/

Use of maternity capital. Strategies for using maternal capital The importance of maternal family capital

During the seminars on pension reform the site aims to reveal the full potential of the currently available ways for an active citizen to increase the size of his future pension capital.

Such instruments for increasing capital include:

Let's consider how they can use the tool " maternal capital" - state support for families with children - mothers of two or more children. The implementer of this state function is the Pension Fund of Russia.

1. The concept of maternity capital

2. The procedure for obtaining maternity capital

3. Possibilities of using maternity capital

1. The concept of maternity capital

Maternal (family) capital is funds federal budget, transferred to the Pension Fund of Russia (PFR) in order to support families with children.

Maternal capital can be used to improve living conditions families, education for children or for the formation of a mother’s future pension.

According to Federal Law No. 256-FZ dated December 29, 2006 “On additional measures state support families with children" (hereinafter referred to as 256-FZ), maternity capital is intended for families who, in the period from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2018, had (will have) a second child (or a third child or subsequent children). We are talking about both the birth and adoption of the second, third and subsequent children (hereinafter referred to as the second child).

Recipients of maternity capital can be:

  • a woman who has Russian citizenship and has given birth to (adopted) a second child;
  • the father (adoptive parent) of the second child in the event of termination of the woman’s right to maternity capital in accordance with 256-FZ;
  • a man who has Russian citizenship and is the sole adoptive parent of a second child;
  • a child (children in equal shares), if he is not yet an adult or is studying in an educational institution, but not older than 23 years, upon termination of the right to maternity capital from the father (adoptive parent) or a woman who is the only parent (adoptive parent) in the established law cases.

According to 256-FZ, the amount of maternity capital is reviewed annually taking into account the growth rate of inflation. However, in 2017 its size was not indexed and remained at the level of the 2016 size of 453,026 rubles. For persons who have already disposed of part of the funds, the amount of the remaining amount should also increase to take into account inflation.

The process of obtaining this state benefits can be roughly divided into three stages:

1) obtaining the right to maternity capital: the appearance of a second child in the family in the period from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2018;

2) obtaining a state certificate for maternity capital: the period for applying for a certificate is not limited;

3) disposal of a state certificate for maternity capital: the period of disposal is not limited.

2. The procedure for obtaining maternity capital

The right to receive maternity capital can be used once.

To confirm the right to receive maternity capital, a state certificate for maternity capital (hereinafter referred to as the certificate) is issued. There is no time limit for applying for a certificate after the birth of your second child.

To obtain a certificate you must do the following:

1) issue a birth (adoption) certificate for the child at the registry office;

2) submit to the Pension Fund an application for the issuance of a certificate and certified copies of:

  • a document identifying the applicant and his place of residence;
  • documents confirming the birth (adoption) of children;
  • a document confirming the Russian citizenship of the child (children) born (adopted) after January 1, 2007;

3) wait by mail for notification of the issuance or refusal to issue a certificate. The period for reviewing documents is one month from the date of their submission;

4) obtain a certificate from the Pension Fund of Russia.

3. Possibilities of using maternity capital

Maternity capital funds can only be obtained by non-cash payments.

To use maternity capital, you must submit an application to the Pension Fund for the disposal of funds (part of the funds) of maternity capital.

Maternity capital funds can be used for the following purposes:

1) improvement of housing conditions: acquisition (construction) of residential premises and repayment of a housing loan;

2) education of the child (children) in any Russian educational institution;

4) purchase of goods and services intended for social adaptation and integration into society of disabled children.

Maternity capital funds can be disposed of no earlier than three years from the date of birth (adoption) of the second child. An exception is the use of funds to repay a loan for the purchase (construction) of residential premises.

Maternity capital funds can be managed in in full or in parts, directing it to various purposes. You can also first dispose of the capital partially, and dispose of the rest later.

Also in the fall of 2016, certificate holders (regardless of how much time had passed since the birth of the second child) had the opportunity to receive a one-time payment from it in the amount of 25,000 rubles (or in the amount of the actual balance, if it is a smaller amount). The application must be submitted no later than November 30, 2016.

If a woman did not manage maternity capital before retirement, she has the right to take these funds into account as part of pension savings when assigning her a funded pension.

Maternity capital funds can be used for the formation (hereinafter referred to as pensions) of the mother. In this case, maternity capital funds are included in its composition.

Pension savings can be accounted for and invested in both the Pension Fund and (NPF). Based on the results of investing pension savings, investment income is accrued.

Maternity capital funds (or part of them), initially aimed at forming a pension, can be redirected until it is assigned for other purposes.

The procedure for directing maternity capital funds to form a pension to a non-state pension fund provides for the following actions:

1) obtaining a certificate;

2) conclusion with a non-state pension fund (NPF) and submission to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation of an application for transfer to this fund;

3) submission to the Pension Fund:

  • applications for the disposal of capital (direction of funds (part of the funds) for the formation of a pension);
  • certificate;
  • OPS insurance certificate of the certificate holder;
  • identification document, place of residence of the certificate holder.

Within a month, the Pension Fund makes a decision to transfer funds to the NPF, after which the transfer is carried out within a month.

Thus, if other family issues are resolved, maternity capital can become a tool for increasing the mother’s future pension.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

Introduction

Relevance of this topic is that an additional measure of state support for families with children - maternal (family) capital, introduced on January 1, 2007, stimulates an increase in the birth rate in the country. Low birth rate and lack of material support for families with children began to be considered as the main reasons for the demographic crisis. Many young families cannot decide to have children, not only because of the seriousness of this step, but also because of the lack of opportunities to provide for them, to give them a decent education and housing.

Therefore, it is important that every woman, when deciding to have a child, feels the support of the state and is calm about the future of her family.

Among the priorities for stimulating the birth rate and strengthening the family, the concept of demographic development of the Russian Federation identified:

– formation of a system of social and personal values ​​focused on families with two or more children;

– increasing the material well-being, level and quality of life of the family;

– creation of socio-economic conditions favorable for the birth, maintenance and upbringing of several children, including conditions for self-realization of young people, including obtaining general and vocational education, working with decent wages, as well as the opportunity to provide the family with appropriate housing conditions.

Object of study is the legal regulation of additional measures of state support for families with children.

