CC BY
56
UDC / УДК 631.16: 338.246.02.(47+57):061.1(100)WTO
THE PROBLEMS OF REALIZATION AND DEVELOPMENT PROSPECTS OF MECHANISMS OF THE STATE FINANCIAL BACKING OF AGRARIAN COMMODITY
PRODUCERS OF RUSSIA ПРОБЛЕМЫ РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ И ПЕРСПЕКТИВЫ РАЗВИТИЯ МЕХАНИЗМОВ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОЙ ФИНАНСОВОЙ ПОДДЕРЖКИ АГРАРНЫХ ТОВАРОПРОИЗВОДИТЕЛЕЙ РОССИИ
Popova O. V.*, Doctor of Economic Sciences
Попова О.В., доктор экономических наук Sidorin A.A., Candidate of Economic Sciences Сидорин А.А., кандидат экономических наук Orel State Agrarian University, Orel City, Russia ФГБОУ ВПО Орел ГАУ, Орел, Россия *E-mail: olga v popova@mail.ru
ABSTRACT
The main macroeconomic indicators which make actual the necessity of the emergency modernization of mechanisms of the state backing of agrarian commodity producers are allocated in this article, as well the potential financial opportunities of the Russian Federation in financing of the State program of development of national agro-industrial complex in the conditions of the World Trade Organization, the anti-Russian sanctions and the Russian food embargo are proved there. The clustering of the Russian Federation regions on indicators of the fiscal capacity and a role of agrarian sector in formation of a gross regional product is carried out and it is shown that there is a negative connection of average force between these indicators. The influence of the fiscal capacity and percentage of agriculture in a gross regional product on change of production of agro food products in general and in a section of its separate types is defined. Insufficient level of efficiency of subsidizing of rate per cent and grace leasing deliveries of equipment in support of agrarian commodity producers is reasonable, and it is shown that domination of growth ratio of the size of authorized capital over owned capital in JSC «Rosselkhozbank» and JSC «Rosagroleasing», led to the irrational structure of their liabilities which is expressed in insufficiency of other components of owned capital - extra profit, reserved and accumulated surplus. The possibility of requirements reorientation for direct support of agrarian producers from a «yellow» basket of the WTO in «blue» is shown, connected payments to the «historical» areas and a livestock. On the basis of approbation of an author's technique it is proved that direct, untied measures of support can be effectively used in the conditions of limited state financed opportunities. It is defined that the offered technique can be used for increase of a role of regional authorities in improvement of structure and increase of efficiency functioning of regional agro-industrial complex. It is proved that only in 2009 the amount of actually provided state backing to agriculture of the Orel region was 25,73% lower than the level of necessary financial aid. Thus the main part of the subsidies allocated to the farm business in 2007 - 2013 goes for payment of percent on the current and investment loan.
АННОТАЦИЯ
В статье выделены основные макроэкономические показатели, актуализирующие необходимость экстренной модернизации механизмов государственной поддержки аграрных товаропроизводителей, обоснованы потенциальные финансовые возможности Российской Федерации в финансировании Государственной программы развития национального агропромышленного комплекса в условиях Всемирной торговой организации, антироссийских санкций и российского продовольственного эмбарго. Проведена кластеризация регионов Российской Федерации по показателям бюджетной обеспеченности и роли аграрного сектора в формировании валового регионального продукта и показано, что между этими показателями наличествует
отрицательная связь средней силы. Определено влияние бюджетной обеспеченности и удельного веса сельского хозяйства в валовом региональном продукте на изменение объемов производства агропродовольственной продукции в целом и в разрезе отдельных ее видов. Обоснован недостаточный уровень эффективности субсидирования процентной ставки и льготных лизинговых поставок техники в поддержке аграрных товаропроизводителей, и показано, что преобладание темпов роста размера уставного капитала над собственнымв ОАО «Россельхозбанк» и ОАО «Росагролизинг», привело к нерациональной структуре их пассивов, выражающейся в недостаточности других составных частей собственного капитала - добавочного, резервного и нераспределенной прибыли. Указана возможность переориентации расходов на прямую поддержку аграрных товаропроизводителей из «желтой» корзины ВТО в «голубую», привязав выплаты к «историческим» площадям и поголовью. На основе апробации авторской методики доказано, что прямые, несвязанные меры поддержки могут быть эффективно использованы в условиях ограниченных бюджетных возможностей. Определено, что предлагаемая методика может быть использована для повышения роли региональных органов власти в совершенствовании структуры и повышении эффективности функционировании регионального агропромышленного комплекса. Доказано, что только в 2009г. размер фактически предоставленной государственной поддержки сельскому хозяйству Орловской области оказался на 25,73% ниже уровня необходимой финансовой помощи. При этом основная часть субсидий, выделяемых сельскохозяйственным предприятиям в 2007 - 2013 годы, направляется на оплату процентов по текущим и инвестиционным кредитам
KEY WORDS
Agricultural policy, state financing backing of agro-industrial complex, price disparity, subsidizing of interest rates.
