Financial Journal

p. 22-37

Authors: Mikhail V. Milchakov

2019 marked the start of an active phase of national projects implementation in Russia. The author uses official quantitative data from open sources to examine the features of federal support allocation among Russian regions for national project execution. The methodology and legal framework of federal transfer allocation for national project accomplishment are analyzed. The research shows that in many aspects the regime of grant financing in national projects has a number of advantages and preferences in comparison with the “standard” schemes and approaches. The author proposes formalized approaches to assess the potential impact of federal financial support for national projects on the regional budgets. The article contains recommendations for implementation of wide-purpose grant for national projects funding based on their consolidation and suggestions for optimization of administrative procedures. The author concludes that the allocation of intergovernmental transfers for national projects among regions in general reflects the fiscal capacities of regions and meets the differentiation in budget costs among them. At the same time, some regions increased the revenue base on a larger scale due to the implementation of national projects. On the other hand, it is possible to determine a group of regions with the deficit of current federal aid and preconditions for additional support.

p. 55-63

Authors: Yulia S. Evlakhova

After reviewing of the concept of systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs) and identifying such global and national companies, the authors present the first investigation of Russian systemically important banks’ behavior before and after the publication of the list of systemically important financial institutions. The authors’ method is based on assessment of operational risks during two periods (Jan 1, 2013 — Jan 1, 2015 and Jan 1, 2016 — Jan 1, 2018). The analysis results show that the level of Russian banks’ risks decreased after the publication of the list of systemically important financial institutions, and thus Russian systemically important banks’ behavior did not coincide with the behavior of global and foreign institutions. The authors explain this discrepancy with the fact that the macroeconomic situation affected banking risks more than the publication of the list of systemically important financial institutions did. The authors conclude with a suggestion to continue the investigation of Russian systemically important banks’ behavior by expanding the risk types. These and other new results would influence the regulatory regime for systemically important financial institutions.

p. 75-90

Authors: Elena A. Fedorova, Aleksei E. Nikolaev, Yuliya S. Shirokova, Fedor Yu. Fedorov

This research evaluates the efficiency of exporting and importing companies with FDI. In their study, the authors set up a hypothesis that companies with export and import activities are the most efficient. They are followed by only importing companies and then by companies that only export; the least efficient are fully domestically-owned firms which do not participate in international trade. Another hypothesis is dedicated to the assessment of influence of imposed sanctions on importing companies’ productivity. As a research methodology, the return on assets (ROA) index for companies with FDI in comparison with national enterprises is used to test the first hypothesis. Moreover, for the same purpose the authors apply the classic approach of the DEA method as well as DEA with the regard for spillover effects from FDI. The second hypothesis is examined with the help of the Malmquist index for importing and exporting firms. The empirical database consists of approximately 170,000 records of more than 33,000 Russian enterprises, taking into account to which of the six major sectors of the Russian economy they belong. As a result of the study, the authors conclude that companies with FDI are characterized with a higher level of efficiency compared to companies without foreign capital. Furthermore, international companies are more efficient than enterprises which do not take part in international trade. Concerning the second hypothesis, the authors establish that the sanctions have a negative impact on importing companies’ efficiency, which is especially evident in comparison with growing productivity of exporting firms. This trend could be explained by decreasing FDI inflows into the country and also import restrictions by imposed sanctions, which adversely affect importing companies’ efficiency.

p. 106-116

Authors: Anna V. Agapova, Irina A. Gokinaeva, Alina A. Meleshkina

Development of electronic customs is currently a relevant area of work for both the Eurasian Economic Commission and the Federal Customs Service (FCS) of Russia. It relates to the introduction of a “single window” mechanism, one of the blocks of which is electronic customs. The need of customs audit implementation in the work of customs services in the EAEU countries emphasizes its development being part of the block of electronic customs. However, the introduction of customs audit is restrained by uncertainty in its understanding. The article analyses the existing customs audit application practice for customs control of goods abroad. It is determined that in all researched countries customs audit is understood as a form of customs control. In the study, the authors develop possible approaches to implementation of customs audit in the activities of the Russian Federal Customs Service, namely a form of customs control (based on the experience of foreign countries), a subject type of business activity, and a special type of state control. Possible negative consequences of customs audit introduction in each case are analyzed. In addition, the authors prove that introducing a new form of customs control (customs audit) would be inexpedient. The results of the experiment on customs audit application conducted by the FCS of Russia are also analyzed in the article. The analysis reveals a lack of considerable positive results confirming the validity of introduction of customs audit as a business activity. The authors establish that the best decision at the moment would be the creation of a separate public authority engaged in customs audit. This would allow the workload of customs authorities in goods post-clearance control to be redistributed, and would ensure a wide use of authentic audit reports made by officials in categorizing the participants of foreign trade activities and granting them various simplifications and preferences. It would also expand the necessary cooperation between authorities and participants of foreign trade activities, realizing the principles of the single window system, and could eventually help replace the desk customs inspection.