Abstract

Much of the food and funds for the building industry went through taxes. During the thirties, private farms were subject to a rather complicated system of taxes. They can be divided into several groups: natural (tax for meat supply, milk, potato and wool), money (insurance, self-taxation, cultural duty, agricultural tax), indirect (loans for the creation of machine and tractor stations (Traktorotsentr shares), the second five-year plan, etc.; taking tax for a place in the market (one-time charge). These taxes are very different in importance and therefore possible to avoid them. If the natural taxes were high priority and almost did not develop, the money (especially local) had a fairly extensive system of benefits. However, this situation was ambiguous. Everything depended on the leadership of the district and village councils, which are adjusted to the specific tax assignments smallholdings. In some places, the authorities took the initiative to establish new taxes. These include: the establishment of tax for housing constructions in rural areas, the for coachman keeping, fire buildings, for an extra staff in rural councils, the beautification of the club. In other cases - unjustifiably inflated rates of existing taxes. A particular story - the imposition of fines and penalties on arrears. In some cases, local authorities have resorted to unjustified repression (assorted home, described the property, etc.). Despite the difficult conditions, during this period smallholders played a positive role in providing rural people with food. So in 1936, compared to the drought at 1930, there were no hunger in the Middle Volga region.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call