Subject of research is a mechanism for implementing legal support for families with children for material support.

The purpose of the study The course work is an analysis and synthesis of regulations governing social support for families with children.

Coursework objectives:

– characterize an additional measure of state support for families with children - maternal (family) capital;

– study the rules for filing an application for the disposal of funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital;

– consider the directions of use of maternal (family) capital.

Source base draws up the Constitution of the Russian Federation, Federal laws, decrees of the Government of the Russian Federation, Orders of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of Russia, additional literature and periodicals.

Coursework structure meets the goals and objectives of the study and consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and a list of sources and literature used. The first chapter reveals the concept and meaning of maternal (family) capital. The second chapter is devoted to the rules for filing an application for the disposal of funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital. The third chapter describes the directions in which maternal (family) capital funds can be used.

1. Maternal (family) capital: concept and its meaning

1.1 The concept of maternal (family) capital and its legal regulation

Regulation of social security relations is carried out on the basis of the principles of universality of social security; differentiation of types, conditions and level of support depending on labor contribution, reasons, need and other socially significant circumstances; guarantee of social assistance in cases where a person needs it due to circumstances recognized as socially significant. Only those principles are mentioned here, the manifestation of which is in the norms on maternity capital arouses the greatest interest.

Maternity (family) capital – funds from the federal budget transferred to the budget of the Pension Fund Russian Federation for the implementation of additional state support measures established by this Federal law dated December 29, 2006 No. 256-FZ “On additional measures of state support for families with children.”

The provision of additional state support measures to families with children in the form of the right to maternal (family) capital is based on two circumstances: the birth (adoption) of a second and subsequent child and the period of time during which this occurred, from January 1, 2007 to 31 December 2016

The right to receive maternity capital can be used once for certain categories of citizens provided for in the Federal Law of December 29, 2006 No. 256-FZ “On additional measures of state support for families with children.”

Confirmation of the right to additional measures of state support is a personal document - a state certificate for maternity (family) capital.

The system of legislation ensuring the implementation of additional measures of state support for families with children includes legislative acts that differ in their legal orientation:

– Tax Code of the Russian Federation, part two, dated August 5, 2000 No. 117-FZ, containing a definition that includes maternal (family) capital funds allocated to ensure the implementation of additional measures of state support for families with children as income not subject to taxation (clause 34 of article 217 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation);

– Federal Law of May 19, 1995 No. 81-FZ “On state benefits for citizens with children,” which establishes a unified system of state benefits for citizens with children in connection with their birth and upbringing, which provides state-guaranteed material support for maternity, fatherhood and childhood;

– Federal Law of December 29, 2006 No. 256-FZ “On additional measures of state support for families with children” establishes additional measures of state support for families with children in order to create conditions that provide these families with a decent life.

The by-laws that form the legislative system on additional measures of state support for families with children include:

– Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated December 12, 2007 No. 862 “On the rules for allocating funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital to improve housing conditions” establishes the types of expenses for which funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital can be allocated to improve living conditions, the procedure for filing an application for the disposal of these funds and the list of documents required for consideration of the application, as well as the procedure and timing for the transfer of these funds;

– Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 24, 2007 No. 926 “On approval of the Rules for the allocation of funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital for the education of a child (children) and the implementation of other expenses related to the education of a child (children)” establishes the procedure for the allocation funds (part of the funds) of maternal (family) capital for the education of a child (children) in any educational institution on the territory of the Russian Federation that has the right to provide relevant educational services, as well as for other expenses related to the education of the child (children), and determines the procedure for submitting documents necessary to allocate funds for these purposes;

– Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 30, 2006 No. 873 “On the procedure for issuing a state certificate for maternity (family) capital” - determines the procedure for filing an application for issuing a state certificate for maternity (family) capital, ensures a uniform procedure for accepting and considering applications for it issuance and regulate the procedure for maintaining the federal register of persons entitled to receive additional measures of state support, including the deadlines and forms for submitting information to it.

maternal capital state support

The White House is exploring possible measures to reduce government spending. The head of the Ministry of Economic Development, Alexey Ulyukaev, proposed refusing to pay maternity capital. The authorities found out how effective the incentive program was demographic growth.

On August 26, by order of the Prime Minister, a commission was created to optimize and improve efficiency budget expenditures. As part of this commission, the Minister economic development Alexey Ulyukaev sent a letter to its chairman, Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov, with a proposal to abandon the uniform reduction of all state programs. Instead, targeted reductions are proposed, in particular the completion of the maternity capital program, which, according to the ministry, will save up to 300 billion rubles. in year. In the opinion of the Ministry of Economic Development, the program only shifts the birth calendar - it encourages families to give birth to their second and subsequent children earlier than they would have done without additional government support measures.

The All-Russian Popular Front, through the mouth of the co-chair of the central headquarters, Olga Timofeeva, accused the ministry of professional incompetence. In the media, the proposal of the Ministry of Economic Development quickly evolved into “Ulyukaev demanded.” Deputy Prime Minister for Social Affairs Olga Golodets announced the extension of the issuance of maternity capital beyond December 31, 2016, when the program ends. In a long-running discussion, Golodets proposed expanding the list of purposes for using capital, adding to the existing three “investments in agricultural business or in the employment of mothers.” In an absentee dispute with the minister, the Deputy Prime Minister was supported by the press secretary of the Russian Prime Minister, Natalya Timakova: “Currently, the issue of abolishing maternal capital is not on the government’s agenda. The Prime Minister considers proposals for a possible reduction in this program to be inappropriate and untimely.” The discussion died down for a while.

The era of maternal capital in Russia began at the very end of 2006. In the week before the New Year, the State Duma, the Federation Council and President Putin adopted, approved and signed Federal Law 286, which established measures of additional state support for the family. The law introduced the term “maternity (family) capital” - funds from the state budget, which the country issued through a pension fund in the form of a certificate to several categories of citizens. Firstly, for women who gave birth to their second child after January 1, 2007. Secondly, for women who gave birth to their third and subsequent children in the new year, if they have not received a certificate before. The same measures applied to adopted children. The law stated “family” in parentheses, since not only women can receive the certificate. In addition to women, men who were the only adoptive parents of their second and subsequent children can become owners of long-term money. Moreover, they are not necessarily Russian citizens: a father or adoptive parent, in the event of termination of the right to receive maternity capital by a citizen of the Russian Federation (death, deprivation of parental rights, commission of a crime against a child), can receive a certificate in her place, regardless of the color of his passport. In case of termination of rights on the part of the father, a child under 23 years of age receives a certificate himself.

