The sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2017 will amount to 2,753,242.4 million rubles (3.2% of GDP), in 2018 - 2,011,192.8 million rubles (2.2% of GDP), in 2019 - 1 142,165.5 million rubles (1.2% of GDP), including:
sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit in 2017 will amount to 3,056,115.7 million rubles (3.5% of GDP), in 2018 - 2,339,826.7 million rubles (2.5% of GDP), in 2019 - 1,269,242.7 million rubles (1.3% of GDP);
sources external funding federal budget deficit will amount to (-) 302,873.4 million rubles (-0.3% of GDP) in 2017, in 2018 - (-) 328,634.0 million rubles (-0.4% of GDP), in 2019 - (-) 127,077.2 million rubles (-0.1% of GDP).
In terms of sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit in the forecast period, receipts from government borrowings will prevail. Thus, in 2017, the volume of attraction from the placement of government securities Russian Federation, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, is planned in the amount of 1,878,722.4 million rubles, in 2018-2019 the indicated figure will be 1,581,262.4 million rubles and 1,658,695.0 million rubles, respectively. The repayment volumes will amount to 828,722.4 million rubles in 2017, 531,262.4 million rubles in 2018 and 608,695.0 million rubles in 2019.
The volume of payments for repayment and maintenance public debt as a percentage of the total volume of borrowings, excluding planned exchange operations (coverage ratio) will be 84.7% in 2017, 92.9% in 2018 and 91.9% in 2019.
The Accounts Chamber notes that in 2017-2019, the growth in attracting government borrowings from the Russian Federation through the placement of government bonds on the domestic debt market may lead to a deterioration in the conditions (increase in yield) for the placement of government bonds for the federal budget, as well as to an increase in the volume of government domestic debt Russian Federation and the debt burden on the federal budget in terms of servicing it.
In addition, according to the Accounts Chamber, in 2017-2019, in the context of the continuing policy of foreign states to curb the inflow of foreign investment The risks of non-attraction to the Russian financial market due to the placement on the domestic market of government securities in the currency of the Russian Federation in the required volumes and on acceptable terms based on a number of factors, including the outpacing growth in the supply of OFZs at auctions over the growth in demand for OFZs in 2015-2016 years.
Rates coupon income on government securities of the Russian Federation planned for placement, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, are forecasted at the following level: in 2017 OFZ-PK - 11% per annum, OFZ-PD - 9% per annum, OFZ-IN - 3% per annum ; in 2018 OFZ-PK - 9.75% per annum, OFZ-PD - 8.5% per annum, OFZ-IN - 3.5% per annum; in 2019 OFZ-PK - 9.5% per annum, OFZ-PD - 8.5% per annum, OFZ-IN - 3.5% per annum.
The Accounts Chamber notes that if the RUONIA rate remains at the level of the current values of the second half of 2016 (10.45% per annum) by the end of the year, the OFZ-PK coupon yield will be about 11.9% per annum and the estimate of the Russian Ministry of Finance of the interest rates in 2017 at the level of 4% should be assessed as optimistic.
According to the experts of the Russian Academy of National Economy and public service under the President of the Russian Federation and the Institute economic policy them. E.T. Gaidar "demand for Russian state securities is and will remain high: OFZ investment is one of the best strategies in domestic debt markets developing countries which is largely due to the predictable, understandable and credible policy of the Bank of Russia to reduce inflation. In addition, the presence of a large and liquid market for domestic public debt is a necessary condition for the recognition national currency country as a reserve currency, at least on a regional scale.
Another major source of financing the deficit is planned to use the Reserve Fund in 2017 in the amount of 1,151.9 billion rubles and funds of the NWF in 2017 in the amount of 668.2 billion rubles, in 2018 - 1,162.2 billion rubles, in 2019 - 139.7 billion rubles.
The Accounts Chamber notes that during 2016 the Federal Treasury used the resources of the Reserve Fund to finance the federal budget deficit while reducing the balance of funds in the currency of the Russian Federation on the unified account of the federal budget below the target of 500 billion rubles. Wherein Federal Treasury placements were carried out on deposit accounts with credit institutions, as well as in securities under repo transactions for volumes exceeding the resulting deviations from the target of 500 billion rubles.
Thus, the decrease in the amount of funds in the single treasury account below the target (500 billion rubles) and the associated need to use the Reserve Fund in the presence of sufficient funds to cover the resulting deficit, which are in placement, indicate the need to improve the quality of planning by the Federal Treasury operations to manage funds on a single account of the federal budget.
Volume of proceeds to the federal budget from privatization federal property in 2017 compared to 2016 will decrease by 267,116.9 million rubles and amount to 138,211.9 million rubles, in 2018 - 13,607.0 million rubles, in 2019 - 13,886.7 million rubles .
In 2017, in accordance with the decisions adopted by the Government of the Russian Federation, it is planned to alienate the federally owned blocks of shares:
10.9% minus 1 share of VTB Bank (PJSC) (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated June 15, 2016 N 1223-r);
25% minus 1 share of PAO Sovcomflot (Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1649-r dated August 3, 2016).
Estimated receipts to the federal budget from the sale of a stake in VTB Bank (PJSC) are projected at 95,500.0 million rubles, from the sale of a stake in PAO Sovcomflot - 24,000.0 million rubles.
The Committee notes that the actual figures for proceeds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation of the Russian Federation in the capital in 2011-2016 show that the values established in the initial versions of the federal laws on the federal budget are adjusted multiple both upwards and downwards. reduction depending on the actual performance.
Thus, it should be noted that the start of the procedure for the sale of the federal block of shares in PAO Sovcomflot has been repeatedly postponed since 2015, due to the deterioration of the macroeconomic situation in the Russian Federation and a decrease in investment attractiveness Russian companies with both private capital and state participation.
The Accounts Chamber notes the risk of further postponement of the transaction planned for 2017 for the sale of the federal stake in PAO Sovcomflot in case of unfavorable market conditions.
The volume of receipts to the federal budget from the privatization of state blocks of shares (shares) joint-stock companies and objects of other property (excluding the value of shares largest companies, occupying a leading position in the relevant sectors of the economy, and taking into account the order of the Government of the Russian Federation of June 9, 2016 N 1172-r) is planned in 2017 in the amount of 18.7 billion rubles, in 2018 - 13.6 billion rubles , in 2019 - 13.9 billion rubles.
The Committee believes that the primary goal of the privatization program should be to create effective management businesses rather than looking for additional sources of financing the deficit.
The volume of proceeds from the sale of state stocks precious metals and precious stones in the domestic market in 2017 will increase by 5,889.0 million rubles against 2016 and amount to 10,411.0 million rubles, in 2018-2019 the specified volume will be 10,500.0 million rubles annually. Increasing federal budget revenues Money it is planned to ensure this by increasing the volume of supply of precious stones (mainly natural diamonds) from the State Fund of Russia.
Payments for the purchase of state reserves of precious metals and precious stones in 2017-2019 will increase compared to 2016 and will amount to 6,000.0 million rubles in 2017, 8,500.0 million rubles in 2018, and - 10,500.0 million rubles.
The budget allocations provided for the possible execution of state guarantees of the Russian Federation in the currency of the Russian Federation will amount to 80,573.4 million rubles in 2017, 115,523.2 million rubles in 2018, and 84,030.1 million rubles in 2019. rubles. The volumes of the indicated appropriations are formed according to the state guarantees of the Russian Federation in force at the time of preparation of the draft law, based on the actual volumes of the obligations of the principals secured by them. A coefficient of 0.2 is applied to the volume of budget allocations for the execution of state guarantees provided for the implementation of the state defense order.
An analysis of the actual use of budget allocations provided for the execution of state guarantees for possible warranty cases showed that in 2014-2015 the execution of state guarantees was not carried out, in January-September 2016 the obligations of the guarantor in the amount of 0.13 billion rubles were fulfilled, in 2013 the guarantor's obligations were fulfilled in the amount of 2.6 billion rubles.
The provision of budget loans to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation from the federal budget in 2017 is provided for in the amount of up to 100,000.0 million rubles, in 2018 up to 100,000.0 million rubles, in 2019 up to 50,000.0 million rubles in order to providing additional financial assistance to the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Budget loans are provided to partially cover the budget deficits of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, cover temporary cash gaps arising in the execution of the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as to carry out activities related to the elimination of the consequences of natural disasters and man-made accidents. The fee for using such budget loans is set at 0.1 percent per annum.
When determining the volume of granting budget loans from the federal budget in 2017 to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, the need for partial compensation of the total amount of debt on debt obligations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to be repaid by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in 2017 was taken into account (with the exception of Moscow, Khanty-Mansiysk and Yamalo -Nenets Autonomous Okrug).
At the same time, it should be noted that in the amendments of the Government of the Russian Federation to the draft federal law N 4313-7 "On Amendments to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation and the Recognition of Certain Provisions of Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation as invalid", it was proposed to extend for 2017 the norm on amending the consolidated budget drawing of the federal budget without amending the federal law "On the federal budget for 2017 and for the planning period of 2018 and 2019" in accordance with the decisions of the Government of the Russian Federation after preliminary consideration by the tripartite commission on interbudgetary relations in the event of an increase in budget allocations for the provision of budget loans from the federal budget to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in excess of the established amount of budget appropriations within the proceeds from the return of budget loans granted to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
So, on the basis of a similar norm in 2015, budget allocations were increased by 32.0 billion rubles, while the volume of early repaid budget loans amounted to 63.4 billion rubles, in 2016 - by 28.0 billion rubles, the volume of returned budget loans as of October 1, 2016 amounted to 40.1 billion rubles, which is potential additional funds for the provision of budget loans from the federal budget to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in excess of the established amount of budget appropriations.
The Committee notes that article 7, paragraphs 8 and 9 federal law dated April 9, 2009 N 58-FZ "On amendments to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation and certain legislative acts Russian Federation" established that until January 1, 2017, the budget deficit of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation ( local budget) may exceed the specified limits on the difference between received and repaid budget loans, and the state (municipal) debt before January 1, 2018 - on the amount of debt on budget loans.
The Committee considers it possible to synchronize the effect of these norms by extending until January 1, 2018 the removal of the limitation on the size of the budget deficit of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation (local budget).
The Accounts Chamber notes that from January 1, 2018, the ability of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to attract budget loans will be limited due to the termination of the temporary restrictions established by Article 107 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation. When calculating the maximum amount of public debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, from January 1, 2018, debt on budget loans provided from the federal budget will be taken into account.
According to the results of the execution of the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in 2015, the excess of the maximum amount of public debt of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation (including budget loans) was noted in 18 regions. At the same time, in the Republic of Ingushetia, the volume of debt on budget loans is 13.3% higher than the annual volume of budget revenues of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation, excluding the approved volume of gratuitous receipts, in the Republic North Ossetia- Alania - by 7.2%.
The provision of budget loans for the implementation of activities related to the elimination of the consequences of natural disasters and man-made accidents, if necessary, will be carried out, as in previous years without charging interest.
The volume of repayments on loans granted to other budgets of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation will amount to 226,228.6 million rubles in 2017, 330,164.3 million rubles in 2018, and 202,500.0 million rubles in 2019, which is more than 2 times higher than the volume of their provision in 2017-2018 and more than 4 times in 2019.
The provision of budget loans at the expense of targeted foreign loans (borrowings) in 2017-2019 will remain in the amount and for the same purposes as in 2016 (300 thousand US dollars), in ruble equivalent in 2017-2019 will be respectively 20 .3 million rubles, 20.6 million rubles and 21.3 million rubles.
The Accounts Chamber notes that Article 11 of the draft law does not provide for budget allocations for the provision of budget loans by the federal budget within the country at the expense of targeted foreign loans (borrowings) in 2018-2019, which does not correspond to the draft Program of State External Borrowings of the Russian Federation.
The return of budget loans provided within the country at the expense of targeted foreign loans, in accordance with the calculation of internal sources, in 2017 is provided in the amount of 1.3 billion rubles, in 2018 - 0.9 billion rubles, in 2019 - 0, 7 billion rubles.
Compensatory payments on guaranteed savings of citizens in accordance with the Federal Law of May 10, 1995 N 73-FZ "On the restoration and protection of savings of citizens of the Russian Federation" (deposits in the Savings Bank of the Russian Federation as of June 20, 1991, deposits (contributions) in organizations state insurance of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 1992 and the redemption of certificates of the USSR Savings Bank and USSR State Treasury obligations placed on the territory of the Russian Federation in the period up to January 1, 1992) in 2017-2019 will not change compared to the volume of payments in 2016 and will amount to 5,500.0 million rubles annually.
In general, for the period from 1996 to 2015, funds in the amount of 490.8 billion rubles were allocated from the federal budget for these purposes. The actual execution of compensation payments amounted to: for 2012 - 11.9 billion rubles, or 23.8% of the planned annual volume, for 2013 - 9.2 billion rubles, or 18.4%, for 2014 - 7, 8 billion rubles, or 15.6% of the originally envisaged volume, for 2015 - 6.8 billion rubles, or 13.5% of the originally envisaged volume, as of October 1, 2016, the total volume compensation payments amounted to 4.2 billion rubles, or 75.8% of the amount provided for by Federal Law N 359-FZ, subject to changes.
The Committee notes that the trend of an annual reduction in the actual execution of compensation payments, due to the non-expansion of the age categories of citizens entitled to receive compensation in a threefold amount of the balance of deposits in the Savings Bank of the Russian Federation and deposits (contributions) in state insurance organizations, gives reason to expect non-performance these goals means in in full.
Other sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit are planned in 2017 in the amount of 185,992.7 million rubles, in 2018 - 127,639.3 million rubles, in 2019 - 79,565.1 million rubles.
In terms of sources of external financing of the deficit in 2017 - 2019, the volume of repayment of the state external debt of the Russian Federation will exceed the attraction of funds: in 2017, the attraction of external loans will amount to 480,444.1 million rubles (7,117.7 million US dollars), repayment - 512,671.3 million rubles (7,595.1 million US dollars). ); in 2018, attraction - 209,457.9 million rubles (3,048.9 million dollars), repayment - 284,120.5 million rubles (4,135.7 million dollars); in 2019 - attraction of 214,319.3 million rubles (3,014.3 million US dollars), repayment - 243,397.2 million rubles (3,423.3 million US dollars).
Budget allocations provided for the possible execution of state guarantees of the Russian Federation in foreign currency, in 2017 planned in the amount of 2,256.6 million rubles (33.4 million US dollars), in 2018 - 3,653.9 million rubles (53.2 million US dollars), in 2019 - 4 179.5 million rubles (58.8 million US dollars). The volumes of budget allocations for the possible execution of the state guarantees of the Russian Federation are formed according to the state guarantees of the Russian Federation in force at the time of preparation of the Draft Law, based on the actual volumes of the obligations of the principals secured by them.
