CC BY
27
E. Badmaeva
TAX DISCRIMINATION AGAINST THE BUDDHIST CLERGY IN KALMYKIA (1923 - 1931)
Е.Н. Бадмаева
Налоговая дискриминация буддийского духовенства в
Калмыкии (1923 - 1931 годы)*
Following the Civil War and the transition to the New Economic Policy (NEP), the Soviet government began to employ tax policy as a weapon against religious organizations and clergymen. This move arose out of the anti-religious policy of the first years of Soviet power, when the state adopted laws that deprived clerics of their economic base.
In national territories such as Kalmykia and Buryatia, where the indigenous population was Buddhist, economic relations between local authorities and religious organizations had been souring since 1923. Local officials in Buryatia, for example, resolved to take decisive action against the Buddhist clergy. In their words, the campaign should "be conducted with all the energy, means, and methods that the Soviet government and the Communist Party possess." At the same time, they considered it necessary "to approach the struggle against the lamstvo [Buddhist clergy] with particular sensitivity and caution consistent with political tact.1"
In the Kalmyk Autonomous Oblast (KAO), the government headed by A.Ch. Chapchayev, the first chairman of the Kalmyk Central Executive Committee (Oblispolkom), actively fought against religion "by all means and methods." Acting on orders issued by the USSR People's Commissariat of Finances (Narkomfin), the tax apparatus pursued its goals extremely aggressively. According to one Narkomfin instruction, "servitors of religious cults were subject to income and property taxes. Only those who did not derive their means of subsistence from their profession, had no other sources of income, and were fully supported by religious communities, were exempt from taxation."2
Every year Narkomfin reinforced its demands on the clergy through a regular tax document . In accordance with Narkomfin resolution 102 of September 3, 1923, "On the local taxation of buildings intended for divine services," the local tax apparatus began assessing houses of worship. Narkomfin set a limit on the all-Union tax of 0.5 percent of a building's value.3
In Kalmykia, the Oblispolkom Financial Department determined a
* Translated by Ivonna S. Daldinova (Kalmyk Scientific Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, Elista).
building's value based on the estimates of the Kalmyk Oblast Department of State Insurance (all state insurance institutions were subordinate to Narkomfin USSR). On December 3, 1924, the annual tax rate was increased to 1.8 percent of the value of a religious building.4
For the clergy, this represented a substantial sum of money. They constantly appealed to the central authorities with justifiable claims and complaints concerning excessive taxation. However, officials in Moscow usually referred such appeals to the oblast financial departments. Although Narkomfin issued a decree on January 2, 1924 on the admissibility of granting tax privileges to priests in the form of deferments, installments, and forgiveness of debts and fines, local tax institutions hesitated to apply this order.
On January 17, 1924, the Tax Administration of the Kalmyk Oblispolkom's Financial Department5 sent an order to all ulus (uyezd) financial inspectors to intensify tax work in February and March 1924. The Tax Administration also sent to the Kalmyk Oblast Communist Party Committee (Obkom) an appeal concerning the need to increase agitation in all uluses regarding the timely and full payment of taxes.6
In August 1924, large religious associations sent an appeal to the AllUnion Central Executive Committee of the USSR that characterized the income-property tax as "a hidden form of tax on membership in a cult." In the appeal, the representatives of different faiths requested that the tax pressure on clergymen be eased. Less than a year later, in January 1925, the clergy's request was satisfied in part. On January 2, 1925, Narkomfin issued Order 453, "On taxation of church buildings and clergy," which recognized instances of violations in the tax sphere, especially in the national republics and regions. The order pointed to the need to end incidents of arbitrary taxation of religious buildings and the clergy through all kinds of unauthorized taxes and fees. Narkomfin proposed that local financial institutions use all reasonable means in assessing taxes but, when absolutely necessary, to offer certain dispensations.7
Leaders of provincial and regional financial institutions, however, deliberately ignored Narkomfin's instructions, and the KAO was no exception.