The money can be spent on improving living conditions, children’s education and savings part mothers' pensions. The same law established the size of maternal capital - 250 thousand rubles, as well as the need for it annual indexation. This year, for the first time, the state indexed capital to an accuracy of half a ruble. Its size is now 429,408 rubles. 50 kopecks

In many societies, the birth rate, having reached a certain critical minimum point, began to rise again

At first glance, the introduction of maternity capital did not become turning point in the demographic situation in our country. In the 21st century, it was not as pessimistic as previously imagined. Since 2000, the birth rate in Russia has been growing steadily, increasing over the past 14 years, according to Rosstat, from 1215 thousand to 1901 thousand births per year, by as much as 56%. If we take into account that the population of Russia, despite the positive dynamics of the 2000s, continued to decline until 2010 (the deep demographic failure of the nineties was not overcome immediately), then the total fertility rate, that is, the number of births per 1 thousand inhabitants, reveals an even more significant increase - almost 60%. What is the reason for such impressive growth, and is it related to the emergence of maternal capital?

It is widely believed that with material and technical progress, the birth rate is naturally declining, and developed countries are literally doomed to depopulation. This view has merit, but only to some extent. In many societies that pioneered the path of depopulation (France, the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian countries), the birth rate, having reached a certain critical minimum point, began to rise again, gradually approaching the replacement level (just over two children per woman). The experience of this kind of partial demographic restoration has already been accumulated by a significant number of developed countries. However, it is Russia that stands out among them with the highest rates of maternal renaissance.

In addition to the pace, Russia can also boast of the duration of the observed rise - with minor fluctuations, the birth rate has been growing for the fifteenth year in a row. This year, as the results for January-August published by Rosstat show, the positive trend continues.

It is curious that most Western European nations that entered the stage of such restoration stumbled over the global financial and economic crisis, as a result of which the level reached by 2008-2010 still remains unsurpassed. Unlike them on post-Soviet space crisis, although it was more severe economic consequences, practically did not affect demographics. Apparently, our people, accustomed to more severe blows of fate, did not take the fluctuations in the world market seriously and did not begin to adjust their parental plans.

Russia demonstrates unprecedentedly high rates of demographic revival

If in England, France or Sweden the birth rate approached its minimum in a smooth, evolutionary way, then in our country the decline acquired a revolutionary character due to the shock of radical social changes. It is not surprising that post-Soviet nations, after a deeper failure, are gaining height more steeply. We assume that our sociocultural stereotypes could not change much in the short period of reforms, but were only crushed by the weight of economic and psychological circumstances. Therefore, it is more correct to compare the pace of demographic restoration in Russia with Ukraine or Belarus rather than with the countries of Western Europe. However, here too the comparison confirms the phenomenal nature of Russian growth. If we do not take into account the jumps in the birth rate that took place after heavy wars, when husbands returned to their families, then a 60 percent increase in the birth rate in peacetime is an indicator that claims to be a world record.

In modern Russian society There is a popular stereotype that the increase in the birth rate observed in Russia, if not entirely, then to a very significant extent, is due to migrants. However, we must take into account that the largest centers of immigration to Russia - Uzbekistan and Azerbaijan - have long been no longer distinguished by high demographic indicators. The modern birth rate in these countries is close to simple reproduction and is less than a quarter higher than in Russia. The birth rate of the Chinese, another nation featured in the migration phobias of their compatriots, has recently become lower than the domestic one (we emphasize: we are, of course, talking about a comparison of relative figures - births per 1 thousand population, and not an absolute comparison of the more than billion-strong PRC and 143 million Russian Federation). Even in the case of the absolutely incredible complete replacement of the indigenous population of Russia with visitors from these countries, it is not only impossible to ensure a 60 percent increase, unique in world practice, but in general it is quite difficult to guarantee any noticeable increase in the birth rate. After all, we must take into account that due to the labor nature of migration, men in this environment significantly predominate over women, which does not contribute to a high birth rate per 1 thousand people.

Contrary to stereotypical phobias, we can safely say that the driving force behind the demographic revival of the 2000s and 1900s is not migrants, but Russians and peoples close to Russians in sociocultural stereotypes. This is indirectly, but very eloquently evidenced by regional analysis changes that have occurred (see map).

In groups where the birth rate grew at a rate above average, regions with a predominantly Russian population absolutely predominated (with the exception of Mari El and Tuva). Such obvious epicenters of migration attraction as Moscow and the Krasnodar Territory find themselves in the lagging group, and the Moscow Region, although it has crossed the average line, looks rather modest.

The birth rate grew at the slowest rate in the North Caucasus. Contrary to popular belief, this region also experienced demographic crisis nineties, although in a significantly less acute form than central and northern Russia. Today we are witnessing a process of convergence of family guidelines between the Slavic and Caucasian peoples. If in the group of regions with a predominantly Russian population the birth rate on average has already exceeded the level of the pre-reform 1990, then in the group of republics of the North Caucasus, which have traditionally been distinguished by large families, overall fertility rates range from 70 to 95% of the 1990 level. The differences between the sizes of Russian and Caucasian families are no longer as contrasting as they used to be. The total fertility rate between the respective regions now differs by about one and a half times (in contrast to the more than double gap in favor of the North Caucasus in the early nineties).

There was no reduction to 97% of the 1999 level in 2013, because not only the number of women changed, but also the intensity of births

Again, we emphasize: we are comparing growth rates, not the achieved level of fertility. In terms of the number of births per 1 thousand people, the North Caucasus republics are still ahead of the central regions, which, however, are now closing the gap with them. A more accurate picture would be provided by comparing not general, but total fertility rates, that is, not the number of newborns per 1 thousand inhabitants, but the number of children per woman, but the authors do not have such data broken down by region.

Thus, Russia is demonstrating an unprecedentedly high rate of demographic revival, which cannot be attributed to migration or the contribution of regions with traditionally high birth rates - the locomotive of the maternal renaissance is the regions with a predominantly Russian population.

