State Unitary Enterprises Research Articles

Оценка эффективности управления государственными унитарными предприятиями Свердловской области

Оценка эффективности управления государственными унитарными предприятиями Свердловской области

АЛГОРИТМ И МЕТОДИКА РАСЧЕТА СТАВОК ПОРТОВЫХ СБОРОВ С УЧЕТОМ УРОВНЯ КОНКУРЕНТОСПОСОБНОСТИ МОРСКИХ ПОРТОВ

The article defines the improvement of main directions of state regulation of port dues system operating in the Russian Federation seaports, in order to ensure economic feasibility, openness and transparency in establishing rates of port dues in accordance with the Russian Federation legislation. Following the results of world and Russian practice analysis of establishment and levy of port dues in seaports the authors propose their division into two groups: dues of public legal nature and payment for services of civil nature, rendering in the port. Instead of eight types of dues, which are currently established in the Russian Federation seaports, it is proposed to establish two port dues: tonnage and infrastructure, in order to facilitate the administration of payments between payers and payees of port dues. The tonnage due will be a source of monetary funds for financing costs for maintenance and operation of the seaports infrastructure facilities, and infrastructure dues will be an extra-budgetary source of monetary funds allocated for modernization and development of port infrastructure owned by the Russian Federation, and transferred to state unitary enterprises in economic management. There have been developed the algorithm and the method of calculating tonnage dues and infrastructure dues. The proposed algorithm for establishing dues of tonnage and infrastructure dues is based on the conceptual approach, which determines, that a key criterion for assessing the adequacy of levied amounts of port dues is the level of the seaport competitiveness. The use of this approach allows to optimally allocate the burden of the port dues payment in the Russian Federation seaports, in order to ensure financing costs on the maintenance and operation of port infrastructure, as well as its development and modernization.

The Public Sector and Privatization Policy

In 2016, statistical data began to be published in the framework of the newly introduced System of Public Property Management Efficiency Estimates. It was approved by Decree of the RF Government of 29 January 2015, No 72 and introduced by way of replacing the public sector monitoring data, collected and released by the Federal State Statistics Service (Rosstat) since the late 1990s in accordance with the provisions stipulated in Decree of the RF Government of January 4, 1999, No 1 (as amended as of December 30, 2002). Among other things, the System of Public Property Management Efficiency Estimates contains data on the number of federal state unitary enterprises (FSUEs) and joint-stock companies (JSCs) with RF stakes in their capital, which previously were published as part of government privatization programs (from 2011 – for three-year period, and prior to 2011- for one-year period.

Globalization and treats to national security

УДК 343.9.01Глобализация в настоящее время имеет в значительной степени негативную и криминогенную направленность. Это выражается в тенденциях приватизации государственной собственности, бегства капиталов, офшоризации экономики, а также манипулирования сознанием населения посредством информационных технологий, которые угрожают национальной безопасности Российской Федерации.

Особенности формирования и реализации кадровой политики при расчете заработной платы работникам государственных унитарных предприятий

Особенности формирования и реализации кадровой политики при расчете заработной платы работникам государственных унитарных предприятий

The Review of the Meetings of the Government of the Russian Federation in February 2015

In February 2015, at the meetings of the Government of the Russian Federation the following issues among other things were discussed: establishment of administrative responsibility for violation of the procedure for carrying out transactions by state (municipal) unitary enterprises or state (municipal) entities and supplying of the data on accounting and management of federal property; upgrading of the system of the secondary vocational training and development of the national system of accreditation.