A.K. Kekeev, head of the Kalmyk Oblispolkom Financial Department, and Menar, head of the department's Tax Administration, continued the policy of relentless tax persecution of the clergy in order to obtain ever greater tax revenues and to ruin it. In the KAO, all types of direct and indirect taxes, including income-property taxes, were imposed on religious organizations and clergymen. Contrary to Order 453, even clergy who met the necessary qualifications did not receive tax privileges.8
As a result, in the KAO Buddhist and Orthodox clergy found themselves in a very difficult financial situation. Unable to pay their taxes in full, they fell deeper into debt. A meeting of the Kalmyk Oblispolkom Financial Department, chaired by Kekeev in August 1925, addressed the issue of state and local tax arrears resulting from insolvency. The per-
petual debtors included Buddhist clergymen (Gelungs) who, due to low income, lack of funds, movable and immovable property, were unable to pay taxes. Excessive taxation caused many clerics to abandon the clergy. In the Northern aimak (volost) of Erketenevsky ulus, 14 Gelungs left the order in 1923 and 1924 alone.9
In October 1925, the extraordinary spiritual congress of Erketenevsky ulus noted that "many Gelungs left the clergy because of poverty and lack of funds for the payment of income-property tax." The ulus spiritual council was entrusted by the believers to "initiate a petition on maintaining at their previous religious rank all Gelungs who had converted to the laity."10
This critical situation regarding tax payments held true in all the ul-uses of Kalmykia. Nevertheless, the Financial Department displayed no haste in cancelling the Gelungs' uncollected taxes. Relatives were required to provide official information on the deaths of Gelungs and the lower groups of Buddhist clerics (getsuls and mandzhiks) in order to have their debt cancelled. Likewise, cancelling arrears due to resignation and the termination of religious duties required the submission of an inspection report to the ulus executive committee.11
In 1926, the national system of income tax payment underwent changes. Henceforth, income tax would be determined exclusively on the basis of declarations filed by individuals. This change, however, did not work out as the central authorities had intended. During the second half of the 1920's, political factors assumed a greater role in tax assessments as agricultural income and trade taxes fell more on the well-off sections of society like priests and owners of private commercial and industrial enterprises. Local punitive organs took an active part in implementing tax policy.12
In Kalmykia, the Financial Department's Tax Administration tightened control over church revenues and sought to prevent tax reductions. Tax Administration employees blamed arrears on deliberate tax evasion by the clergy, their untimely submission of necessary information due to illiteracy or ignorance of the Russian language, and the intentional concealment of their continuing to perform religious duties.13
In April 1926, the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party adopted the theses "On anti-religious propaganda among the nationalities of the USSR." The Bolshevik leadership, fearing a negative popular reaction in the national territories, carefully formulated its anti-religious work among the peoples of the Soviet East. It sought to take into account their specific economic structure, the predominance of feudal relations in everyday life, and the close interconnection of the population and the clergy. However, despite warnings and instructions from Moscow, KAO party organizations and state institutions eagerly resorted to repressive measures against the clergy. By 1928, the number of khuruls had decreased by thirty to a total of seventy, and the number of clergy had shrunk from 2,485 in 1924 to 1,406, a reduction of 56.6 percent. By
1936, only forty-one Buddhist clergy and fourteen khuruls remained.14
As industrialization got underway after 1927, I.V. Stalin, who believed that there had been a "slackening in the anti-religious struggle," called for a new, all-out attack on religion and the clergy. The Kalmyk Obkom, at the direction of the Party Central Committee, stepped up the struggle against the clergy, seeing in it an irreconcilable ideological foe and an enemy of Soviet power. In 1928, the Kalmyk Obkom Anti-Religious Commission undertook a determined struggle against the local clergy, applying various political and economic pressures.
