Executive Summary

Serbia’s investment climate had been improving modestly in recent years, driven by macroeconomic reforms, greater financial stability, improved fiscal discipline, and a European Union (EU) accession process that provides impetus for legal changes that improve the business environment. The government successfully completed a three-year Stand-by Arrangement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), with the government exceeding all of its fiscal targets in 2018. The government signed a new Policy Coordination Instrument with the IMF in mid-2018. However, as additional reforms slowed, Serbia fell five places in 2019 on the World Bank’s Doing Business list, and is now ranked 48th globally in terms of the ease of doing business, still up from 59th two years earlier.

Attracting foreign investment remains an important priority for the Serbian government. U.S. investors in Serbia are generally positive, highlighting the country’s strategic location, well-educated and affordable labor force, excellent English language skills, investment incentives, and free trade arrangements with key markets, particularly the EU. Generally, U.S. investors enjoy a level playing field with their Serbian and foreign competitors. The U.S. Embassy in Belgrade often assists investors when issues arise, and Serbian leaders are responsive to our concerns.

Despite notable progress in Serbia, challenges remain, e.g. with regard to bureaucratic delays and corruption. Significant risks to the investment climate include unresolved loss-making state-owned enterprises (SOEs), a large informal economy, corruption, and an inefficient judiciary. Political influence on the decisions of nominally independent regulatory agencies is also a concern.

The Serbian government has identified economic growth and job creation as its top economic concerns, and has committed itself to resolving a number of long-standing issues related to the country’s slow transition to market-driven capitalism. On the legislative front, the government has passed significant reforms to labor law, construction permitting, inspections, public procurement, and privatization that have helped improve the business environment. Both companies and officials have noted that the adoption of reforms has sometimes outpaced thorough implementation of these reforms. Digitizing certain functions (e.g. construction permitting, tax administration, and e-signatures) has not yet brought a dramatic improvement in processing times, which may be a longer and more difficult process. The government is slowly making progress on resolving the fate of troubled state-owned enterprises. Where possible, this has been achieved through bankruptcy or privatization actions. For example, bankruptcy protections were removed for 17 state-owned companies in May 2016, and the situation of most of these companies has been resolved. The government is also slowly decreasing Serbia’s bloated public sector workforce, mainly through attrition and hiring freezes, which continued through 2018.

If the government delivers on promised reforms during the course of its EU accession process, business opportunities could continue to grow in the coming years. Sectors that could benefit include agriculture and agro-processing, solid waste management, sewage, environmental protection, information and communications technology (ICT), renewable energy, health care, mining, and manufacturing.

Women in Serbia generally enjoy equal treatment in business, and the government offers various programs to support women’s businesses. One recent program provided approximately USD 1 million in 2018 to support women’s innovative entrepreneurship, in the form of small grants.

Investors should monitor the government’s implementation of reforms as well as the government’s changing investment incentive programs.

Table 1: Key Metrics and Rankings

Measure Year Index/Rank Website Address
TI Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 87 of 180 http://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overview 
World Bank’s Doing Business Report 2019 48 of 190 http://www.doingbusiness.org/en/rankings
Global Innovation Index 2018 55 of 126 https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicator 
U.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, stock positions) 2017 $164 http://www.bea.gov/international/factsheet/ 
World Bank GNI per capita 2017 $5,180 http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD 

1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment

Policies towards Foreign Direct Investment

Serbia is open to FDI, and attracting FDI is a priority for the government. Even during its socialist past, Serbia prioritized international commerce and attracted a sizeable international business community. This trend continues, and the Law on Investments extends national treatment to and eliminates discriminatory practices against foreign investors. The law also allows the repatriation of profits and dividends, provides guarantees against expropriation, allows customs duty waivers for equipment imported as capital in kind, and enables foreign investors to qualify for government incentives.

The Government’s investment promotion authority is the Development Agency of Serbia (Razvojna agencija Srbije – RAS: http://ras.gov.rs/). RAS offers a wide range of services, including support of direct investments, export promotion, and coordinating the implementation of investment projects. RAS serves as a one-stop-shop for both domestic and international companies. The government maintains a dialogue with businesses through associations such as the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, American Chamber of Commerce in Serbia, Foreign Investors’ Council (FIC), and Serbian Association of Managers (SAM).

Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment

Foreign and domestic private entities have the right to establish and own businesses, and to engage in all forms of remunerative activity.

For some business activities, licenses are required, e.g. financial institutions must be licensed by the National Bank of Serbia prior to registration. Licensing limitations apply to both domestic and foreign companies active in finance, energy, mining, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, tobacco, arms and military equipment, road transportation, customs processing, land development, electronic communications, auditing, waste management, and production and trade of hazardous chemicals.

Serbian citizens and foreign investors enjoy full private property ownership rights. Private entities can freely establish, acquire, and dispose of interests in business enterprises. By law, private companies compete equally with public enterprises in the market and for access to credit, supplies, licenses, and other aspects of doing business. Serbia does not maintain investment screening or approval mechanisms for inbound foreign investment. U.S. investors are not disadvantaged or singled out by any rules or regulations.

Agribusiness: Foreign citizens and foreign companies are prohibited from owning agricultural land in Serbia. EU citizens are exempt from this ban, as of August 28, 2017, although they may only buy up to two hectares of agricultural land under certain conditions. They must permanently reside in the municipality where the land is located for at least 10 years, practice farming on the land in question for at least three years, and own adequate agriculture machinery and equipment. Foreign ownership restrictions on farmland do not apply to companies registered in Serbia, even if the company is foreign-owned. Unofficial estimates suggest that Serbian subsidiaries of foreign companies own some 20,000 hectares of farmland in the country.

Defense: The Law on Investments adopted in 2015 ended discriminatory practices that prevented foreign companies from establishing companies in the production and trade of arms (for example, the defense industry) or in specific areas of the country. Further liberalization of investment in the defense industry continued via a new Law on the Production and Trade of Arms and Ammunition, adopted in May 2018. The law enables total foreign ownership of up to 49 percent in seven state-owned companies, collectively referred to as the “Defense Industry of Serbia,” as long as no single foreign shareholder exceeds 15 percent ownership. The law also cancels limitations on foreign ownership for arms and ammunition manufacturers.

Other Investment Policy Reviews

Serbia has not conducted an investment policy review through the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), World Trade Organization (WTO), or United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

Business Facilitation

According to the World Bank’s 2019 Doing Business report, it takes five procedures and 5.5 days to establish a foreign-owned limited liability company in Serbia. This is faster than the average for Europe and Central Asia. In addition to the procedures required of a domestic company, a foreign parent company establishing a subsidiary in Serbia must translate its corporate documents into Serbian.

Under the Business Registration Law, the Serbian Business Registers Agency (SBRA) oversees company registration. SBRA’s website is available in English at www.apr.gov.rs/home.1435.html. All entities applying for incorporation with SBRA can use a single application form and are not required to have signatures on applications notarized.

Companies in Serbia can open and maintain bank accounts in foreign currency, although they must also have an account in Serbian dinars (RSD). The minimum capital requirement is symbolic at RSD 100 (less than USD 1) for limited liability companies, rising to RSD 3 million (approximately USD 31,000) for a joint stock company. A single-window registration process enables companies that register with SBRA to obtain a tax registration number (poreski identifikacioni broj – PIB) and health insurance number concurrently with registration. In addition, companies must register employees with the Pension Fund at the Fund’s premises. Since December 2017, the Labor Law requires employers to register new employees before they start their first day at work; previously, the deadline was registration within 15 days of employment. These amendments represent an attempt by the government to decrease the grey labor market by allowing labor inspectors to penalize employers if they find unregistered workers.

Some U.S. companies that have ownership by investment funds have reported challenges opening a local bank account due to concerns over compliance requirements on reporting ultimate beneficial ownership. This comes as Serbia has increased its efforts to comply with international best practices to combat money laundering, and is working to implement new procedures.

Pursuant to the Law on Accounting, companies in Serbia are classified as micro, small, medium, and large, depending on the number of employees, operating revenues, and value of assets.

RAS supports direct investment and promotes exports. It also implements projects aimed at improving competitiveness, supporting economic development, and supporting small-and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and entrepreneurs. More information is available at http://ras.gov.rs.

Serbia’s business facilitation mechanisms provide for equitable treatment of both men and women when a registering company, according to the World Bank’s 2019 Doing Business report. The government has declared 2017-2027 a Decade of Entrepreneurship, with special programs to support entrepreneurship by women.

Outward Investment

The Serbian government neither promotes nor restricts outward direct investment. Restrictions on short-term capital transactions—i.e. portfolio investments—were lifted in April 2018 through amendments to the Law on Foreign Exchange Operations. Prior to this, residents of Serbia were not allowed to purchase foreign short-term securities, and foreigners were not allowed to purchase short-term securities in Serbia. Now, Serbian residents are allowed to purchase foreign short-term securities issued in the European Union, or by international financial organizations. Also, foreigners are now allowed to purchase Serbian short-term securities. There are no restrictions on payments related to long-term securities.

Capital markets are not fully liberalized for individuals. Citizens of Serbia are not allowed to have currency accounts abroad, or to keep accounts abroad, except in exceptional situations listed in the Law on Foreign Exchange Operations (such situations may include work or study abroad).

2. Bilateral Investment Agreements and Taxation Treaties

Serbia does not have a bilateral investment agreement with the United States. Serbia has bilateral investment treaties in force with Albania, Armenia, Algeria, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Cuba, the Czech Republic, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guinea, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Libya, Lithuania, Macedonia, Malta, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, San Marino, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and Zimbabwe. (See http://mtt.gov.rs/download/Pregled percent20Zemalja.pdf.)

