The State Duma in disputes approved a one-time withdrawal of 300 billion rubles from businesses. in the form of a tax on excess profits

The State Duma yesterday adopted in the first reading the loudest tax bill of this year – on a one-time withdrawal to the budget from 2.5 thousand relatively large Russian companies of at least 300 billion rubles. in the form of a tax on the excess profits they previously received. Unlike most government bills, this initiative did not meet with the full support of parliamentarians – three of the five Duma factions (communists, socialist-revolutionaries and New People) opposed at once. During the discussion, this even aroused suspicions of lobbying for the interests of big business among United Russia colleagues, but it had no effect on the voting results.

A package of bills on a one-time excess profit tax passed the first reading in the State Duma yesterday. We are talking about two projects. The first one introduces a clause in the Tax Code stating that one-time taxes can be established by federal laws, the second one regulates the tax itself.

The base tax rate will be 10% of the difference between the company’s 2021-2022 and 2018-2019 profits. Since such a new tax, according to the law, can only be introduced from next year, it will formally start working in 2024. However, since the budget needs the money now, a “workaround” has been devised – companies can deposit the amount from October 1 to November 30 of this year in the form of a security deposit at a rate of only 5% against next year’s tax.

Companies whose arithmetic average profit for 2021 and 2022 exceeded 1 billion rubles will pay. The payment will not affect small and medium-sized businesses, payers of the unified agricultural tax, coal miners, as well as companies in the oil and gas sector (for them, additional tax exemptions are already provided for this year).

The Ministry of Finance expects to collect at least 300 billion rubles in this way. (calculated at a rate of 5%). The tax will affect 2.5 thousand companies, or 3% of taxpayers. In the sectoral context, the distribution of revenues among the top 50 payers, according to the agency, will look like this: 20% will come from enterprises in the field of mining solid minerals, 19% from mineral fertilizer producers, 13% from metallurgists, 12% from wholesale and retail. Another 9% – the banking sector, 5% – petrochemicals, power generation, construction companies, manufacturing and logistics industries. The rest is 1%. It should be noted that the day before, in an interview with RIA Novosti, Deputy Finance Minister Alexei Sazanov did not rule out the possibility of levying a tax on excess profits in the future, if “a situation arises hypothetically when there are such excess incomes and the need to finance a large deficit.”

During the discussion of the drafts, three factions – the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, New People, A Just Russia – For the Truth – opposed their adoption. Deputy from SRZP Valery Gartung considered that the number of payers did not include those who receive “real super profits”, meaning the oil and gas sector (the Ministry of Finance promised to submit a comparison of the burden on it and on payers of a one-time tax from the effect of the tax, its non-core subsidiaries; see “Kommersant” dated June 28). Deputy from the New People Alexander Demin was worried that not those who “played on the market situation and rising prices for raw materials” would fall under the tax, but those who did not sleep for days during these two years against the backdrop of the pandemic and SVO, rebuilt logistics and saved their enterprises.” The Communist Party of the Russian Federation also objected in the same logic – deputy Yevgeny Bessonov said that large industrial enterprises that perform “tasks set by the president” would fall under the tax.

“Who are we pitying now?” Andrey Makarov, head of the Duma Committee on Budget and Taxes, asked the opponents of the bills. He recalled that in 2021 more than 2 trillion rubles. “it went to dividends – and not to what, to hell, investments,” and promised to submit to the second reading the volumes of state support received by companies. At the same time, commenting on the speeches of his colleagues, he threatened that he could name “which speech is connected with which business.”

However, among those who protested against the projects, there were also those to whom the withdrawal of 300 billion rubles planned by the authorities. It seemed like an insufficient solution: Denis Parfyonov from the Communist Party of the Russian Federation was interested in why only 1% of the budget revenue is planned to be collected, despite the fact that “many organizations could give more.”

Considering the proposed option to cover the budget deficit is not entirely fair, the dissenting deputies proposed their own. Among them are the introduction of a progressive personal income tax scale, an increase in export duties, and the abolition of the tax maneuver in the oil sector. All proposals one way or another were resolutely rejected by the Ministry of Finance.

From what is definitely planned to be finalized for the second reading, as Andrey Makarov noted, this is “the nature of the security deposit”. So, in the conclusion of the budget committee, the deputies refer to the position of the RSPP, which indicated the need to adjust the draft in terms of applying the deduction in order to unambiguously interpret and deprive the right to use it when making a refund of any amount at the initiative of not only taxpayers, but also the state, in order to give business “Guarantees of the implementation of the agreements reached and thereby maintain the incentive to transfer the tax at the end of 2023.”

The RSPP refrained from commenting yesterday. Similar comments were reported to Kommersant at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry. According to its President Sergey Katyrin, by the second reading it is necessary, in particular, to more clearly formulate the rules on tax payment in 2023 in the format of a security deposit at a rate of 5%, so that there are no risks of raising the rate to 10%. “For example, it is necessary to provide for the risks of returning or not offsetting part of the amount, because in the current parameters, if at least 1 ruble is not credited, then this will be considered a violation of the conditions and the rate will increase. Such moments must be excluded, ”he explained.

The result of voting for the adoption of projects in the first reading, as often happens, did not reflect the degree of discussion. 316 deputies were in favor, only 28 were against.

Evgenia Kryuchkova, Vadim Visloguzov