CC BY
31
♦-----------------------------------------------------------------------
and Credit: textbook I Edited by M.V. Romanovsky, O.V. Vrublevskaya. M., 2001.
4. Finanzieiie Entwicklung des Staates in der VGR, Deutshe Bundesbank. Vorlaufige Zahlen, Stand. Februar 2003.
5. Finance: textbook I Edited by A.G. Gryaznova, E.V. Markina. M.: Finance and Statistics, 2004.
6. Barulin S.V., Kovaleva T.M. Principle of Finances: New Re-alia II Finance and Credit. 2004. № 5. P. 5-9; Kovaleva T.M., Barulin S.V. Budget and Budgetary Policy: study guide. M.: Publishing House “Knorus”, 2005. P. 19 - 28.
7. Finance and Credit: textbook I Edited by A.Yu. Kazak. Ekaterinburg: Publishing House “PIPP”, 1994.
8. This position is shared by V.M. Rodionova, L.A. Drobozina, D.S. Molyakov and other scientists of Moscow scientific school. However, L.A. Drobozina adds two more functions to the given ones. They are regulative and stabilizing (Finance: textbook for higher educational establishments I Edited by L.A. Drobozina. M.: Finance, YuNITI, 1999. P 21).
9. The followers of this approach are E.A. Voznesensky, M.V. Romanovsky and other scientists of Leningrad scientific school. B.M. Sabanti and A.Yu. Kazak being the followers of this idea on the whole do not believe finances perform controlling function, though.
10. Pavlova L.N. Finances of Enterprises. M.: YuNITI, 1998.
11. Finance, Currency of Money and Credit / Edited by VK. Senchagov, A.I. Arhipov. M..: Prospect, 2000.
12. Barulin S.V.,Kovaleva T.M. Budget and Budgetary System. M.: Publishing House “Knorus”, 2004.
13. Musgrave R., Musgrave P. Public Finance in Theory and Practice. McGraw-Hill, 1989.
14. Yakobson L.N. State Sector of Economy: Economic Theory and Policy: textbook for higher educational establishments. M.: Publishing House “GU VShE”, 2000.
15. Formation of National Financial Strategy of Russia: the Way to Rise and Prosperity / Edited by V.K. Senchagov. M.: Publishing House “Delo”, 2004.
удк336.5 A.Yu. Nikitin
IMPROVEMENT OF FUNDING METHODS OF FINANCIAL SECURITY OF REGIONAL POLICY DEVELOPMENT
Research of aspects of funding methods of financial security of regional policy development is presented. The aims and tasks of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation are investigated. Disadvantages of qualitative and quantitative criteria used for selection of investment projects claiming to get financial support from the government are discussed.
Key words: the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation, regional investment funds, selection of investment projects, criteria of efficiency.
А.Ю. Никитин
СОВЕРШЕНСТВОВАНИЕ ФОНДОВЫХ МЕТОДОВ ФИНАНСОВОГО ОБЕСПЕЧЕНИЯ ПОЛИТИКИ РЕГИОНАЛЬНОГО РАЗВИТИЯ
Статья посвящена исследованию проблем совершенствования фондовых метсдов финансового обеспечения политики регионального развития. Исследуются задачи и функции Инвестиционного фонда РФ. Анализируются недостатки качественных и количественных критериев отбора инвестиционных проектов, претендующих на получение государственной финансовой поддержки.
Ключевые слова: Инвестиционный фонд РФ, региональные инвестиционные фонды, отбор инвестиционных проектов, критерии эффективности.
Assignment of resources of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation to financially support innovation projects has become one of the most significant decisions of the government of the Russian Federation in the process of innovation economy development. The Government of the Russian Federation adopted the Regulation dated March 1, 2008 № 134 “On Approval of the Regulations on the Formation and Utilization of the Budgetary Provisions of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation”. Since the date of the Regulation approval budgetary provisions of the Investment Fund are intended not only for the projects aimed at socio-economic development of the Russian Federation and its regions (infrastructure development) but for innovation projects implementation as well.
In accordance with Budgetary Code of the Russian federation (Article 179.2) the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation is finances set aside in the federal budget of the Russian Federation intended for financing investment
projects implementation. The Fund is replenished by increase in oil cut-off price in the Stabilization Fund formation (since February 2008 the Reserve Fund and National Welfare Fund) and by advanced repayment of foreign debt, i.e., out of savings interest. Ministry for Regional Development performs the function of providing the government support from the Investment Fund. The Investment Fund is intended for investment and concession projects of federal, regional and interregional importance co-financing carried out on terms of private-public financing partnership [1].
