Taxes before and after lunch

Why is the government discussing an increase in income tax that he no longer has to collect

Photo: Pixabay / Tumisu

A few days after the election of Vladimir Putin, it turned out that the government of Dmitry Medvedev, who was leaving in April, continues to discuss the future - in particular, does not leave a discussion about increasing the income tax. The probability that in the White House nothing will fundamentally change from a personnel point of view is still very large, but the government will not be the same meaningfully since May 2018. An unspoken ban on raising taxes has been lifted, now the White House has three options for choosing the future - the growth of public debt, reducing administrative rents or increasing the tax burden, while one of the main factors in the future choice will be the activity of the military.

Kazus minimum wage

It does not matter for what reason Arkady Dvorkovich on the third day after the actual announcement of the results of the presidential election announced the discussion in the government of the possibility of increasing income tax from the current 13% to 15%. Formally, this was just the answer to the question of students of the Plekhanov Institute, where the Deputy Prime Minister gave a public lecture on what was discussed at a meeting with the current Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev on March 20.

There is no particular secret here: the meeting was devoted to Vladimir Putin’s instructions following the results of the message to the Federal Assembly (they were published on March 22): the government and the Central Bank are indicated by June 15 to increase the plan of investment in the Russian economy by 2024 and at the same time - a plan for reducing the level of poverty over the next six years by half.

The main sensation (if it was at all) in the statement of Arkady Dvorkovich is not that the future personal income tax rate from 2019 will be debated in the White House (the law does not allow to increase it before). The meaning of the idea, which, by the way, is not too much like the Ministry of Finance is to change the tax deduction mode from the personal income tax in the amount of one minimum wage. Now the minimum salary, despite the presence of such a deduction, is still taxed 13% of the income tax, as, by the way, the salary is less than the minimum wage - the standard explanation for this amazing fact is that the law does not allow to accrue a salary less than the minimum wage, and if it is accrued, it is believed that this is a partial employment rate, and it does not prohibit the law from it, it would be at full above the minimum wage. One way or another, the initiative to increase the minimum wage to the subsistence minimum requires money, and bringing the situation to “honest”: from all salaries less than the minimum wage - in 2019 the minimum wage will be 12-13 thousand rubles. per month - should not take any income tax. Since the budget does not have additional revenues, the total amount of income in the country is proposed to be redistributed in favor of the poor: everyone who receives more minimum wages is proposed to pay personal income tax at a rate of 15%, less at a rate of 0%. However, in the winter discussions of 2017/2018, the government also discussed another option - an increase in personal income tax to 17.5% (this was argued that Ukraine can withstand the income tax of 18% without large social protests) with the direction of most additional healthcare fees.

The main sensation in the statement of Arkady Dvorkovich is not that the future personal income tax rate has been debated in the White House since 2019, but that the tax deduction from the personal income tax base in the amount of one minimum wage will have to change.

The old new government

The fact that the team of Dmitry Medvedev was involved in subject discussions about future tax rates is largely a declaration of the fact that a significant part of these ministers will remain in their places. Otherwise, it makes no sense to discuss the fulfillment of Vladimir Putin’s instructions - the new ones will come, even if they themselves think about how to reduce poverty twice in six years.

Meanwhile, the continuation of the discussion about taxes, in the previous six years de facto prohibited by Vladimir Putin (the first deputy prime minister Igor Shuvalov repeatedly stated that the taxes could not change in the end of the “political cycle” because of Putin, and this promise is more or less restrained), shows that, even if in the government in the government in the government in the government in the government On April-May 2018, not a single minister or Deputy Prime Minister will change, it will still be a different government. Since 2012, the current personnel of the White House has been called upon to play only one role - holding the situation unchanged in the process of financial stabilization and budget consolidation. Simply put, the task of the Dmitry Medvedev team until 2018 was to promote the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance in reducing inflation, reducing government agents, the completion of the old state program of weapons and “decaying” the credit situation with the regions - and, if possible, do nothing more that could destabilize the situation. In the process, we note, the White House managed to make a little more, for example, to begin the reform of control and supervision, to try out a design approach to public administration, to create the basic infrastructure of the "Electronic Government". But the main task was performed with great enthusiasm, especially in the last two years-the governments were not visible and not heard, many even occurred to many that living in a country with such a quiet and non-aggressive executive branch in something even better than in the state obsessed with reforms.

Now everything should change - with or without the Medvedev team in the White House, since May, it will be necessary to discuss not too ambitious (Putin in his message set, we note, quite modest goals, fully fulfilled not even a very talented government in a successful combination of circumstances), but a completely material program of visible changes. The discussion about personal income tax is only its component, in fact, the dilemma is somewhat wider.