Serbia does not have a bilateral taxation treaty with the United States.

Serbia has signed and implemented bilateral taxation treaties with Albania, Armenia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, China, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia (as of January 1, 2019), Iran, Ireland, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Latvia, Lithuania, Libya, Luxembourg, Macedonia, Malta, Moldova, Montenegro, the Netherlands, Norway, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, the Republic of Korea, Romania, Russia, San Marino (as of January 1, 2019) Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Sweden, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom, and Vietnam. (See the Serbian Finance Ministry website at http://www.mfin.gov.rs/pages/issue.php?id=7063.)

Serbia has signed and ratified bilateral taxation treaties with Ghana, Guinea, Morocco, Palestine, the Philippines and Zimbabwe; however, the foreign legislatures have not yet ratified these agreements.

Serbia is a member of the Central European Free Trade Agreement (with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia, Moldova, Montenegro, and Kosovo). It enjoys free trade status for almost all products exported to the European Customs Area (the EU plus the European Free Trade Association states of Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland). Serbia has bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) with Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, and Turkey.

Serbia is in negotiations for a multilateral free trade agreement with the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU – Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Russia), which would supersede its current bilateral FTAs with most EAEU member countries.

Serbia enjoys duty-free treatment of certain exports to the United States under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), valid until December 31, 2020, and has Most Favored Nation status on exports of other goods.

3. Legal Regime

Transparency of the Regulatory System

Serbia’s record on transparency of the regulatory system is mixed. Serbia is undertaking an extensive legislative amendment process aimed at domestic reforms and harmonizing its laws with those of the European Union’s acquis communautaire. As part of that process, Serbia has adopted new legislation and amended numerous existing laws and regulations. These changes have created a more favorable legal environment; however, Serbia still needs to address a number of problems with respect to transparency in the development, adoption, and implementation of regulations. The harmonization of Serbian law with the acquis has required intensive reforms and a high volume of adopted legislation, representing a challenge for the government, Parliament, the business sector, and society as whole.

When a new law is proposed, the competent Ministry within the government establishes a working group, usually comprised of representatives of state authorities and organizations as well as experts in specific fields. These are mostly ad hoc bodies that review specific issues, provide proposals, opinions, and professional explanations.

At this stage in the legislative process, public discussion or debate is generally optional; however, if the proposed law would substantially change the legal regime in a specific field, or if the subject matter is an issue of a particular interest to the public, public debate is mandatory. In recent years, many laws have been adopted through “urgent procedure”, which excludes parliamentary debate, and therefore reduces public debate as well. The European Commission’s 2018 Progress Report for Serbia stated that “Public consultations on proposals are often conducted formalistically and too late in the process, not enabling all interested parties to provide timely and qualitative input.” The government’s Rulebook outlines the details and procedures regarding public debate. The government publishes laws and regulations undergoing public hearings at: http://javnerasprave.euprava.gov.rs/.

Concerns regarding public debate on Serbian legislation have been echoed by the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption (GRECO). GRECO observed in a 2015 evaluation report that the transparency of the Serbian legislative process could be improved by ensuring that draft legislation, amendments, and the agendas and outcome of committee sittings are disclosed in a timely manner, that adequate timeframes are in place for submitting amendments and that the urgent procedure is applied as an exception and not as a rule. GRECO also recommended further developing rules on public debates and public hearings, and ensuring their implementation in practice. GRECO reiterated these concerns in a compliance report on Serbia in March 2019, stating that the majority of laws and acts are still adopted under an ‘urgent’ or emergency procedure, which in effect prevents timely information and participation in legislative work. According to the Rules of Procedure of the National Assembly, it is still possible—and it is still the rule to a large extent—to present amendments up to 24 hours before the discussion in the emergency procedure. No additional safeguards have been introduced to either curb the use of this procedure or provide for new deadlines for submitting amendments. Thus, most of GRECO’s concerns regarding this part of the recommendation remain valid.

To adopt a law, a minimum of 126 members of the National Assembly must vote in favor, after which the law is sent to the President of Serbia, who may promulgate the law or return it to Parliament for reconsideration.

Serbia’s budget information is publicly available; however, there are serious concerns about the legislative process, which severely limited Parliament’s review and debate of the draft 2019 budget when it was passed in December 2018. For example, on the budget and several other significant laws, opposition parties have accused the ruling coalition of obstructing debate in Parliament by filing a large number of insignificant amendments, which are often almost identical in content, to use up the allocated time for debate and prevent legislators from scrutinizing the budget and debating substantive amendments. Just before the vote, the ruling coalition has habitually withdrawn most of these amendments.

Publicly-listed companies apply International Financial Reporting Standards. There are no informal regulatory processes managed by NGOs or private sector associations.

Several Serbian organizations publish recommendations for government action to improve the transparency and efficiency of business regulations. The Foreign Investors Council publishes an annual White Book (http://www.fic.org.rs/projects/white-book/white-book.html), NALED publishes a Grey Book (https://www.slideshare.net/NALED/grey-book-10-recommendations-for-eliminating-administrative-obstacles-to-doing-business-in-serbia), and AmCham publishes similar materials on its website (http://www.amcham.rs/home.1.html).

Serbia’s National Assembly website (http://www.parlament.gov.rs/narodna-skupstina-.871.html) provides a list of adopted laws and those that have been proposed. In addition, individual ministries generally provide access to the relevant legislative framework under which the ministry operates on the ministry’s website.

The Business Entities Register (http://www.apr.gov.rs/eng/Registers/Companies/CompaniesRegister.aspx) is a centralized electronic database of business entities in Serbia and contains registration data.

Serbia has a system of official inspectorates charged with regulatory enforcement. Nationally there are currently 37 different inspectorates within 12 ministries that apply over 1,000 regulations. There is no overarching law to regulate inspections and there are shortcomings with regard to the coordination of inspections. Administrative courts are the legal entities which consider appeals to inspection decisions.

International Regulatory Considerations

Serbia is not a member of the World Trade Organization or the EU; however, Serbia is in the process of adopting the EU’s acquis communautaire as part of its EU accession process. Serbia obtained EU candidate country status in 2012 and opened formal accession negotiations in January 2014. No accession date has been set.

Legal System and Judicial Independence

The legal system of Serbia is based on principles of both Roman law and continental civil law. It is composed of the Serbian Constitution and a system of laws. Contract law in Serbia is similar to contract law in the United States.

According to the Constitution, Serbia’s judicial system is legally independent of the executive branch, but in practice experts raise questions about judicial independence in Serbia. Significant obstacles remain in the way of true judicial independence. The High Judicial Council proposes judges, which are elected by the National Assembly. Judicial office is permanent after an initial three-year probationary term; however, in a January 2017 survey of elected judges, approximately 40 percent of those interviewed stated that they felt exposed to political pressure. In January 2018, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) published draft amendments to the Serbian Constitution pertaining to the reorganization of the Serbian judiciary and prosecution service, purportedly to increase their independence and professionalism. Civil society actors have been highly critical of the MoJ for failing to involve them in the drafting process, or to take seriously their objections to the draft amendments. In 2018, the Venice Commission, a Council of Europe body tasked with evaluating the proposed constitutional changes, evaluated and recommended changes to the constitutional amendments. The proposed constitutional amendments are currently pending before Parliament.

Serbia’s main court system handles most types of civil and criminal law, with specialized departments and judges to handle different types of cases. Basic Courts and High Courts are the courts of first instance, with appeals to Appellate Courts. There are also separate systems of Commercial, Administrative, and Misdemeanor Courts to handle specialized cases in those areas. The highest court of appeal for all these systems is the Supreme Court of Cassation.

The Constitutional Court is a separate institution that may assess the constitutionality of almost all legal acts. A constitutional appeal may be lodged against individual acts or actions of state bodies or organizations entrusted with public authority.

Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment

Significant laws for investment, business activities, and foreign companies in Serbia include the Law on Investments, the Law on Foreign Trade, the Law on Foreign Exchange Operations, the Law on Markets of Securities and other Financial Instruments, the Company Law, the Law on Registration of Commercial Entities, the Law on Banks and Other Financial Institutions, Regulations on Conditions for Establishing and Operation of Foreign Representative Offices in Serbia, the Law on Construction and Planning, the Law on Financial Leasing, the Law on Concessions, the Customs Law, and the Law on Privatization. These acts set out the basic rules foreign companies must follow if they wish to establish subsidiaries in Serbia, invest in local companies, open representative offices in Serbia, enter into agency agreements for representation by local companies, acquire concessions, or participate in a privatization process in Serbia.

Key tax legislation includes the Law on Value Added Tax, Law on Income Tax, Law on Corporate Profit Tax, Law on Real Estate Tax, and the Law on Mandatory Social Contributions. Laws and regulations related to taxes can be found on the Finance Ministry’s website at http://www.mfin.gov.rs/pages/issue.php?id=1578.

Laws and regulations related to business operations can be found on the Economy Ministry’s website at http://www.privreda.gov.rs/cat_propisi/zakoni/.

Laws and regulations on portfolio investments are on the Securities Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.rs/.