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА
Аграрная политика, государственная финансовая поддержка АПК, диспаритет цен, субсидирование процентной ставки.
The change of social, economic and political operating conditions of national economy demand the urgent adjustment of development plans of its separate sectors. At most it concerns the most sensitive branches, first of all, agriculture.
Having become the member of the World Trade Organization (22.08.2012), Russia fully made out the negative consequences of this important step in the strategic plan, however positive changes didn't manage to be reached as from the second half of April, 2014 the Russian Federation got under blow of the anti-Russian sanctions.
At the beginning of August, 2014 Russia declared introduction of embargo on import of separate types of agricultural products from the countries which supported sanctions: EU, USA, Australia, Canada, Norway, etc.
It is obvious that embargo procedure opens new opportunities for development of domestic agriculture, potential of sale of its production especially as depreciation of the ruble lowers the interest of foreign exporters in internal market of Russia.
However the policy of Republic of Belarus and Kazakhstan, and also Serbia, Turkey, Macedonia and even Mongolia [1] minimized positive consequences of this step for domestic agro-industrial complex.
The defined changes of macroeconomic parameters together with key parameters of the Food Security Doctrine of the Russian Federation[14]and the State program of development of agriculture and regulation of the markets of agricultural production, raw materials and food for 2013 - 2020 [9]allow to allocate the main problems of realization of mechanisms of the state financing backing of Russian agrarian producers.
At Russia's accession to the World Trade Organization parameters of restrictions of the state financial support were pegged to US dollar (fig. 1), therefore, proceeding from the mid-
year average exchange-value of ruble, in 2012 Russia could spend for financing of the yellow basket 273,3 billion rubles, in 2013 - 294,57 billion rubles, in 2014 - 455,71 billion rubles. However the actual financing of a national agrarian policy was significantly lower and, as judged by the developing situation in the energy resource market, prospects on approach of limits of the Agreement on agriculture of the WTO to actually set aside sums it isn't necessary to expect.
9 9
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
■ pegging level, billion dollars
Figure 1 - The total amount of obligations of Russia for the aggregate measure of support (AMS),
billion dollars (made by data[5])
The requirement about co-finance of the state backing from regional authorities acts as additional restriction[9].In these conditions subjects of agro- industrial complex can't count on participation in the government program as beneficiary region have no opportunity to carry out co-funding in programs of crediting, tenders for participation in programs of development rural territories, etc. Therefore, according to results of researches[11], there is a threat of productions' pass through with the considerable ratio of a value added to regions with the high level of the budgetary security even if conditions of agricultural production in them are unfavorable. However the carried-out calculations showed the existence of multiple-valued tendencies (tab. 1).
Table 1 - Group of regions of Russia on the taxable capacity level fiscal capacity and a role of
agrarian sector in economy*
Fiscal capacity index FCi > 0,9, role of rural sector of the ratio of agriculture in a gross regional product i < 0,08 (1 group) Fiscal capacity index FCi > 0,9, role of rural sector of the ratio of agriculture in a gross regional producti > 0,08 (the 2nd group)
Vladimir, Kaluga, Lipetsk, Moscow, Tver, Tula, Yaroslavl, Arkhangelsk, Vologda, Leningrad, Murmansk, Novgorod, Nizhny Novgorod, Sverdlovsk, Kemerovo Tyumen, Chelyabinsk, Irkutsk, Novosibirsk, Tomsk, Sakhalin regions; Republic of Karelia, Komi, Bashkortostan, Tatarstan, Khakassia; Perm and Krasnoyarsk territories. Belgorod, Voronezh, Kursk, Astrakhan, Volgograd, Rostov, Orenburg, Samara, Kurgan and Omsk regions; Khabarovsk Territory
Fiscal capacity index FCi< 0,9, role of rural sector of the ratio of agriculture in a gross regional product i < 0,08 (the3rdgroup) Fiscal capacity index FCi< 0,9, role of rural sector of the ratio of agriculture in a gross regional product i > 0,08 (the4thgroup)
The Ivanovo Region, Smolensk, Kaliningrad, Pskov, Penza, Amur and Magadan regions; Udmurt Republic and Republics of Buryatia, Tyva, Sakha (Yakutia); Transbaikal, Kamchatka, Primorsk territories; Chukotka Autonomous Region Bryansk, Kostroma, Orel, Ryazan, Tambov, Kirov, Saratov and Ulyanovsk regions; The Republics of Adygea, Kalmykia, Dagestan, Ingushetia, the Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia, North Ossetia - Alania, Chechen, Mari El, Mordovia, Chuvash, Altai; Krasnodar, Stavropol and Altai territories; Jewish Autonomous Region.