In the last two years, the governments were not visible and not heard, it even occurred to many that living in a country with such a quiet and non-aggressive executive branch in something even better than in a state obsessed with reforms. Now everything should change

Alternatives

If we talk about the economy and only about it, the key question of the Kremlin and the White House for the next six years is how to make internal investors invest 20–25% more in the economy than in 2017. There are three fundamental approaches to solving these problems, and around three of these ideas, apparently, the internal conflicts of the future government will be formed.

The first approach is now proposed mainly by the Minister of Economics Maxim Oreshkin. Its main idea is that the reserve fund funds spent in 2014-2017 on anti-crisis measures are currently located almost unused in the banking system (mainly nationalized due to the banking crisis) in the form of a “structural surplus of liquidity”, which now is about 3 trillion rubles. These trillions, according to Bank of Russia, will not “resolve” in banks for at least five years. The Ministry of Economy offers to borrow this money from the banking system in various ways, including the main “infrastructure mortgage”: the state builds up public debt, issuing bonds, banks buy bonds at the means of “structural surfacing”, money is sent to builders who create the right to society, and, more precisely, to the authorities in the regions, “infrastructure facilities” - roads, schools, treatment, treatment, treatment, treatment, treatment, treatment. structures, dams and bridges. This exempts a certain amount of free money in the budgets, and as a result of investment they grow (together with the public debt), and in essence, there is no need to increase taxes - Russia has been living on credit for itself for several years.

The second approach is more traditional and is now proposed mainly by the Ministry of Finance. He assumes that the state is almost “hand” looking for investors for the objects he needs, offering them special investment conditions - according to the scheme of new “special investment contracts” (SPIC 2.0). In this scheme (which, by the way, is not associated with the Minister of Finance Anton Siluanov, whose views on the problem, apparently more difficult), taxes can be slightly adjusted, in particular, due to some reduction in tax pressure on employers and an increase in indirect taxes. The main source of “released” money for investments should be the funds of budget savings, mainly unproductive construction projects, the abolition of all kinds of taxes on taxes, an increase in tax collection due to digital technologies. The released money can be directed to a solution to social problems. This is a traditional approach, which, as in the case of the ideas of the Ministry of Economy, does not imply taxes - but only their redistribution.

The third approach is usually associated with Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets, although in practice the “social” coalition is more variegated, and apparently, the positions of the military-industrial complex can be strong in it. This, by the way, is not surprising. From the outside it may seem that the government, increasing expenses “on the defense”, mainly cares about the fight against an overseas potential enemy. But in fact, one of the main motivations of financing the military-industrial complex is not even so much the export of weapons as maintaining employment and any acceptable income in the multimillion-dollar army of the defense industry, which, with the exception of the nuclear industry, has not been reformed. The appointment of Sergei Kiriyenko in the presidential head of the administration in this sense is an easily explained phenomenon: his managerial efforts in Rosatom brought a certain success, they see a certain modern repetition of Lavrenty Beria, who gave the USSR an atomic bomb. The main idea of ​​the “military-social” bloc is that increasing income in the budget sector, from doctors to rackets, should be the internal demand engine in the Russian economy surrounded by enemies. Therefore, everything that is necessary to combat poverty, GDP growth, increase investments is an increase in tax redistribution, a decrease in social inequality in income between private and public sectors. If the Maxim Oreshkin version is to some extent the “South Korean” path of development, and the Ministry of Finance is the “East European”, then the “military-social” ideas are the way, to some extent repeating the ideas of the “social state” of France from Francois Mittein.

The government will also present supporters of the “fourth path” - a banal growth of investments in power structures and weapons with ignoring any social needs. In many ways, what the future government will become, will be determined by the real influence in the power of this particular “fourth force”

It should be noted that all three approaches have a common component: all of them agree that the current level of health care expenses, education, and, in general, “human capital” is too low so that the current power is more or less reliably standing on the feet. Only alternative methods are proposed to increase the costs of these purposes - in the first version, in fact, by increasing the public debt, in the second - due to the reduction of the volume of administrative rent, in the third - due to the growth of tax redistribution. By tradition, the government after May 2018 will not have a consensus about which way to choose, in addition, supporters of the “fourth path” - banal growth of investments in power structures and weapons with ignoring any social needs will always be presented in it. In many ways, what the future government will become, will be determined by the real influence in the power of this particular “fourth power”. She, as far as one can judge, has no substantial tax or social ideas at all (perhaps this is even good). But she needs money, and on the go will choose which of the three future groups in the White House is more suitable for her to solve this problem.

And the personal income tax rate is already technical details. No matter how tempting it may sound, it is unlikely that Vladimir Putin will be able to force future ministers not to do anything else six years - and he himself, apparently, understands that the pause has been dragged on. It would be nice in the coming months to finally solve something.

* Author - Deputy editor -in -chief of the newspaper Kommersant, the text is written specifically for The New Times