On March 2, 1928, the Anti-Religious Commission approved a special program to survey the khuruls, aimed at studying the religious situation in the KAO.15 As a result of the survey, all church buildings and, accordingly, church properties were registered. Then, in April 1928, the Kalmyk Obkom formed a special commission to study the economic situation of the khuruls and churches located in the central part of the oblast in Iki-Tskhurovsky and Baga-Tsokhurovsky uluses. The commission developed plans for a number of measures to study the religious situation in the region, which also marked the beginning of a new stage of the anti-religious struggle in Kalmykia.16
In January 24, 1929, the Party Central Committee issued the resolution, "On measures to strengthen anti-religious work," which formally declared a cautious approach to the clergy. In the wake of this resolution, party organizations and state institutions in Kalmykia began to give the appearance of loyal relations with the Buddhist clergy, as well the clergy of other faiths. In a letter to Ilishkin, the responsible secretary of the Bagatsokhurovsky ulus party committee, A.Ch. Chapchayev, the Kalmyk Obkom member (since 1928), wrote: "According to accurate information available to us, the clerics of the Bagatsokhurovsky ulus, due to the seizure of their livestock, are furiously agitating among the population... it is necessary to immediately leave for Tsagan-Aman and give an explanation and try to convince the population that this livestock was accumulated by the khurul as a result of deception, injustice, and charlatanism. At the same time, all this should be explained in polite terms in the Kalmyk language, not allowing any insult to the religious feelings of the ignorant individual. In addition, it is necessary to hold a number of meetings in other regions of the ulus to clarify this fact."17
V.F. Dalinger, the Deputy Head of the OGPU in Kalmykia, in a secret letter to Chapchayev requested the removal of "a certain irregularity committed by the lower authorities that emerged in the selection of cattle and to return the selected livestock to the khurul so to deprive the clergy of the opportunity to press this fact."18
Kalmyk party organizations and state institutions, notwithstanding the decisions of central party leaders to conduct a more flexible policy towards clergymen and religious organizations, continued to take measures to seize khurul buildings. They vehemently opposed the construction of a new khurul building in Maly-Derbet to replace one that had
burned down.19 In a letter to the Kalm-Bazarinsky Ulus party committee, the Kalmyk Obkom secretary, U. Tserenov , demanded it "intensify anti-religious propaganda and strongly ensure that the believing population refrain from making further donations for the transfer of the khuruls..."20 In 1929, the anti-religious campaign throughout the country intensified. By decision of the highest governmental and administrative organs of the USSR, the property and non-property relations between the state and religious associations were clearly defined. According to this decision, in the KAO buildings belonging to a religious cult - the khuruls -were subject to compulsory fire insurance at the expense of those people who signed the insurance contract.21
A secret letter from the Kalmyk Obkom to all ulus party committees, stated: "According to the information received by the oblast committee, it is clear that until now some of the correctly closed khuruls and churches have not been used in full, and are vacant. This situation causes discontent among the population. There are also cases where financial authorities impose taxes on ministers of the cult... In this regard, the Oblast Committee of the VKP(b) categorically suggests that immediate measures be taken to use properly closed khuruls and churches for cultural, educational and other needs. At the same time, where the khuruls and the churches were closed against the will of the population by administrative means, reverse the closure with appropriate explanations. We remind you that closure of the khuruls and churches can be made only after the decision of the oblast executive committee. With regard to tax policy in relation to the clergy, it is necessary to adhere to the relevant regulations and not to allow excesses."22
In 1929, Narkomfin published Order 398, "On the procedure for assessing local taxes on buildings intended for liturgical purposes," and the People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs of the RSFSR adopted Resolution 123, "On the use of premises by religious associations." This decree reinforced the practice of evacuating houses of prayer from living quarters. In addition, prayer rooms were required to comply with sanitary standards; various commissions created by local authorities verified compliance. There followed seizures of religious premises (khuruls) throughout the KAO. The Bagatsokhurovsky Ulus Party Committee adopted a decree on the seizure of three khurul buildings in order to relocate local government institutions in them.23
On January 5, 1930, Narkomfin issued Directive 195, "On the Taxation of Religious Societies and Prayer Buildings," which gave full independence to local authorities in the formation of their budgets. On February 8, 1930, in accordance with this directive, the Kalmyk Oblispolkom, headed by A.P. Pyurbeyev, introduced new local taxes. Now every clergyman had to pay fees to the state treasury for buildings, livestock, means of transport (oxen and parade horses belonging to khuruls and churches), a special apartment tax, and fees for the sanitary inspection of cattle and livestock products (wool and leather)24.
