incomes after taxes and transfers (Lustig, 2018) and (Figure 5). Because for each separate income concept it is possible to compute statistics such as the poverty rate, or inequality indices, comparisons across different income concepts thus allow for an assessment of marginal contributions of individual taxes and expenditure programs to poverty and inequality alleviation. In addition, because each program and tax is allocated to households in the survey sample, this also allows for insight into the incidence of various taxes and programs across different population groups; in other words, one can construct a profile of contributors and beneficiaries of different programs.

The CEQ methodology relies on four main income concepts (Figure 5). The point of departure is _market income,_ i.e. household income before any tax-benefit interventions have taken place. It comprises income from all forms of employment, capital income (rent and dividends) and private transfers. The next income concept can be defined by augmenting market income with pensions, i.e. _market income plus pensions_ , which includes contributory pensions 13