* made by data [6].
The correlation and regression analysis showed the existence of an average negative association between fiscal capacity index and ratio of added value of agriculture in a gross regional product. If to exclude regions with the worst conditions for agricultural production from the sample frame, the correlation coefficient slightly increases (to minus 0,55).
The analysis of influence of the fiscal capacity indicators and the role of agrarian sector in formation of a gross regional product on production run-up of farm products in general and broken down by its main types are presented in table 2.
Table 2 - Production rate of increment of farm products in groups of regions of Russia*
Indicators groups of regions
1 | 2 | 3 | 4
Period 2006-2012
Average annual growth, % - - - -
-agricultural output 11,0 16,4 12,9 14,05
- gross grain harvest -4,67 -0,27 0,0 -1,00
-whole yield of sugar-beet 1,6 7,4 9,9 7,9
- meat-animal and poultry production for slaughter 6,21 10,71 5,33 6,43
-milk yield -0,86 1,2 -0,16 1,31
Period 2008-2012
Average annual growth, % - - - -
-agricultural output 5,7 9,3 9,9 8,8
- gross grain harvest -12,2 -10,48 -5,16 -8,67
-whole yield of sugar-beet 9,02 14,04 16,7 10,4
- meat-animal and poultry production for slaughter 5,15 9,06 5,54 6,34
-milk yield -1,19 0,44 -0,29 0,97
* made by data [6].
Thus, the maximum losses of production of grain crops happen in regions of the first group, a run-up of whole yield of sugar-beet-in the regions of the third cluster, of milk - in the regions of the second one. As for meat production, the third group of regions conceded the leadership in 2008-2012 to the second group.
Based on the above, the course for development of large holdings, whose interests are lobbied by regional authorities, don't correspond to modern realities of Russia. The accent has to be displaced towards average and small businesses which, besides, still play an important role of the social buffer in development of rural territories.
The increase of key interest rate of Bank of Russia to 17% entailed the appreciation of credit resources. The rules of credits subsidity in agro-industrial complex in 2015 are reconsidered for preservation of the reached volumes of agricultural production and for providing of soft bank lending of a branch. Compensation will be carried out of 14-15% per annum (instead of the operating mechanism of compensation of 2/3 rates of refinancing of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation - 5,5%), as a result the load on agricultural producers has to decrease [4].However it should be noted that support of interest rates for the credits and preferential provision of equipment in leasing supports, first of all, bank and leasing systems of the country, and also large agro holdings.
Besides, significantly more funds are allocated for support of the main state financial agents in realization of a national agrarian policy, than it was provided, and quality of formation of their liabilities leaves much to be desired (tab. 3).
It is obvious that growth ratio of authorized capitals of these companies significantly exceed similar indicators on owned capital that doesn't answer elementary economic logic concerning effective entities of market economy.
In this regard, we consider that it is necessary to reorient mechanisms of the state backing of agrarian commodity producers from subsidizing of interest rates to direct measures of agriculture backing. However long stagnation of domestic agro-industrial complex doesn't allow to use fully mechanisms of the «untied» measures attached to the «historical» areas or a livestock as in this case as base values would appear data by 1994 when Russia for the first time filed documents for accession to WTO, and they were
significantly higher than the present. By force of the state financed limitation, we can't fully use this opportunity and refer these expenses regular in structure of a «blue» basket [2].
Therefore we consider it efficient to use the developed technique of the state backing of the income of agrarian producers in the conditions of a nonequivalent interindustry exchange [12].
Table 3 - The main indicators of dynamics and quality of owned capital of JSC «Rosselkhozbank»
and JSC «Rosagroleasing»*
Indicators Years 20013 in % by 2007 Average annual growth ratio, %
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
JSC «Rosselkhozbank», billion rub
Authorized capital 27,7 61,2 106,2 108 148 188 218 787,00 1,75
Owned capital 33,8 66 113,2 115,9 138,6 179,2 209,1 618,64 1,35
The ratio of authorized capital in owned capital, % 81,95 92,72 93,82 93,18 106,3 104,9 104,3 X X
JSC «Rosagroleasing », billion rub
Authorized capital 35,3 43,3 72,3 72,3 75,3 78,8 78,8 223,23 1,14
Owned capital 36,5 44,5 73,6 73,7 75,5 77,1 76,1 208,49 1,13
The ratio of authorized capital in owned capital, % 96,71 97,3 98,23 98,1 99,74 102,2 103,5 X X
* made by data [7,8].
The offered technique is based on monitoring of the prices and calculation of average expenses. It allows determining the level of direct financial backing depending on efficiency of use of raw materials potential and a zone arrangement of the territory of the businesses.