The Investment Fund of the Russian Federation was formed as a part of the federal budget in 2006 with the amount of 69.7 bln. Rub. In 2007 the Investment Fund spent 28 bln. Rub.; in 2008 - 28 bln. Rub.; in 2009 r - 87 bln. Rub., particularly 77 bln. Rub. - on federal projects and 10 bln. Rub. - on regional projects. In 2010 it was planned to replenish the Investment Fund by 37 bln. Rub. and to finance only the projects which had already been under
development. Co-financing of the rest of the projects was planned to be continued in 2011 and later1.
The main budget policy guidelines for 2011-2013 plan the total amount of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation to be 149.7 bln. Rub., particularly in 2011 it is planned to be 57.3 bln. Rub.; 6.6 bln. Rub. of which are planned for financing the accomplishment of regional projects. The amount of money stated above will provide the opportunity to complete investment projects based on private-public financing partnership and aimed at socioeconomic development of the Russian Federation in the sphere of infrastructure development (social in particular) which is of federal importance2.
In the first half of 2011 Ministry for Regional Development is developing a draft of statute on regional investment funds which aim will be to assist constituent entities of the Russian Federation to work out the regulatory framework for these funds development. Regulation of the Federal Government № 880 will take effect in 2012. This Regulation changes the terms of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation financing regional investment projects. One of these terms is development of regional investment finds in constituent entities of the Russian Federation [3].
In 2011 every constituent of the Russian Federation has to develop and adopt its own regulatory framework,
i.e., a regulation on regional investment fund, and to select projects claiming to get government financial support from the budget of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation. One of the conditions for further financing from the Investment Fund is the complete implementation of one project financed from the regional investment fund without financial support from the federal budget [4].
The project review procedure comprises three main stages: review by the investment commission, review by the governmental commission and approval by the meeting of the government of the Russian Federation.
The government is expected to finance business projects worth at least 5 bln. Rub. over a five-year period. The private investor will be required to provide at least 25% of the project cost. The project profitability should be 4% - 11%.
Government support from the Investment Fund comes in the three forms: direct co-financing of project; acquisition of a stake in the share capital of a company managing a specific project; a system of State guarantees that will differ from existing guarantees of the Ministry for Finance (the guarantees do not have to be envisioned in the budget each year and these funds are not nullified at the end of the year).
Two types of criteria will be used in selecting projects: qualitative and quantitative. Qualitative criteria include national priority, among other things. Quantitative criteria include: overall economic performance manifested as the project contribution to gross regional product and gross domestic product; budget performance (growth in tax revenue); financial performance (internal rate of return, payback period, profitability index). Qualitative criteria are adopted in a joint order of the Ministry for Economic Development and the Ministry for Finance.
1 The amount of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation by the end of 2012 should be 271 bln. Rub. // URL: http:// www.finansmag.ru/news/36097.
2 The amount of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation in 2100-2013 should be 150 bln. Rub. // URL: http://www.rian.ru/ economy/20100805/262106014.html.
One of the key criteria for getting access to finances from the Investment Fund of infrastructure projects is budget efficacy. The government develops infrastructure within the limits of parallel financing while private businesses construct industrial facilities which will repay budget expenditures in the future. Grass root development of infrastructure projects depends on budget resources: at any moment the government may not have the needed financial resources for further project development.
The problem can be solved through regional and municipal legislation. It can be done due to adoption of economic model of private-public partnership (PPP). This model is in the model law “On Participation of Constituent Entity of the Russian Federation, of Municipal Entity in Public-Private Partnership Projects”. It was developed by a subcommittee on PPP of Council of Federation Committee on Economic Policy, Business and Ownership. In the context of this model a private investor may invest in both construction of industrial facilities and in development of infrastructure. Provided that refunding of investments in this case is not only through tariffs but through future revenues or economies of budgetary finances, e.g., maintenance of schools or hospital premises which start to be operated more efficiently and streamline expenses.
Projects claiming to get financial support from the government should meet the requirement of economic, financial and budgetary efficacy. Effect of implementation of investment projects is assessed on the basis of quantitative and qualitative criteria.
Additional requirements have been worked out for innovation projects.
1. Part IV of the Regulation dated March 1, 2008 № 134 “On approval of the Regulations on the Formation and Utilization of the Budgetary Provisions of the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation” establishes a new criterion for project selection “expected effect of innovation development of economy due to implementation of innovation projects”.