Laws and regulations related to payment operations can be found on the National Bank of Serbia’s website at http://www.nbs.rs/internet/english/20/index.html

In October 2017, the Serbian Institute for Standardization, with support of the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, OSCE and the U.S. Department of Justice, adopted international standard ISO 37001 on Anti-bribery Management Systems, the first international standard to specify requirements and provide guidance for establishing, implementing, maintaining and improving an anti-bribery management system. The standard can be applied by any type of organization – all levels of government, state-owned enterprises, private sector companies (large and small) and non-government organizations. ISO 37001 requires an organization to implement a series of measures to prevent bribery that are proportionate and reasonable to the risks. For more information, see https://www.iss.rs/en/standard/?keywords=37001&Submit=.

Competition and Anti-Trust Laws

The Law on Protection of Competition was enacted in 2009 and amended in 2013. The Commission for the Protection of Competition is responsible for competition-related concerns and in principle implements the law as an independent agency reporting directly to the National Assembly. In some cases, companies have reported perceptions that political factors have influenced the Commission’s decision-making. In 2017, the Commission completed 108 proceedings for violations of competition rules, approved 140 mergers (and rejected four), and issued 93 opinions about potential breaches of competition rules. Annual reports of the Commission’s actions are published online at http://www.kzk.gov.rs/izvestaji. Laws and regulations related to market competition are available at http://www.kzk.gov.rs/en/zakon-2.

Expropriation and Compensation

Serbia’s Law on Expropriation authorizes expropriation (including eminent domain) for the following reasons: education, public health, social welfare, culture, water management, sports, transport, public utility infrastructure, national defense, local/national government needs, environmental protection, protection from weather-related damage, mineral exploration or exploitation, resettlement of persons holding mineral-rich lands, property required for certain joint ventures, and housing construction for the socially disadvantaged.

In the event of an expropriation, Serbian law requires compensation in the form of similar property or cash approximating the current market value of the expropriated property. The law sets forth various criteria for arriving at the amount of compensation applicable to different types of land (e.g. agricultural, vineyards or forests), or easements that affect land value. The local municipal court is authorized to intervene and decide the level of compensation if there is no mutually agreed resolution within two months of the expropriation order.

The Law on Investment provides safeguards against arbitrary government expropriation of investments. There have been no cases of expropriation of foreign investments in Serbia since the dissolution of the former Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 2003. There are, however, outstanding claims against Serbia related to property nationalized under the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which was dissolved in 1992.

The 2014 Law on Restitution of Property and Compensation applies to property seized by the government since the end of World War II (March 9, 1945), and includes special coverage for victims of the Holocaust, who are authorized to reclaim property confiscated by Nazi occupation forces. Under the law, restitution should be in kind when possible, and otherwise in the form of state bonds. Many properties are exempt from in-kind restitution, including property previously owned by corporations. Heirless property left by victims of the Holocaust is subject to a separate law, which was approved in February 2016.

Serbia committed itself under its restitution law to allocate EUR 2 billion, plus interest, for financial compensation to citizens in bonds and in cash. The restitution law caps the amount of compensation that any single claimant may receive at EUR 500,000 (approximately USD 565,000). With amendments to the Law on Restitution and Compensation adopted in December 2018, the government postponed for the third time issuance of these bonds until December 2021, pending approval of necessary by-laws that would regulate bond issuance. The bonds will be denominated in euros, carry a two-percent annual interest rate, have a maturity period of 12 years, and be tradable on securities markets. The deadline for filing restitution applications was March 1, 2014. The Agency for Restitution received over 74,000 property claims, and the adjudication process is still ongoing. Information about the Agency for Restitution and the status of cases is available on its website at www.restitucija.gov.rs/eng/index.php.

Dispute Settlement

ICSID Convention and New York Convention

When negotiating contracts, the parties may agree on the manner in which to resolve disputes. Most often for domestic entities, contract dispute resolution is left to the courts and can be pursued through civil procedures. Under Serbian commercial law, contractual relations are regulated by the Law on Obligations (also known as the Law on Contracts and Torts). Contract-related disputes are governed by Chapter 34 of the Civil Procedure Law, which details the procedure in commercial disputes. Commercial Courts have jurisdiction over commercial disputes between domestic and foreign commercial and legal entities only. Exceptionally, a natural person can be a party as a substantial intervener in the case. Appeals are referred to the Higher Commercial Court.

Parties to a contract are free to decide which substantive law shall govern the contract. The law of Serbia does not have to be the governing law of a contract entered into in Serbia.

Judgments of foreign courts are enforceable in Serbia only if they are recognized by Serbian courts. Jurisdiction over recognition of foreign judgments rests with the Commercial Courts and Higher Courts. Procedures for recognition of foreign court decisions are regulated by the Law on Resolution of Disputes with the Regulations of Other Countries, as well as by bilateral agreements. One condition is reciprocity.

Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Although Serbia is a signatory to many international treaties regarding international arbitration, enforcement of an arbitration award can be a slow and difficult process. Serbia’s Privatization Agency refused for five years (2007-2012) to recognize an International Chamber of Commerce/International Court of Arbitration award in favor of a U.S. investor. The dispute caused the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), which had insured a portion of the investment, to severely restrict its activities in Serbia. The U.S. Embassy facilitated a settlement agreement between the Serbian government and the investor, which took effect in January 2012. OPIC reinstated its programs for Serbia in February 2012, but in 2015 and early 2016 both a first instance and appellate Serbian court dismissed OPIC’s request for enforcement action to collect damages awarded to it by an international arbitration board in the same case. Serbia has no Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) with the United States. In the past 10 years, two investment disputes have involved U.S. citizens.

International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts

The Law on Arbitration authorizes the use of institutional and ad hoc arbitration in all disputes, and regulates the enforcement of arbitration awards. The law is modeled after the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNICTRAL Model Law).

Commercial contracts in which at least one contracting party is a foreign legal or natural person may incorporate arbitration clauses, invoking the jurisdiction of the Foreign Trade Court of Arbitration of the Serbian Chamber of Commerce, or any other foreign institutional arbitration body, including ad hoc arbitration bodies. Arbitration is voluntary. International arbitration is an accepted means for settling disputes between foreign investors and the state; however, some companies have reported difficulties in enforcing international arbitration awards in Serbia.

Serbia is a signatory to the following international conventions regulating the mutual acceptance and enforcement of foreign arbitration:

  • 1923 Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses
  • 1927 Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitration Decisions
  • 1958 Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention)
  • 1961 European Convention on International Business Arbitration
  • 1965 International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID)

Serbia allows for mediation to resolve disputes between private parties. Mediation is a voluntary process and is conducted only when both parties agree. The Law on Mediation regulates mediation procedures in disputes in the following areas of law: property, commercial, family, labor, civil, administrative and in criminal procedures where the parties act freely, unless the law stipulates exclusive authority of a court or other relevant authority.

Mediators can be chosen from the list of the Serbian National Association of Mediators, or from an official registry within the Ministry of Justice. There are two types of mediation: court-annexed and private mediation. A person can also be referred to mediation by a court, advocate, local ombudsman, employees of municipal or state authorities, an employer, or the other party to the conflict.

Bankruptcy Regulations

The Bankruptcy Law brings Serbian bankruptcy procedures in line with international standards. According to the law, the goal is to provide compensation to creditors via the sale of the assets of a debtor company. The law stipulates automatic bankruptcy for legal entities whose accounts have been blocked for more than three years, and allows debtors and creditors to initiate bankruptcy proceedings. The law ensures a faster and more equitable settlement of creditors’ claims, lowers costs, and clarifies rules regarding the role of bankruptcy trustees and creditors’ councils. Parliament adopted new amendments to the Bankruptcy Law in December 2017. These amendments enable better collection and reduced costs for creditors; provide shorter deadlines for action by bankruptcy trustees and judges; improve the position of secured creditors; anticipate new ways of assessing debtors’ assets by licensed appraisers; and introduce a special rule to lift bans on the execution of debtor assets that are under mortgage, giving rights to the secured creditor to sell such assets under rules that apply to mortgage sales.

Foreign creditors have the same rights as Serbian creditors with respect to initiating or participating in bankruptcy proceedings. Claims in foreign currency are calculated in dinars at the dinar exchange rate on the date the bankruptcy proceeding commenced. Under Serbia’s Criminal Code, causing or faking a bankruptcy are criminal acts.

The 2019 World Bank Doing Business Report ranked Serbia 49 out of 190 economies with regard to resolving insolvency, with an average of two years needed to resolve insolvency and a cost of 20 percent of the estate. The recovery rate was estimated at 34.5 cents on the dollar (http://www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploreeconomies/serbia).

The Credit Bureau of Serbia is part of the Association of Banks of Serbia (http://www.ubs-asb.com/Default.aspx?tabid=541). Its primary aim is to check the credit capacity of potential banking clients. The Credit Bureau records all financial obligations of citizens and companies toward banks and other service providers, and tracks if clients meet their obligations. Credit Bureau data are considered accurate, as most participants provide information on client indebtedness on a daily basis. Credit Bureau data include debts related to loans, credit cards, leasing, mobile telephony service providers, current accounts, and issued guarantees.

4. Industrial Policies

Investment Incentives

The 2015 Law on Investment defines Serbia’s investment incentives program. Incentives are available to both domestic and foreign investors. The law established a Council for Economic Development and the Development Agency of Serbia (RAS). The Council has oversight responsibility for the investment incentives program, while RAS plays a more operational role.

The level of available subsidies for investment projects is determined under the Decree on Defining Conditions for Approving Incentives in Attracting Direct Investments, approved for the current year in January 2019. Investors are obliged to provide 25 percent of eligible costs from their own resources. For investment projects valued at EUR 50-100 million, subsidies are limited to 25 percent of the total investment, falling to 17 percent for projects over EUR 100 million. Under certain conditions, large companies can gain support for up to 50 percent of eligible costs for investment projects, medium-sized companies up to 60 percent, and small companies up to 70 percent.