It should be noted that payments from the federal budget for the fulfillment of debt obligations under guarantees provided in foreign currency in 2014-2015 and the past period of 2016 were not made due to the fulfillment by the principals of their obligations.
ConsultantPlus: note.
The text of the paragraph is given in accordance with the original.
In accordance with the draft External Borrowing Program, in 2017 it is envisaged to attract IBRD loans for 17 projects, including 9 existing projects, in the total amount of 117.7 million US dollars (equivalent to 7,944.1 million rubles), which is USD 23.7 million, or 25.2%, more than the indicator for 2016, established by Federal Law N 359-FZ and in calculations thereto, and is due to the adjustment of the planned volumes of raising loans for 9 existing projects, taking into account the actual need for use borrowed money in 2016, as well as an increase in the forecast exchange rate of the US dollar against the ruble, in 2018 - for 15 projects, including 7 ongoing projects, for a total of 48.9 million US dollars (3,357.9 million rubles ), in 2019 - for 12 projects, including 4 ongoing projects, for a total amount of 14.3 million US dollars (1,019.3 million rubles).
The Accounts Chamber notes that the council executive directors World Bank According to the Russian Ministry of Finance, there have been no questions regarding the provision of IBRD loans to the Russian Federation for the implementation of new IBRD projects.
Taking into account that the coordination takes place from one to 8 years, the probability of signing loan agreements is low, it is necessary to note the risks of non-execution of the External Borrowing Program in 2017-2019.
In addition, according to the Accounts Chamber, during the implementation of IFI projects in the total amount of project financing, the share of IFI loan funds is significantly reduced compared to the originally planned volume, and the originally planned implementation period is exceeded by 5–8 years, which leads to a significant increase in federal budget expenditures. .
The provision of state financial and state export loans to foreign states and (or) foreign legal entities in 2017 is planned in the amount of 376,750.0 million rubles (5,581.5 million US dollars) (return - 108,360.6 million rubles ( 1,605.3 million US dollars), in 2018 the provision is projected in the amount of 417,181.0 million rubles (6,072.5 million US dollars) (return - 166,863.6 million rubles (2,428.9 million . US dollars), in 2019 provision - 259,394.1 million rubles (3,648.3 million US dollars) (return - 165,574.4 million rubles (2,328.8 million US dollars). funds are needed for the completion of existing projects and the implementation by the Russian Federation commitments made within the framework of existing intergovernmental agreements, as well as in order to provide state financial support for the export of industrial products in industries where a high level of competitiveness of domestic products is maintained.
It should be noted that the actual provision of state financial and export credits annually falls below the planned volume. Thus, in 2012, execution amounted to 80.2% of approved budget assignments, in 2013 - 47.2%, in 2014 - 91.1%, in 2015 - 91.8%.
The Accounts Chamber notes that the reason for the underutilization of the approved volumes of state loans is the lack of export contracts and, as a result, non-use by foreign borrowers of state loans of the Russian Federation provided to finance projects included in the program for providing state financial and state export loans, as well as non-signing of intergovernmental agreements throughout the year.
Arrears of foreign governments, their legal entities on the principal debt on government loans provided former USSR and the Russian Federation, increased in 2015 by 97.6 billion rubles, or 34.2%, and amounted to 383.2 billion rubles, due to the length of the procedure for settling overdue debts of individual debtors.
The Accounts Chamber notes the expediency of intensifying activities to settle overdue debts of individual debtors, which will positively affect the parameters of the federal budget.
Other sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit will amount to - (-) 270,646.1 million rubles or (-) 4,009.6 million US dollars in 2017, in 2018 - (-) 253,971.3 million rubles ( -) 3,696.8 million USD), in 2019 - (-) 97,999.3 million rubles (-) 1,378.3 million USD).
Introduction
1. Theoretical foundations of budget balance management
1.1 The concept and meaning of the budget deficit
1.2 Classification of sources of financing the budget deficit
1.3 The essence of public debt and methods of managing it
2. Analysis of the budget deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation
2.1 general characteristics sources of financing the federal budget deficit
2.2 Analysis of domestic public debt
2.3 Analysis of external public debt
3. Ways to overcome the federal budget deficit
3.1 Problems of balancing the federal budget of the Russian Federation and methods for reducing the deficit
3.2 Prospects for public debt and ways to reduce it
Conclusion
Bibliography
budget deficit financing debt
Introduction
Holding economic reforms changed the basis for the functioning of the country's budget system. Relations between state authorities at various levels have also changed, which required the development of a methodology for the formation of a new budget mechanism. The budgetary system of any federal state in certain periods of time exists in the conditions of budget imbalance. Normal operation such a system is associated with the need for a rational redistribution of budgetary resources using a clear mechanism for its implementation.
The budget deficit is a financial phenomenon that all the states of the world inevitably faced at certain periods of their history. A fully balanced state budget, that is, a budget without a balance, is only theoretically possible.
It is practically impossible to imagine a state in which all the financial and economic levers that stimulate the flow of funds to the budget work flawlessly, and government spending does not exceed revenues.
Many economically developed states have lived and continue to live in debt, although it would be fair to note the emerging Lately tendency to reduce the budget deficit economically developed countries. A budget deficit is considered normal, approximately corresponding to the level of inflation in the country.
The reason for the imbalance is also public debt. Servicing the public debt (payment of interest to lenders) is a heavy burden for any state, as it constantly draws a certain share working capital and leads to an increase in the budget deficit of the state.
For the last decade, Russia has been searching for effective ways to reform interbudgetary relations. Today, of course, there is a need to create a science-based financial mechanism balancing budgets. At the same time, the quality of the balance of their budgets should be of great importance. However, it should be noted that many theoretical and methodological problems of balancing budgets have not been resolved due to the changed social, economic and political conditions for the functioning of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. All this determines the relevance term paper especially during the ongoing global financial crisis.
The purpose of this work is to analyze the budget deficit, sources of its financing and public debt as the most important elements. financial system states, their main characteristics.
The specific objectives of this course work are:
Determination of the essence of the deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation, sources of its financing and public debt;
Analysis of the composition and dynamics of sources of financing the deficit, as well as internal and external public debt;
Analysis state of the art and problems of balancing the budget of the Russian Federation, as well as identifying possible prospects and ways to reduce the deficit state budget and public debt.
1. Theoretical foundations of budget balance management
1.1 The concept and meaning of the budget deficit
In the budgets of various levels, the principle of balance always applies, which means that the volume of budgeted expenditures must correspond to the total volume of budget revenues and receipts from the sources of financing its deficit. In the preparation, approval and execution of the budget authorized bodies should proceed from the need to minimize the size of the budget deficit.
However, it is extremely difficult to achieve equality of income and expenses. Usually budget revenues exceed its expenditures and vice versa. The excess of revenues over expenditures is called a budget surplus, and the excess of expenditures over revenues is called a budget deficit.
IN modern world There are no states that at one time or another in their history would not have faced budget deficits. It is due to various reasons. In some cases, the state may deliberately increase the budget deficit. In particular, in order to stimulate economic activity and aggregate demand during a downturn in production, the government may take special decisions aimed at increasing the level of employment (for example, funding programs to create new jobs) or significantly reduce taxes. As a result, budget expenditures increase or its revenues decrease, resulting in a deficit. But this deficit is deliberately created by the state and is called a structural deficit.
In contrast to the structural deficit, cyclical deficit is less dependent on the conscious fiscal policy states. It is due to the general decline in production, which occurs at the stage of crisis and is the result of the cyclical development of the economy. In the context of a decline in production, taxes and state revenues are reduced, which means that there is a deficit.
There are also active and passive deficits. An active deficit occurs as a result of an excess of spending over income, and a passive one as a result of a decrease in tax rates and other receipts, which is a consequence of the slowdown in economic growth, underpayments, etc.
There are short-term and long-term budget imbalances. An imbalance is short-term if the excess of spending over income is limited to one fiscal year and is a reflection of changes in the macroeconomic situation compared to the one in which the budget was prepared. This is mainly due to the lack of the necessary experience in macroeconomic forecasting, insufficient consideration of the possible changes in a number of circumstances.
For example, a reduction in revenues to the budget may occur as a result of falling export prices, a reduction in production volumes below the envisaged level, shifts in the structure of demand for manufactured products and a decrease in their competitiveness. An increase in the state budget deficit may also be caused by an unexpectedly sharp increase in government spending due to an increase in the inflation rate above the foreseen value, the expansion of transfer payments, combined with the introduction of tax breaks, which is a very popular measure before the next election.
Long-term fiscal imbalance is associated with a widening gap between government spending and revenue over the years and is due to causes that are more sustainable. Thus, in most developed countries over the past 15 years, there has been a steady upward trend in the national budget deficit. This is due to the following factors:
1) an increase in the number of social payments, and hence the social burden on the budget;
2) unfavorable demographic situation associated with the aging of the population, resulting in an increase in the cost of pensions, allocations for health care, etc.;
3) liberalization tax legislation and as a consequence of this, a decrease in the value of tax rates (without a corresponding adjustment in government spending);
4) an increase in the volume of external debt.
In general, the state budget is determined by three main factors:
1) a long-term trend in the dynamics of tax revenues and government spending;
2) stage business cycle, in which the economy is in the period under review;
3) the current policy of the state in the field budget spending and income.
Very often, especially in our country and in other countries, there is an artificial either overestimation or underestimation of the true value of the budget deficit. Thus, artificially lowering the budget deficit can be carried out using the following tools:
1) "tax amnesty", which allows taxpayers who have previously evaded taxes to pay at one time the entire amount equal to a certain part of the total tax collection;
2) measures to collect overdue tax payments;
3) introduction of temporary or added taxes;
4) deferred payments wages public sector employees;
5) postponing the mandatory indexation of wages in accordance with the dynamics of the inflation rate;
6) sale of state assets;
7) the presence of a hidden deficit due to quasi-budget spending.
The latter include centralized loans provided for preferential terms Central bank. Besides, central bank can finance separate operations related to public debt, to cover losses from stabilization measures exchange rate currencies, refinance Agriculture and so on. As a result, the losses of the Central Bank are growing and inflation is increasing, while the deficit is not growing.
An artificial increase in the size of the state budget deficit can occur as a result of the following circumstances. First, when assessing the amount of public spending, depreciation in the public sector of the economy is not always taken into account. Secondly, an important item of government spending is servicing the public debt. However, very often the amount of interest payments on the debt is overestimated due to inflationary payments.
At high rates of inflation, when the differences in the dynamics of nominal and real interest rates are very significant, this overstatement of government spending can be quite significant. There are even situations when the nominal (official) deficit and government debt are growing, while the real deficit and debt are declining, which makes it much more difficult to assess the government's policy. Therefore, when measuring the budget deficit, an adjustment for inflation is required.
With this adjustment, the real budget deficit is determined, which is the difference between the nominal deficit and the amount of interest on the public debt, multiplied by the inflation rate. The overall budget deficit less the inflationary portion of interest payments is the operating deficit.
It is believed that the presence of a budget deficit in itself is not yet a signal of economic trouble. Very often, the deficit is seen as an important instrument of the state's economic policy, primarily macroeconomic regulation. Skillful handling of this tool allows the state to solve a fairly wide range of economic and social problems. However, it must be borne in mind that a long-term imbalance in the budget can have a negative impact on the size of aggregate demand and income, the price level, and the state of the balance of payments. Therefore, the strategic goal for any state, of course, is balanced budget.
There are different ideas about how and for how long the budget should be balanced. Thus, according to the theory of an annually balanced budget, which was widely theoretical basis public policy most developed countries until the 30s. XX century., It is necessary to achieve equality of income and expenditure of the state annually. This, according to supporters of this theory, allows national governments to pursue more responsible policies. The state lives within its means, does not accumulate debts, does not provoke inflation. If there is a decrease in income, then the state must either increase taxes or reduce spending.
Under conditions where there is an increase cash income, the state should act in the exact opposite way, i.e. cut taxes or increase spending. Currently, this theory is practiced by a limited number of countries, mainly countries with developing and transition economy. In most developed countries, widespread practice state regulation economics received the theory of cyclical balancing of the budget. The foundations of this theory were laid by J. Keynes in the 30s.
It was Keynesian theory that rejected the need for an annual balanced budget. It effectively legalized budget deficits to stimulate the economy. The essence of the theory of cyclical balancing of the budget is that during an economic downturn, in order to stimulate economic growth, the state is obliged to cut taxes and increase spending. The state must compensate for the sharp drop in demand and prevent the reduction of public spending. In this case, there will inevitably be a budget deficit.
During the boom phase, the state pays off its debts at the expense of increased rates taxation or by increasing the tax revenues of newly earned enterprises. Thus, by the end of the economic cycle, the budget becomes balanced. Balancing is carried out throughout the cycle: excess budget funds in the recovery phase compensates for the budget deficit in the crisis phase.
In this case, a large role is given to "built-in stabilizers" ( progressive system taxation, state transfer payments - social payments, unemployment benefits, etc.). With their help, the size of aggregate demand is able to automatically decrease or expand, depending on the phase of the cycle, in the opposite direction to the movement of the conjuncture. For example, when falling business activity as a result of the decline total income there is an automatic reduction in tax revenues and an increase in certain types of transfer payments, which leads to the formation of a cyclical deficit and partially offsets the reduction in aggregate demand.
In the context of an economic recovery, the opposite happens - they increase tax payments transfer payments are reduced. Within many modern theories, in particular the theory of a compensating budget, it is considered impossible, and even unnecessary, to achieve its balance. Considering that in modern conditions If there are stable factors that increase the budget deficit, then it is necessary to use the state credit more fully as a legitimate source of budget revenues. It is the state credit, according to the representatives of this theory, that is able not only to compensate for the gap between income and expenditure, but also to attract an excess part of savings and invest it in the economy. In most developed countries market economy the government seeks to balance the budget in the longer term - on a cyclical or functional basis. In an unstable economy, when the situation is generally less predictable, the government is forced to balance the budget every year.
Therefore, it is no coincidence that the Budget Code of the Russian Federation notes that the federal, regional or local budget cannot be adopted with a surplus or deficit, the annual budget balancing must be carried out. This is of course less effective method, since it leads to a decrease in the degree of built-in stability of the economy, causes frequent fluctuations in tax rates, reduces investment activity, as well as the efficiency of income distribution. However, to some extent it is justified, since in an unstable economy the situation is less predictable.
In Russia, in accordance with the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, the State Duma can only adopt a balanced budget. Therefore, along with revenue items, the federal budget should include a deficit as a balancing item. At the same time, a special item “Expenses for servicing and repaying the public debt” is allocated in the expenditure side of the budget. This Russian budget practice differs, for example, from the American one. In the US, the budget can be adopted with a deficit, i.e. it is initially unbalanced. At the same time, the sources of debt repayment, as well as income from loans issued to pay off the debt, are taken out of the budget.