Practical approval of a technique on materials of the Orel region showed that the actual volume of the allocated subsidies for the analyzed period exceeded the level of calculated values of this indicator (tab. 4)It goes to prove that the state allocated enough funds for support of agricultural commodity producers these years. Only in 2009 the amount of actually provided state backing for agriculture was 25,73% lower than the level of necessary financial aid. However the main part of the subsidies allocated to the farm business these years goes for payment of interest on the current and investment credits.
Table 4 - The size of actually provided and estimated levels of the state backing of the farm business
in the Orel region, million rubles*
Indicators 2007y 2008y 2009y. 2010y 2011y 2012y 2013
In total actual subsidies for agricultural industry 667,67 951,64 1488,92 1792,86 1712,12 1369,18 2185,02
- for support of crop production 10,91 9,58 2,74 2,33 3,35 8,49 8,49
- for support of animal production 7,86 11,26 10,95 5,15 7,29 6,02 15,21
- crediting subsidy assistance 63,05 66,89 85,18 83,53 82,61 83,92 60,84
- other subsidies 18,18 12,27 1,13 8,98 6,76 1,56 15,46
Rated value of subsidies 621,66 744,34 1872,06 1258,80 968,19 1073,46 1716,74
The share of rated value of subsidies in total amount of actually provided financial resources, % 93,11 78,22 125,73 70,21 56,55 78,40 78,57
* made by data [3].
Thus, the offered technique allows: to make the state financial backing available for all businesses , but not for its limited pool; to stimulate increase in production as the size of subsidies is estimated proceeding from the guideline prices of a unit of production; to
promote efficiency engineering as the guideline price is settled from the results of the best enterprises; to rationalize commodity and purchasing interventions in the market of agricultural raw materials; to increase the efficiency of use of budgetary funds at the branch and national level.
REFERENCES
1. Berres, L. Sanctions full of holes: where the prohibited goods «filter» into Russia from / L. Berres [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.mk.ru/economics/2014/10/24/dyryavye-sankcii-otkuda-v-rossiyu-prosachivayutsya-zapreshhennye-tovary.html. Located 25.10.2014
2. Borhunov, N.A. Price disparity and state backing of agriculture of Russia from positions of the WTO / Borhunov N.A., Popova O.V., Sidorin A.A.//Economy of the farm business and processing companies. - 2012. - №4. - P. 22-26
3. Annual accounting reports of the farm business in the Orel region. Department of economy and state backing of agro-industrial complex. Collective work. [An electronic resource] -Access mode: http://www.mcx.ru/news/news/show/33667.355.htm. Located 22.01.2015
4. The report of the working group about Russia's accession to the World Trade Organization. [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.mcx.ru/news/news/show/33667.355.htm. Date of the address: 14.11.2014
5. Official site of Federal State Statistics Service of the Russian Federation [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.gks.ru/
6. Official site of JSC «Rosselkhozbank» Federation [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.rshb.ru/
7. Official site of JSC «Rosagroleasing»[An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.rosagroleasing.ru/
8. The resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation «About introduction of modifications in the State program of agricultural development and regulation of the markets of farm products, raw materials and the food for 2013 - 2020» of December 19, 2014 No. 1421 [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.mcx.ru/documents/document/show/22026.htm Date of the address: 25.12.2014
9. The working group on improvement of Rules of granting and distribution of subsidies on rendering green box subsidies in crop production. Efficient instrument of the state agrarian policy [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://www.mcx.ru/documents/document/show/26710.htm. Date of the address: 25.12.2014
10. Serova, E. The main tendencies in development of agro-industrial sector of Russia in 2005 year [An electronic resource] / Bulletin of the Agro-industrial Economy Center, 2006. № 1 (27). - Access mode: www/iet.ru/fat/bunlls/bull27r.pdf. Date of the address: 25.03.2007
11. Sidorin, A.A. The state backing of the agrarian producers' income in the conditions of a nonequivalent interindustry exchange / A.A. Sidorin// Agro-industrial complex: economy, management. - 2011. - №7. - P. 78-82.
12. Uzun, V. The influence the WTO rules on use efficiency of means of state backing of agriculture / V. Uzun // Agro-industrial complex: economy, management. - 2013. - № 10. -P. 11-24.
13. The decree of the Russian President of January 30,2010 No. 120 «About the approval of food security doctrine of the Russian Federation» [An electronic resource] - Access mode: http://graph.document.kremlin.ru/page.aspx?1049708. Date of the address: 20.11.2014
14. Ushachev, I. AProviding food security in the context of global partnership / I. Ushachev // Agro-industrial complex: economy, management. - 2011. - № 11. - P. 3-11.
15. Ushachev, I. Problems of ensuring competitiveness of agro-industrial complex products in the conditions of regional integration and globalization / I. Ushachev // Agro-industrial complex: economy, management. - 2013. - № 7. - P. 3-14.