2. Business plan of innovation projects should contain calculation of effect of innovation economy development due to the project implementation.
Ministry for Industry, Science and Technologies of the Russian Federation has already formulated and utilized the criteria for project selection. Carried out analysis of program documents and obtained experience in selection of innovation projects made by Ministry for Industry and Science make it possible to conclude that the following indicators will be probably taken into account in assessing the impact of innovation projects on the country economy development. These indicators are advanced development of Russian economy development of sectors of economy basic for the Russian Federation (advanced processing of natural resources, utilization of energy, transport and agricultural resources), modernization of industries in all spheres of economy; production assimilation and introduction of products to the market; job creation; scientific substantiation of the project; industrial applicability of new technology (product); possibility of production assimilation for 3 - 4 years; relation of total sales volume for products of the project for the given time period and the volume of the claimed budgetary finances; impact on the environment, etc. [2].
Specific criteria which will be the basis for innovation projects assessment and their contribution to the econo-
my will be defined by the Investment and Government Commissions.
At the first stage of selection all the projects will be assessed using qualitative criteria. Each criterion has its own ratio. Within each criterion every project is assigned from one to three points. The highest point is assigned to the project which fully meets the given criterion requirements. The criteria are presented in the Table in descending order of significance.
It is evident that the given criteria are not thoroughly worked out. When applying the first criterion a problem arises as to defying the moment when this period of time starts: at the moment the project design passport is approved, at the moment the project starts getting finances from the Investment Fund, or at the moment decision on financing the project from the Investment Fund is made. The wording of the second criterion does not consider the interests of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. In the process of assigning points within the criterion interests of certain constituent entities of the Russian Federation are considered but they are of the least significance. In case a project has the most preferable form of implementation but other well-elaborated methods of their achievement, this project is assigned only two points in accordance with the third criterion. In case alternative methods of meeting the target are not enough elaborated, somehow the project is assigned lower number of
points. Some risk categories (the fourth category) are impossible to investigate and predict with a hundred percent accuracy. At that they will always be the sources for risk and have a significant negative impact. In the list of criteria the structure of risk is not quite proper and motivated; subjectivity of assessment is possible. Wording of the fifth criterion does not correspond to the terminology of the Regulation which says that there should be accommodation of government and private interests but not their balance. The sixth criterion does not say what the words “optimal risk sharing possibilities” imply. It is logically to assume that risk possibilities are shared in half as there is no percentage ratio given. This may cause a subjective assessment.
Quantitative criteria include: correlation between the estimated cost of the project and the amount of finance claimed for support from the Investment Fund for project implementation (bln. Rub.), indicator value of budget efficiency computed in accordance with the procedure established by the government of the Russian Federation; value of integral indicator of economic efficiency computed in accordance with the procedure established by the government of the Russian Federation; investment project implementation period stated in project design passport (in years); discounted payback period of the project computed in accordance with the procedure established by the government of the Russian Federation (in years).
Qualitative Criteria for Assessment of Investment Projects Efficacy Claiming to Get Financial Support
from the Investment Fund*
Criteria Principles of Criteria Assessment Number of Points
3 2 1
Relevance of tasks for the Russian Federation solved within the framework of the Droiect Focus on the developm ent of the country not on the developm ent of a definite reaion Projects which can be implemented immediately Projects which should be implemented within 1 - 3 years Projects which should be implemented after n 3 year-period
Conformity of the project tasks with socio-economic priorities of the Russian Federation development The targets stated in the project should conform to the interests of socioeconomic development of the Russian Fede ra tio n Projects which targets totally conform to the interests of socioeconomic development of the Russian Federation Projects which targets partially conform to development strategies of the economic branches of the Russian Federate n Projects which targets conform to the prioriti es of socioeconomic development of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation
Preference of the project out of the number of alternative ways of the stated target ac hievement Priority is given to projects which present a uni que way of the sta ted target achievement Projects which present a unique way of the stated target achievement Projects which present the most preferable way of the stated target achievement Projects which present alternative ways of the stated target achievement but they are not so thoroughly developed as the projects themselves
Quality and degree of elaboration of the project Analyse of risks and prognostics factors related to the project implementation Projects which risks are investigated and meas ures for their minimizing effect are provided Projects which risks are investigated and measures for their minimizing effect are provided. However, there is a potential source of risk the impact of which may have considerable negative effects Projects which risks are inv estigate d and m eas ures for their minim zing effect are provided. However, there are two or more potential sources of risk the impact of which may have considerable negative effec ts
Balance between private and government in terests in the project Conformity to the interests Projects which ensure balance between government and private interests Projects which ensure mostly government interests Projects which ensure mostly private interests
Pareto opti mality of risk sharing possibilities between the parties of the project Optimal risk sharing possibilities between government and private business Projects which have the optimal risk sharing possibiliti es between government and private business Projects where investor primarily bears risks Projects where government primarily bears risks
* According to the data of the Project “The Method of Calculating and Applying the Criteria of Efficiency of Investment Projects Eligible for Government Support from the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation”
In substantiating the contribution of the project to innovation economy of the regions it is necessary to be guided by integral indicators stated in program documents (Perspective of Socio-Economic Development of the Region; The Main Trends in Regional Investment Policy, etc.). When applying for financing innovation projects from the Investment Fund it is recommended to substantiate the contribution of the project to socio-economic development of the country or the region taking all the above mentioned criteria into account. When applying for financing complex projects it is necessary to point out synergy effect of the projects implementation, i.e., their overall effect on the
economy of the country in general and/or on the economy of certain regions.