1.2 Classification of sources of financing the budget deficit
If the budget for the next financial year with a deficit is adopted, it is necessary to determine the sources of financing the budget deficit. Sources of financing the deficit differ by levels of the budget system. Thus, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit are:
1) internal sources:
Loans received by the Russian Federation from credit institutions in the currency of the Russian Federation;
State loans carried out by issuing securities on behalf of the Russian Federation;
Proceeds from the sale of state-owned property, etc.;
2) external sources:
Government loans in foreign currency by issuing securities on behalf of the Russian Federation;
Loans from foreign governments, banks and firms, international financial organizations, provided in foreign currency.
Sources of financing the budget deficit of the subject of the Russian Federation and the local budget can only be internal sources:
Government loans carried out by issuing securities on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or a municipality;
Budget loans received from the budgets of other levels of the budget system of the Russian Federation;
Loans received from credit institutions;
Proceeds from the sale of property owned by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal property, etc.;
In most countries, including Russia, the following main methods of financing the budget deficit are used:
1) credit and money issue (monetization);
2) debt financing (internal and external);
3) an increase in tax revenues to the state budget, as well as income from privatization, the sale of state property.
The last, third method can hardly be attributed to the methods used exclusively to finance the budget deficit. It is widely used and simply to replenish budget revenues. Therefore, the first and second methods are more related to the actual sources of financing the budget deficit.
Monetization as a way to reduce the budget deficit is an increase in the amount of money in circulation (including through bank financing). With monetization, the amount of money in circulation increases, the growth rate money supply significantly exceed the growth rate of real GDP, which leads to an increase in the average price level. At the same time, all economic agents pay a kind of inflationary tax and part of their income is redistributed in favor of the state through increased prices.
The state generates additional income - seigniorage, i.e. new income from printing money. The monetization of the state budget deficit may not be accompanied directly by the issue of cash, but may be carried out in other forms. For example, in the form of expansion of Central Bank loans to state-owned enterprises at preferential rates or in the form of deferred payments.
Monetization turns out to be a rather risky way of financing the budget deficit, since it can have a negative impact on the state of the balance of payments. This is due to the fact that as a result of monetization, there is an increase in the supply of money and an excess of cash accumulates in the hands of the population. It inevitably generates an increase in demand for domestic and imported goods, as well as for various financial assets, including foreign ones. This, in turn, drives up prices and puts pressure on the balance of payments.
If the balance of payments becomes negative, then this does not reduce the federal budget deficit, but, on the contrary, leads to its increase. Moreover, this negatively affects the exchange rate of the national currency - its partial devaluation occurs. The mechanism for restoring the equilibrium of the balance of payments under these conditions is based on "binding" the excess money supply by selling on foreign exchange market part of the official reserves of the Central Bank, which makes it possible to stabilize the money market as a whole.
The monetization of the state budget deficit causes the smaller the increase in inflation in the country, the more open the economy is and the more foreign exchange reserves the Central Bank can spend on maintaining a relatively fixed exchange rate of the national currency and restoring the balance of payments. At the same time, the growth of inflation as a result of the monetization of the budget deficit turns out to be more significant in the flexible mode. exchange rate, although the costs of official foreign exchange reserves are reduced.
The negative inflationary consequences of the monetization of the budget deficit can be mitigated by austerity measures. monetary policy. If the Central Bank reduces the lending capacity of commercial banks (usually by increasing the reserve ratio or discount rate percent) simultaneously with the expansion of loans public sector to finance the budget deficit, domestic market rates rise, holding back economic activity. As a result, private investment and net exports are declining, and inflation no longer has the same effect. negative impact on the state of the balance of payments.
Money emission can be non-inflationary only at significant rates of economic growth, since the growing economic activity is accompanied by an increase in the demand for money, which absorbs part of the additional money supply. In general, monetization can be used as a way to solve the problem of the state budget deficit. However, it must be borne in mind that this is an unsafe method for the economy. It is usually used by national governments in exceptional cases when, for example:
1) there is a significant external debt, which excludes concessional financing of the budget deficit from external sources;
2) the possibilities of domestic debt financing are practically exhausted;
3) the foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank are depleted, which is why the regulation of the balance of payments remains a paramount task;
4) the economy is able to withstand high inflation, and citizens are already accustomed to the constant rise in prices.
If the government still chooses the emission method of budget financing, then Central Bank it is necessary first of all to introduce restrictions (limits) on lending state enterprises and organizations. Otherwise, there may be a risk of complete displacement of the private sector from the credit market and a drop in investment activity. It is also necessary to constantly keep the inflation rate under control and monitor the state of the balance of payments.
A less painful and more manageable way to deal with government deficits is through debt financing. As a result of debt financing, the budget deficit is covered by loans made by the state both within the country and abroad. Based on this, the external and internal debt of the state is formed.
In different directions of economic thought, debt financing is treated differently. Thus, representatives of the neoclassical trend, starting with A. Smith, have a negative attitude towards debt financing. They believe that A. Smith was right when he said that deficit financing is "a one-way street, once you enter it, you cannot turn back." As a result of debt financing, the wealth of the nation is reduced, the tax burden is aggravated, which hinders the accumulation of capital.
Modern monetarists (M. Friedman, F. Caten and others) believe that if the state finances its needs through loans in the capital market, this leads to an increase interest rate, and hence to the crowding out of private investment and a sharp reduction in investment. In addition, through the public debt, the economic burden is shifted to future generations, when citizens will be forced to pay off the debts of the state due to tax revenues in the future.
Representatives of the Keynesian trend, on the contrary, believe that there is nothing wrong with government borrowing. Thanks to them, the distribution of the tax burden over time is carried out, which is not so bad, since the results of such borrowing can be used by several generations, so they must bear the burden of reimbursing them.
Public debt acts as a source of mobilization of additional resources and increase financial opportunities, so government loans can be an important factor accelerating the pace of socio-economic development. The objective need to use debt financing to meet the needs of society today is due to many factors, primarily the increase in government spending. Conducting an active social policy, providing defense capability, International activity and so on. demand from the state a constant increase in budgetary expenditures. Meanwhile, state budget revenues are always limited by the possibilities of taxation. In this sense, public credit helps to reduce the contradiction between the ever-increasing needs of society and the limited resources of the state.
The use of government loans to finance additional government spending is also determined by their much smaller negative consequences for the economy compared, for example, with additional emission. On the other hand, the practice of debt financing is politically more favorable to the government than raising taxes. Therefore, through debt financing, the government can significantly increase its spending without adding to such an unpopular tax burden.
An increase in public spending makes it difficult to control future deficits, and ever-increasing interest payments on public debt significantly limit the government's ability to use the budget as a stabilization lever to influence the economy. At the same time, external debt can become a serious factor not only economic, but also political significance. Exorbitant payments from the state budget on debts divert funds from financing social, economic, defense and other programs of the government.
Increasing tax revenues seems at first glance to be the easiest way to reduce or eliminate federal budget deficits. But there are some circumstances that make one think that increased taxes can only cause an increase in deficits. More high stakes taxes are associated with larger, not smaller, deficits. This is because if the government receives more financial resources, legislators will not only spend all the additional tax revenue, but will spend more. Thus, there are doubts about the thesis that tax increases will effective tool reducing deficits. Increasing taxes may worsen rather than alleviate the problem.
Thus, none of the methods of financing the state budget deficit has absolute advantages over the others and is not completely non-inflationary.
1.3 The essence of public debt and methods of managing it
When budget expenditures begin to exceed its revenues, when the budget deficit becomes a chronic phenomenon, and its coverage is carried out by non-emission methods, debt arises. That is, the Government of the Russian Federation at the same time conducts borrowing activities from legal entities and individuals, foreign states, foreign financial and international organizations. Borrowing funds by budgets of various levels leads to the accumulation of debt to be repaid in the form of principal and accrued interest.
Public debt is the amount of debt on issued and outstanding government loans, loans received, including the accrual of interest on them, and government guarantees issued. In fact, public debt is debentures RF before legal and individuals, foreign and international organizations, other subjects of law. The state debt of the Russian Federation is secured by all federally owned property constituting the state treasury.
The state debt of the Russian Federation includes debt obligations in the form of:
Credit agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation with credit organizations, foreign state and international financial institutions;
Government securities issued on behalf of the Russian Federation;
Agreements on the provision of state guarantees of the Russian Federation;
RF guarantee agreements to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
Re-formalized contractual obligations of third parties into the state debt of the Russian Federation on the basis of adopted federal laws;
Agreements and agreements on the restructuring of debt obligations of previous years, concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation.
Debt obligations of the Russian Federation are divided into short-term (up to one year), medium-term (from 1 to 5 years) and long-term (from 5 to 30 years). Obligations are repaid within the terms determined by the specific terms of loans, and cannot exceed 30 years. The state debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation is a set of debt obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, secured by all the property owned by the constituent entity of the Russian Federation that constitutes its treasury.
Debt obligations of a subject of the Russian Federation are carried out in the form of:
Credit agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of the subject of the Russian Federation with individuals and legal entities, credit institutions;
Government loans of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation in the form of securities;
Contracts with the provision of state guarantees on behalf of the subject of the Russian Federation;
Guarantee agreements of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
Re-executed contracts of obligations of third parties into the state debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation;
Agreements and agreements on the prolongation and restructuring of debt obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation of previous years, concluded on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation.
Municipal debt - a set of debt obligations of the municipality, which is secured by all municipal property that constitutes its treasury. The debt obligations of the municipality are carried out in the form of:
Credit agreements and contracts concluded by the municipality;
Municipality loans in the form of securities issue;
Agreements on the provision of municipal guarantees;
Contracts of guarantee of the municipality to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
Debt obligations of legal entities re-registered as municipal debt on the basis of legal acts of local governments.
The repayment of the public debt is carried out at the expense of the revenues of the budgets of the corresponding level or through the issuance of new government loans. The public debt is repaid through treasuries and banks by redeeming bonds on stock exchange or directly from creditors by conducting redemption draws or annual payments.
Under the market conditions for Russia, the most acceptable way to regulate the budget deficit is to cover it exclusively with public debt, which, in turn, needs centralized management.
Public debt management should be understood as a set of government actions related to studying the loan capital market, issuing loans, paying interest on issued loans, converting and consolidating loans, determining the rate of bonds for money market, carrying out activities to determine interest rates on state credit and repayment of issued loans.
Operations related to the preparation of documents required for the sale of government securities, the study of the situation on the loan capital market, the placement of loans among creditors, the payment and accrual of interest, are carried out by the Ministry of Finance of Russia and other divisions under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Public debt management costs are shown as special financial transactions separately from the budget, and only interest payments on the debt are included in the budget expenditure. An important role in the management of public debt is played by the secondary market for government bonds, where securities are traded. Operations in the primary and secondary markets for government bonds are carried out by investment and universal banks(dealers). The amounts that the state receives in loans from creditors, as well as interest on them, are repaid mainly from budget funds, current revenues and the issuance of new loans. This method of repaying government loans is called refinancing.
Public debt management operations are associated with cash execution of the budget, operations are performed by issuing banks. Banks participate in the issuance of loans, the payment of interest on them and the payment of bonds subject to redemption.
The state, in order to manage public debt, resorts to clarifying the terms of the loan regarding profitability by reducing the nominal interest rate (conversion) or converting Short-term liabilities in medium - or long-term (consolidation) or combining several loans into one loan (unification), which forms a consolidated (funded) debt.
One of the methods of public debt management is the redemption of loans circulating in the loan capital market. In this option, the state instructs the central and commercial banks repurchase loans with the subsequent payment of cash to them. If the state does not have funds to pay off the state internal debt (bankruptcy), it can cancel the loan or refuse to pay it, but this method is rarely used in practice.
Public debt management in the Russian Federation is carried out by the Federal Treasury, which is organizationally part of the Russian Ministry of Finance. It is entrusted with the following tasks:
Registration of all debt obligations of the state and debt guarantees (external and internal);
Preparation of service proposals public debt;
Determining the levels, composition, time and conditions for issuing domestic and foreign loans, including the issuance of government securities.
The Ministry of Finance of Russia acts on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation as a borrower both on the domestic and foreign financial market. In this regard, cooperation is being established between the Ministry of Finance of Russia and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in the field of issuing government securities and managing internal and external public debt. The Central Bank of the Russian Federation carries out operations with government securities, namely, their purchase and sale, redemption, issues loans secured by government securities, acts as an agent of the Russian Ministry of Finance in placing new issues of government debt.
2. Analysis of the budget deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation
2.1 General characteristics of sources of financing the federal budget deficit
The amounts of sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008. according to the statistics of the Accounts Chamber are presented in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1. Sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008. (billion rubles)
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | |
| General funding | -1612,9 | -1994,1 | -1794,6 | -1705,1 |
| including: | ||||
| internal funding | -707,4 | -1243,6 | -1614,1 | -1570,0 |
| out of him: | ||||
| debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, municipalities denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation | 98,1 | 177,6 | 223,5 | 171,6 |
| 35,0 | 17,6 | 19,3 | 6,7 | |
| state reserves of precious metals and precious stones | 9,6 | 1,6 | 12,9 | -2,1 |
| budget balances | -815,7 | -1398,2 | -1761,1 | -1991,3 |
| external funding | -905,5 | -750,5 | -180,5 | -135,0 |
| including: | ||||
| -108,0 | -41,2 | -95,3 | -80,1 | |
| -639,3 | -681,4 | -85,2 | -34,5 | |
| -158,2 | -27,9 | - | -20,4 |
Thus, the amounts of sources of general financing of the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation did not change much during these four years.
Share ratios are presented in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2. Shares of sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008 (billion rubles)
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | |
| General funding | 100,00% | 100,00% | 100,00% | 100,00% |
| including: | ||||
| internal funding | 43,86% | 62,36% | 89,94% | 92,08% |
| out of him: | ||||
| debt obligations of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipalities denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation | -6,08% | -8,91% | -12,45% | -10,06% |
| shares and other forms of participation in capital, which are in state and municipal ownership | -2,17% | -0,88% | -1,08% | -0,39% |
| state reserves of precious metals and precious stones | -0,60% | -0,08% | -0,72% | 0,12% |
| budget balances | 50,57% | 70,12% | 98,13% | 116,78% |
| external funding | 56,14% | 37,64% | 10,06% | 7,92% |
| including: | ||||
| debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, denominated in securities indicated in foreign currency | 6,70% | 2,07% | 5,31% | 4,70% |
| loan agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, indicated in foreign currency | 39,64% | 34,17% | 4,75% | 2,02% |
| other sources of external financing | 9,81% | 1,40% | - | 1,20% |
This table shows that in 2007-2008 the main share of the sources of financing the budget deficit came from internal financing and only a small part from external financing. However, in 2005-2006, the shares of internal and external sources were approximately equal, and in 2005, external financing in total was more than internal.