The Tax Administration, headed by F. Ya. Ryazantsev, seized for non-payment of the income-property tax in 1930 all the household property of four Gelungs of the Salsky khurul in Maloderbetovsky ulus - Zungra Ilijirinov, Shagdzhi Dorzhiev, Balgir Utnasunov, Samtan Chimgirov -and sold it at auction. After this, the clergymen were forced to leave the priesthood. In addition, Utnasunov and Chimgirov were imprisoned for two years. The village council of Tsagan-Nur seized all property, including bed linen, from Gelung Lekshad Beveev for non-payment of taxes in 1930 and sold it at auction.25
The tax payment increases fell heavily on the shoulders of the clergy. Gelungs who did not leave the priesthood wrote local authorities requesting that they petition higher authorities to alleviate their tax burden. Such letters were also sent to the central spiritual bodies. In February 28, 1931, the Central Spiritual Council elected at the First Congress of the Kalmyk Buddhist Clergy and Believing Laymen (July 19, 1923), called the attention of A.P. Pyurbeyev, Kalmyk Oblispolkom chairman, to the fact that when assessing and levying taxes on clergy the tax authorities demanded immediate payment in full, often forcibly. For non-payment or delay in paying excessive taxes, they had recourse to property seizures and evictions. The taxpayer himself was either brought to trial or sent to serve terms of heavy labor. The Central Spiritual Council asked Pyurbeyev to reduce taxes on Gelungs, Getsuls, and Manjiks.26 Like the requests of the Kalmyk priests themselves, this petition remained unanswered.
Based on the decisions and practical work of the Oblispolkom Financial Department and its Tax Administration in relation to clergymen and religious associations, one can say that arbitrariness and discrimination marked the taxation of this social group. F.Ya. Ryazantsev, head of the Financial Department from 1930 to 1932, explained the toughening tax policy in relation to the clergy in these years as a result of the "sharpening class struggle" in the country. Given Soviet legislation, he did not doubt the legality of the taxes imposed on the Kalmyk clergy. The Financial Department submitted to the KAO Central Executive Committee three-year figures on tax payments from priests. These figures show "the growth in the level of taxes from priests." In the 1928/29 economic year (October 1 to September 30) the tax payment on an income of 700 rubles came to 76 rubles. In 1929/30 and 1930/31, taxes on the same income climbed to 117 and 364 rubles, respectively. In other words, for those three years taxes on a 700 ruble income increased nearly five-fold (4.8). Taxes on incomes of 1,200 rubles grew 6.4 times: 1928/29 - 147 rubles; 1929/30 - 228 rubles; 1930/31 - 943 rubles.27
From the second half of the 1920s to 1931, the clergy endured taxation at the same rates and for the same reasons as the most well-off strata of the population (e.g. peasants who refused to enter collective farms). At first, the state equated clergymen to practitioners of the free professions, and then to the "non-laboring element." Ownership by a cleric served as one determinant of a "kulak" farm.28
The local party and Soviet leaders in Kalmykia carried out the "general line" of the Bolshevik Party to eradicate religion from the life of society with great zeal. The authorities convinced the semi-literate Kalmyk population who understood little Russian that religion and clergymen were enemies of socialism who had to be fought mercilessly.
The situation was complicated by the fact that not all central party and state decisions appeared in the Soviet press and, as a result, remained unavailable to local leaders and institutions. Local leaders' lack of necessary qualifications, regardless of nationality, negatively affected their ability to orient themselves in the complicated political and economic environment.
This complex of reasons led to numerous violations of the tax laws in relation to the clergy, leading eventually to a sharp deterioration in their financial situation, which in turn, resulted in many Buddhist clergymen in Kalmykia abandoning the priesthood and the performance of their religious duties.