The entire period of demographic revival in Russia can be divided into two equal time periods of seven years: before the introduction of maternity capital (2000-2006) and after (2007-2013). Objective conditions for demographic growth during these periods developed differently. In 2000-2006, the number of women of childbearing age in the country increased, as children of the last Soviet demographic boom of 1982-1988 entered adulthood. In 2007-2013, the number of potential mothers began to decline, as a small generation of girls born at the end of perestroika and at the height of " shock therapy" (1989-1995)

Based on these data, demographers of various schools and directions predicted that starting around 2010, the birth rate would begin to fall in Russia. The head of the Center for the Study of Population Problems of Moscow State University Valery Elizarov, the director of the Institute of Demography at the Higher School of Economics Anatoly Vishnevsky, his deputy Sergei Zakharov, Associate Professor of the Department of Sociology of Family and Demography of the Faculty of Sociology of Moscow State University Viktor Medkov and others wrote about this.

Based on data from the 2001 and 2010 all-Russian censuses, as well as age-specific birth rates in 2000 published by Rosstat, several conclusions can be drawn. If the frequency of births per woman remained unchanged throughout the entire period under consideration, and only the number of potential women in labor had changed, then in 2006 the number of children born would have reached 106% of the starting level in 1999 (about 1290 thousand people). Such an increase would be explained by an increase in the number of potential mothers from the Soviet baby boom generation of the mid-80s. However, by 2013, the number of children born would have decreased to 97% of the 1999 level (1,180 thousand) - this is 20-25 years later, the echo of the demographic failure as a result of the collapse of the USSR would reach us.

However, the real frequency of births depends not only on the extensive factor (the number of women of fertile age), but also on the intensive factor, that is, on the frequency of births per woman. If there is a shift in society from the ideal of a one-child family to the ideal of a two-child family, or vice versa, this radically affects the birth rate.

In fact, the decrease to 97% of the 1999 level did not occur in 2013, because not only the number of women changed, but also the intensity of births. Our “woulds” regarding the number of births turned out to be rejected by reality. As we now know, neither in 2010 nor in 2012 did the pessimistic forecasts of demographers come true. On the contrary, the Russian birth rate continued to grow, and in 2013, for the first time in the entire post-reform era, it exceeded the death rate, providing our country with natural population growth.

In 2006, the country's birth rate increased by 22% compared to 1999. 6% of this growth is provided by an extensive factor - an increase in the number of women. The remaining 16% falls on the intensive factor, that is, on the increased frequency of births, in other words, on the desire not to limit oneself to one, but to give birth to a second and third child.

In 2013, we expected a decrease in the number of births due to a decrease in the number of women. But the birth rate, on the contrary, increased sharply - by 56%. It turns out that the increased intensity of births not only provided a 56% increase compared to 1999, but also compensated for the predicted three percent decrease. In total, the frequency of births per woman compared to 1999 reached 159% in 2013. An additional 59% compared to the year of the historical minimum is provided solely by an increase in intensity, and not by quantitative factors. In 2006, the role of the intensive factor was expressed in only a 16 percent increase. It turns out that the sum of the factors that increase the frequency of births (in everyday language - increasing the number of children in our families) acted approximately four times stronger in 2013 than in 2006.

It is obvious that after the introduction of maternity capital, the intensity of births increased significantly. Moreover, the role of the intensive factor at this time turned out to be almost four times more significant than in the period without maternity capital. As a result, in 2007-2013, the birth rate grew even faster than in the previous seven-year period, despite the reduction in the maternal generation. This is a serious preliminary argument in favor of maintaining the social measure we are discussing.

Of course, based on the above, it cannot be argued that the introduction of maternity capital was the only or at least the main reason for the increase in the birth rate in 2007-2013. But it is even more reckless to declare that economic stimulation did not bring the expected effect, resulting only in a shift in the birth calendar. Those who reduce the effect of maternal capital to a calendar shift imply that the children born should have been born anyway, only a little later, so in the end we will not get any real increase in the birth rate, and from the point of view of the demographic future, the issuance of almost 430 thousand . rub. for a family - a waste of money.

The share of second and subsequent births, judging by the estimated data from Demoscope weekly and the Ministry of Labor, increased from approximately 42.3% to 51.5% of the total number of births only from 2006 to 2012. In absolute numbers, this means an increase from 625 thousand to 980 thousand, or more than one and a half times. Let's assume that the experts from the Ministry of Economic Development are right in explaining this increase in the birth rate with a calendar shift. In this case, over almost eight years of operation of the demographic program for payments of maternity capital, more than one and a half times more women should have made repeat visits to maternity hospitals. That is, to the eight expected annual groups of women giving birth (who would still decide to give birth at the designated time, even if there were no maternal capital), more than four more similar groups should be added, made up of those who, without maternal capital, would postpone their second birth for later. To complete more than four of these cohorts would require more than a four-year shift in second birth plans nationwide! But this is physically impossible, since the difference between the average age of birth of the first and second child at the time of the introduction of maternal capital was slightly less than five years and, for physiological reasons, could not be reduced by more than three to four years. Even if, thanks to the incentive of family capital, second children were born after the first in an assembly line order, already in the sixth year of the program the resource of one and a half growth would have been exhausted (six planned annual cohorts would have visited maternity hospitals, plus three extra planned ones, who arrived there as a result of the maximum physiologically possible compaction of the calendar childbirth). Consequently, from 2012, growth would be replaced by a rapid decline in the birth rate, because all desired second children have already been born prematurely. However, we are not seeing any reduction this year and cannot even predict for the next one. This means that maternity capital stimulated “original”, “above-plan” births, and did not bring the planned ones closer, as the Ministry of Economic Development believes. And therefore, 300 billion rubles. per year are not spent on fun with a wall calendar, but actually allow maternal capital to be converted into human capital.

Moreover, a calendar shift would inevitably lead to a younger age of the average birth. In reality, the opposite picture is observed: women in labor in Russia are aging. According to the Foundation social insurance Russian Federation, during the period of maternity capital, the average age of mothers increased from 26.6 to 28.2 years. IN age group From 35 to 40 years of age, the birth rate grows twice as fast as the average for the entire maternal cohort. This suggests that there is not a shift of the calendar forward, not an early birth ahead of schedule, but the implementation of long-awaited and constantly postponed plans has finally begun, allowing many mothers to jump on the last carriage of the departing train at the end of their fertile age. If not for the improvement social conditions Without government support, these deferred hopes would never have come true.