A large share of domestic sources of financing the deficit belongs to the debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, municipalities, denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation.
A significant share of external sources of financing the deficit in 2005-2006 consisted of credit agreements and agreements concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, indicated in foreign currency. And in 2007-2008 the shares loan agreements and contracts greatly decreased, and the main part of external sources began to be debt obligations of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, denominated in securities indicated in foreign currency.
This is due to the fact that in 2007 and 2008 external financial borrowings and credits (loans) of foreign governments, banks and firms were not provided for by the external borrowing program, which led to a decrease in the share of loan agreements and agreements from 34.17% in 2006 to 4.75% in 2007 and then to 2.02% in 2008.
Shares and other forms of participation in the capital, which are in state and municipal ownership, as well as state reserves of precious metals and precious stones in the total amount of funding sources are insignificant. The dynamics of sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2003-2008 is shown in the following diagram.
Rice. 2.1. Dynamics of deficit financing sources
federal budget in 2003–2008
The data in this chart confirm that last years an increasing share of the sources of financing the federal budget deficit falls on the sources of domestic financing, and the share of external financing sources is decreasing.
2.2 Analysis of domestic public debt
The dynamics of the volume of public domestic debt from 1993 to 2009 is presented in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3. The volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation
| As of | The volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation, billion rubles | |
| Total | including state guarantees in the currency of the Russian Federation | |
| 01.01.1993 | 3,57 | 0,08 |
| 01.01.1994 | 15,64 | 0,33 |
| 01.01.1995 | 88,06 | 2,14 |
| 01.01.1996 | 187,74 | 7,46 |
| 01.01.1997 | 364,46 | 17,24 |
| 01.01.1998 | 490,92 | 3,47 |
| 01.01.1999 | 529,94 | 0,88 |
| 01.01.2000 | 578,23 | 0,82 |
| 01.01.2001 | 557,42 | 1,02 |
| 01.01.2002 | 533,51 | 0,02 |
| 01.01.2003 | 679,91 | 8,62 |
| 01.01.2004 | 682,02 | 5,58 |
| 01.01.2005 | 778,47 | 12,93 |
| 01.01.2006 | 875,43 | 18,86 |
| 01.01.2007 | 1064,88 | 31,23 |
| 01.01.2008 | 1301,15 | 46,68 |
| 01.01.2009 | 1499,82 | 72,49 |
In accordance with the report of the Accounts Chamber, the total volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation in rubles as of January 1, 2008 amounted to 1,301.15 billion rubles, or 4.3% of GDP for 2007, and as of January 1, 2009 - 1,499.82 billion. rubles, or 3.5% of GDP in 2008. Increase total amount The state internal debt of the Russian Federation for 2008 amounted to 198.67 billion rubles, or 15.27%, the ratio of public debt to GDP decreased over this period by 0.8 percentage points.
The increase in the total volume of the public debt of the Russian Federation in 2008 occurred, in particular, due to an increase in the public domestic debt by 198.67 billion rubles, or 15.27%.
During 2008, the share of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation in the total volume of the state debt of the Russian Federation increased from 54.2% to 55.7%. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation are presented in Figures 2.2. and 2.3.
Rice. 2.2. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2008 (1,301.2 billion rubles)
Rice. 2.3. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009 (1,499.8 billion rubles)
According to the report on the state of the state internal and external debt of the Russian Federation, as of January 1, 2008, the state internal debt amounted to 1,301,151.9 million rubles (3.9% of GDP in 2007); as of January 1, 2009 - 1,499,824.4 million rubles (3.6% of GDP in 2008) and increased by 198,672.5 million rubles, or 15.3%. As of January 1, 2009, the state domestic debt does not exceed the limit of the state domestic debt (1,804,189.6 million rubles) established by Article 1 of Federal Law No. 198-FZ of July 24, 2007. Of particular importance in the formation of public domestic debt are government securities (Fig. 2.4.)
Rice. 2.4. State internal debt of the Russian Federation, expressed in government securities, billion rubles
The share of the state internal debt denominated in government securities in the volume of the state internal debt as of January 1, 2009 compared to January 1, 2008 decreased by 1.2 percentage points and amounted to 94.8%.
2.3 Analysis of external public debt
In accordance with Article 6 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, external debt is obligations arising in foreign currency. The dynamics and structure of the state external debt are presented in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4. The structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation (at the beginning of the year; billion US dollars)
| 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | |
| Public external debt (including obligations of the former USSR assumed by the Russian Federation) | 114,1 | 76,5 | 52,0 | 44,9 | 40,6 |
| including: | |||||
| debt to countries participating in the Paris Club | 47,5 | 25,2 | 3,1 | 1,8 | 1,4 |
| debt to non-Paris Club countries | 6,4 | 5,7 | 5,2 | 3,7 | 3,3 |
| commercial debt | 2,2 | 1,1 | 0,8 | 0,7 | 1,2 |
| debt to international financial organizations | 9,7 | 5,7 | 5,5 | 5,0 | 4,6 |
| Eurobond loans | 35,3 | 31,5 | 31,9 | 28,6 | 27,7 |
| bonds of the internal state foreign currency loan (OVGVZ) | 7,1 | 7,1 | 4,9 | 4,5 | 1,8 |
| debt on loans from Vnesheconombank provided at the expense of the Bank of Russia | 5,5 | - | - | - | - |
| provision of guarantees of the Russian Federation in foreign currency | 0,4 | 0,3 | 0,6 | 0,6 | 0,6 |
Article 1 of Federal Law No. 198-FZ of July 24, 2007 (as amended) sets an upper limit on the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009, in the amount of USD 41.9 billion (EUR 27.2 billion).
According to the report on the state of the state external and internal debt of the Russian Federation at the beginning and end of the reporting financial year, the volume of the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009 amounted to dollar equivalent 40.6 billion US dollars, which is confirmed by the results of the audit and does not exceed the established ceiling on public debt. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation are presented in Figures 2.5. and 2.6.
Rice. 2.5. The volume and structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2008 (44.9 billion US dollars)
Rice. 2.6. The volume and structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009 (40.6 billion US dollars)
According to the Accounts Chamber, the state external debt in ruble terms as of January 1, 2008 amounted to 1,101,649.8 million rubles (44,880.7 million US dollars), or 3.3% of GDP in 2007, increased over 2008 by 90,538.9 million rubles, or 8.2%, and amounted to 1,192,188.7 million rubles (40,577.7 million US dollars) as of January 1, 2009, or 2.9% of GDP for 2008. At the same time, in dollar terms, the volume of the state external debt decreased by 4,303.0 million US dollars, or by 9.6%.
As a result of the reduction in debt on most types of public external debt, its structure changed: the share of market debt (government securities of the Russian Federation denominated in foreign currency) decreased from 74% to 73%, while the share of non-market debt (loans from foreign governments, IFIs, foreign commercial banks and firms, state guarantees in foreign currency) from 26% to 27%.
3. Ways to overcome the federal budget deficit
3.1 Problems of balancing the federal budget of the Russian Federation and methods for reducing the deficit
Since the end of 2007, rising world oil prices have been accompanied by an increase in demand for gas and other energy sources that replace it, thereby spurring an increase in the cost of the latter, both in the world and in the all-Russian market.
By the end of 2008, the cost of a barrel of oil was set at $130. In general, in 2008 electricity tariffs increased by 40%.
Already increased costs at manufacturing enterprises have increased due to the rise in the cost of raw materials, which are in great demand in the world. This process was caused by the orientation of our raw material and energy potential for export. Because of this, the need to develop and expand production in real sector economy were not fully satisfied.
That is, the change in the global environment (mainly commodity prices) caused a rapid transition from a surplus to a deficit federal budget since 2009. In 2008, the federal budget surplus, according to the Ministry of Finance, was 1 trillion. 697 billion rubles, or 4% of GDP. In 2009, there was a deficit, which amounted to 2 trillion. 326.14 billion rubles or 6.4% of GDP.
The federal budget in January-April 2010 was executed with a deficit of 3.4% of GDP, according to the Ministry of Finance. The slowly growing negative balance of the state treasury is taking shape against the backdrop of an actual freezing of government spending and stagnation of revenues - they have not been growing since mid-2009.
The Ministry of Finance summed up the results of the execution of the federal budget in the first third of the year 2010. Revenues in January-April amounted to 2.618 trillion rubles, expenses - 3.063 trillion rubles, budget deficit - 445 billion rubles, or 3.4% of GDP (Fig. 3.1.). So far, this is far from the 6.8% of GDP expected by the Ministry of Finance by the end of the year. Separately for April, the situation with the deficit looks somewhat worse than in general for four months. The April deficit amounted to 5.7% of GDP against 3.9% in March.
Rice. 3.1. Revenues and expenditures of the federal budget in 2009-2010 (billion rubles).
As can be seen from the graph, federal budget revenues, starting from the second half of 2009, have not actually grown.
It should also be noted that since 2009 the deficit began to be financed from the Reserve Fund of the Russian Federation, and before that it was only formed. Thus, the accounts of the Reserve Fund became sources of financing the federal budget deficit.
In April 2010, the Ministry of Finance of Russia continued to implement the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 19, 2010 No. 23-r on the allocation of funds from the Reserve Fund to finance the federal budget deficit. A part of the Fund's foreign currency funds on accounts with the Bank of Russia, namely USD 5.38 billion, EUR 3.99 billion and GBP 0.78 billion, was sold for RUB 350.00 billion, and the proceeds credited to the account for the accounting of federal budget funds.
As of May 1, 2010, the total volume of the Reserve Fund amounted to 1,188.70 billion rubles, which is equivalent to 40.59 billion US dollars. As of May 1, 2010, the balances on separate accounts for accounting for the Reserve Fund amounted to:
· 18.07 billion US dollars;
· 12.42 billion euros;
· £3.04 billion.
There is an opinion among experts that while maintaining the current economic situation, including the deficit budget, reserve fund may dry up completely in 2011. Therefore, in without fail steps must be taken to reduce the deficit.
Improvement of the state budget should be carried out in several directions: increasing its revenue base; restructuring the expenditure part of the budget; streamlining budget procedures.
Restructuring of the revenue part of the budget. For conscientious and unfavorable taxpayers, the level of taxes is excessive. However, the figures for tax revenues need to be adjusted for the significant amounts of tax arrears to the budget, which increase the tax burden on businesses. Another adjustment can be made for the sheer number of existing tax credits. In addition, it should be taken into account that about a third of all enterprises registered in Russia do not pay taxes at all.
Taking into account all the above factors, the bar for the withdrawal of GDP in favor of the state rises to maximum value at which mass tax evasion begins. Thus, in the short term there are no prerequisites for reducing the budget deficit by increasing tax revenues. Therefore, the main increase in budget revenues can be obtained through a significant reduction in the number of tax benefits and an increase in the collection of customs duties and income from the production and sale of alcohol.
The main directions of the restructuring of budget expenditures. The reality of the federal budget is determined both by the collection of funds and the validity of the planned costs. In the conditions of the limited resources of the state, the federal budget should be developed on the basis of clear priorities for spending its funds. It is important for society to know not only what and in what amounts public money is spent, but also why certain directions and volumes of expenditures are chosen.
When restructuring the obligations of the state, the basic principle must be fulfilled: the state must give money primarily for reforms. Those areas where real reforms are taking place should be provided with financial resources as a matter of priority.
In conditions of limited financial resources, it is important to prioritize the spending of budgetary funds: social spending, the share of which is increasing in the total budget; the structure of social expenditures should also highlight priorities: expenditures on wages and pensions; military spending, which reflects priority funding for defense research and development spending.
The most important task of the state is further implementation government spending savings programs. However, budget savings should not be at the expense of the poor.
Improving budget procedures. It is necessary to revise the borrowing policy to cover the budget deficit. First, the focus should not be on the needs of the budget, but on limiting the negative impact on economic growth of the burden of servicing the domestic public debt. Secondly, certain principles of the state's work in the financial market must be changed.
The following measures can also be suggested:
To carry out the drafting of the budget for the next financial year based on the maximum funding limits, which will simplify the work of preparing the budget, make its indicators realistic;
Link budgeting with medium-term budgeting, which is important for determining financial policy state for the future and develop a government action program for its implementation.
In modern conditions, the state must strengthen its functions in regulating economic and social processes in society, develop a program effective action opposing the development of the budget deficit.
Some countries have proved that in conditions associated with a sharp increase in the budget deficit, it is possible to achieve a balance of its revenues and expenditures, using the entire mechanism of state regulation for this. Therefore, the budget deficit should be financed from reserve funds created from the surpluses of previous years, and if they are insufficient, from attracted resources.
3.2 Prospects for public debt and ways to reduce it
Analysis of the Accounts Chamber shows that the volume of public debt in 2010 will amount to 5,499.2 billion rubles, which is 1,575.8 billion rubles or 1.4 times more than the figure approved for 2009. Some decrease in the growth rate of public debt is envisaged (from 40.2% in 2010 to 17.8% in 2012), and its volume in 2012 compared to 2009 will increase by 2.1 times. The dynamics of the volume and structure of public debt in 2008-2012 is presented in the following diagram.
Rice. 3.2. Dynamics of the volume and structure of public debt in 2008 - 2012
The structure of public debt in 2010-2012 will change somewhat: the share of domestic debt will decrease from 64.1% at the beginning of 2010 to 52.5% at the end of 2012, respectively, the share of public external debt will increase from 35.9% to 47.5% .
The debt burden on the federal budget is growing significantly: the ratio of public debt to GDP will increase from 9.7% in 2009 to 15.4% at the end of 2012.
At present, the Government of the Russian Federation proceeds in its debt activities from the need to:
Creation of conditions for increasing the importance of public borrowing as the main source of refinancing of public debt;
Restrictions on the volume of government borrowing by the amount of repayment of public debt;
Increasing the share of domestic debt in the structure of public debt;
Reducing the cost of servicing public debt;
Restrictions on attracting funds from international financial organizations by financing infrastructure projects of national importance;
These directions of the debt policy are successfully implemented by the Government of Russia, and the following are considered the main objectives of the debt strategy:
Preservation of the volume and structure of the state debt, allowing guaranteed fulfillment of obligations for its repayment and servicing, as well as refinancing the debt, regardless of the state of the federal budget;
Implementation of state internal borrowings in an amount that allows you to actively develop the market for corporate and municipal borrowings that provide financing for investments in industries and regions;
Changes in the structure of the public debt of the Russian Federation in terms of a further increase in the share of domestic debt in the structure of total public debt.
Russia is now actively using the method of repaying its external debt with commodity deliveries, but other methods are forgotten. The prospect may be the exchange of debt obligations for shares of privatized enterprises, the redemption of government debts for ruble funds with their subsequent direction for investment. From such operations, Russia will receive not only relief from the debt burden, but also the revival of work on the implementation of the privatization program and additional investment in the real sector of the economy.