The Decree makes available funds for investment projects in manufacturing and customer service centers. For manufacturing investments, state subsidies are available for any company that invests the equivalent of EUR 100,000 and employs at least 10 persons in a “devastated area.” For service center investments, subsidies are available for companies investing the equivalent of EUR 150,000 and creating at least 15 new jobs anywhere in the country. The required minimum investment and employment levels for subsidies increase on a sliding scale according to the level of development of the investment location. For each investment project in a devastated area, the state will pay the investor 40 percent of the eligible gross salary costs for newly employed people in the two-year period after reaching employment commitments, up to the equivalent of EUR 7,000 per new job; the subsidy declines to 20 percent of eligible costs up to EUR 3,000 per job in the most developed regions. For labor-intensive projects that create more than 200 new jobs, the government can approve additional incentives. The state will also provide subsidies for the purchase of fixed assets, again on a sliding scale based on the level of development at the investment location. The subsidy reaches 30 percent of eligible asset costs in a devastated area, and declines to 10 percent in the most developed areas of Serbia. The total amount of subsidies granted cannot exceed the amount allowed under Serbia’s EU-compliant state aid regulations. The Serbian government may sell land for construction at a below-market price in support of an investment project that is of national importance. There is a separate Decree on Defining Conditions for Approving Incentives in Attracting Direct Investments in Production of Food Products also approved in January 2019 with almost identical conditions to those mentioned above. The only difference is that state subsidies are available for any company that invests the equivalent of the minimum EUR 2 million and employs at least 30 new employees regardless of the level of the municipality development. For projects investing over EUR 20 million in the fixed assets the government will approve additional incentives. For more details visit: https://ras.gov.rs/uploads/2019/02/uredba-2019.pdf and https://privreda.gov.rs/cat_propisi/uredbe2/ (Serbian only).

Both Decrees on Attracting Direct Investments also establish criteria for granting local incentives to investments of importance for local development.

At the provincial level, the government of the Vojvodina region offers investment incentives, which are very similar to those described above. The main difference is that the program is implemented by the Development Agency of Vojvodina, which was established in February 2017 as the successor to the Vojvodina Investment Promotion Agency (VIP) (http://rav.org.rs/business-environment/incentives).

Local municipalities may sell land for construction at below-market rates for investments that promote local economic development. Other major incentives at the local level include exemptions or deductions on land-related fees and other local fees.

Serbia’s tax laws offer several incentives to new investors. The corporate profit tax rate is a flat 15 percent, one of the lowest in the region. Non-resident investors are taxed only on income earned in Serbia. A ten-year tax holiday on corporate profits is available for investors who hire more than 100 workers and invest more than RSD 1 billion (USD 10.5 million). The tax holiday begins once the company starts making a profit.

In February 2018, the government approved a new decree on film incentives that allows both domestic and foreign filmmakers to receive a refund of 25 percent of qualified costs, an increase from an earlier 20 percent incentive. The budget for film incentives in 2019 amounts to USD 8.6 million.

Employment incentives allow payroll tax deductions for persons registered with the National Employment Service for more than six months. The incentives currently in place are valid from the moment of employment until December 31, 2019:

  • 1-9 new jobs: 65 percent deduction
  • 10-99 new jobs: 70 percent deduction
  • 100+ new jobs: 75 percent deduction

The Serbian Innovation Fund provides various granting opportunities for young entrepreneurs and start-ups, including mini grants for development of technological innovation, matching grants for commercialization of research and development, and a collaborative grant scheme for joint R&D projects creating new products and services. These grants are mainly available for companies established in Serbia with majority private Serbian ownership. For more details visit: http://www.innovationfund.rs/

Some subsidized loans for start-ups, entrepreneurs and SMEs are available through the state-owned Fund for Development and various ministries, and part are issued through RAS. Detailed information is available at https://fondzarazvoj.gov.rs (Serbian only). These loans are available to foreign-owned companies registered in Serbia, provided the Serbian registered company has not recorded losses in the previous two years.

Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation

Serbia maintains 14 designated customs free zones, in Apatin, Belgrade, Kragujevac, Krusevac, Novi Sad, Pirot, Priboj, Sabac, Smederevo, Svilajnac, Subotica, Uzice, Vranje, and Zrenjanin. The free zones, established in accordance with the 2006 Law on Free Zones, are intended to attract investment by providing tax-free areas for company operations. Businesses operating in the zones qualify for benefits including unlimited duty-free imports and exports, preferential customs treatment, and tax relief in the form of value-added tax (VAT) exclusions. If goods produced within zone use a minimum of 50 percent of domestic components, they are considered to be of Serbian origin and are therefore eligible to be imported into Serbian territory or exported without customs pursuant to free trade agreements. Companies operating within a free zone are subject to the same laws and regulations as other businesses in Serbia, except for their tax privileges.

Goods entering or leaving the free zones must be reported to customs authorities, and payments must be made in accordance with regulations on hard-currency payments. Goods delivered from free zones into other areas of Serbia are subject to customs duties and tax. Earnings and revenues generated within free zones may be transferred freely to any country, including Serbia, without prior approval, and are not subject to any taxes, duties or fees.

In 2017, there were a total of 221 companies operating in Serbia’s free economic zones, of which 166 were domestically-owned and 55 foreign-owned. The number of companies dropped by 16 percent compared to 2016. The companies employed a total of 28,366 workers, which represents an increase of 13 percent compared to 2016. Total exports from free zones exceeded USD 2.5 billion in 2017, which is approximately 15 percent of Serbia’s total exports. Total imports into the zones were approximately USD 2.4 billion, or 11 percent of total imports. Total annual turnover in the free zones stands at some USD 5.5 billion. Many companies operating in free zones are producers of automobile parts and other industrial goods. They include large multinational companies like Fiat, Michelin, Tigar Tyres, Ametek, Continental, Yazaki, Lear, PKC, Siemens, Swarovski, and Panasonic. Additional information about Serbia’s free zones is available at: www.usz.gov.rs/eng/index.php

Performance and Data Localization Requirements

The Serbian government does not mandate local employment or have onerous visa, residence, or work permitting requirements for foreign nationals. It does not impose conditions for foreign investors to receive permission to invest.

The Serbian government does not maintain a policy of forced localization designed to oblige foreign investors to use domestic content in goods or technology. Similarly, the government does not force foreign investors to establish or maintain a specified amount of data storage within the country. There are no requirements for foreign IT providers to turn over source code or provide access to encryption.

With the Data Protection Law passed in November 2018, Serbia has implemented the requirements of the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The law set a transition period of nine months, with full enforcement scheduled for August 2019. Some experts have criticized the law as unclear, citing provisions transcribed from EU law that included mechanisms that do not yet exist in Serbia’s domestic legal system. This may lead to questions regarding the law’s implementation in Serbia. Other experts have argued that with the law, Serbia has enacted a high personal data protection standard, and that defects will be resolved over time.

The Decree on Conditions for Approving Incentives in Attracting Direct Investments defines conditions and limitations for investment incentives, such as maintaining investments at a specified location for up to five years. Similarly, investors are obliged to maintain the number of newly engaged employees for up to five years. Potential investors who want to use state grants are required to provide a minimum of 25 percent of eligible costs from their own resources. The deadline for implementation of investment projects and the creation of new work places is three years from the date of applying for state grants. This deadline may be extended for up to five years based on a written justification. Beneficiaries are obliged to provide a bank guarantee as security for the eventual return of received funds. In case of non-fulfilment of the conditions provided for in the state grant contract, the Ministry of Economy and the Council for Economic Development may decide to terminate the contract at any time; however, authorities have generally shown great flexibility in favor of investors to succeed. Conditions are applied uniformly to both domestic and foreign investors.

5. Protection of Property Rights

Real Property

Serbia has an adequate body of laws for the protection of property rights, but enforcement of property rights through the judicial system can be very slow. A multitude of factors can complicate property titles: restitution claims, unlicensed and illegal construction, limitation of property rights to rights of use, outright title fraud and other issues. Investors are cautioned to investigate thoroughly all property title issues on land intended for investment projects.

During the country’s socialist years, owners of nationalized land became users of the land and acquired rights of use that, until 2003, could not be freely sold or transferred. In July 2015, the government adopted a law that allows for property usage rights to be converted into ownership rights with payment of a market-based fee.

In March 2015, the government implemented new amendments to the Law on Planning and Construction that separated the issuance of permits from conversion issues. These amendments cut the administrative deadline for issuing construction permits for a potential investor to 30 days and introduced a one-stop shop for electronic construction permits.

Serbia’s real property registration system is based on a municipal cadaster and land books. Serbia has the basis for an organized real estate cadaster and property title system. However, legalizing tens of thousands of structures built over the past twenty years without proper licenses remains an enormous challenge, as two million buildings in Serbia are not registered in the cadaster, of which almost half are residential properties. According to some estimates, every third building in Serbia was not built in accordance with legal requirements. In November 2015, the government adopted a new Law on Legalization, which simplified the registration process. Since then, however, only slightly more than 183,000 decisions on legalization have been issued. The deadline set by the law for legalization of all buildings constructed without proper permits is November 2023.

The World Bank’s 2019 Doing Business Report ranks Serbia 55 of 190 countries for time required to register real property (21 days).

Intellectual Property Rights

Serbia is a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) member and a signatory to all key agreements administered by WIPO. The government has taken steps to implement and enforce the World Trade Organization (WTO) Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. Serbia’s intellectual property rights (IPR) laws include TRIPS-compliant provisions and are enforced by courts and administrative authorities.