Specifics of Accounting Recognition and Reflection of Government Assistance Funds for Agro-industrial Complex Organizations

Despite the economy denationalization, a great number of non-budgetary organizations (state and municipal unitary enterprises as well as economic partnerships and companies) are still financed from the budget to a varying degree. Budgetary financing is a non-repayable provision of state budgetary funds to enterprises, institutions, organizations to cover their expenses in full or partially. Besides, there are transactions with characteristics of targeted financing in the economic practice and between commercial organizations. Almost in all countries, government and assistance is rendered to agricultural enterprises to ensure their effective work. As a rule, funds allocated for the sector support are earmarked and strictly controlled by government authorities in terms of compliance with their destination.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY AND BUSINESS COMPANIES OF PUBLIC SECTOR

The article substantiates the necessity of forming a new technology of state property management, control system development for state unitary enterprises and joint stock companies with a state share in the authorized capital. It is important to carry out quarterly monitoring of their activities, based on modern methods of financial analysis and business valuation. It will allow monitoring in on-line mode the current state of the company, the effectiveness of management decisions to timely identify the most promising areas of business development.

Public Sector and Privatization in Russia in 2012

The Russia’s Government has adopted no other privatization programs over the last two years, as it did in the 2000s, since the Forecast Plan (Program) for the Federal Property and the Guidelines of Federal Property Privatization for 2011-2013 was adopted in November 2010. However, it is these documents that contained numerical data on federal state unitary enterprises (FSUEs) and joint stock companies (JSCs) in which the Russian Federation had a participating interest as of the beginning of a calendar year. Therefore, there is no sufficient information for making an impartial assessment of the dynamics of the foregoing components in the public sector in 2012.

Tendencies and Ways of Development of Unitary Enterprises

The articles by the experts of the Association of Studies of Public Economics analyze the situation with firms of the state sector of the Russian economy along three directions:- qualitative analysis of Russian and foreign experience in governing the public sector of the economy;- institutional and legal analysis of state unitary enterprises (SUEs);- comparative statistical analysis of performance indicators of public and private firms in Russia.On the basis of Russian and foreign experience authors study unsuccessful attempts to create effective forms of state entrepreneurship, argue the impossibility to make positive incentives for managers within the system of "bureaucratic entrepreneurship" and the necessity to limit state intervention into economic activity by a small number of public goods which cannot be provided by markets. Authors give a number of examples of various forms of inefficient governance and misuse of public property in modern Russia. Authors study the evolution of the legal form of SUEs which was created in the Soviet-type economy, perspectives of its existence in the modern Russian legislation. They prove the contradictory nature of SUEs and make conclusion about the inevitability of transformation of this sector of the Russian economy. The results of performance indicators comparison of private and public enterprises are contradictory. Federal SUEs show significantly better results than private firms in return on sales, liquidity and financial stability though return on labor and capital (labor productivity and return on assets) is lower in the SUEs. At the same time corporations with a majority block of shares in the hands of the federal government (which are similar to the SUEs in many aspects) are the worst performers among all types of firms with state participation. Authors attempt to explain these contradictions.

Relative Inefficiency of the State and Private Sectors: The Statistical Approach

The articles by the experts of the Association of Studies of Public Economics analyze the situation with firms of the state sector of the Russian economy along three directions:- qualitative analysis of Russian and foreign experience in governing the public sector of the economy;- institutional and legal analysis of state unitary enterprises (SUEs);- comparative statistical analysis of performance indicators of public and private firms in Russia.On the basis of Russian and foreign experience authors study unsuccessful attempts to create effective forms of state entrepreneurship, argue the impossibility to make positive incentives for managers within the system of "bureaucratic entrepreneurship" and the necessity to limit state intervention into economic activity by a small number of public goods which cannot be provided by markets. Authors give a number of examples of various forms of inefficient governance and misuse of public property in modern Russia. Authors study the evolution of the legal form of SUEs which was created in the Soviet-type economy, perspectives of its existence in the modern Russian legislation. They prove the contradictory nature of SUEs and make conclusion about the inevitability of transformation of this sector of the Russian economy. The results of performance indicators comparison of private and public enterprises are contradictory. Federal SUEs show significantly better results than private firms in return on sales, liquidity and financial stability though return on labor and capital (labor productivity and return on assets) is lower in the SUEs. At the same time corporations with a majority block of shares in the hands of the federal government (which are similar to the SUEs in many aspects) are the worst performers among all types of firms with state participation. Authors attempt to explain these contradictions.