Of great importance for improving the efficiency of state debt activity will be a unified debt policy, unity of planning and accounting for all operations to attract, service and repay external and internal government borrowings. All this will allow:
Optimize the terms of circulation, redemption and profitability of government securities;
Minimize the adverse effects of fluctuations in the foreign exchange rate and interest rates in international financial markets on the amount and cost of government borrowings;
Optimize budget spending on public debt servicing;
Timely and fully fulfill obligations to internal and external creditors.
Optimization of the structure of public debt based on the creation of an effective management system will strengthen creditors' confidence in the Russian state as a reliable borrower, ensure full and profitable participation of the state in the domestic financial market and a worthy entry into the foreign borrowing market in the near future, create more favorable conditions for continuing the implementation of the policy reducing the debt burden on the economy and the state budget.
Experts identify the following main principles of the debt policy of the Russian Federation in the future.
First, unconditional servicing of obligations and maintaining a high credit rating. For getting investment rating when formulating debt policy, it is important to ensure that high level confidence of creditors, unconditional and timely fulfillment of debt obligations.
Second, long-term strategy and effective use. It is necessary to strengthen the long-term orientation of the debt policy, to put an end to its subordination to the solution of current budgetary problems. The debt strategy should be characterized integrated approach, taking into account the features of the general economic strategy development of Russia, its currency, monetary, financial, investment policy. An active debt strategy should be at least, of three components: a strategy for servicing existing debt, a strategy for attracting new financial resources and a strategy for using borrowed funds. At the same time, in order to achieve the goals of an active debt strategy, it is necessary to increase flexibility and efficiency in making decisions on public debt management.
Thirdly, connection with foreign policy. Russia should be more active than in the past in defending its interests in the existing global system of managing credit and debt relations.
Fourth, ensuring transparency of debt settlement transactions. The existing public debt reporting system is characterized by a high degree of closeness, primarily for financial market participants - potential investors in terms of the amount of information available to them about the most important aspects debt management policies and operations. Meanwhile, the transparency of the decision-making regime, the clarity of the rules and procedures for carrying out public debt management operations contribute to strengthening the confidence of creditors and investors in government debt obligations. This, in turn, increases the efficiency of ongoing public debt management operations and, in the long run, may lead to a reduction in the cost of servicing public debt.
And, finally, it should be noted that the development of the government borrowing market in a qualitative direction will contribute to the solution of government tasks to maintain Russia's rating as a first-class borrower, ensuring the unconditional, timely and full fulfillment of all obligations on public debt.
Conclusion
At present, a budget deficit has become a frequent occurrence for the state budget of most countries. Recently, the federal budget of the Russian Federation has also become scarce. The budget deficit may be the result of an unfavorable economic situation or the result of a purposefully pursued budget policy.
Exist various ways financing the budget deficit. If it is carried out by issuing money, then this leads to an increase in the amount of money in circulation, an increase in prices and inflation. Covering the deficit by borrowing from the private sector reduces private investment through the issuance of government securities.
The budget deficit is inextricably linked with the concept of public debt, which, depending on the sources of the loan, can be internal and external. Significant public debt has a negative impact on the economy: it leads to an increase in the polarization of society, negatively affects the rate of economic growth, the cost of servicing the public debt increases the budget deficit. External public debt (debt to other countries, foreign companies, banks and international economic organizations) is repaid from export earnings, which can also adversely affect the pace of economic development.
Positive shifts in the structure of the budget are achieved by reducing irrational government spending, regulating interbudgetary relations, and, most importantly, as a result of tax reform.
The most important legally fixed measures for the management of public debt include the establishment of maximum volumes of public internal and external debt, the limits of external borrowing; sources of domestic financing of the budget deficit, including receipts from the issue of government securities; size limit external borrowings; expenses for servicing the state internal and external debt; upper limits of state internal and external guarantees.
Contemporary economic condition The Russian Federation is characterized by a deficit budget (since 2009). The main share of sources of financing the budget deficit falls on domestic financing. As a result, the Reserve Fund, which is used as one of the main sources of financing the federal budget deficit, is greatly depleted.
In addition, the amount of public debt, both internal and external, is constantly increasing. In the future, a further increase in debt is expected.
Based on all this, we can conclude that these phenomena have an adverse impact on the development of the country as a whole. Therefore, the Government needs to develop and implement special programs both to reduce the budget deficit and to reduce domestic and foreign debt. Only the adoption of effective measures in these areas will contribute to the socio-economic development of Russia.
Bibliography
2. Conclusion of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation on the report on the execution of the federal budget for 2008 - Moscow, 2009
3. Agapova T. A., Seregina S. F., Macroeconomics: Textbook; Moscow: Business and Service, 2004
4. Aleksandrov I. M. Budgetary system of the Russian Federation; Moscow, Dashkov & Co., 2007
5. Godin A. M., Maksimova N. S., Podporina I. V., Budget system of the Russian Federation; M.: Dashkov and Co., 2006
6. N. I. Kulikov, L. N. Chainikova, E. Yu. Babenko, Modern budgetary system of Russia; Tambov TSTU, 2007
7. Myslyaeva I. M., State and municipal finance; Moscow, INFRA-M, 2007
8. http://ach.gov.ru
9. http://budgetrf.ru
10. http://gks.ru
11. http://minfin.ru
12. http://politika.su
13. http://statistika.ru
According to the Federal Law "On the Execution of the Federal Budget for 2008" No. 382-FZ dated December 28, 2009, the federal budget surplus amounted to 1,705,052.4 million rubles, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit amounted to minus 1,705,052.4 million rubles, in including internal sources of financing 421,242.9 million rubles, external sources minus 135,024.3 million rubles, change in the balance of funds of the federal budget in the amount of minus 1,991,270.9 million rubles.
According to the Federal Law “On the Execution of the Federal Budget for 2009” No. 255-FZ of October 3, 2010, the federal budget deficit for 2009 amounted to minus 2,322,310.5 million rubles, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit amounted to 2,322,310.5 million rubles. rubles, including sources of internal financing 421,940.9 million rubles, sources of external financing minus 128,604.1 million rubles, changes in the balance of funds of the federal budget 2,028,973.7 million rubles.
According to the data of the Federal Treasury, in particular the “Cash Execution of the Federal Budget as of January 1, 2011”, the federal budget deficit in the amount of minus 1,811,791.5 million rubles, the sources of financing of the federal budget amount to 1,811,791.5 million rubles, including sources internal financing 7,445,846.6 million rubles, sources of external financing 119,676.3 million rubles, change in the balance of funds of the federal budget 1,684,669.4 million rubles
The federal law "On the federal budget for 2011 and the planning period of 2012 and 2013" FZ No. 357 of December 13, 2010 provides for a federal budget deficit for 2011 of minus 1,814,004.0 million rubles. Funding sources 1,814,004.0 million. rubles, including sources of internal financing 1,768,274.1 million rubles, sources of external financing 45,729.9 million rubles, changes in the balance of federal budget funds 289,396.8 million rubles.
For the planning period of 2012 and 2013, the federal budget deficit is planned to be minus 1,734,450.0 million rubles and minus 1,795,680.0 million rubles, respectively. Sources of funding for the federal budget for 2012 are envisaged in the amount of 1,734,450.0 million rubles, including sources of internal funding of 16,515,281.7 million rubles, sources of external funding of 82,921.8 million rubles, changes in the balances of federal funds budget of 7,500 million rubles.
Sources of financing of the federal budget for 2013 are envisaged in the amount of 1,734,450.0 million rubles, including sources of internal financing of 16,515,281.7 million rubles, sources of external financing of 82,921.8 million rubles, changes in the balance of federal funds budget of 7,500 million rubles.
Sources of financing of the federal budget for 2013 are provided in the amount of 1,795,680.0 million rubles, including sources of internal financing of 17,121,367.7 million rubles, sources of external financing of 83,543,227.5 million rubles, changes in cash balances federal budget 10,000 million rubles.
Based on the data on the sources of financing the federal budget, presented in Appendix 8, we will analyze the structure of sources of financing the federal budget deficit for the period from 2008 to 2013.
The structure of sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit from 2008 to 2013 is presented in Appendix 9.
The federal budget for 2008, according to the Federal Law "On the execution of the federal budget for 2008" No. 382-FZ of December 28, 2009, was executed with a surplus of 1,705,052.4 million rubles, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit amounted to minus 1,705,052.4 million rubles, including sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit in the amount of 421,242.9 million rubles (-24.71% of the total sources of financing the federal budget deficit). Among them, the share of government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, was minus 10.6%, the exchange rate difference on federal budget funds was minus 42.4%, and the change in other financial assets in federal ownership was 24.5%.
According to the Federal Law “On the Execution of the Federal Budgets for 2009” No. 255-FZ dated October 03, 2010, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit for 2009 amounted to 2,322,310.5 million rubles, of which sources of internal financing in the amount of 421,940.9 million rubles accounted for 18.17% of all sources, of which 17.9% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit accounted for the share of funds from operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, the exchange rate difference on federal budget funds amounted to 15 .1%, change in other financial assets minus 7.6% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit.
According to the data of the Federal Treasury, in particular the "Cash Execution of the Federal Budget as of January 1, 2011", the sources of financing the federal budget deficit for 2010 amounted to 1,811,791.5 million rubles, including the sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit amounted to 7,445.9 million. rubles (0.41% of all sources), the main of which are funds from operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation (34.3%), other sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit amounted to minus 614,029.6 million rubles (-33.9% of all sources), of which the smallest share is accounted for by changes in other financial assets in federal ownership (-13.1% of all sources).
The federal law "On the federal budget for 2011 and the planning period of 2012 and 2013" FZ No. 357 dated December 13, 2010 approved sources of financing the federal budget deficit for 2011 in the amount of 1,814,004.0 million rubles, including internal sources of deficit of the federal budget were approved in the amount of 1,768,274.1 million rubles, which is 97.5% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit. Of these, the largest share falls on government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation in the amount of 1,340,757.2 million rubles (73.9% of all sources), funds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation in capital held in federal ownership were approved in the amount of 297,954.0 million rubles (16.4% of all sources). The smallest share falls on budget credits provided within the country in the currency of the Russian Federation in the amount of minus 63,987.0 million rubles or minus 3.5% of all sources.
For 2012, the sources of financing the federal deficit are planned in the amount of 1,734,450.0 million rubles, including 95.2% of all sources of financing in the amount of 1,651,528.2 million rubles, of which the largest share is for funds received from the placement of government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation 86.7% of all sources in the amount of 1,504,408.2 million rubles, for funds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation in capital held in the federal property accounts for 15.9% of all sources in the amount of 276,115.0 million rubles. The smallest share falls on the execution of state guarantees of the Russian Federation in the currency of the Russian Federation in the amount of minus 50,100.0 million rubles (-7.1% of all sources).
In 2013, it is also planned to finance the federal budget deficit from internal sources of financing the federal budget deficit, the largest share of which is occupied by funds from operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is expressed in the currency of the Russian Federation in the amount of 1,504,408.2 million rubles (95 4% of all sources), 17.2% of all sources in the amount of 309,365.0 mln.
The structure of sources of external financing of the federal budget in the total volume of sources of financing the federal budget deficit from 2008 to 2013, as well as the structure of changes in the balances of federal budget funds in the total volume of sources of financing the federal budget deficit from 2008 to 2013 are presented in Appendix 10.
The federal budget for 2008, according to the Federal Law "On the Execution of the Federal Budget for 2008" No. 382-FZ of December 28, 2009, was executed with a surplus of 1,705,052.4 million rubles, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit amounted to minus 1,705,052.4 million rubles, including sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit in the amount of minus 135,024.3 million rubles (7.92% of the total sources of financing the federal budget deficit). Among them, the largest share is occupied by funds on operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency amounted to a minus of -80,106.5 million rubles (4.7% of all sources).
According to the Federal Law “On the Execution of the Federal Budgets for 2009” No. 255-FZ dated October 3, 2010, the sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit for 2009 amounted to minus -128,604.0 million rubles (-5.54% of all sources), out of of them, the share of funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency, accounts for minus 2.1% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit in the amount of -47,974.4 million rubles, foreign loans account for minus 2.3% all sources in the amount of -52,468.6 million rubles.
According to the data of the Federal Treasury, in particular the “Cash Execution of the Federal Budget as of January 1, 2011”, the sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit for 2010 amounted to 119,676.3 million rubles (6.6% of all sources), among which the main funds are transactions with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency in the amount of 121,556.1 million rubles or 6.71% of all sources, foreign government loans account for minus 2.31% of all sources in the amount of -41,937.5 million. rubles.
The federal law "On the federal budget for 2011 and the planning period of 2012 and 2013" FZ No. 357 of December 13, 2010 approved sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit for 2011 in the amount of 45,729.9 million rubles (2.52% of all sources ), among which the largest share is occupied by funds from operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency in the amount of 137,529.8 million rubles (7.6% of all sources), the smallest share is accounted for by loans from foreign states in the amount of minus 45,370.3 million rubles (-2.5% of all sources), state financial and state export credits in the amount of 36,206.1 million rubles (-2.0% of all sources).
For 2012, sources of external financing of the federal deficit are planned in the amount of 82,921.8 million rubles (4.78% of all sources), including the largest share of funds received from the placement of government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency. currency 10.1% of all sources in the amount of 174,409.7 million rubles. The smallest share falls on other sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit, including state guarantees in the amount of minus 14,732.9 million rubles (-0.85% of all sources) and state financial and state export credits in the amount of minus 49,699.1 million rubles (-2.87% of all sources).
In 2013, it is also planned to finance the federal budget deficit from external sources of financing, the largest share of which is occupied by funds from operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is expressed in foreign currency in the amount of 176,114.1 million rubles (9.8% of all sources ). The smallest specific share, as in 2012, falls on state guarantees in the amount of minus 16,448.6 million rubles (-0.92% of all sources) and state financial and state export credits in the amount of minus 51,469.3 million rubles (or 2 .87% of all sources).
According to the Federal Law "On the Execution of the Federal Budget for 2008" No. 382-FZ dated December 28, 2009, the federal budget for 2008 was executed with a surplus of 1,705,052.4 million rubles, sources of financing the federal budget deficit amounted to minus 1,705,052.4 million rubles, including the change in the balances of federal budget funds amounted to minus 1,991,271.0 million rubles (or 116.79% of all sources). Including the largest share falls on the change in cash balances of the Reserve Fund in the amount of minus 4,007,198.9 million rubles (235% of all sources), the change in cash balances of the Stabilization Fund of the Russian Federation in the amount of 3,849,111.3 million rubles (225.8% of all sources), the change in the cash balances of the National Wealth Fund in the amount of minus 2,184,493.8 million rubles amounted to 128.1% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit. The smallest share falls on the change in other balances of federal budget funds minus 20.6% of all sources.