For the most part, Serbia’s IPR legislation is modern and compliant with both the EU acquis communautaire and international standards. According to the EU’s 2017 Progress Report, Serbia has done a good job aligning its IP legislation with the acquis. Further alignment with the acquis is needed for the Law on Copyright and Related Rights, the Law on Topographies of Semiconductor Products, and the Laws on Patents and Trademarks; strengthening enforcement capacity and coordination among stakeholders is also needed. Serbia opened Chapter 7 pertaining to Intellectual Property in June 2017. Serbian laws extend legal protections to all major forms of IPR (including patents, trademarks, copyrights, industrial designs, geographic indicators, and semiconductor products). Serbia aims to adopt amendments to the Law on Trademarks (particularly to introduce a procedure for third-party objection), the Law on Patents, the Law on Semiconductor Circuits, and the Law on Copyright and Related Rights. An initial deadline for aligning IP legislation with the acquis by September 2018 has now been extended into 2019 due to changes in the relevant EU legislation, thus allowing Serbian legislators to incorporate new requirements. Amendments to the Law on Patents were adopted in 2018, which introduced changes to provisions on the protection of plant varieties and to the general patent prosecution proceedings before the IP Office and courts. In the first quarter of 2019, the Government adopted proposed amendments to the Law on Copyright and Related Rights and sent it to Parliament for adoption. Amendments to the Law on Special Competence for Efficient Protection of Intellectual Property Rights are also expected, with the goal of restructuring enforcement responsibilities among inspectorates.

The level of IPR protection in Serbia is improving. Enforcement remains haphazard but is roughly consistent with levels in neighboring countries. The government has a Permanent Coordination Body for IPR enforcement activities with participation from the tax administration, police, customs, and a number of state inspection services. The Public Procurement Law requires bidders to affirm that they have ownership rights to any IPR utilized in fulfilling a public procurement contract. Although still available, trade in counterfeit trademarked goods—particularly athletic footwear and clothing—are declining in volume as the government has stepped up its actions to combat illegal street sales and seize pirated goods at the border. Upon seizure, however, authorities cannot destroy the goods unless they receive formal instructions from the rights holders, who are billed for the storage and destruction of the counterfeit goods. The Customs Administration and Trade Inspection issues periodic reports on seizures, but these are segregated according to the type of good (e.g. cigarettes or apparel) rather than type of infringement (e.g. IPR or tax payments). Data on seizures is not publicly available. It is, however, possible to monitor the Customs Administration’s daily border seizures via their official Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/upravacarina.rs/

The tax administration checks software legality during its regular tax controls of businesses, but it intends to halt software inspection operations on the grounds that it is a non-core activity. In this case, responsibility would be transferred to the general market inspectorate. The estimated value of Serbia’s illegal software market is approximately USD 116 million. According to the most recent International Data Corporation (IDC) study, dated 2015, software piracy in Serbia is around 67 percent. Although this is down from 72 percent in 2011, it remains among the highest piracy rates in the Balkan region. However, the number of legal entities using illegal software continues to drop and was estimated at 55 percent in 2016.

Procedures for registration of industrial property rights and deposit of works of authorship with the Serbian Intellectual Property Office are straightforward and similar to procedures in most European countries. Relevant information is available at http://www.zis.gov.rs/home.59.html.

Regarding copyright and related rights, Serbia has room to improve, particularly with regard to the digitalization of orphan works and broadcasting of audiovisual works, including cross-border, satellite, and cable broadcasting. Potential improvements include:

  • Amend the Criminal Procedure Code and related procedural laws, particularly in the area of cyber-crime
  • Adopt implementing regulations for various IPR laws that specify enforcement procedures and steps, currently subject to different interpretation by relevant authorities
  • Reverse Copyright Law amendments from December 2012, when the National Assembly exempted small businesses from paying royalties for copyrighted music, capped fees payable to collective rights managers, and allowed businesses to pay one collective bill for all music rights
  • Amend the Copyright Law regarding collective rights for video works
  • Align the Laws on Copyright, Topographies of Semiconductor Products, Patents and Trademarks with the EU acquis, including with the IPR Enforcement Directive
  • Amend the Law on Trademarks to enable third parties to oppose trademark registration if the submitted trademark resembles that party’s registered trademark

Enforcement actions by state authorities, such as inspectorates or customs authorities, can be relatively fast. However, enforcement of IPR in the court system often lasts up to two years. With the creation of semi-specialized IPR courts, which began operating in 2015, these proceedings have improved, according to the Foreign Investors’ Council. The Serbian Intellectual Property Office continues to organize IPR-focused training for judges, with the expectation that more specialized understanding of IPR will enable more timely court decisions.

Serbia is not listed in the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) Special 301 Report or the USTR Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets. For additional information about treaty obligations and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at www.wipo.int/directory/en/details.jsp?country_code=RS

6. Financial Sector

Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment

Serbia welcomes both domestic and foreign portfolio investments and regulates them efficiently. The Government removed restrictions on short-term portfolio investments April 2018. Residents of Serbia are now allowed to purchase foreign short-term securities, and foreigners are allowed to purchase short-term securities in Serbia. Payments related to long-term securities have no restriction.

In 2018, Serbia recorded net outflows of USD one billion in portfolio investment, according to the National Bank of Serbia (NBS). The Serbian government regularly issues bonds to finance its budget deficit, including short-term, dinar-denominated T-bills, and dinar-denominated, euro-indexed government bonds. The total value of government debt securities issued on the domestic market reached USD 9.9 billion in January 2019, with 67.3 percent in Serbian dinars, 32.1 percent in euros, and 0.6 percent in U.S. dollars.

Total Serbian government-issued debt instruments on the domestic and international markets stood at USD 13.3 billion in January 2019 (see http://www.javnidug.gov.rs/upload/Bilteni/2019 percent20Mesecni/Mesecni percent20izvestaj percent20Uprave percent20za percent20javni percent20dug percent20- percent20CIR percent20Januar percent202019.pdf).

Serbia’s international credit ratings are improving. In March 2017, Moody’s upgraded the Government of Serbia’s long-term issuer ratings to Ba3, from B1. In December 2017, Standard & Poor’s raised its ratings for Serbia from BB- to BB with a positive outlook. Also in December 2017, Fitch raised Serbia’s credit rating from BB- to BB. The improved ratings remain below investment grade.

Serbia’s equity and bond markets are underdeveloped. Corporate securities and government bonds are traded on the Belgrade Stock Exchange (BSE). Of 990 companies listed on the exchange, shares of fewer than 100 companies are traded regularly (more than once a week). Total annual turnover on the BSE in 2018 was USD 584 million, which is almost unchanged compared to the volume of 2017. However, trading volumes have declined since 2007, when the total turnover reached USD 2.7 billion.

Established in 1995, the Securities Commission regulates the Serbian securities market. The Commission also supervises investment funds in accordance with the Investment Funds Law. As of March 2019, 21 registered investment funds operate in Serbia (see http://www.sec.gov.rs/index.php/en/public-registers-of-information/register-of-investment-funds).

Market terms determine credit allocation. In September 2018, the total volume of issued loans in the financial sector stood at USD 21 billion. Average interest rates are decreasing but still higher than the EU average. The business community cites tight credit policies and expensive commercial borrowing for all but the largest corporations as impediments to business expansion. Around 65 percent of all lending is denominated in euros, an additional 3 percent in Swiss francs, and 0.7 percent in U.S. dollars, all of which provide lower rates, but also shift exchange-rate risk to borrowers. Foreign investors are able to obtain credit on the domestic market. The government and central bank respect IMF Article VIII, and do not place restrictions on payments or transfers for current international transactions.

Money and Banking System

Serbian companies often do not access credit, and look to friends or family when they need investment and operational funds. Only a few corporate and municipal bonds have been issued so far, and the financial market is not well developed.

The NBS regulates the banking sector. Foreign banks are allowed to establish operations in Serbia, and foreigners can freely open both local currency and hard currency non-resident accounts. The banking sector comprises 91 percent of the total assets of the financial sector. As of September 2018, consolidation had reduced the sector to 28 banks with total assets of USD 35 billion (about 80 percent of GDP), with 76 percent of the market held by foreign-owned banks. The top ten banks, with country of ownership and estimated assets are Banca Intesa (Italy, USD 5.6 billion); UniCredit (Italy, USD 4.0 billion); Komercijalna Banka (Serbian government, USD 3.8 billion); Société Générale (France, USD 2.9 billion); Raiffeisen (Austria, USD 2.7 billion); AIK Banka Nis (Serbia, USD 1.9 billion); Erste Bank (Austria, USD 1.9 billion); Eurobank EFG (Greece, USD 1.6 billion); Postanska Stedionica (Serbian government, USD 1.6 billion); and Vojvodjanska Banka (Hungary, USD 1.2 billion). See http://www.nbs.rs/internet/latinica/55/55_4/kvartalni_izvestaj_III_18.pdf.

Four state-owned banks in Serbia went bankrupt after the global financial crisis in 2008. The state compensated the banks’ depositors with payouts of nearly USD 1 billion. A number of state-controlled banks have had financial difficulties since the crisis because of mismanagement and, in one instance, alleged corruption. The banks honored all withdrawal requests during the financial crisis and appear to have regained consumer trust, as evidenced by the gradual return of withdrawn deposits to the banking system. In December 2018, savings deposits in the banking sector reached USD 11.6 billion, exceeding pre-crisis levels.