Sociological studies conducted in 2013 by Rosstat also make it possible to assess the role of maternal capital in these changes. In a survey of Russian families of all ages, 6% of all married couples surveyed reported that the issuance of this benefit had a decisive influence on their decision to have a child. The share of 6% looks insignificant, but in absolute numbers nationwide it grows to 1,800 thousand people. The total birth rate in 2007-2013 exceeded the level achieved in 2006 by approximately the same number of children. Approximately the same number of children ensures Russia's superiority in the pace of maternal renaissance over its sisters - Belarus and Ukraine.

After the introduction of maternity capital, the birth rate accelerated in the country. And this happened not due to a shift in the birth calendar, but due to a real increase in the number of children born per woman. For the first time in the past 20 years, the two-child family model gained a noticeable advantage over the one-child family; the total number of second and subsequent births exceeded the number of first ones. In the excess of the number of second and subsequent births over the first, the role of maternal capital is obvious.

We fundamentally did not consider the issues of the ethics of this cancellation and the very ethics of posing the question. But even a rational view shows that maternity capital turned out to be an effective social measure.
Vladimir Timakov, Alexey Tokarev

Push. By Sverdlovsk region There are countless Tajik migrants. They reproduce strongly, all of them are either citizens or have a residence permit. disingenuous statistics, IMHO.

According to this program, women who gave birth (adopted) a second child or subsequent children after January 1, 2007 are entitled to additional financial support from the federal budget. These funds (maternity capital) are provided to the mother in the form of a certificate when the second (or subsequent) child reaches the age of three. According to legislators, a woman can use this certificate in a strictly defined way - invest in the construction of housing, in the education of one of her children, or in the funded part of her own pension.

Everything would be fine, but in reality, getting this capital is not so easy. The outgoing year was marked by several major scandals in the regions. Thus, in the Ulyanovsk region, officials did not warn mothers about their right to government money or missed the deadline for issuing the certificate. Employees in Tatarstan Pension Fund They forced parents to bring not only certificates from the registry office, but also the birth certificate of the applicant herself, which many no longer had. In addition, maternity capital ceases to be indexed at the time of receipt of the certificate. The family received it in 2010 - instead of 250 thousand rubles it will be 310 thousand. But no more. So it’s unlikely that there will be enough for preparatory courses for college for a child: in a few years, inflation will leave a penny of wealth. And now the amount is only enough for country house 200 kilometers from Moscow. Little nasty things

In 2010, children for whose birth families are entitled to maternal (family) capital reached the age of three. This means that the reform, which at one time caused a great public outcry, is beginning to become a reality. And of particular relevance is the question of how the expected effects of the maternity capital program relate to the practical results of the initial functioning of this project.

In the summer of 2011, the Gender Studies program (European University in St. Petersburg) with the support of the Foundation. Heinrich Böll conducted a sociological study on this issue. During the study, 19 interviews were collected with mothers and married couples who have the right to use maternal (family) capital. Interviews were conducted in Volgograd, St. Petersburg, Moscow and Leningrad regions. The study involved people with different numbers of children in the family (from 2 to 4 children), with different levels of education (from secondary to higher) and income. This article is devoted to discussing the results of the described project.

Maternity capital: content and criticism

The starting point for the introduction of the maternity capital program was the message of Russian President V.V. Putin to the Federal Assembly on May 10, 2006. In this speech, the president determined demographic problem(population decline) as the country's most pressing problem. Putin associated her decision, first of all, with stimulating the birth rate, namely, with the introduction of measures of state support for young families (primarily women) who decide to give birth to a child.

Do maternal capital and child benefits somehow encourage a woman to become a mother? - Maternity capital had little influence on a woman’s decision to give birth. However, in the regions, significant assistance can be provided at a time when a woman must devote all her energy to caring for a child and cannot earn money herself. This is when the baby is between one and a half to two years old. Therefore, an increase in child care benefits at this age can be a positive factor, and in some cases, a decisive factor. The fact is that there are cases where women, even after a caesarean section, were forced to look for work because they could not feed the child on benefits. Other measures, e.g. one-time benefits, according to our observations, are not very effective. Svetlana Rudneva: “Only one woman out of ten refuses an abortion”

The President declared the need integrated approach To state aid families. The set of innovations he proposed included an increase in child care benefits for up to 1.5 years, compensation for the costs of preschool education of children, and the development of reproductive healthcare. At the same time, maternal capital was named as the main measure designed to encourage women to have at least two children.

The essence of the proposed measure was as follows: a woman who gave birth to a second (or subsequent) child in the period from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2016, receives a “maternity capital” certificate from the state. The size of this capital in 2006 was 250 thousand rubles, and by 2011 it was indexed to 365,700 rubles. Once the child reaches three years of age, the mother can use this certificate strictly in accordance with legally defined areas of spending (to improve her own living conditions, for the education of her children, or for the funded part of her own pension). Although in regulatory documents this measure of state support was defined as family ( official name program sounds like a program of “maternity (family) capital”), its actual recipients were women-mothers. The father received the right to dispose of maternal capital only in exceptional circumstances - in the event of the death of the mother, deprivation of her parental rights, or her commission of a crime against the child.

Soon after its introduction, this reform became the center of public debate. The concerns of liberal-minded experts were related to the fact that monetary payments in the declared amount were not sufficient to encourage middle-class families to have children. Already at the start of the program, two hundred and fifty thousand in maternity capital could not serve as a significant help for purchasing an apartment (in Moscow, this amount could buy about 5 square meters of living space) or paying for a child’s education. Economists warned that the assistance promised by the state would seem attractive only to low-income segments of the population, and an increase in the number of births in this group of families would ultimately lead to a number of social problems.

Another feminist-oriented line of criticism focused on the gender aspects of the ongoing reform. Its supporters emphasized that by addressing its programs primarily to mothers, the state thereby consolidates the traditions of Soviet social policy, when the woman was presented as the main agent of child care and the passive object of care by the paternalistic state. It also problematized the fact that by giving priority to monetary measures to support parents (including maternity capital), the authorities thereby avoid solving more pressing issues of family policy - reforming children's healthcare, accessibility of preschool educational institutions and so on.