Notes
1 Цыремпилова И.С. Региональная власть и религиозные институты на территории Бурятии в 1920 - 30-х гг.: Специфика и трансформация взаимоотношений // Власть. 2016. № 12. С. 164-168.
2 Русские патриархи ХХ века: Судьбы Отечества и церкви на страницах архивных документов. М., 1999. С. 124.
3 Отделение церкви от государства в СССР. М., 1926. С. 200.
4 Ibidem. С. 202.
5 Бадмаева Е.Н. Деятельность финансовых органов Калмыцкой автономной области (1920 - 1935 гг.) // Magna adsurgit: historia studiorum. 2016. № 1. С. 80.
6 National Archive of Republic of Kalmykia (NA RK). F. Р-82. Op. 2. D. 17. L. 22.
7 Отделение церкви от государства в СССР. М., 1926. С. 211.
8 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 2. D. 1375. L. 1.
9 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 1. D. 41. L. 180.
10 Церенов В.З. Эркетени: Земля и люди: Из истории Черноземелья. Элиста, 1997. С. 122.
11 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 1. D. 41. L. 187.
12 Верещагин С.Г. Политика налогов в СССР в период с 1917 по 1941 гг. // Право и политика. 2007. № 7. С. 138.
13 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 1. D. 41. L. 177.
14 NA RK. F. П-1. Op. 2. D. 150. L. 10; Синицын Ф.Л. «Красная буря»: Советское государство и буддизм в 1917 - 1946 гг. СПб., 2013. С. 482.
15 NA RK. F. П-1. Op. 1. D. 264. L. 35, 40.
16 NA RK. F. П-1. Op. 1. D. 301. L. 1-3.
17 NA RK. F. П-1. Op. 1. D. 291. L. 29.
18 Ibidem. L. 33.
19 Ibidem. L. 33, 87.
20 Ibidem. L. 86.
21 Кашеваров А.Н. Государственно-церковные отношения в советском обществе 20 - 30-х гг. (новые и мало изученные вопросы). СПб., 1997. С. 27.
22 NA RK. F. П-1. Op. 1. D. 291. L. 230.
23 Ibidem. L. 89.
24 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 2. D. 1541. L. 1.
25 Ibidem. L. 6.
26 NA RK. F. Р-3. Op. 2. D. 1541. L. 2-7.
27 Ibidem. L. 1.
28 Собрание законов и распоряжений Рабоче-Крестьянского Правительства СССР. 1929. № 34. Ст. 301.
Author, Abstract, Key words
Ekaterina N. Badmaeva - Doctor of History, Deputy Director, Kalmyk Scientific Center, Russian Academy of Sciences (Elista, Republic of Kalmykia, Russia)
en-badmaeva@yandex.ru
This article is the first to analyze Soviet tax policy in relation to the Buddhist clergy in the Kalmyk Autonomous Region (Oblast). The study covers the period of the New Economic Policy and early stages of industrialization and agricultural collectivization in the USSR. Unpublished documents in the National Archives of the Republic of Kalmykia provide the source base for this research. The author focuses attention on the decision-making and tax-collecting activities of the Kalmyk Regional Financial Department and its Tax Administration. These institutions subjected Buddhist clerics in Kalmykia, whom they considered enemies of socialism, to myriad direct and indirect taxes. Constant tax increases strained the clergy's financial resources to the utmost. According to the author, fiscal policy toward the Buddhist clergy amounted to tax discrimination. Through this discrimination, regional Bolshevik Party and government officials intended first to reduce the number of clergymen and khuruls in Kalmykia, then to eliminate them completely. By the early 1930s, excessive tax pressure led to a sharp deterioration in the financial position of the Buddhist clerics, the departure of many of them from the clergy's ranks, and the closure of most khuruls.
Kalmykia, Kalmyk Autonomous Region (Oblast), Buddhism, Khurul, Buddhist clergy, Gelung, Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks) (RCP(b)), Soviet State, People's Commissariat of Finance, Tax Administration, tax policy, tax burden, tax discrimination, Arashi Ch. Chapchaev.