In December 2017, the IMF assessed that Serbia’s banking sector remains robust, with large liquidity and capital buffers. Profitability of the sector is on the rise. Deposit growth has continued, and results of lending surveys point to more relaxed lending standards for SMEs amid greater competition, cheaper sources of funding, and higher risk tolerance. The IMF said it supports NBS efforts to enhance prudential policies in the context of implementing the Basel III framework on capital adequacy. In a recent review, the IMF pointed to the continued resilience of the banking sector, with an average capital adequacy ratio exceeding 22.8 percent in September 2018 and a gradual improvement in asset quality.

The IMF assessed in 2018 that authorities had made important progress, with the aggregate stock of non-performing loans (NPLs) falling both in nominal terms and relative to total loans. NPLs have declined to 5.7 percent as of December 2018, their lowest level since January 2009. Since the adoption of an NPL resolution strategy in mid-2015, NPLs have declined from 22.2 to 5.7 percent of the total loan portfolio. NPLs remain fully provisioned. In addition, there are significant foreign exchanges risks, as 74 percent of all outstanding loans are indexed to foreign currencies (primarily the euro). As of April 2019, the government was considering action to protect consumers who had taken mortgage loans denominated in Swiss francs. These measures would reportedly include mandatory conversion to euros, with banks and the state sharing losses from a reduction of outstanding principal and interest balances. However, no measures had yet been finalized.

The NBS, as chief regulator of the financial system, has announced that cryptocurrencies are not regulated by law in Serbia. NBS is not currently preparing such regulations, as the volume of cryptocurrency use is still very low. NBS said it therefore does not have the authority to issue licenses for trading in cryptocurrencies or for setting up cryptocurrency ATMs. Nor are cryptocurrency traders or internet platforms subject to NBS oversight. NBS stressed that those engaging in cryptocurrency transactions or activities are the sole carriers of risk.

Despite the lack of regulation, trading in cryptocurrencies in Serbia does occur. The company ECD Group has installed an online platform for trading in cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin BTC, Litecoin LTC, and Ethereum ETH) at https://ecd.rs/. The company claims to have over 1,000 registered users of the platform. ECD Group has also installed three ATMs for cryptocurrencies in Serbia, two of which are only for buying bitcoins and litecoins, while one supports two-way transactions – i.e. both buying and selling. Trading in crypto-currencies dropped by 90 percent in 2018 in Serbia compared to 2017, EDC Serbia said. Previously, some users would buy up to four to five bitcoins per day, but in 2018 Serbians were mostly selling bitcoin. Bitcoin “mining” also dropped in Serbia, and many are selling their equipment used for this purpose, according to EDC’s CEO, who is also the founder of the BitCoin Association of Serbia. (http://www.bitcoinasocijacija.org)

Hostile takeovers are extremely rare in Serbia. The Law on Takeover of Shareholding Companies regulates defense mechanisms. Frequently after privatization, the new strategic owners of formerly state-controlled companies have sought to buy out minority shareholders.

Foreign Exchange and Remittances

Foreign Exchange

Serbia’s Foreign Investment Law guarantees the right to transfer and repatriate profits from Serbia, and foreign exchange is available. Serbia permits the free flow of capital, including for investment, such as the acquisition of real estate and equipment. Non-residents may maintain both foreign currency and dinar denominated bank accounts without restrictions. Investors may use these accounts to make or receive payments in foreign currency. The government amended the Foreign Exchange Law in December 2014 to authorize Serbian citizens to conclude transactions abroad through internet payment systems such as PayPal.

The NBS targets inflation in its monetary policy, and regularly intervenes in the foreign exchange market to that end. In 2018, the NBS sold the equivalent of USD 280 million on the interbank currency market, and bought USD two billion, to prevent sharp fluctuations of the dinar. In the one-year period ending March 2019, the dinar appreciated 3.2 percent against the euro and depreciated 8.6 percent against the U.S. dollar. No evidence has been reported that Serbia engages in currency manipulation. According to the IMF, Serbia maintains a system free of restrictions on current international payments and transfers, except with respect to blocked pre-1991 foreign currency savings abroad.

Remittance Policies

Personal remittances constitute a significant source of income for Serbian households. In 2018, total remittances from abroad reached USD 3.1 billion, or approximately 7.2 percent of GDP.

The Law on Foreign Exchange Operations regulates investment remittances, which can occur freely and without limits. The Investment Law allows foreign investors to freely and without delay transfer all financial and other assets related to the investment to a foreign country, including profit, assets, dividends, royalties, interest, earnings share sales, proceeds from sale of capital and other receivables. The Foreign Investors’ Council, a business association of foreign investors, confirms that there are no limitations on investment remittances in Serbia.

Sovereign Wealth Funds

Serbia does not have a sovereign wealth fund.

7. State-Owned Enterprises

The Law on Public Enterprises, adopted in February 2016, defines a public enterprise as “an enterprise pursuing an activity of common interest, founded by the State or Autonomous Province or a local government unit.” The law also defines “strategically important companies” as those in which the state has at least a 25 percent ownership share.

The law aimed to introduce responsible corporate management in public companies and strengthen supervision over public companies’ management. The law requires that directors of public companies be selected through a public application procedure and that they not hold any political party positions while serving. The law also requires that a portion of public companies’ profits be paid directly to the state, provincial, or local government budget. However, Transparency International Serbia analyzed implementation of the law in September 2017 and concluded that almost none of these requirements have been implemented, including the professionalization and transparency of management. The full report can be seen at: http://transparentnost.org.rs/images/publikacije/Political_influence_on_public_enterprises_and_media.pdf

State-owned enterprises (SOEs) dominate many sectors of the economy, including energy, transportation, utilities, telecommunications, infrastructure, mining, and natural resource extraction. According to the Ministry of Economy, Serbia has 727 SOEs, which employ more than 250,000 people, or approximately 15 percent of the formal workforce. A list of all public enterprises is available at the Ministry of Economy’s website (http://www.privreda.gov.rs/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Spisak-Javnih-Preduzeca-25.05.2016..pdf ). In addition to these companies, at the end of 2018 some 90 companies with nearly 30,000 employees had not been resolved through privatization or bankruptcy, down from 150 companies with 52,000 employees at the end of 2017. The Ministry of Economy is preparing these companies for divestiture (see Privatization Program, below).

A quasi-governmental watchdog agency, the Fiscal Council, assessed in September 2017 that unreformed and un-privatized state-owned companies represent the most significant threat to Serbia’s state budget. In December 2016, the Serbian government committed to the IMF to significantly reduce the fiscal cost of SOEs by curtailing direct and indirect subsidies, strictly limiting the issuance of new guarantees, and enhancing the accountability, transparency, and monitoring of SOEs. According to the World Bank, the Serbian government currently spends approximately EUR 300 million (USD 340 million), or nearly one percent of GDP, on direct support for SOEs. The Fiscal Council said in January 2019 that even when they do not require immediate budget support, as a rule, SOEs operate inefficiently and do not invest enough to keep their businesses healthy. For example, by far the largest SOE in Serbia, the power company EPS, has invested less per year than the value of the depreciation of its assets, the Fiscal Council warned.

In June 2017, the Fiscal Council published a separate study on state-owned local utility and service companies, and assessed that they received subsidies up to EUR 200 million (0.7 percent of GDP) annually but still generated losses of EUR 50 million. In addition, they have accumulated payment arrears totaling some EUR 150 million. At the same time, the quality of the services they provide is very low. For example, 98 percent of waste ends up at landfills without any processing, compared to 25 percent in the EU. Only 15 percent of waste water is treated, compared to 85 percent in neighboring countries. The Council assessed that these local companies fail to collect 10 percent of their receivables, and the bulk of unpaid obligations are from SOEs.

In principle, SOEs are treated the same as private sector competitors. SOEs can purchase goods from the private sector and foreign firms under the Public Procurement Law. For example, foreign companies regularly win public tenders for the construction of roads and other infrastructure projects. Under the Public Procurement Law, a buyer must select a domestic supplier if the domestic supplier’s price is no more than five percent higher than a foreign supplier’s price. The Public Procurement Office (PPO) is an independent state body that supervises implementation of the Law on Public Procurement. Private enterprises have the same access to financing, land, and raw materials as SOEs, as well as the same tax burden and rebate policies. However, the IMF estimated that in 2014, SOEs enjoyed benefits amounting to approximately two percent of GDP.

Serbia—not yet a member of the WTO—is not a party to the WTO’s Government Procurement Agreement (GPA).

In February 2018, Serbia joined the Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS), which aims to address tax avoidance strategies that exploit gaps and mismatches in tax rules to artificially shift profits to low or no-tax locations. Under the framework, 112 countries and jurisdictions are collaborating to implement measures against BEPS.

Privatization Program

In 2001-2015, the Serbian government privatized 3,047 SOEs. The government cancelled 646 of these privatizations, alleging that investors did not meet contractual obligations related to employment and investment. According to the Privatization Law, the deadline for the privatization of the 646 companies in the Privatization Agency’s portfolio was December 31, 2015. However, 90 companies were still unresolved at the end as of December 2018. Among others, these companies include 11 spas, which all have unresolved property issues; 19 companies in Kosovo; 15 veterinary stations which were transferred to local municipalities; and 19 companies that employ disabled persons.