According to the Federal Law “On the Execution of the Federal Budget for 2009” No. 255-FZ dated October 3, 2010, the change in the balance of federal budget funds amounted to 2,028,973.6 million rubles, 87.37% of all sources. Including the largest share in the composition of sources falls on the change in cash balances of the Reserve Fund of the Russian Federation in the amount of 2,223,772.7 million rubles or 95.76%. The share of funds of the National Wealth Fund amounted to minus 3.9% in the amount of minus 90,013.5 million rubles.
According to the data of the Federal Treasury, in particular the “Cash Execution of the Federal Budget as of 01.01.2011”, the change in the balance of funds of the federal budget amounted to 1,684,669.4 million rubles, or 93% of all sources of financing the federal budget deficit. The change in cash balances of the Reserve Fund of the Russian Federation accounts for 58.2% (1,054,563.4 million rubles) in all sources of financing the federal budget deficit, the funds of the National Welfare Fund directed to finance the federal budget deficit amounted to 11.4% of all sources of financing in the amount of 206,614.9 million rubles, the change in other balances of federal budget funds was 23.4%.
The federal law "On the federal budget for 2011 and the planning period of 2012 and 2013" FZ No. 357 of December 13, 2010 approved the change in the balance of federal budget funds in 2011 in the amount of 289,396.8 million rubles, which is 16% of all sources financing the federal budget deficit. The largest share falls on the change in cash balances of the Reserve Fund in the amount of 284,396.8 million rubles 15.7%. The change in cash balances of the National Wealth Fund will be 5,000 million rubles or 0.3% of all sources.
For the planning period of 2012 and 2013, due to the depletion of the Reserve Fund, the law established the financing of the federal budget deficit at the expense of the National Welfare Fund in the amount of 7,500 million rubles (0.43% of all sources) and 10,000 million rubles (0.56 % of all sources), respectively.
year 2009. The sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2009 increased by 236.2% compared to 2008 due to the federal budget surplus in 2008 being replaced by a deficit in 2009.
Sources of domestic financing of the federal budget deficit in 2009 compared to 2008 increased by 0.17%. Including funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, increased by 142.2%, government reserves of precious metals and precious stones increased by 373%, budget loans provided within the country in the currency of the Russian Federation decreased by 753.5%, funds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation in federally owned capital decreased by 70.7%.
2010 In 2010, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit decreased by 22% compared to 2009.
The sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit in 2010 decreased by 98.2% compared to 2009. Among them, the largest increase of 663.7% in funds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation in capital owned by the federal government, state reserves of precious metals and precious stones by 85.5%, the repayment of obligations from other sources of domestic financing of the federal budget deficit decreased by 71.5%, in addition, the funds on operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, increased by 49.4%. The exchange rate difference on federal budget funds decreased by 137.7%, funds on other budget credits (loans) provided by the federal budget within the country decreased by 52.2%.
2011. In comparison with 2010, in 2011, a slight increase in the sources of financing the federal budget deficit by 0.12% is provided.
It was also approved to increase the sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit in 2011 by 1,760,828.2 million rubles compared to 2010. Of these, an increase in funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation, is provided for by 719,281.8 million rubles, or by 115.7%, a significant increase of 19 times compared to 2010 was approved for funds from the sale of shares and other forms of participation in federally owned capital, it is also planned to reduce state reserves of precious metals and precious stones by 90.5% and change other financial assets in federal ownership by 78.8%. In addition, in 2011, the execution of state guarantees of the Russian Federation in the currency of the Russian Federation was approved in the amount of minus 54,800 million rubles. The net value of budgetary credits provided within the country in the currency of the Russian Federation is planned to be minus 63,987.1 million rubles, which is 62% more than in 2010.
The planning period for 2012 and 2013 provides for a 4.4% decrease in the sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2012 compared to 2011, and an increase of 3.5% in 2013 compared to 2012. Among the sources of internal financing of the federal budget deficit (in 2012 decrease by 6.6% compared to 2011, in 2013 increase by 3.7% compared to 2012) in 2012 it is planned to increase funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation by 12.2% compared to since 2011, in 2013 - a slight decrease of 1.3% compared to 2012. Also in 2012, it is planned to fulfill state guarantees of the Russian Federation in the currency of the Russian Federation in the amount of minus 123,055.5 million rubles, which is 124.5% more than in 2011, in 2013 minus 100,503.0 million rubles, which is by 18.3% less than in 2012. In addition, the net value of budget loans provided within the country in the currency of the Russian Federation in 2012 is planned in the amount of 33.3 million rubles, which is 152% more than in 2011, in 2013 in the amount of 54,560.0 million rubles, which is 64% more than in 2012.
An analysis of the dynamics of sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit shows that in 2009 overall volume sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit increased by 4.8% compared to 2008 due to an increase in funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency by 40.1%, a decrease in foreign loans by 52.1% .
In 2010, the increase amounted to 193.6% due to an increase in funds for operations with government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency by 353.4% in the amount of 169,530.5 million rubles, and due to an increase in the balance value of government financial and state export credits by 68,218.7 million rubles, which is 242.3% more than in 2009.
For 2011, a reduction in external sources of financing the federal budget deficit by 62% was approved due to a decrease in loans from foreign states by 8.2%, a decrease in the balance value of state financial and state export credits by 190.4%, and the execution of state guarantees in foreign currency in in the amount of 10,223.6 million rubles.
For the planned period of 2012 and 2013, it is planned to increase the sources of external financing of the federal budget deficit by 81.3% in 2012 by 2011 and by 0.75% in 2013 by 2012. This increase will occur due to an increase in funds on government securities, the nominal value of which is indicated in foreign currency by 27%, as well as due to loans from foreign states by 40.4%. Also, for the planned period of 2012 and 2013, it is planned to fulfill state guarantees in foreign currency in the amount of 14,732.9 million rubles and 16,448.6 million rubles, respectively.
An analysis of the dynamics of changes in the balances of federal budget funds for the period from 2008 to 2013 shows that in 2009 the change in the balances of federal budget funds increased by 4,020,244.6 million rubles, or 201.9%, compared to 2008. The balances of the Reserve Fund increased by 6,230,971.6 million rubles or by 155.5% compared to 2008, the funds of the National Wealth Fund increased by 2,094,480.3 million rubles or by 95.9%. In connection with the restructuring of the Stabilization Fund from 1.01.2008. were sent to the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund. Other balances of federal budget funds decreased by 456,096.1 million rubles, or by 129.8%.
In 2010, there is a reduction in the balance of federal budget funds by 344,304.2 million rubles, or by 17% compared to 2009. Including the cash balances of the Reserve Fund decreased by 1,169,209.3 million rubles or by 52.6% compared to 2009, the cash balances of the National Welfare Fund increased by 296,628.5 million rubles or 329.5% compared to 2009. Other balances of federal budget funds in 2010 increased by 528,276.7 million rubles.
For 2011, the law approved the reduction of federal budget cash balances by 1,395,272.7 million rubles, or by 82.8% compared to 2010. The reduction of cash balances of the Reserve Fund was approved in the amount of 770,166.7 million rubles or 73% by 2010. Funds from the National Welfare Fund will decrease by 201,614.9 million rubles, or by 97.6% compared to 2010, according to the law.
For the planning period of 2012 and 2013, due to the depletion of the Reserve Fund, it is planned to finance the federal budget deficit at the expense of the National Welfare Fund. In 2012, it is planned to increase funds by 50% by 2011, in 2013 by 33.3% by 2012.
Thus, the main sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2011-2013 will be state borrowings in the domestic financial market (73.9%, 86.7% and 82.7%, respectively, in the total sources of financing the federal budget deficit), as well as funds from the privatization of federally owned property (16.4%, 15.9%, 17.2%) due to the expected use of the Reserve Fund in 2011 in full.
According to Annexes No. 42 and 43 to the Federal Law “On the Federal Budget for 2011 and the Planning Period of 2012 and 2013”, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit for 2011 were formed in the amount of 1,814.0 billion rubles, in 2012 and 2013 due to with a reduction in the volume of the federal budget deficit, it is envisaged to reduce the size of the sources of financing the federal budget deficit to 1,734.4 billion rubles and 1,795.7 billion rubles, respectively, which corresponds to the volume of the deficit.
Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below
Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.
Posted on http:// www. all best. en/
Introduction
1. Theoretical foundations of budget balance management
1.1 The concept and meaning of the budget deficit
1.2 Classification of sources of financing the budget deficit
1.3 The essence of public debt and methods of managing it
2. Analysis of the budget deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation
2.1 General characteristics of sources of financing the federal budget deficit
2.2 Analysis of domestic public debt
2.3 Analysis of external public debt
3. Ways to overcome the federal budget deficit
3.1 Problems of balancing the federal budget of the Russian Federation and methods for reducing the deficit
3.2 Prospects for public debt and ways to reduce it
Conclusion
Bibliography
budgetfunding gapduty
Introduction
The implementation of economic reforms has changed the basis for the functioning of the country's budget system. Relations between state authorities at various levels have also changed, which required the development of a methodology for the formation of a new budget mechanism. The budgetary system of any federal state in certain periods of time exists in the conditions of budget imbalance. The normal functioning of such a system is associated with the need for a rational redistribution of budgetary resources using a clear mechanism for its implementation.
The budget deficit is a financial phenomenon that all the states of the world have inevitably faced in certain periods of their history. A fully balanced state budget, that is, a budget without a balance, is only theoretically possible.
It is practically impossible to imagine a state in which all the financial and economic levers that stimulate the flow of funds to the budget work flawlessly, and government spending does not exceed revenues.
Many economically developed countries have lived and continue to live in debt, although it would be fair to note the recent trend towards a reduction in the budget deficit of economically developed countries. A budget deficit is considered normal, approximately corresponding to the level of inflation in the country.
The reason for the imbalance is also public debt. Servicing the public debt (payment of interest to lenders) is a heavy burden for any state, as it constantly takes over a certain share of working capital and leads to an increase in the state budget deficit.
For the last decade, Russia has been searching for effective ways to reform interbudgetary relations. Today, of course, there is a need to create a science-based financial mechanism for balancing budgets. At the same time, the quality of the balance of their budgets should be of great importance. However, it should be noted that many theoretical and methodological problems of balancing budgets have not been resolved due to the changed social, economic and political conditions for the functioning of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. All this determines the relevance of the course work, especially during the ongoing global financial crisis.
The purpose of this work is to analyze the budget deficit, sources of its financing and public debt as the most important elements of the financial system of the state, their main characteristics.
The specific objectives of this course work are:
* determination of the essence of the deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation, sources of its financing and public debt;
* analysis of the composition and dynamics of sources of financing the deficit, as well as internal and external public debt;
* analysis of the current state and problems of balancing the budget of the Russian Federation, as well as identifying possible prospects and ways to reduce the state budget deficit and public debt.
1. Theoreticalbasicsmanagementbalancebudget
1.1 conceptAndmeaningbudgetarydeficit
In the budgets of various levels, the principle of balance always applies, which means that the volume of budgeted expenditures must correspond to the total volume of budget revenues and receipts from the sources of financing its deficit. When drawing up, approving and executing the budget, the authorized bodies should proceed from the need to minimize the size of the budget deficit.
However, it is extremely difficult to achieve equality of income and expenses. Usually budget revenues exceed its expenditures and vice versa. The excess of revenues over expenditures is called a budget surplus, and the excess of expenditures over revenues is called a budget deficit.
In the modern world, there are no states that at one time or another in their history would not face a budget deficit. It is due to various reasons. In some cases, the state may deliberately increase the budget deficit. In particular, in order to stimulate economic activity and aggregate demand during a downturn in output, the government may take special decisions aimed at increasing employment levels (for example, funding programs to create new jobs) or significantly reduce taxes. As a result, budget expenditures increase or its revenues decrease, resulting in a deficit. But this deficit is deliberately created by the state and is called a structural deficit.
In contrast to the structural cyclical deficit, to a lesser extent depends on the conscious fiscal policy of the state. It is due to the general decline in production, which occurs at the stage of crisis and is the result of the cyclical development of the economy. In the context of a decline in production, taxes and state revenues are reduced, which means that there is a deficit.
There are also active and passive deficits. An active deficit arises as a result of the excess of expenditures over income, and a passive deficit arises as a result of a decrease in tax rates and other receipts, which is a consequence of a slowdown in economic growth, underpayments, etc.
There are short-term and long-term budget imbalances. Imbalances are short-term in nature if the excess of expenditures over revenues is limited to one financial year and reflects changes in the macroeconomic situation compared to the one in which the budget was prepared. This is mainly due to the lack of the necessary experience in macroeconomic forecasting, insufficient consideration of the possible changes in a number of circumstances.
For example, a reduction in revenues to the budget may occur as a result of falling export prices, a reduction in production volumes below the envisaged level, shifts in the structure of demand for manufactured products and a decrease in their competitiveness. The increase in the state budget deficit may also be caused by an unexpectedly sharp increase in public spending due to higher inflation than planned, the expansion of transfer payments, combined with the introduction of tax incentives, which is a very popular measure before the next elections.
Long-term fiscal imbalance is associated with a widening gap between government spending and revenue over the years and is due to causes that are more sustainable. Thus, in most developed countries over the past 15 years, there has been a steady upward trend in the national budget deficit. This is due to the following factors:
1) an increase in the number of social payments, and hence the social burden on the budget;
2) the unfavorable demographic situation associated with the aging of the population, as a result of which the costs of paying pensions, spending on health care, etc., increase;
3) liberalization of tax legislation and, as a result, a reduction in tax rates (without a corresponding adjustment in public spending);
4) an increase in the volume of external debt.
In general, the state budget is determined by three main factors:
1) a long-term trend in the dynamics of tax revenues and government spending;
2) the stage of the economic cycle in which the economy is in the period under review;
3) the current policy of the state in the field of budget expenditures and revenues.
Very often, especially in our country and in other countries, there is an artificial either overestimation or underestimation of the true value of the budget deficit. Thus, artificially lowering the budget deficit can be carried out using the following tools:
1) "tax amnesty", which allows taxpayers who have previously evaded taxes to pay at one time the entire amount equal to a certain part of the total tax collection;
2) measures to collect overdue tax payments;
3) introduction of temporary or added taxes;
4) deferred payment of wages to employees of the public sector;
5) postponing the mandatory indexation of wages in accordance with the dynamics of the inflation rate;
6) sale of state assets;
7) the presence of a hidden deficit due to quasi-budget spending.
The latter include centralized loans provided on favorable terms by the Central Bank. In addition, the Central Bank can finance certain operations related to public debt, cover losses from measures to stabilize the exchange rate, refinance agriculture, etc. As a result, the losses of the Central Bank are growing and inflation is increasing, while the deficit is not growing.