References (Articles from Scientific Journals)
1. Badmaeva E.N. Deyatelnost finansovykh organov Kalmytskoy avtonom-noy oblasti (1920 - 1935 gg.) [The Activity of the Financial Organs of the Kalmyk Autonomous Oblast (1920 - 1935).]. Magna adsurgit: historia studiorum, 2016, no. 1, pp. 71-85. (In Russ.).
2. Tsyrempilova I.S. Regionalnaya vlast i religioznye instituty na territorii Buryatii v 1920 - 30-kh gg.: Spetsifika i transformatsiya vzaimootnosheniy [Regional Authority and Religious Institutions in Buryatia, 1920 - 30s: The Specificity and Transformation of Relationships.]. Vlast, 2016, no. 12, pp. 164168. (In Russ.).
3. Vereshchagin S.G. Politika nalogov v SSSR v period s 1917 po 1941 gg. [Tax Policy in the USSR, 1917 to 1941.]. Pravo ipolitika, 2007, no. 7, pp. 133-143. (In Russ.).
(Monographs)
4. Kashevarov A.N. Gosudarstvenno-tserkovnye otnosheniya v sovetskom obshchestve 20 - 30-kh gg. (novye i malo izuchennye voprosy) [Church-State Relations in Soviet Society in the 1920s and 1930s (New and Little-Studied Questions).]. St. Petersburg, 1997, p. 27. (In Russ.).
5. Sinitsyn F.L. "Krasnaya burya": Sovetskoe gosudarstvo i buddizm v 1917 - 1946 gg. ["Red Storm": The Soviet State and Buddhism, 1917 - 1946.]. St. Petersburg, 2013, p. 482. (In Russ.).
6. Tserenov V.Z. Erketeni: Zemlya i lyudi: Iz istorii Chernozemelya [Erketeni: Land and People: From the History of Chernozemelie.]. Elista, 1997, p. 122. (In Russ.).
Автор, аннотация, ключевые слова
Бадмаева Екатерина Николаевна - докт. ист. наук, заместитель директора по научной работе Калмыцкого научного центра Российской академии наук (Элиста)
en-badmaeva@yandex.ru
В статье впервые анализируется специфика налоговой политики по отношению к буддийскому духовенству на территории Калмыцкой автономной области. Хронология исследования охватывает период новой экономической политики и начало перехода к индустриализации и коллективизации сельского хозяйства в СССР. Основу источниковой базы исследования составили неопубликованные документы Национального архива Республики Калмыкия. Главное внимание уделено деятельности Калмыцкого областного финансового отдела и его Налогового управления. Автором впервые в отечественной историографии анализируются ключевые решения этих учреждений в сфере налогообложения буддийского духовенства и их практическая деятельность по сбору налогов. Буддийские священнослужители облагались всеми видами прямых и косвенных налогов. Постоянное увеличение размера налогов сделало
их непосильными для священнослужителей. Деятельность Калмыцкого областного финансового отдела и его Налогового управления по отношению к буддийскому духовенству являлась, по сути, налоговой дискриминацией этой социальной группы. Главная причина налоговой дискриминации заключалась в том, что органы партии большевиков и советские учреждения в Калмыкии считали буддийских священнослужителей врагами социализма. Поэтому главная цель налоговой дискриминации состояла в уменьшении количества священнослужителей и хурулов в Калмыкии, а затем и в полной их ликвидации. К началу 1930-х гг. чрезмерное налоговое давление привело к резкому ухудшению материального положения буддийских священнослужителей, отказу многих из них от духовного звания и закрытию большинства хурулов.
Калмыкия, Калмыцкая автономная область, буддизм, хурул, буддийские священнослужители, гелюнг, Российская коммунистическая партия (большевиков) (РКП(б)), Советское государство, Народный комиссариат финансов, Налоговое управление, налоговая политика, налоговое бремя, налоговая дискриминация, А.Ч. Чапчаев.