Most significantly, the Ministry of Economy must still resolve several large, strategically important SOEs. These include the Resavica coal mine, MSK Kikinda, Petrohemija, and others; however, there was progress in privatization in 2018. Copper mining complex RTB Bor was sold to China’s Zijin Mining, and agricultural corporation PKB to Al Dahra of the United Arab Emirates. In addition, fertilizer producer Azotara was sent to bankruptcy. In many cases, closing these companies would mean leaving whole regions of Serbia destitute, since these companies are drivers of local economies. The Serbian government continues to engage foreign investors in the privatization process, inviting them to submit bids, participate in auctions, and purchase company shares. Invitations for privatization and bidding are published on the Ministry of Economy website at http://www.priv.rs/Naslovna.

In December 2018, the French Vinci Airports took over operations of Belgrade’s Nikola Tesla Airport under a 25-year concession agreement. According to official statements, Vinci had offered EUR 501 million to manage the airport and EUR 732 million in investment, as well as an annual fee of up to EUR 16 million. The state telecommunications company Telekom Srbija has garnered investor interest, but the Serbian government has twice canceled its privatization, most recently in December 2015. The government has also committed to privatizing the second largest bank in the country, Komercijalna Banka, although this process has moved slowly.

8. Responsible Business Conduct

Responsible Business Conduct (RBC) and Corporate Social Responsibility are relatively new concepts in Serbia, and many Serbian companies view it mainly as a public relations tool. Multinational companies are more effective practitioners and often bring best practices, with U.S. companies among the most active. For example, Molson Coors in Serbia supported Serbia’s Special Olympics team in Rio de Janeiro in September 2016. Companies such as Eaton and Ball Packaging Serbia have contributed to their communities through can recycling, public service campaigns, educational and environmental initiatives, and donations in kind. Since 2003, Phillip Morris Serbia alone has donated over USD 17 million to community initiatives in Serbia.

The Serbian government has no formal mechanism in place to encourage companies to follow RBC principles; however, a new Council for Philanthropy held its first session in September 2018. Founded with grant support from USAID, the Council aims to use public policy to create a more encouraging environment for giving in Serbia. Chaired by the Prime Minister, other members of the Council include ten government ministers, the Belgrade Mayor, the Director of the Tax Administration, and several NGOs. Donors have pointed to issues that have a negative impact on philanthropy, including a lack of tax incentives for donors, no available exemptions from value-added tax for donations in kind, the lack of a system for monitoring donations from companies, and the absence of official data on charities. According to the 2018 World Giving Index, published by the Charities Aid Foundation, Serbia was ranked 129 out of a total of 144 countries listed. https://www.cafonline.org/docs/default-source/about-us-publications/caf_wgi2018_report_webnopw_2379a_261018.pdf

The Law on Public Procurement allows the government to ask bidders to fulfill additional conditions, especially those related to social and environmental issues, and allows the government to consider criteria such as environmental protection and social impact when evaluating bids.

The United Nations Development Program’s Global Compact initiative has 50 participants in Serbia, and has organized a number of educational events intended to strengthen RBC capacity in Serbia.

Several local organizations, such as the American Chamber of Commerce, Foreign Investors’ Council, and the Serbian Chamber of Commerce (PKS) promote the concept of RBC among the Serbian business community and the public. PKS presents a national award to Socially Responsible Businesses. The Trag Foundation supports the Serbian Philanthropy Forum, a networking body for donors (including numerous corporate actors) to advance philanthropic concepts in Serbia. The NGO Smart Kolektiv is providing consulting services in RBC and establishing an RBC Index, which is the first national platform for assessing responsible business conduct in Serbia. Responsible Business Conduct Forum and Smart Kolektiv launched the index with USAID support in 2016. The Responsible Business Forum Serbia is a network of socially responsible companies that contribute to the development of the community, stimulating the development of corporate social responsibility and the establishment of firm and lasting socially responsible practices in the business sector. It was established in 2008 at the initiative of 14 leading companies in Serbia. More info available at: https://odgovornoposlovanje.rs/en/about-us.

According to a 2016 OECD study on small and medium enterprises, Serbia has no national strategy that targets environmental policy toward SMEs (see http://www.oecd.org/education/sme-policy-index-western-balkans-and-turkey-2016-9789264254473-en.htm). The study found no evidence of any financial or regulatory incentives to promote the greening of SMEs. Serbia’s 2011 Corporate Law introduced contemporary corporate standards, but business associations indicate that implementation is inconsistent.

The government does not maintain a national contact point for OECD guidelines, including OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Afflicted and High-Risk Areas. The government does not participate in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative or the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights.

9. Corruption

Resources to Report Corruption

Surveys show that corruption in Serbia is believed to be pervasive, but is difficult to quantify. In Transparency International’s 2018 Corruption Perception Index (CPI), Serbia ranked 87 of 180 compared countries, worse than its ranking of 77 in 2017. In its 2018 progress report on Serbia, the EU said corruption remained a serious problem, and anti-corruption efforts had yet to yield meaningful results.

Some U.S. firms have identified corruption as an obstacle to foreign direct investment in Serbia. Corruption appears most pervasive in cases involving public procurement, natural resource extraction, government-owned property, and political influence/pressure on the judiciary and prosecutors.

Serbia is a signatory to the Council of Europe’s Civil Law Convention on Corruption and has ratified the Council’s Criminal Law Convention on Corruption, the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, and the United Nations Convention against Corruption. Serbia also is a member of the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO), a peer-monitoring organization that provides peer-based assessments of members’ anti-corruption efforts on a continuing basis.

The Serbian government has worked to bring its legal framework for combating corruption more in line with EU norms, and a dedicated state body—the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) —oversees efforts in this area. The Criminal Code specifies a large number of potential offenses that can be used to prosecute corruption and economic offenses, including but not limited to giving or accepting a bribe, abuse of office, abuse of a monopoly, misfeasance in public procurement, abuse of economic authority, fraud in service, and embezzlement.

In November 2016, Serbia’s National Assembly further strengthened anti-corruption laws through three pieces of legislation. The Law on Organization and Competence of State Organs in Suppressing Corruption, Organized Crime for the first time established specialized anti-corruption prosecution units and judicial departments, mandated the use of task forces, and introduced liaison officers and financial forensic experts. The Law on Asset Forfeiture was amended to expand coverage to new criminal offences, and amendments to the Criminal Code made corruption offenses easier to prosecute. Following these legal changes, specialized anti-corruption departments started operations in March 2018 in Novi Sad, Belgrade, Kraljevo, and Niš to prosecute offenders who have committed crimes of corruption valued at less than RSD 200 million (USD 2.1 million). Cases valued above this level are handled by the Organized Crime Prosecutor’s Office (OPCO).

During the first 10 months of implementation of the new Law on Organization of State Bodies in Combating Organized Crime, Terrorism and Corruption (March 1 through Dec 31, 2018), three out of four of Serbia’s new specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutorial Departments reported filing 444 indictments and obtaining 315 final criminal convictions for corruption and economic offenses, resulting in prison sentences for more than 60 individuals (the specialized anti-corruption department in Belgrade was unable to update statistics as of the date of this report). While Serbia has begun to establish a track record in low-level corruption convictions, the EU noted in its 2018 progress report that there are still very few convictions for high-level corruption, and those that exist are mostly against former Government officials. There have also been allegations that, in some cases, criminal law was being applied in a discriminatory manner. In one prominent example, a report by Serbia’s Administration for the Prevention of Money Laundering indicated a large number of bank accounts and a number of potentially suspicious transactions by a high-level official, but the Higher Prosecutor’s Office decided not to launch an investigation. In another, the ACA filed a criminal report with OPCO regarding an earlier purchase of real estate with unexplained funds by Serbia’s current Minister of Defense; OCPO dismissed the case, saying no evidence of a crime had been found.

In 2015-2018, there were a series of large-scale arrests of former and current officials on allegations of corruption and abuse of position. In total, these actions resulted in the arrest of over 200 people. To date the arrests have resulted in a number of criminal cases, but none has concluded in either a conviction or an acquittal.

The law requires income and asset disclosure by appointed or elected officials, and regulates conflict of interest for all public officials. The disclosures cover assets of the officials, spouses, and dependent children. Declarations are publicly available on the ACA website and failures to file or to fully disclose income and assets are subject to administrative and/or criminal sanctions. Significant changes to assets or income must be reported annually, upon departure from office, and for a period of two years after separation. In a report covering 2018, the ACA said that 10 criminal charges were dismissed against public office holders in the period. The report noted that there were three first-instance convictions in a basic court, all resulting in six-month terms of imprisonment. Of these, two were with suspended sentences of six months imprisonment plus two years of supervision.

Serbian authorities do not require private companies to establish internal codes of conduct related to corruption or other matters, but some professional associations – e.g. for attorneys, engineers and doctors – enforce codes of conduct for their members. Private companies often have internal controls, ethics, or compliance programs designed to detect and prevent bribery of government officials. Large companies often have elaborate internal programs, especially in industries such as tobacco, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and industries regularly involved in public procurement.

Serbian law does not provide protection for non-governmental organizations involved in investigating corruption. However, the criminal procedure code provides witness protection measures, and Serbia enacted a Whistleblower Protection Law in June 2015, under which individuals can report corruption in companies and government agencies and receive court protection from retaliation by their employers. In 2017, the Higher Court in Novi Sad ruled in favor of a whistleblower who reported malfeasance in the local government. The court ruled that the whistleblower should be compensated financially for damages, and that defendant (city government) had to enable the whistleblower to perform her work duties. In addition, the defendant was obliged to publish the court judgment in daily newspapers. In 2018, 122 cases were filed under the Law.