An artificial increase in the size of the state budget deficit can occur as a result of the following circumstances. First, when assessing the amount of public spending, depreciation in the public sector of the economy is not always taken into account. Secondly, an important item of government spending is servicing the public debt. However, very often the amount of interest payments on the debt is overestimated due to inflationary payments.
At high rates of inflation, when the differences in the dynamics of nominal and real interest rates are very significant, this overstatement of government spending can be quite significant. There are even situations when the nominal (official) deficit and government debt are growing, while the real deficit and debt are declining, which makes it much more difficult to assess the government's policy. Therefore, when measuring the budget deficit, an adjustment for inflation is required.
With this adjustment, the real budget deficit is determined, which is the difference between the nominal deficit and the amount of interest on the public debt, multiplied by the inflation rate. The overall budget deficit less the inflationary portion of interest payments is the operating deficit.
It is believed that the presence of a budget deficit in itself is not yet a signal of economic trouble. Very often, the deficit is seen as an important instrument of the state's economic policy, primarily macroeconomic regulation. Skillful handling of this tool allows the state to solve a fairly wide range of economic and social problems. However, it must be borne in mind that a long-term imbalance in the budget can have a negative impact on the size of aggregate demand and income, the price level, and the state of the balance of payments. Therefore, the strategic goal for any state, of course, is a balanced budget.
There are different ideas about how and for how long the budget should be balanced. Thus, according to the theory of an annually balanced budget, which was widely used as a theoretical basis for the state policy of most developed countries until the 1930s. XX century., It is necessary to achieve equality of income and expenditure of the state annually. This, according to supporters of this theory, allows national governments to pursue more responsible policies. The state lives within its means, does not accumulate debts, does not provoke inflation. If there is a decrease in income, then the state must either increase taxes or reduce spending.
In conditions when monetary incomes increase, the state should act in the opposite direction, i.e. cut taxes or increase spending. Currently, this theory is practiced by a limited number of countries, mainly countries with developing and transitional economies. In most developed countries, the theory of cyclical balancing of the budget has become widespread in the practice of state regulation of the economy. The foundations of this theory were laid by J. Keynes in the 30s.
It was Keynesian theory that rejected the need for an annual balanced budget. It effectively legalized budget deficits to stimulate the economy. The essence of the theory of cyclical balancing of the budget is that during an economic downturn, in order to stimulate economic growth, the state is obliged to cut taxes and increase spending. The state must compensate for the sharp drop in demand and prevent the reduction of public spending. In this case, there will inevitably be a budget deficit.
During the boom phase, the government pays off its debts by increasing tax rates or by increasing the tax revenues of start-up businesses. Thus, by the end of the economic cycle, the budget becomes balanced. Balancing is carried out throughout the cycle: an excess of budgetary funds in the recovery phase compensates for the budget deficit in the crisis phase.
At the same time, a large role is assigned to "built-in stabilizers" (a progressive system of taxation, state transfer payments - social payments, unemployment benefits, etc.). With their help, the size of aggregate demand is able to automatically decrease or expand, depending on the phase of the cycle, in the opposite direction to the movement of the conjuncture. For example, when business activity declines as a result of a decrease in aggregate income, there is an automatic reduction in tax revenues and an increase in certain types of transfer payments, which leads to the formation of a cyclical deficit and partially offsets the reduction in aggregate demand.
In conditions of economic recovery, the opposite happens - tax payments increase, transfer payments decrease. Within the framework of many modern theories, in particular the theory of a compensating budget, it is considered impossible, and even unnecessary, to achieve its balance. Considering that in modern conditions there are stable factors that increase the budget deficit, it is necessary to use state credit more fully as a legitimate source of budget revenues. It is the state credit, according to the representatives of this theory, that is able not only to compensate for the gap between income and expenditure, but also to attract an excess part of savings and invest it in the economy. In most developed market economies, the government seeks to balance the budget over the longer term, on a cyclical or functional basis. In an unstable economy, when the situation is generally less predictable, the government is forced to balance the budget every year.
Therefore, it is no coincidence that the Budget Code of the Russian Federation notes that the federal, regional or local budget cannot be adopted with a surplus or deficit, the annual budget balancing must be carried out. This, of course, is a less efficient way, since it leads to a decrease in the degree of built-in stability of the economy, causes frequent fluctuations in tax rates, reduces investment activity, and also reduces the efficiency of income distribution. However, to some extent it is justified, since in an unstable economy the situation is less predictable.
In Russia, in accordance with the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, the State Duma can only adopt a balanced budget. Therefore, along with revenue items, the federal budget should include a deficit as a balancing item. At the same time, a special item “Expenses for servicing and repaying the public debt” is allocated in the expenditure side of the budget. This Russian budget practice differs, for example, from the American one. In the US, the budget can be adopted with a deficit, i.e. it is initially unbalanced. At the same time, the sources of debt repayment, as well as income from loans issued to pay off the debt, are taken out of the budget.
1.2 classifycationsourcesfundingdeficitbudget
If the budget for the next financial year with a deficit is adopted, it is necessary to determine the sources of financing the budget deficit. Sources of financing the deficit differ by levels of the budget system. Thus, the sources of financing the federal budget deficit are:
1) internal sources:
* loans received by the Russian Federation from credit institutions in the currency of the Russian Federation;
* government loans carried out by issuing securities on behalf of the Russian Federation;
* proceeds from the sale of state-owned property, etc.;
2) external sources:
* government loans in foreign currency by issuing securities on behalf of the Russian Federation;
* loans from foreign governments, banks and firms, international financial organizations, provided in foreign currency.
Sources of financing the budget deficit of the subject of the Russian Federation and the local budget can only be internal sources:
* government loans carried out by issuing securities on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or a municipality;
* budget loans received from the budgets of other levels of the budget system of the Russian Federation;
* loans received from credit institutions;
* proceeds from the sale of property owned by the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal property, etc.;
In most countries, including Russia, the following main methods of financing the budget deficit are used:
1) credit and money issue (monetization);
2) debt financing (internal and external);
3) an increase in tax revenues to the state budget, as well as income from privatization, the sale of state property.
The last, third method can hardly be attributed to the methods used exclusively to finance the budget deficit. It is widely used and simply to replenish budget revenues. Therefore, the first and second methods are more related to the actual sources of financing the budget deficit.
Monetization as a way to reduce the budget deficit is an increase in the amount of money in circulation (including through bank financing). With monetization, the amount of money in circulation increases, the growth rate of the money supply significantly exceeds the growth rate of real GDP, which leads to an increase in the average price level. At the same time, all economic agents pay a kind of inflationary tax and part of their income is redistributed in favor of the state through increased prices.
The state generates additional income - seigniorage, i.e. new income from printing money. The monetization of the state budget deficit may not be accompanied directly by the issue of cash, but may be carried out in other forms. For example, in the form of expansion of Central Bank loans to state-owned enterprises at preferential rates or in the form of deferred payments.
Monetization turns out to be a rather risky way of financing the budget deficit, since it can have a negative impact on the state of the balance of payments. This is due to the fact that as a result of monetization, there is an increase in the supply of money and an excess of cash accumulates in the hands of the population. It inevitably generates an increase in demand for domestic and imported goods, as well as for various financial assets, including foreign ones. This, in turn, drives up prices and puts pressure on the balance of payments.
If the balance of payments becomes negative, then this does not reduce the federal budget deficit, but, on the contrary, leads to its increase. Moreover, this has a negative effect on the exchange rate of the national currency - it is partially devalued. The mechanism for restoring the equilibrium of the balance of payments under these conditions is based on "binding" the excess money supply by selling part of the Central Bank's official reserves on the foreign exchange market, which makes it possible to stabilize the money market as a whole.
The monetization of the state budget deficit causes the smaller the increase in inflation in the country, the more open the economy is and the more foreign exchange reserves the Central Bank can spend on maintaining a relatively fixed exchange rate of the national currency and restoring the balance of payments. At the same time, the growth of inflation as a result of the monetization of the budget deficit turns out to be more significant in the flexible exchange rate regime, although the expenditures of official foreign exchange reserves are reduced.
The negative inflationary consequences of budget deficit monetization can be mitigated by tight monetary policy measures. If the central bank reduces the lending capacity of commercial banks (usually through an increase in the reserve ratio or the discount rate of interest) at the same time as it expands public sector credit to finance the budget deficit, then domestic market rates rise, holding back economic activity. As a result, private investment and net exports are declining, and inflation no longer has such a negative impact on the balance of payments.
Money emission can be non-inflationary only at significant rates of economic growth, since the growing economic activity is accompanied by an increase in the demand for money, which absorbs part of the additional money supply. In general, monetization can be used as a way to solve the problem of the state budget deficit. However, it must be borne in mind that this is an unsafe method for the economy. It is usually used by national governments in exceptional cases when, for example:
1) there is a significant external debt, which excludes concessional financing of the budget deficit from external sources;
2) the possibilities of domestic debt financing are practically exhausted;
3) the foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank are depleted, which is why the regulation of the balance of payments remains a paramount task;
4) the economy is able to withstand high inflation, and citizens are already accustomed to the constant rise in prices.
If the government nevertheless chooses the issuance method of budget financing, then the Central Bank must first of all introduce restrictions (limits) on lending to state enterprises and organizations. Otherwise, there may be a risk of complete displacement of the private sector from the credit market and a drop in investment activity. It is also necessary to constantly keep the inflation rate under control and monitor the state of the balance of payments.
A less painful and more manageable way to deal with government deficits is through debt financing. As a result of debt financing, the budget deficit is covered by loans made by the state both within the country and abroad. Based on this, the external and internal debt of the state is formed.
In different directions of economic thought, debt financing is treated differently. Thus, representatives of the neoclassical trend, starting with A. Smith, have a negative attitude towards debt financing. They believe that A. Smith was right when he said that deficit financing is "a one-way street, once you enter it, you cannot turn back." As a result of debt financing, the wealth of the nation is reduced, the tax burden is aggravated, which hinders the accumulation of capital.
Modern monetarists (M. Friedman, F. Caten, and others) believe that if the state finances its needs through loans in the capital market, then this leads to an increase in the interest rate, which means crowding out private investment and a sharp reduction in investment. In addition, through the public debt, the economic burden is shifted to future generations, when citizens will be forced to pay off the debts of the state due to tax revenues in the future.
Representatives of the Keynesian trend, on the contrary, believe that there is nothing wrong with government borrowing. Thanks to them, the distribution of the tax burden over time is carried out, which is not so bad, since the results of such borrowing can be used by several generations, so they must bear the burden of reimbursing them.
Public debt acts as a source of mobilization of additional resources and increase in financial opportunities, so public borrowing can be an important factor in accelerating the pace of socio-economic development. The objective need to use debt financing to meet the needs of society today is due to many factors, primarily the increase in government spending. Conducting an active social policy, ensuring defense capability, international activities, etc. demand from the state a constant increase in budgetary expenditures. Meanwhile, state budget revenues are always limited by the possibilities of taxation. In this sense, public credit helps to reduce the contradiction between the ever-increasing needs of society and the limited resources of the state.
The use of government loans to finance additional government spending is also determined by their much smaller negative consequences for the economy compared, for example, with additional emission. On the other hand, the practice of debt financing is politically more favorable to the government than raising taxes. Therefore, through debt financing, the government can significantly increase its spending without adding to such an unpopular tax burden.
An increase in public spending makes it difficult to control future deficits, and ever-increasing interest payments on public debt significantly limit the government's ability to use the budget as a stabilization lever to influence the economy. At the same time, external debt can become a serious factor not only of economic, but also of political significance. Exorbitant payments from the state budget on debts divert funds from financing social, economic, defense and other programs of the government.
Increasing tax revenues - at first glance, it seems the easiest way to reduce or eliminate federal budget deficits. But there are some circumstances that make one think that increased taxes can only cause an increase in deficits. Higher tax rates are associated with larger, not smaller, deficits. This is because if the government receives more financial resources, legislators will not only spend all the additional tax revenue, but will spend more. Thus, there are doubts about the thesis that tax increases will be an effective means of reducing deficits. Increasing taxes may worsen rather than alleviate the problem.
Thus, none of the methods of financing the state budget deficit has absolute advantages over the others and is not completely non-inflationary.
1.3 EssencestatedebtAndmethodsmanagementthem
When budget expenditures begin to exceed its revenues, when the budget deficit becomes a chronic phenomenon, and its coverage is carried out by non-emission methods, debt arises. That is, the Government of the Russian Federation at the same time conducts borrowing activities from legal entities and individuals, foreign states, foreign financial and international organizations. Borrowing funds by budgets of various levels leads to the accumulation of debt to be repaid in the form of principal and accrued interest.
Public debt is the amount of debt on issued and outstanding government loans, loans received, including the accrual of interest on them, and government guarantees issued. Actually, the state debt is the debt obligations of the Russian Federation to legal entities and individuals, foreign and international organizations, and other subjects of law. The state debt of the Russian Federation is secured by all federally owned property constituting the state treasury.
The state debt of the Russian Federation includes debt obligations in the form of:
* credit agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation with credit institutions, foreign state and international financial institutions;
* government securities issued on behalf of the Russian Federation;
* agreements on the provision of state guarantees of the Russian Federation;
* RF guarantee agreements to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
* re-formalized contractual obligations of third parties into the state debt of the Russian Federation on the basis of adopted federal laws;
* agreements and agreements on restructuring of debt obligations of previous years, concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation.
Debt obligations of the Russian Federation are divided into short-term (up to one year), medium-term (from 1 to 5 years) and long-term (from 5 to 30 years). Obligations are repaid within the terms determined by the specific terms of loans, and cannot exceed 30 years. The state debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation is a set of debt obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, secured by all the property owned by the constituent entity of the Russian Federation that constitutes its treasury.
Debt obligations of a subject of the Russian Federation are carried out in the form of:
* credit agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation with individuals and legal entities, credit institutions;
* government loans of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation in the form of securities;
* contracts with the provision of state guarantees on behalf of the subject of the Russian Federation;
* suretyship agreements of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
* re-executed contracts of obligations of third parties into the state debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation;
* agreements and agreements on prolongation and restructuring of debt obligations of a subject of the Russian Federation of previous years, concluded on behalf of a subject of the Russian Federation.
Municipal debt-the totality of debt obligations of the municipality, which is provided by all municipal property constituting its treasury. The debt obligations of the municipality are carried out in the form of:
* credit agreements and contracts concluded by the municipality;
* municipal loans in the form of securities issue;
* contracts for the provision of municipal guarantees;
* contracts of guarantee of the municipality to ensure the fulfillment of obligations by third parties;
* debt obligations of legal entities re-registered as municipal debt on the basis of legal acts of local governments.
The repayment of the public debt is carried out at the expense of the revenues of the budgets of the corresponding level or through the issuance of new government loans. Public debt is repaid through treasuries and banks by buying back bonds on the stock exchange or directly from creditors through redemption draws or annual payments.
