Volodymyr Golovatyuk
According to preliminary data from the NBS, by the end of the second quarter GDP reached the level of the previous six months in absolute terms, marking zero growth of the economy in real terms. This was due to the fact that the decline in the first quarter (-1.2%) was offset by growth (+1.1%) in the second quarter.
The overall result was due to the reduction of the created added value in the economy. The structure of GDP was negatively affected by net exports of goods and services and a decrease in final consumption of non-commercial organizations. However, households showed a significant increase in consumption. As well as created accumulation of fixed capital and changes in inventories, which determined the compensated growth.
Economist Vladimir Golovatyuk points out that the final consumption of goods by households grew by 3.8% in the second quarter, while investment in fixed capital – by 26%. In other words, the country consumes more than it produces, maintaining the previous model of economic growth at the expense of external resources.
“Household final consumption exceeds GDP, i.e. the country’s generated income, by 4%. By the way, a year ago – by 2%. Total domestic consumption (household and public sector consumption plus investment) exceeds GDP by 31.3%, and a year ago by 26.5%. This once again emphasizes that the main sectors of the economy – the consumption of the population, the budget and investments – are supported by inflows of funds from abroad. And this is a very negative characteristic of the economic situation,” the expert believes.
GDP growth in the first half of 2025 in terms of utilization was mainly due to gross fixed capital formation (+4.9%) with a share in the formation of GDP of 23.2% and volume growth of 25.3%. And also final consumption of households (+3.5%), whose share in the formation of GDP amounted to 85.8%, the volume of which increased by 4.2%.
Thus, domestic production does not cover the formed needs. Living beyond one’s means is fraught with a lot of unpleasant things, up to the “collapse” of the economy, if the inflow of external injections is suddenly suspended. And it is not even about political ambitions. If the government continues to increase the size of debt obligations at the same pace and it is impossible to provide them with its own production and without new injections, it creates a vicious circle of financial dependence.
And the pace is as follows: in 4 previous years the state debt increased by 52 billion lei and now amounts to 125 billion lei. If the pace is maintained, the state debt will exceed 200 billion lei in 4 years. And no one can guarantee whether there will be economic growth. “The problem is not the size of the debt, but the country’s ability to service it. And taking into account the state of our economy and growth prospects, a debt of 200 billion lei will be unsustainable for the economy and the budget,” Vladimir Golovatiuc believes.
Therefore, according to the expert, it is dangerous to underestimate the importance of the integral indicator of the economy, and even more so to postpone its timely publication. We still do not have so many statistical tools for evaluation, as in European statistics, where they operate with various indices of business activity, demand and supply, characterizing the real state of affairs in various spheres. By the way, it has not been possible to hide the ever-increasing size of the foreign trade deficit, which significantly reduces the income produced in the country.
The negative impact on GDP dynamics of net export of goods and services (-9.1%) was the result of a 5.5% decrease in the volume of total exports of goods and services. In particular, – a decrease in the volume of exports of goods by about 1/5, simultaneously with an increase in the volume of imports of goods and services by 12.9%.
But it is possible to say that everything is not so terrible. At the presentation of the data, Oleg Kara, Director General of the NBS, drew attention to the saving contribution of exports of services, which helped to mitigate the impact of the trade deficit in goods on GDP dynamics.
“Exports of services in the first half of 2025, compared to the same period of the previous year, increased by 9.7%, its share in GDP increased to 16.3%, which in general contributed to GDP growth of 1.5%. It is worth noting that the value of exports of services in the first half of this year exceeded the value of exports of goods by about 6.6%, amounting to about 52% of the total exports of goods and services,” said Oleg Kara.
As for production factors, they made their own contribution to the creation of gross value added: construction (GVA +8%), utilities (+10%), traditionally – the financial sector and trade (+1.6%), information technology (+2%). Even health care and education (+1%) did not falter
The most pronounced negative impact on the results of the half-year was the decline in gross value added in agriculture (-6.1%), manufacturing (-3.4%), real estate operations (-4.6%). The self-employed and scientists worked very unproductively this year – the GVA of professional, scientific and technical activities decreased by 10%.
By the way, when calculating GDP, accounting of the product produced in the non-observed economy is always done, using the statistics of the financial sector, elements of shadow employment, etc. And the Director General of the NBS recognizes this. Only the size of the “additional calculation” is not given anywhere. We did not learn about “envelope salaries”, which indirectly indicate the scale of the phenomenon, in the current review of the labor market either. Although these difficulties in collecting data on the new sample were the reason for the delay with the estimated GDP of the first half of the year.
Of course, the situation is changing, the size of the shadow economy has recently, according to external sources, grown to 37% of GDP in Moldova – a record on the European continent. The shadow economy in Greece, for example, is 36% of GDP, the highest in Europe, almost double the average for developed countries (17%) and well above the EU average.
Other studies, such as the EY publication, show that the shadow economy as a whole has shrunk in 119 countries between 2000 and 2023, despite accounting for about 11.8% of global GDP in 2025. The most obvious consequences of the shadow economy are undermining economic security and lower incomes, which is not surprising given the current level of economic management.
There are different points of view on how long it is necessary to fight the shadow economy. Sometimes it is no longer useful. The size of the shadow economy, which is difficult to estimate, gives rise to politicization of this topic, which is not our goal.
