Sly Government Medvedev

  Crafty maneuver pravitelstvaDlya which the Ministry of Finance plans to move cargo social tax from employers to employees.

Finance Minister Anton Siluanov recently proposed to transfer a portion of insurance premiums from employers to employees, citing the need to reduce the tax burden on business.

Proceed to reform the finance minister proposes in 2018, gradually increasing the load on the population and removing it from the enterprises.

Start with a plan to 2-4%, which would be excluded from the mandatory insurance premiums paid by the employer from the wages fund, this charge will be charged directly to the employee.

If this initiative minister to become a reality, employers will be released every year more and more in contributions to extra-budgetary funds. At the moment, there are three - FIU (he gets 22%), the Social Insurance Fund (2.9%), and the Federal Compulsory Medical Insurance Fund (5.1%).

According Siluanova, this measure will encourage the development of entrepreneurship in Russia. Indeed, Russian businessmen often complain of unaffordable government fees: this is especially true for companies with an average turnover, payable in equal with large corporations taxes.

Employers share social contributions to employees in a number of developed countries, for example, such a system exists in the UK, where the employer pays the state 13, 8% of the employee's annual salary below 7755 pounds, and if the salary exceeds that amount up to 41,450 pounds , pays for itself already the employee, he is obliged to pay 12% of their income. In Germany, the employee and the employer pays half.

But in Sweden, the social security structure resembles Russia - where most of the company makes (31.42%), and another employee pays an additional 7% of the state. That is, the amount invested in the Swedish social security system at 38.42% compared to their income. Russians - 30%. However, the standard of living of Swedish and Russian pensioners differs clearly by 8% ...

The head of the government in the social block Deputy Prime Minister Olga Golodets far refrained from commenting on this initiative, the Ministry of Finance: formal proposal has not yet formalized. However, based on the determined tone Siluanova, the Ministry of Finance still try to implement this idea.

What can cause such a reform? If the goal - economic growth, is it possible to achieve this result through reduced income? After all, the welfare of the citizens should be the ultimate goal of any change, and in this case, such a prospect is not visible, on the contrary.

In addition, if the first of many workers were reluctant to "gray" wages and other refuse on principle to such vacancies in the case of significant growth in the individual tax burden, many citizens will join the employers in finding criminal schemes on tax evasion. The problem is that social security contributions are linked in the minds of Russians with their personal benefits from a very abstract.

The state pension, few expect to live in their old age, and the health care system is increasingly commercialized - not very clear on that leave social gatherings? Therefore we expect from ordinary citizens growth of civic consciousness and responsibility, which is calculated on pro-reform is not necessary. In addition, the instability of the pension system, for which the rules change too often, too, is not conducive to good faith taxpayers. Accumulating theoretical pension points, laying a solid share of their income on a monthly basis - not a very tantalizing prospect for the average worker.

- I have great doubts as to whether now is the right time to make these decisions, although in principle the transfer of insurance benefits available to employees - says Doctor of Economics Andrei Kolganov. - But this measure will be effective only if it is offset by a proportional increase in wages.

- Is it for business, it will not mean the equivalent current costs? Which, in this case, the sense of change?

- Not exactly. The fact that the increase in wages means an increase in purchasing power of the population and the expansion of the domestic market. Indirectly, this will have a stimulating effect on the business, although the formal enterprises will also continue to pay into the pocket of the state, but in this case, these funds will first be issued to the employee.

Formally, for business, nothing has changed, but in terms of makroekonomki this measure will have a certain stimulating effect. Another question is whether the business internally compensate for wages. If it is a slow and gradual process, and will be taken any steps to ensure that the employee has not incurred the costs of such a redistribution, in principle, such a reform could benefit. However, there are serious doubts that employers will raise salaries - emphasizes the expert.

At the same time, the Ministry of Finance believe that companies that received a tax break, will reduce the prices of their products, which compensates for the population of the tax maneuver. Probably, it would have happened if the benefits received and the average start-ups: lower costs would allow them to start a successful competition with larger companies, including by lowering product prices. In this case, would benefit both consumers and many start-up companies have felt the ground beneath the feet. However, we are on the electoral stimulation does not go.

If we talk about the crisis in the economy caused and sanctions and other factors, then the transfer of the tax burden from business to employees looks a bit strange in the background of all the developed countries to carry out a redistribution of the tax burden in the first place by means of a progressive tax scale.

The main vygodopriobetatelyami tax redistribution, which plans to the Ministry of Finance will be the big companies, including raw materials and transportation monopoly, said independent economist Vladislav Zhukovsky.

- We can not say that the idea itself is an absolute evil, it all depends on how it will be implemented. China continues to develop social market economy, a vertically integrated state capitalism, of the burden of social security payments transferred to employees, such a system exists in Europe, and in America, and it is certainly your common sense. In this case, the citizen has a great responsibility for shaping their future pension.

However, if to speak about Russia, then immediately there are several pitfalls.

Firstly, it must be clearly understood that when we are told that the business pays 30% of salary, he takes the money is not out of the empty space, and reducing the amount of these payments to the employee's salary. And if this obligation is removed from the employer, the employee is entitled to request an increase to their salary. In this case, the cost of the employer are not reduced, but simply redistributed.

Suppose the authorities will reduce to 25% mandatory payments of enterprises, and of course, it will be significant savings for business, as there are no guarantees that the employer in this case there is no salary increase, most likely it will not.

In the end, it turns out that the employee's income will be reduced, and the employer will grow, it will be a redistribution of funds from capital to labor.

With that in Russia for work and so very much underpaid. It is very well illustrated by the extraction sectors, generating profits.

Why, for example, the Russian metal such competitive price? Because in Russia payroll employees have less than 15% of total costs. Surplus value extracted huge, of course. In the Western countries, labor costs account for 35-37% of the costs of the company. And in high-tech industries, in companies such as Apple, Boeing, payroll can reach two-thirds of all the costs.

- The stated purpose of this maneuver is, the assurances of the Finance Ministry, support for small and medium-sized businesses, whether he can really breathe a sigh of relief if the plan will be implemented Siluanova?

- Small business working on a simplified system of taxation, it is released from the contributions of non-budgetary funds, the only thing that the entrepreneur has to pay personally for himself. Therefore, a small business from this reform will not win, and not lose, it is not in any way affected.

This transfer payments is beneficial, especially for raw material monopolies, big business - transport, gas, oil and banking corporations. Although the sector is very high salaries this innovation touches a little - when the level of annual income 624,000 rubles, the percentage of insurance payments decreased threefold. Kick will be done by employees of knowledge-intensive industries, will begin the mass exodus to the "shadow."

If the first worker was interested in deductions by the employer, and could even "squeal" on it to the tax authorities, in the case of redistribution of payments, the employee will also be drawn into the "gray" criminal schemes.

Business really needs refreshing, but the measure of the benefit will be minimal. Need other measures.

You should begin to lower interest rates, reduce the cost of loans at least twice, freeze tariffs of state monopolies, to audit the energy and utilities sector. Introduce tax incentives in terms of income tax, VAT, personal income tax in the high-tech industries, etc. A

we see that all the exact opposite: a talk about business support, the state seeks to get into the pocket to the employee, reduced ability to pay is even more slow down economic growth. The aim in this case does not support the entire economy, and help the monopolies and state corporations. This is a continuation of economic policies Kudrin.
Nadezhda Alexeeva
Source: km.ru