In 2008–2009, influenced by criticism and also in the context economic changes, a number of additions were made to the maternal (family) capital program. In connection with the global financial crisis families facing the need to pay mortgage loans, it was allowed to use maternity capital to cover the mortgage immediately after the birth of the second or subsequent child. Citizens were also given the right to register lump sum payment in the amount of 12,000 rubles at the expense of maternity capital. In addition, fathers received the right to use maternity capital to improve their living conditions, if a loan agreement, and they are in a registered marriage with a woman who has the right to maternity capital.

These innovations, however, did not remove the claims previously made against the program: the main recipient and manager of the funds remained the child’s mother; the list of areas in which maternity capital can be spent has not been expanded; its amount remained incomparable with market prices for housing. Next, we will look at what role the maternity capital program actually played for families with children, and also how justified the criticism leveled against it was.

What do they spend it on?

When analyzing the attitude of families to the maternity capital program, we were interested in two main questions: what choices do citizens make within the framework of the opportunities offered by the state and how does this measure of state support relate to reproductive and economic strategies parents.

The answer to the first of these questions is in general view may be found in statistical materials concerning the use of maternity capital funds. Thus, according to official data from the Ministry of Health and social development Russian Federation, for the period from January to September 2010, the Pension Fund accepted 27 thousand applications for the transfer of maternity capital funds to consumer accounts. Most of these funds (about 24 thousand applications) were spent on purchasing housing and improving living conditions. Another 2.8 thousand applicants decided to use a certificate for maternal (family) capital to pay for their children’s education; only 210 applications were submitted to transfer certificate funds to the funded part of the mother’s pension.

In addition, the ministry’s report traces two interesting trends: 1) the demand among the population for “anti-crisis” changes in the maternity capital program (in 2009–2010, 239 thousand applications were submitted for repayment of mortgage loans; 90% of families with a certificate received payments at his expense); 2) general low level use of funds from this program (by the fall of 2010, slightly more than 11% of the total number of families with appropriate certificates used maternity capital funds in the main areas of spending). By turning to the interviews collected during our project, we will try to clarify the observed distribution.

So, the most significant direction for spending maternity capital for citizens seems to be improving housing conditions. The “housing issue,” in general, is characterized by them as one of the leading factors that young families weigh when deciding to have children. At the same time, the participants in our study say that they have certain (quite high) standards for housing. The ideal is an apartment with several rooms (a separate room for each family member), located in a “good” area with developed infrastructure (a kindergarten and a clinic located next to the house). In order to achieve this ideal, citizens are ready to accumulate all the resources available to them - support from parental families, other relatives, friends; assistance at the place of work; loans from banks; government support programs.

Maternity capital is one of the elements (usually not the most essential) of such a complex scheme aimed at improving living conditions. At the same time, due to the presence of bureaucratic barriers and frequent changes in social policy, government support turns out to be the resource that is most difficult to count on and the use of which is most difficult to control. Thus, for some families, the maternity capital program appeared as a lucky chance that allowed them to pay off the balance mortgage loan. For other families who tried to include it in advance in their plans to purchase a home, it acted as the weakest and most unpredictable link in the financial chain, a link that jeopardized the transaction to purchase an apartment. For example, one St. Petersburg resident interviewed (Konstantin, 43 years old) talked about how, due to a delay in the transfer of maternity capital, his family’s receipt of another, larger one was suspended. social benefits, at the expense of which it was planned to buy an apartment. As a result, Konstantin, who contacted the prosecutor’s office to resolve this issue, came to the conclusion that “this certificate, it is just a piece of paper (...) it cannot be bought for money.”

Thus, the opportunity to use maternity capital to improve housing conditions gives rise to the following actions by its owners:

1) using maternity capital as a lucky chance to cover part of the mortgage. It is important that this, the most common, method of using maternity capital is not strategic (and was not initially provided for in the law). Mortgages in the vast majority of cases were issued by families before the introduction of the maternity capital program. Accordingly, although the new measure of state support eased the financial burden of the family, it did not play any significant role in the decision to purchase housing and the related decision to have a child.

2) planned use of maternity capital to purchase a house/apartment. This situation is characterized by the perception of microfinance as one of the types of resources involved in the purchase of housing. Although, compared to the support of the parental family or credit loans, this resource is the least significant; access to it is usually described by our citizens as the most problematic. The lack of clear legislative mechanisms for action in a number of difficult situations and bureaucratic delays often disrupt families’ plans to use microbiology to improve their living conditions. The way out of such difficult situations is often to turn to “shadow” schemes (for example, paying bribes to officials). It should be noted here that many families who are considering the opportunity to spend maternity capital on improving their living conditions, after weighing the possible obstacles and costs, ultimately decide not to do so.

The second most popular area for using maternity capital funds (in terms of volume - less common) is the education of children. Middle-class families view the development of their children's cultural and social capital as an important component of the parental role. In this context, education is priority direction family expenses. However, although many parents in our study invest significant own funds in preschool education of the child (visiting his/her clubs, sections, classes with tutors), they do not plan to use maternal capital for these purposes. There are two main explanations for this.

Firstly, parents reject the option of using maternity capital for higher education children due to the fact that the instability of the ongoing social policy and the current changes in the education system do not allow them to make long-term plans. Secondly, citizens who themselves studied for free generally expect their children to receive a free education. If it is completely transferred to a paid basis, families do not consider maternity capital as a possible means to solve the problem.

Those of the respondents who did use maternity capital for their children’s education invested it in the child’s preschool education (kindergarten, creative clubs, etc.). The choice of this option was determined for them by their distrust in the stability of the government’s policies and the desire to receive the promised support “here and now.” Families who chose this path note that there are a number of difficulties that arise when trying to spend maternity capital for educational purposes. First of all, such difficulties are associated with insufficient development (sometimes simply absence) institutional mechanisms use of certificate funds in this direction. As a result, citizens are faced with the need to independently collect information about the features legal procedures, as well as overcome bureaucratic barriers. This is what one of the women tells us who managed to use MK funds to pay for a commercial kindergarten:

“I don’t even know who came up with the idea that we could pay for the kindergarten in this way. I asked this question to this commission. They said: “Yes, but we don’t know anything yet.” Then they found out somewhere. And even before me, one mother from our kindergarten managed to formalize this. That is, my documents were sent again, and it was easier to demand the necessary documents for this” (Galina, 37 years old, St. Petersburg).

