Is it worth talking to an accountant about economic policy

The Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Anton Siluanov spoke about budget difficulties, the need to reduce budget expenditures and increase his revenues at the moment when there are no difficulties in the federal budget. Let's figure out why.

Everything is fine in the budget

For the first half of 2014, the federal budget was reduced with a surplus of 649 billion rubles, despite the fact that for the whole of 2014 a shortage of 390 billion rubles was planned. Instead of minus 0.5% to GDP, we have a plus of 1.9% in the federal budget. The remains in the budget accounts for the first half of the year increased by 1.2 trillion rubles.
In the federal budget, everything looks very good, which is even a little strange against the background of stagnation of the economy. It would be, sit and rejoice. But the minister wrinkles his forehead and talks about budget difficulties:

1. The shortage of non-Neniftegazy income due to a slowdown in the economy.
2. Pension Fund budget deficit.
3. The desire to replenish the reserve fund of the budget.
4. Difficulties in regional budgets.

Budget difficulties - invented and real

Of course, there is a shortage of non-Neniftegazy income due to a slowdown in the economy, but it is not critical-for six months only 1.5% of the plan. Given the significant overfulfillment of oil and gas revenues (6.7%), there is no problem at all.

The deficit of the Pension Fund is a completely artificial, far -fetched, sucked from a finger. From nowhere it follows that the pension fund should only be replenished at the expense of deductions from the salary. This concept is related only to the accumulative pension systems, but not to joint. In joint systems, the state’s pension obligations are financed at the expense of all its income. And these concepts can be confused, either not understanding in the economy, or consciously leading a shadow on the wove.

Budget accumulations in rubles are a separate song. There is nothing more harmful to the economy than such savings. Because deductions in them take out money from the economy and slow down its growth. Moreover, they are not any reserves, because to save the currency that you yourself are issuing is nonsense. Its stock is not needed if at any time you can print how much is required.

The only serious problem from Siluanov noted by the shortage of regional budgets. Because when intercessor to his post, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed the so -called May decrees that assigned a lot of additional expenses for regional budgets, but did not provide them with resources to solve these problems. A politically very convenient solution: everyone sees that the president is kind, this is the boyars around the bad. And allows you to keep the governors on a short leash and in the constant role of petitioners in federal offices. The deficit of regional budgets is a consciously designed and politically motivated design. Nobody thinks to get rid of her.

But the key real economic problems in the budget remained out of sight of the minister or on the periphery of his vision, at the level of philistine reasoning. Here are a few of them.

1. First of all, this is stagnation, a stop of the economy. You need to do something to start economic growth. But the minister does not see such a task for himself. For him, the main thing is the budget balance with the largest supply of unused money in the account.
2. Corruption in the implementation of budget expenditures. The formal chief Siluanov, Prime Minister D. Medvedev, stated , while still the president of the country, that corruption at the state order is 1 trillion rubles. Siluanov does not see a problem.
3. Inefficiency or dubious effectiveness of many budget expenditures. This is recognized by Siluanov, but no more. How to deal with this, he does not know.
4. Strange budget proportions are an annual reduction in social articles in favor of power: defense, national security, etc. Guns and batons instead of health and education. This is literally, literally and true, not only for the budget planning, but also for its execution. For the first half of 2014, budget expenditures were completed by 46.4% of annual appointments. At the same time, at National Born - by 58.4%, and, say, for health care - by 39.6%. Against such a background, the minister’s “care” of the Mednita Foundation looks only as an occasion for raising taxes, and nothing more.

Recipes from the Ministry of Finance

In the economy, solutions that seem obvious are incorrect. There is a classic image explaining why this is so. If you are in the crowd, then to see better, you need to stand on tiptoe. But if everyone stands on tiptoe, no one better.

Here is a simple idea: the lower the inflation, the better. But Japan or the United States set itself the tasks of increasing inflation.

Debts are bad, every housewife knows. But almost all developed countries have public debt at 100% GDP. They are hardly worse than housewives understand the economy.

All the recipes that the minister finds go from the idea to balance the budget and accumulate a reserve fund. Moreover, the minister does not even think about the consequences of such a policy. Hence his idea - to increase taxes and reduce costs.

The consequences of such solutions in a stagnant economy are only an increase in the decline.

Economists always have an explanation for almost any position. So the minister explains to us that stimulating the economy by increasing government departments will have a short-term effect, and debts will accumulate. At the same time, he himself confirms that we have no debts problems - the public debt is only 11% of GDP, and in Europe - about 100%. By the way, taking into account budget reserves, our debt is generally 0% (in budget reserves and accounts lies more than 11% of GDP). But it categorically refuses to increase the debt of siluangs.

The short -term effect - maybe this is necessary to start economic growth, and without such a push the economy will not move anywhere. Of course, other conditions for growth are needed, but you still need to push something in the direction of growth, and not in the opposite, as it happens with the Ministry of Finance.

Failless vessels

Some elements of the policy of the Ministry of Finance can only be explained by the presence of non -coordinating vessels in the head.

For example, Siluanov speaks of the difficulties of borrowing. He cannot increase government departments because he cannot place government bonds. To sell them more, you will have to increase the percentage. But after all, he himself advocated for enrolling the funded part of the pension of people to the budget and himself let this money on expenses, to the Crimea. And if this money remained in pension funds, government bonds would be bought on them, and the acuteness of the problem would disappear.

By the way, next year the issue has still been suspended, probably, the Ministry of Finance will again take this money (or most of them). And people will continue to pay funded contributions for retirement, which do not increase their pension. Such a policy can be called hidden tax or, in a simple way, robbery in broad daylight.

Another example. The budget occupies in the market and immediately puts up the borrowed money to the reserve fund. At the same time, he pays 6–8% per annum of state -owned bonds and receives 0% from the Central Bank for investing funds of his reserves. Direct budget losses that are hidden are disguised as income from the course difference (when the ruble falls). What is the meaning of such a policy? The state generally does not need these reserves, because it issues them. The deduction from economic growth is obvious, and the benefits are zero. All this budget rule is an economic absurdity, and Siluanov speaks of the need to tighten it.

It is amazing that you can advocate for increasing non -Neneftegas revenues and at the same time offer an increase in taxes that destroys the economy. There is an accountant’s mentality: to save and do not spend. Well, they accumulated. More than 11% of GDP in the budget lie dead cargo, and the economy stopped. Dead end. But the debit with the loan beat.

Still, it is not worth trusting the management of the state of a housewife, but an economic policy (at least a state, even a company)-an accountant.