U.S. firms interested in doing business or investing in Serbia are advised to perform due diligence before concluding business deals. Legal audits generally are consistent with international standards, using information gathered from public books, the register of fixed assets, the court register, the statistical register, as well as from the firm itself, chambers, and other sources. The U.S. Commercial Service in Belgrade can provide U.S. companies with background information on companies and individuals via the International Company Profile (ICP) service. An ICP provides information about a local company or entity, its financial standing, and reputation in the business community, and includes a site visit to the local company and a confidential interview with the company management. For more information, contact the local office at belgrade@trade.gov and visit www.export.gov/serbia. The U.S. Commercial Service also maintains lists of international consulting firms in Belgrade, local consulting firms, experienced professionals, and corporate/commercial law offices, in addition to its export promotion and advocacy services for U.S. business.

The Regional Anti-Corruption Initiative maintains a website with updates about anti-corruption efforts in Serbia and the region: http://rai-see.org/.

Resources to Report Corruption

Serbian Anti-Corruption Agency

  • Carice Milice 1, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia
  • +381 (0) 11 4149 100
  • office@acas.rs

Transparency International Serbia

10. Political and Security Environment

Since October 2000, Serbia has had democratically-elected governments that have committed publicly to supporting regional stability and security. Governments, however, frequently call early elections on the local and national level, which often leave politicians and elected officials focused on the next campaign. Elections in Serbia are generally free, without incidents of violence. The government has made EU membership a primary goal, but progress toward that goal is slow, with only 16 out of 35 chapters open in Serbia’s EU acquis and only two chapters provisionally closed. Corruption is widespread, and despite some anti-corruption reforms by the government, arrests and investigations generally focus on low or mid-level technocrats, and corruption-related trials are typically drawn-out and subject to a lengthy appeal process.

Protests are not uncommon, particularly in urban areas. Beginning in December 2018, weekly anti-government demonstrations have been held across the country, attracting large crowds in major cities. The protests have been broadly peaceful. There were large protests following the presidential election in April 2017, and in 2016 after the illegal demolition of residential buildings in Belgrade. Immediately following Kosovo’s February 2008 declaration of independence from Serbia, groups attacked embassies of countries that recognized Kosovo, including the torching of the U.S. Embassy in Belgrade.

Organized groups of counter protesters assaulted participants at the 2010 LGBTI Pride Parade in Belgrade. The Serbian government cancelled the three subsequent Pride Parades at the last minute, ostensibly because of threats of violence by the same nationalist and extremist groups that attempted to disrupt the 2010 parade. Since 2014, the government has allowed Pride Parades to take place in central Belgrade, under heavy police protection, but without incident. The 2018 Pride Parade was believed to be the first time participants outnumbered security forces since 2010. Nevertheless, Serbia is not permissive to LGBTI persons, most of whom experience low personal security and are not comfortable disclosing their sexual orientation, according to polling conducted by independent organizations.

Since 2017, there has been an increase in criminal activity linked to organized crime groups. Sports hooliganism in Serbia is often associated to organized crime, and violent hooliganism remains a concern at matches of rival soccer teams within Serbia.

A number of ultra-nationalist organizations, such as Obraz and Nasi, are present in Serbia. These organizations have harassed Serbian political leaders, local NGOs, and media outlets considered to be pro-Western, but these incidents are infrequent. Additionally, their calls for action against selected targets have not resulted in any violent incidents thus far. In the 2016 parliamentary elections, three far-right political parties were elected to the National Assembly: the Serbian Radical Party, the Democratic Party of Serbia, and Dveri.

11. Labor Policies and Practices

According to the Statistical Office, Serbia has a total active labor force of approximately 3.2 million people, of which 2.8 million are employed (55.6 percent men and 44.4 percent women) and some 412,000 are unemployed. In 2018, the formal employment rate was 47.3 percent and the informal employment rate was 19.5 percent, with two-thirds of the total informally employed in the agriculture sector. Unemployment in 2018 was 12.7 percent, compared to 13.5 percent a year earlier. Youth unemployment remains relatively high at 29.7 percent, and the share of youth in the total population drops from year to year. The leading sector for employment is the government and public administration, followed by trade, services, transport, agriculture, forestry and fishery, manufacturing, and construction.

Demand for IT experts (web developers, programmers, designers) is significantly higher than supply. The National Employment Service (NES) administers various employment support schemes, including new employment, apprenticeship, and re-training programs. For more details see http://www.ras.gov.rs/en/invest-in-serbia/why-serbia/financial-benefits-and-incentives and http://rav.org.rs/business-environment/incentives/.

Labor costs are relatively low in Serbia, especially compared to European averages. In January 2019, the average net take-home salary was approximately USD 528 per month. The minimum wage is approximately USD 262 per month. Investors routinely cite favorable labor costs, as well as a highly-educated, multi-lingual workforce, as advantages to doing business in Serbia. Almost 58 percent of the workforce has completed secondary education, while 25 percent have completed higher education.

Amendments to the Labor Law in 2014 simplified procedures for hiring and dismissing workers, and changed rules for collective bargaining and the extension of collective agreements to non-negotiating parties. The law also changed severance payment requirements, so that the employer pays severance based on the years of service with that specific employer, rather than on the employee’s total years of employment, as was the case previously. Employees may be hired for up to 24 months on a provisional basis before it is required to engage them on an indefinite basis.

The official mechanism for tripartite labor dialogue is the Social and Economic Council, an independent body with representatives of the government, the Serbian Association of Employers, and trade unions. The Council is authorized to conclude an umbrella collective agreement at the national level covering basic employment conditions for all companies in Serbia. Additional information about the Council is available at http://www.socijalnoekonomskisavet.rs/eng/pocetna_eng.html.

Serbia has ratified all eight International Labor Organization core conventions including Forced Labor (No. 29), Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize (No. 87), Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining (No. 98), Equal Remuneration (No. 100), Abolition of Forced Labor (No. 105), Discrimination (No. 111), Minimum Age (No. 138), and Worst Forms of Child Labor (No. 182).

The Department of Labor’s report on the World Forms of Child Labor in Serbia can be found online at http://www.dol.gov/ilab/reports/child-labor/serbia.htm. The Human Rights Report on Serbia is available at http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/236786.pdf

12. OPIC and Other Investment Insurance Programs

The former Serbia and Montenegro signed a bilateral agreement with the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) in 2001. Following Serbia and Montenegro’s dissolution, the agreement remained in effect for Serbia. In 2009, OPIC severely restricted its programs for Serbia over an investment dispute involving a U.S. company that held OPIC insurance policies on its Serbian investments. The Serbian government and the investor concluded a settlement agreement in 2012. OPIC filed an arbitration claim against the investor and was awarded damages. OPIC then sought to use the Serbian court system to enforce the arbitration decision and collect from the investor’s property in Serbia. However, both the first instance and appellate courts rejected OPIC’s request. OPIC has reinstated its full range of programs for Serbia.

13. Foreign Direct Investment and Foreign Portfolio Investment Statistics

Table 2: Key Macroeconomic Data, U.S. FDI in Host Country/Economy

Host Country Statistical Source* USG or International Statistical Source USG or International Source of Data:
BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, Other
Economic Data Year Amount Year Amount
Host Country Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (M USD ) 2018 $47,100 2017 $41,500 www.worldbank.org/en/country
Foreign Direct Investment Host Country Statistical Source* USG or International Statistical Source USG or International Source of Data:
BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, Other
U.S. FDI in partner country (M USD , stock positions) 2018 $79.4 2017 $164 BEA data available at http://bea.gov/international/direct_investment_multinational_companies_comprehensive_data.htm
Host country’s FDI in the United States (M USD , stock positions) 2018 $2.6 2017 $4 BEA data available at http://bea.gov/international/direct_investment_multinational_companies_comprehensive_data.htm
Total inbound stock of FDI as % host GDP 2018 0.2% 2017 0.4% N/A

*Source of GDP data: Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Serbia at http://www.mfin.gov.rs/pages/issue.php?id=3 

*Source of FDI data: National Bank of Serbia (NBS) at http://www.nbs.rs/internet/cirilica/80/platni_bilans.html 

NBS data on FDI significantly differ from U.S. data. The NBS calculates FDI according to the country from which the investment arrives, rather than by the ownership of the investing company. Frequently, U.S. investments in Serbia are carried out through subsidiaries of U.S. companies located in another European country. If a U.S. company invests in Serbia through a Dutch subsidiary, for example, the NBS records the investment as coming from the Netherlands rather than from the United States.


Table 3: Sources and Destination of FDI

Direct Investment From/in Counterpart Economy Data
From Top Five Sources/To Top Five Destinations (US Dollars, Millions) 2017
Inward Direct Investment Outward Direct Investment
Total Inward $37,605 100% Total Outward $3,615 100%
Netherlands $7,346 20% Bosnia and Herzegovina $995 27%
Austria $4,356 12% Montenegro $793 22%
Cyprus $2,890 8% Slovenia $453 13%
Germany $2,366 6% Russian Federation $187 5%
Slovenia $2,019 5% Bulgaria $110 3%
“0” reflects amounts rounded to +/- USD 500,000.


Table 4: Sources of Portfolio Investment

Data not available.

14. Contact for More Information

Sarah Gjorgjievski
Economic Section
Bulevar kneza Aleksandra Karadjordjevica 92
11040 Belgrade, Serbia
+381-11-706-4282
SerbiaInvestment@state.gov

2019 Investment Climate Statements: Serbia
Build a Custom Report

01 / Select A Year

02 / Select Sections

03 / Select Countries You can add more than one country or area.

U.S. Department of State

The Lessons of 1989: Freedom and Our Future