The third direction of using maternity capital is related to the investment of these funds in the funded part of the mother’s pension. However, this path is usually not taken seriously by families - the previously noted distrust in the stability of the ongoing social policy and a series of changes in the pension system prevent citizens from making such long-term plans.

Continuing the topic, it should be noted that the liberal criticism expressed during the introduction of the reform was justified. For a significant portion of citizens, the amount provided under this program is indeed too insignificant to be able to improve their living conditions or pay for their children’s education. According to one of the interviewed mothers, based on real prices on the market, maternity capital can be used to purchase 5 square meters housing. Since the eldest daughter of our interlocutor did not enter a university in a budget department, the woman thought about investing maternal capital in her child’s education. However, according to her calculations, the amount of the certificate would only be enough for two and a half years of study at one of the universities in St. Petersburg.

As a result, parents who do not have sufficient additional resources and do not trust the opportunity to invest maternity capital in a pension choose the “deferred use” strategy. Maternity capital turns into a “piece of paper” for them, which is poorly taken into account when forming the family’s economic plans and can be used only in case of a favorable combination of circumstances. “This is not capital - this is a piece of paper about capital!” - this is how I described it this situation a young mother from the Moscow region.

Citizens in a similar situation note that they would be happy to spend maternity capital funds on other pressing family needs that are not provided for in the law on additional measures of state support - apartment renovation, purchase land plot, payment for the child's treatment. The existence of such a need, as well as doubts about the stability of state support, force them to think about ways to illegally cash out maternity capital. Although none of the respondents themselves resorted to “shadow” schemes for using maternity capital, this practice is usually well known to them from the experience of friends or from funds mass media. It is often associated with obtaining a loan from a bank secured by maternity capital and the subsequent fictitious “purchase” of dilapidated housing for this money (a sufficient number of companies have appeared in our country to help carry out this operation, however, citizens often carry out it on their own - “buying” housing from relatives or friends).

Summarizing the above, we can highlight the following main strategies for using maternity capital:

1) to improve housing conditions, which is available only to families with additional sources of financial support;

2) to cover a mortgage - a situational measure added to the law for a certain period and has no strategic significance;

3) for the education of children; and in most cases, avoiding long-term planning, parents invest capital in their child’s preschool education;

4) “deferred use”, in which families doubt the feasibility of one direction of spending declared by the state, but at the same time do not have additional resources to use microcredit for other legitimate needs;

5) “deception of the state” - attempts to illegally cash out maternity capital, associated with the desire to solve pressing problems and distrust of government policy.

In this situation, the most popular and, in fact, non-strategic way of using maternity capital is to receive a lump sum at its expense. cash payment(12,000 rubles). These actions correlate with families’ general perception of social policy, which can be summarized in the phrase “take everything you can from the state, here and now.” The following words sound like a refrain in the interview: “It seems like they introduced a withdrawal of twelve thousand. Naturally, we immediately took it off, because, as they say, there’s at least a tuft of wool from a black sheep” (Polina, 35 years old, Volgograd). However, it is obvious that the resulting “tuft of wool” is not a significant increase in family budget. This money, incommensurate with the costs of raising a child, “goes to diapers,” according to most parents.

The described difficulties in using maternity capital, small amount Given this measure of state support, lack of faith in the stability of the ongoing social policy leads to the fact that families do not take into account maternal capital when discussing decisions about the birth of children and their number. In general, citizens approve of support for motherhood and parenthood as principles of social policy. However, our research shows that the horizon of citizens’ orientation towards assistance from the state is significantly limited. The respondents are aware of the variability of the existing family policy and cannot count on it in the long term, so they try to “take everything while they give it” (in the short term). Otherwise, citizens prefer to rely on themselves and their family, on all kinds of available resources, including their own skills, personal and professional experience, the ability to individually “fight” the system in the interests of the family and the child, overcoming numerous barriers in formal and informal ways.

The material was prepared within the framework of the Gender Democracy program of the Foundation. Heinrich Böll.

By the way, we have started a channel on Telegram, where we publish the most interesting news about real estate and real estate technologies. If you want to be one of the first to read these materials, then subscribe: t.me/ners_news.

Subscribe to updates

In 2015, natural population growth was again recorded for the third time in a row, and the Government assigns a significant role in achieving this to the maternity capital program.

What is maternity capital, how to use it and how to spend it, what are its benefits and benefits - these are the most common questions parents ask. Let's figure it out.

"Maternal capital" is a form of state support for Russian families in which, from 2007 to 2018 inclusive, a second child was born or adopted.

As a project, maternity capital was developed based on the impending demographic catastrophe. For a number of reasons, young parents did not want to have children and were often limited to just one child in the family. While mortality/fertility statistics forced the authorities to take urgent decisions to strengthen the prestige of the family institution, and at the same time encourage parents to have as many children as possible. This is how a government incentive and support project—maternity capital—was developed and implemented in 2007.

Amounts of maternity capital

The amount of “monetary remuneration” was supposed to increase from year to year, but as can be seen in the table - unlike all previous years passed since 2007, the size of the maternity capital certificate in 2016 did not change and remains 453 thousand 026 rubles, as in 2015. That is. its size stopped growing. The reasons are simple. But first, let’s look at the 2 most necessary terms, the meaning and knowledge of which will help you understand the next question - In connection with what does the amount of maternity capital grow or stop?

1. Inflation- an excessive increase in the amount of paper money circulating in the country, causing its depreciation. The word comes from Lat. words inflatio - swelling. If in simple words, inflation is an increase in prices for goods and services. This means that the same amount of money will, over time, buy fewer goods and services than before.

2. Indexing- the state increases the income and savings of citizens in accordance with rising prices during inflation. Indexation (reimbursement of income) is continuously linked to inflation (price increases).

But let's return to maternal capital.

Its size, taking into account inflation, was supposed to increase in 2016, but this did not happen, allegedly due to the high deficit budget funds, which arose against the backdrop of a sharp drop in oil prices.

