Investments minus – Newspaper Kommersant No. 33 (7478) dated February 22, 2023
[ad_1]
The authorities and business continue to publicly exchange views on the mechanism of a one-time contribution of large companies to the leaky Russian budget. The fee has already been agreed as mandatory, not voluntary, but there is still no consensus on how to calculate it. The Ministry of Finance allowed businesses to be excluded from the tax base for capital investments – this idea as a whole fits into the logic of stimulating private investment over the past few years. The RSPP also talks about the need to take into account such investments when calculating the contribution, but insists on the formation of a permanent investment support mechanism in order to avoid such one-time withdrawals.
The discussion about the design of a one-time contribution of large companies to the budget at the expense of their “surplus profits” of the last two years is expanding due to new proposals. Recall that since the beginning of February, the government’s idea of a business contribution to the budget, which faced a drop in revenues at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, has been discussed (see Kommersant on February 9). The concept of a voluntary payment did not meet with understanding in the RSPP, since the implementation of such an option is hampered by corporate procedures. Later, the head of the Ministry of Finance, Anton Siluanov, said that the collection would be taken through “tax tools”, and not as a voluntary one.
Yesterday, the head of the RSPP, Alexander Shokhin, also announced that the payment had been agreed upon as a mandatory one. According to him, it is still not clear how to count the “excess income” – from profit before or after tax – and how to collect the payment this year, not next year. The Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, Alexander Shokhin added, proceeded from the fact that the fee could be set in the form of “some kind of advance payment”, which should be encouraged by “some kind of discount for companies.” To make a decision, according to him, it is necessary “the sooner the better.” Alexander Shokhin explained the unwillingness to drag out the process by the growth of the appetite of the Ministry of Finance: if the discussion began with 200 billion rubles, now the department is talking about 300 billion rubles. It should be noted that after yesterday’s message from the president, there have been more directions for the “development” of these funds, about 500 billion rubles. required only for new social programs in the annexed regions (see Kommersant-Online).
For its part, the Ministry of Finance spoke yesterday about the possibility of exclusion from the base for collecting capital investments – according to Anton Siluanov, this issue is being worked out. Note that this idea fits into the logic of the government’s long-standing work to launch an investment boom through private investment in the economy. In 2022, for obvious reasons, the boom did not take place despite numerous measures to support it – the launch of agreements on the protection and promotion of capital investments (see “Kommersant” dated December 12), various mechanisms for concessional financing of investment projects as part of anti-crisis packages (see “Kommersant” dated December 12). 7 November and 16 December). As a result, the government was forced to increase government spending and government investment (see Kommersant on February 21).
The options for the “investment or contribution in full” split will apparently be discussed in the next two weeks. Alexander Shokhin also speaks about the need to take into account the support of investment activity. According to him, the principle position of business is to give priority to stimulating investments through permanent mechanisms instead of one-time withdrawals. The latter should not create risks for the development of enterprises: in 2021-2022, the government has already made decisions to withdraw excess profits through taxes. Also, according to Alexander Shokhin, the RSPP insists on the exclusion of social investments in the regions where companies operate when calculating the base “for any design of tax exemptions.”
[ad_2]
Source link