1. Zabalueva M.A. Principles of Financial Policy and Financial Mechanism of Attracting Investments // Bulletin of Saratov State Socio-Economic University. 2010. № 2 (31).
2. Zusman E. Innovations at the Investment Fund // Corporate Lawyer. 2008. № 5.
3. Shamshidinova R.A. Factors Which Have an Impact on the Process of Foreign Capital Investment Attraction to the Russian Federation // Bulletin of Saratov State Socio-Economic University. 2009. № 1 (25).
4. Rossiiskaya Gazeta. February 3, 2011 // URL: http//: www.rg.ru.
УДК 336.148 M.A. Rezinkin
IMPROVEMENT OF INTERNAL CONTROL IN THE TREASURY SYSTEM
The importance of treasury internal control in government finance management is investigated. Measures to improve the efficiency of treasury internal control are suggested.
Key words: treasury, control, budget, finances, federal.
M.A. Резинкин
СОВЕРШЕНСТВОВАНИЕ ВНУТРЕННЕГО КОНТРОЛЯ В СИСТЕМЕ КАЗНАЧЕЙСТВА
В статье рассмотрена роль казначейского внутреннего контроля в системе управления государственными финансами. Автором предложены меры по повышению эффективности казначейского внутреннего контроля. Ключевые слова: казначейство, контроль, бюджет, финансы, федеральный.
Control being a management function is aimed at ensuring effective functioning of economic systems. One of the most important elements of control is development and improvement of treasury internal control. Treasury internal control is a process which is implemented by the Executive Board and officials of Federal Treasury. The purposes of the internal control are to adhere to legislative, normative acts and regulations, to achieve both greater efficiency and gains in performance of the activities, to improve the quality of the reporting made.
Development of effective treasury control for government revenue assurance formation, its due promptitude and control for legal order and efficiency of utilization and spending of budget money is becoming one of the most important tasks of modern economic policy of the Russian Federation.
The main purposes of treasury internal control are to carry out preventive measures duly and efficiently, to identify the reasons for the revealed violation, and to elaborate a package of measures for further prevention of violations and for minimizing the effects of the already revealed violations jointly with the constituent entity. Being an important function of management, internal control has a great impact on efficient and successful achievement of tasks and functions in State management. The signs of efficient internal control in Federal Treasury are its complexity, and task and requirement orientation with respect to the conditions of its functioning [1].
In accordance with uniform requirements and standards of internal control developed by Ministry for Finance of the Russian Federation it is necessary to ensure the control is organized on systemic and flexible basis which manifests itself in the process of subjects and objects of control selection and in the form it is performed. Anti-corruption is the key element of internal control. It is characterized by ultimate regulation of all the processes at the stage of pre-checkout preparation, of control activities conducting, of making up, and of eliminating the violations revealed.
Internal control in Federal Treasury is efficiently developing and functioning. The object of internal control is the whole scope of activities of the departments of Federal Treasury of the Russian Federation. This scope of activities includes the quality of performance of state functions, financing and operating activities including.
The objects of control are subdivisions of the central administrative department and local departments - Federal Treasury departments in constituent entities of the Russian Federation.
Within the framework of treasury internal control expert advisory commissions (supervisory councils) successfully function. They were established under the jurisdiction of the Heads of the corresponding departments of Federal Treasury. As a rule, Heads of all the structural divisions of the corresponding level are the members of these supervisory councils. Heads of divisions or Deputy Directors of the