But this does not mean that there is no inflation in the country - it is there and, according to the annual forecast, it is 7.21% (this figure may change by the end of the year). In 2015, inflation was 12.91%.

Until what year is the support program valid?

In 2015, news about the abolition of maternity capital leaked to the media, and Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov commented on this rumor:

“Sometimes they say that the Ministry of Finance is going to terminate maternity capital. No, we in the government have not yet made a decision, have not put an end to it, have not discussed this issue. This was the experts' point of view, which we generally think is reasonable. But the final decision will be made by the government.”

But in December 2015, Vladimir Putin ordered the extension of the maternity capital program for another 2 years - until December 31, 2018. Federal Law No. 433-FZ of December 30, 2015, the extension of the program was enshrined in law.

Purposes of spending maternity capital:

Improving living conditions

Mortgage loan repayment;

Reconstruction and repair of a residential building with an increase in living space;

Compensation for building a house;

Do-it-yourself home repair and construction;

Share building;

Participation in housing construction cooperatives.

Getting an education

Student accommodation in the dormitory of an educational institution

Payment for educational institution services

Facts you need to know

The right to receive maternity (family) capital is granted only once.

Maternity capital cannot be deposited or spent, for example, on a car or repayment current debts on loans and public services. This is a kind of protection of capital from unjustified waste by parents,

If the certificate is lost, you can obtain a duplicate;

Maternity capital funds can only be received by bank transfer. Any schemes for cashing out these funds are illegal. At the same time, the owner of a certificate for maternity capital, who agrees to take part in cash-out schemes, commits an illegal act and can be recognized as an accomplice to a crime based on the misuse of public funds.

Use of maternity capital for disabled children

January 1, 2016 - for the first time in many years of the program, changes were made in the areas of use of the certificate. Now maternal capital can officially be used for the social rehabilitation of disabled children.

However, in reality, this direction did not fully work either from January 1 or during the entire first half of 2016 - this opportunity operates only “on paper”, and the branches of the Pension Fund cannot even begin accepting applications from citizens.

The reason for this was the sluggishness of the Government, which has not yet approved 2 by-laws, without which work in the new main direction is impossible:

  • a special list of goods and services for which maternity capital can be used within the new direction;
  • rules for using a certificate for the purchase of goods and services according to the above list.

In addition, the mechanism provided for in the law for using maternity capital in a new direction was a complete disappointment for parents - only in the form of compensation for costs incurred!

This means that parents must first independently find the necessary funds and use them in the intended direction, in order to then receive confirmation intended use payment documents and contracts compensation from the Pension Fund within two months! And then - the actual availability of goods and services purchased according to documents will still need to be confirmed by an inspection report, obtained from specialists of social services authorities at the place of residence.

This is what bureaucracy is like.

And one more small detail, reminiscent of the inscription on the packaging of some product, specially printed in small font, which is very difficult to read:

According to the current rules, state subsidy funds can be used only after 3 years from the date of birth of the second or subsequent child (as well as 3 years after the entry into force of a court decision in the case of a child being adopted into a family under an adoption scheme).
In this regard, for children (second, third and subsequent) born or adopted in 2016, payments according to general rule will be implemented only in 2019.

It looks something like this: give birth now, and we will reward you later!

The exception, as before, will be cases of using maternity capital for a mortgage:

  • to repay a previously taken loan or loan for the purchase or construction of housing;
  • as down payment to receive a new home loan or loan.

Opinion of child psychologist Irina Chesnova:

Irina Chesnova

I really like this way of asking the question: you are having a second child now. And we will “reward” you for this. After. May be. If you want. First, you scrape together money for childbirth, strollers, diapers, toys, fast for two or three years, being content only with your dad’s salary, and only then you will be happy! But what about it? We must make sure that your intentions are the most serious, that you will not abandon the child and will not “hang” him on the fragile shoulders of the state, and that you did not give birth to him in order to rob the budget of three hundred thousand rubles (such money!).

Do you know what it's called? "Presumption of guilt." Each family is considered marginal, planning to profit from budget money by having/adopting a second child. And so that no one would have the opportunity to get money and abandon the baby, drink and go on a spree, spend it on the “wrong thing”, and this whole scheme was invented with a three-year “deferment” and a certificate instead of “real” money, which can only be used in specified options.

I perfectly understand the logic of the authors of this scheme. Wonderful. There are too many such marginal comrades in our country, in whose drunken heads the idea of ​​doing business with the birth/adoption of children is immediately born. But! What are the rest of the families (which, by the way, are the majority) to blame for? Why, because of a drunk neighbor, were normal parents not given the opportunity to spend four hundred thousand on diapers, a lactation consultant, massage and an early development school? For treatment of a child? For a good renovation in the apartment? For a car for the whole family? Or a garage? In the end, each cell of society has its own needs.

And if the state gave this money “humanely,” each family, deciding on a second child, knew that it would be able to spend it on what they needed. That would be an incentive!

Very, very many families want a second child, and either give birth without hoping for government help, or do not give birth because they are frightened by the prospect of poverty. Why do they need savings for retirement when they need money “here and now” - for a million different little things that a baby needs?

Conclusion:

The very idea of ​​solving the demographic problem in the country using maternal capital was a big breakthrough and hope for the majority of citizens modern Russia. In practice, several major shortcomings were identified both in the “maternity capital” program as a whole and in the idea itself:

1 . No matter how many children you give birth to in your entire life, you receive a certificate for receiving maternity capital once in your life.

2. In Russia, inflation and indexation interact with a serious delay. Prices for food or goods are rising much faster than official level rising inflation.

3. Spending “maternity capital” on housing is a thought that makes you smile. In cities with a population of over a million, solve for 400 thousand rubles “ housing problem" impossible. It is possible to buy real estate with a mortgage, and this amount will be used for the down payment or to repay interest on the loan. This financial support looks much more significant in regions where real estate prices are noticeably lower. Nevertheless, this item is one of the most popular in Russia.

It is clear that the problem of demography cannot be solved only through maternal capital. This is a great help. But, alas, it is NOT an incentive. It is not yet capable of being a powerful engine of fertility and effective demographic program. What do you think? What factors will play a major role in your decision to have a second (third) child?

Share