Under the market conditions for Russia, the most acceptable way to regulate the budget deficit is to cover it exclusively with public debt, which, in turn, needs centralized management.
Public debt management should be understood as a set of government actions related to studying the loan capital market, issuing loans, paying interest on issued loans, converting and consolidating loans, determining the bond rate in the money market, taking measures to determine interest rates on government loans and repay issued loans.
Operations related to the preparation of documents required for the sale of government securities, the study of the situation on the loan capital market, the placement of loans among creditors, the payment and accrual of interest, are carried out by the Ministry of Finance of Russia and other divisions under the Government of the Russian Federation.
Public debt management expenditures are shown as special financial transactions separately from the budget, and only interest payments on the debt are included in budget expenditures. An important role in the management of public debt is played by the secondary market for government bonds, where securities are traded. Operations in the primary and secondary markets for government bonds are carried out by investment and universal banks (dealers). The amounts that the state receives in loans from creditors, as well as interest on them, are repaid mainly from budget funds, current revenues and the issuance of new loans. This method of repaying government loans is called refinancing.
Public debt management operations are associated with cash execution of the budget, operations are performed by issuing banks. Banks participate in the issuance of loans, the payment of interest on them and the payment of bonds subject to redemption.
In order to manage public debt, the state resorts to clarifying the terms of a loan regarding profitability by reducing the nominal interest rate (conversion) or turning short-term obligations into medium- or long-term ones (consolidation) or combining several loans into one loan (unification), which forms a consolidated ( funded debt.
One of the methods of public debt management is the redemption of loans circulating in the loan capital market. In this option, the state instructs central and commercial banks to buy back loans with subsequent payment of funds to them. If the state does not have funds to pay off the state internal debt (bankruptcy), it can cancel the loan or refuse to pay it, but this method is rarely used in practice.
Public debt management in the Russian Federation is carried out by the Federal Treasury, which is organizationally part of the Russian Ministry of Finance. It is entrusted with the following tasks:
* registration of all debt obligations of the state and debt guarantees (external and internal);
* preparation of proposals for servicing public debts;
* Determining the levels, composition, time and conditions for issuing domestic and foreign loans, including the issuance of government securities.
The Ministry of Finance of Russia acts on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation as a borrower in both the domestic and foreign financial markets. In this regard, cooperation is being established between the Ministry of Finance of Russia and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in the field of issuing government securities and managing internal and external public debt. The Central Bank of the Russian Federation carries out operations with government securities, namely, their purchase and sale, redemption, issues loans secured by government securities, acts as an agent of the Russian Ministry of Finance in placing new issues of government debt.
2. AnalysisbudgetarydeficitfederalbudgetRussianFederations
2.1 Generalcharacteristicsourcesfundingdeficitfederalbudget
The amounts of sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008. according to the statistics of the Accounts Chamber are presented in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1. Sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008. (billion rubles)
|
General funding |
|||||
|
including: |
|||||
|
internal funding |
|||||
|
debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, municipalities denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation |
|||||
|
state reserves of precious metals and precious stones |
|||||
|
budget balances |
|||||
|
external funding |
|||||
|
including: |
|||||
Thus, the amounts of sources of general financing of the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation did not change much during these four years.
Share ratios are presented in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2. Shares of sources of financing the deficit of the Federal budget of the Russian Federation in 2005-2008 (billion rubles)
|
General funding |
|||||
|
including: |
|||||
|
internal funding |
|||||
|
debt obligations of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipalities denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation |
|||||
|
shares and other forms of participation in capital, which are in state and municipal ownership |
|||||
|
state reserves of precious metals and precious stones |
|||||
|
budget balances |
|||||
|
external funding |
|||||
|
including: |
|||||
|
debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, denominated in securities indicated in foreign currency |
|||||
|
loan agreements and contracts concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, indicated in foreign currency |
|||||
|
other sources of external financing |
This table shows that in 2007-2008 the main share of the sources of financing the budget deficit came from domestic financing and only a small part from external financing. However, in 2005-2006, the shares of internal and external sources were approximately equal, and in 2005, external financing in total was more than internal.
A large share of domestic sources of financing the deficit belongs to the debt obligations of the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, municipalities, denominated in securities indicated in the currency of the Russian Federation.
A significant proportion of external sources of financing the deficit in 2005-2006 were credit agreements and agreements concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, indicated in foreign currency. And in 2007-2008, the share of loan agreements and contracts greatly decreased, and the main part of external sources began to be debt obligations of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, denominated in securities indicated in foreign currency.
This is due to the fact that in 2007 and 2008 external financial borrowings and credits (loans) of foreign governments, banks and firms were not provided for by the external borrowing program, which led to a decrease in the share of loan agreements and agreements from 34.17% in 2006 to 4.75% in 2007 and then to 2.02% in 2008.
Shares of shares and other forms of participation in the capital, which are in state and municipal ownership, as well as state reserves of precious metals and precious stones in the total amount of funding sources are insignificant. The dynamics of sources of financing the federal budget deficit in 2003-2008 is presented in the following diagram.
Rice. 2.1. Dynamics of deficit financing sources
federal budget in 2003-2008
The data of this diagram confirm that in recent years, an increasing share of sources of financing the federal budget deficit has come from sources of domestic financing, while the share of external financing sources has been decreasing.
2.2 Analysisinternalstatedebt
The dynamics of the volume of public domestic debt from 1993 to 2009 is presented in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3. The volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation
|
As of |
The volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation, billion rubles |
||
|
including state guarantees in the currency of the Russian Federation |
|||
In accordance with the report of the Accounts Chamber, the total volume of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation in rubles as of January 1, 2008 amounted to 1301.15 billion rubles, or 4.3% of GDP for 2007, and as of January 1, 2009 - 1499.82 billion rubles, or 3.5% of GDP in 2008. The increase in the total amount of the public domestic debt of the Russian Federation in 2008 amounted to 198.67 billion rubles, or 15.27%, the ratio of public debt to GDP decreased over this period by 0.8 percentage points.
The increase in the total volume of the public debt of the Russian Federation in 2008 occurred, in particular, due to an increase in the public domestic debt by 198.67 billion rubles, or 15.27%.
During 2008, the share of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation in the total volume of the state debt of the Russian Federation increased from 54.2% to 55.7%. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation are presented in Figures 2.2. and 2.3.
Rice. 2.2. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2008 (1,301.2 billion rubles)
Rice. 2.3. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009 (1,499.8 billion rubles)
According to the report on the state of the state internal and external debt of the Russian Federation, as of January 1, 2008, the state internal debt amounted to 1,301,151.9 million rubles (3.9% of GDP in 2007); as of January 1, 2009 - 1,499,824.4 million rubles (3.6% of GDP in 2008) and increased by 198,672.5 million rubles, or 15.3%. As of January 1, 2009, the state domestic debt does not exceed the limit of the state domestic debt (1,804,189.6 million rubles) established by Article 1 of Federal Law No. 198-FZ of July 24, 2007. Of particular importance in the formation of public domestic debt are government securities (Fig. 2.4.)
Rice. 2.4. State internal debt of the Russian Federation, expressed in government securities, billion rubles
The share of the state internal debt denominated in government securities in the volume of the state internal debt as of January 1, 2009 compared to January 1, 2008 decreased by 1.2 percentage points and amounted to 94.8%.
2.3 Analysisexternalstatedebt
In accordance with Article 6 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, external debt is obligations arising in foreign currency. The dynamics and structure of the state external debt are presented in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4. The structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation (at the beginning of the year; billion US dollars)
|
Public external debt (including obligations of the former USSR assumed by the Russian Federation) |
||||||
|
including: |
||||||
|
debt to countries participating in the Paris Club |
||||||
|
debt to non-Paris Club countries |
||||||
|
commercial debt |
||||||
|
debt to international financial organizations |
||||||
|
Eurobond loans |
||||||
|
bonds of the internal state foreign currency loan (OVGVZ) |
||||||
|
debt on loans from Vnesheconombank provided at the expense of the Bank of Russia |
||||||
|
provision of guarantees of the Russian Federation in foreign currency |
Article 1 of Federal Law No. 198-FZ of July 24, 2007 (as amended) sets an upper limit on the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009, in the amount of USD 41.9 billion (EUR 27.2 billion).
According to the report on the state of the state external and internal debt of the Russian Federation at the beginning and end of the reporting financial year, the volume of the state external debt of the Russian Federation amounted to 40.6 billion US dollars as of January 1, 2009, which was confirmed by the results of the audit and does not exceed the established the upper limit of the public debt. The volume and structure of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation are presented in Figures 2.5. and 2.6.
Rice. 2.5. The volume and structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2008 (44.9 billion US dollars)
Rice. 2.6. The volume and structure of the state external debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2009 (40.6 billion US dollars)
According to the Accounts Chamber, the state external debt in ruble terms as of January 1, 2008 amounted to 1,101,649.8 million rubles (44,880.7 million US dollars), or 3.3% of GDP in 2007, increased over 2008 by 90,538.9 million rubles, or 8.2%, and amounted to 1,192,188.7 million rubles (40,577.7 million US dollars) as of January 1, 2009, or 2.9% of GDP for 2008. At the same time, in dollar terms, the volume of the state external debt decreased by 4,303.0 million US dollars, or by 9.6%.
As a result of the reduction in debt on most types of public external debt, its structure changed: the share of market debt (government securities of the Russian Federation denominated in foreign currency) decreased from 74% to 73%, while the share of non-market debt (loans from foreign governments, IFIs, foreign commercial banks and firms, state guarantees in foreign currency) from 26% to 27%.
3. Waysovercomingdeficitfederalbudget
3.1 PproblemsbalancefederalbudgetRussianFederationsAndmethodsdecreasedeficit
Since the end of 2007, rising world oil prices have been accompanied by an increase in demand for gas and other energy sources that replace it, thereby spurring an increase in the cost of the latter, both in the world and in the all-Russian market.
By the end of 2008, the cost of a barrel of oil was set at $130. In general, in 2008 electricity tariffs increased by 40%.
Already increased costs at manufacturing enterprises have increased due to the rise in the cost of raw materials, which are in great demand in the world. This process was caused by the orientation of our raw material and energy potential for export. Because of this, the needs for the development and expansion of production in the real sector of the economy were not fully satisfied.
That is, the change in the global environment (mainly commodity prices) caused a rapid transition from a surplus to a deficit federal budget since 2009. In 2008, the federal budget surplus, according to the Ministry of Finance, was 1 trillion. 697 billion rubles, or 4% of GDP. And in 2009 there was a deficit, which amounted to 2 trillion. 326.14 billion rubles or 6.4% of GDP.
The federal budget in January-April 2010 was executed with a deficit of 3.4% of GDP, according to the Ministry of Finance. The slowly growing negative balance of the state treasury is taking shape against the backdrop of an actual freezing of government spending and stagnation of revenues - they have not been growing since mid-2009.
The Ministry of Finance summed up the results of the execution of the federal budget in the first third of the year 2010. January-April revenues amounted to 2.618 trillion rubles, expenditures - 3.063 trillion rubles, budget deficit - 445 billion rubles, or 3.4% of GDP (Fig. 3.1.). So far, this is far from the 6.8% of GDP expected by the Ministry of Finance by the end of the year. Separately for April, the situation with the deficit looks somewhat worse than in general for four months. The April deficit amounted to 5.7% of GDP against 3.9% in March.
Rice. 3.1. Revenues and expenditures of the federal budget in 2009-2010 (billion rubles).
As can be seen from the graph, federal budget revenues, starting from the second half of 2009, have not actually grown.
It should also be noted that since 2009 the deficit began to be financed from the Reserve Fund of the Russian Federation, and before that it was only formed. Thus, the accounts of the Reserve Fund became sources of financing the federal budget deficit.
In April 2010, the Ministry of Finance of Russia continued to implement the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated January 19, 2010 No. 23-r on the allocation of funds from the Reserve Fund to finance the federal budget deficit. A part of the Fund's foreign currency funds on accounts with the Bank of Russia, namely USD 5.38 billion, EUR 3.99 billion and GBP 0.78 billion, was sold for RUB 350.00 billion, and the proceeds credited to the account for the accounting of federal budget funds.
As of May 1, 2010, the total volume of the Reserve Fund amounted to 1,188.70 billion rubles, which is equivalent to 40.59 billion US dollars. As of May 1, 2010, the balances on separate accounts for accounting for the Reserve Fund amounted to:
· 18.07 billion US dollars;
· 12.42 billion euros;
· £3.04 billion.
There is an opinion among experts that if the current economic situation, including the deficit budget, continues, the Reserve Fund may completely dry up in 2011. Therefore, it is imperative to take measures to reduce the deficit.
Similar Documents
Problems of budget deficit and public debt both in theoretical and practical terms. Economic consequences of public debt. Essence and types of deficiency. Ways to finance the budget deficit. The problem of the budget deficit in Russia.
term paper, added 03/22/2009
Study general condition public debt and budget deficit of the Russian Federation. Structure and dynamics of external public debt. Review of the problem of balancing the state budget. Exploring ways to overcome this problem.
term paper, added 06/01/2014
The study of the budget deficit, when budget expenditures exceed its revenues and a negative budget balance is formed. Analysis of public debt. Features and main sources of financing the state budget deficit in the Republic of Belarus.
term paper, added 04/01/2010
Principles of construction of the budget system. Revenues and expenditures of the state budget. The essence of the budget deficit and surplus. Economic essence concept of public debt. Types of public debt: external and internal, the parameters of their classification.
term paper, added 02/12/2009
Analysis of the state budget as the most important element of the financial system of society. Disclosure of the concept of budget deficit and public debt, their analysis and ways to manage these indicators, methods of financing in the Russian economy.
term paper, added 05/18/2014
The economic essence of the concept of the state budget, the balance of its revenues and expenditures. Methods of financing the state budget deficit. Monetization of the budget deficit in the Republic of Belarus, its external and internal financing.
term paper, added 02/06/2014
The essence of public debt, causes and consequences, impact on the development of the Russian economy. Ways to reduce public debt. Assessment of the deficit of the federal budget of the Russian Federation. His forecast for 2010-2012. and funding sources.
term paper, added 11/09/2010
The essence and content of the state budget deficit. Types and methods of financing the state budget deficit. State budget deficit of the Republic of Belarus and ways to overcome it. The state of public finances.
term paper, added 04/16/2007
Causes and assessment economic consequences budget deficit and surplus. General composition and disclosure of the essence of public debt, its relationship with the budget deficit. Sources of financing the budget deficit and public debt management.
term paper, added 08/06/2013
The budget system of the state. Formation of the budget in countries with market economies and in Russia. State budget deficit. Types of budget deficit. Financing the budget deficit. State debt. Problems of the state debt of the Russian Federation.