Regulation and Management of Enterprises with State Participation: International Experience

The articles by the experts of the Association of Studies of Public Economics analyze the situation with firms of the state sector of the Russian economy along three directions:- qualitative analysis of Russian and foreign experience in governing the public sector of the economy;- institutional and legal analysis of state unitary enterprises (SUEs);- comparative statistical analysis of performance indicators of public and private firms in Russia.On the basis of Russian and foreign experience authors study unsuccessful attempts to create effective forms of state entrepreneurship, argue the impossibility to make positive incentives for managers within the system of "bureaucratic entrepreneurship" and the necessity to limit state intervention into economic activity by a small number of public goods which cannot be provided by markets. Authors give a number of examples of various forms of inefficient governance and misuse of public property in modern Russia. Authors study the evolution of the legal form of SUEs which was created in the Soviet-type economy, perspectives of its existence in the modern Russian legislation. They prove the contradictory nature of SUEs and make conclusion about the inevitability of transformation of this sector of the Russian economy. The results of performance indicators comparison of private and public enterprises are contradictory. Federal SUEs show significantly better results than private firms in return on sales, liquidity and financial stability though return on labor and capital (labor productivity and return on assets) is lower in the SUEs. At the same time corporations with a majority block of shares in the hands of the federal government (which are similar to the SUEs in many aspects) are the worst performers among all types of firms with state participation. Authors attempt to explain these contradictions.

Inefficiency of State Property Management (The Case of Large Enterprises)

The articles by the experts of the Association of Studies of Public Economics analyze the situation with firms of the state sector of the Russian economy along three directions:- qualitative analysis of Russian and foreign experience in governing the public sector of the economy;- institutional and legal analysis of state unitary enterprises (SUEs);- comparative statistical analysis of performance indicators of public and private firms in Russia.On the basis of Russian and foreign experience authors study unsuccessful attempts to create effective forms of state entrepreneurship, argue the impossibility to make positive incentives for managers within the system of "bureaucratic entrepreneurship" and the necessity to limit state intervention into economic activity by a small number of public goods which cannot be provided by markets. Authors give a number of examples of various forms of inefficient governance and misuse of public property in modern Russia. Authors study the evolution of the legal form of SUEs which was created in the Soviet-type economy, perspectives of its existence in the modern Russian legislation. They prove the contradictory nature of SUEs and make conclusion about the inevitability of transformation of this sector of the Russian economy. The results of performance indicators comparison of private and public enterprises are contradictory. Federal SUEs show significantly better results than private firms in return on sales, liquidity and financial stability though return on labor and capital (labor productivity and return on assets) is lower in the SUEs. At the same time corporations with a majority block of shares in the hands of the federal government (which are similar to the SUEs in many aspects) are the worst performers among all types of firms with state participation. Authors attempt to explain these contradictions.

The Size of the State Sector of the Economy (Theoretical Approaches, Survey of Literature, Russian Experience)

The articles by the experts of the Association of Studies of Public Economics analyze the situation with firms of the state sector of the Russian economy along three directions:- qualitative analysis of Russian and foreign experience in governing the public sector of the economy;- institutional and legal analysis of state unitary enterprises (SUEs);- comparative statistical analysis of performance indicators of public and private firms in Russia.On the basis of Russian and foreign experience authors study unsuccessful attempts to create effective forms of state entrepreneurship, argue the impossibility to make positive incentives for managers within the system of "bureaucratic entrepreneurship" and the necessity to limit state intervention into economic activity by a small number of public goods which cannot be provided by markets. Authors give a number of examples of various forms of inefficient governance and misuse of public property in modern Russia. Authors study the evolution of the legal form of SUEs which was created in the Soviet-type economy, perspectives of its existence in the modern Russian legislation. They prove the contradictory nature of SUEs and make conclusion about the inevitability of transformation of this sector of the Russian economy. The results of performance indicators comparison of private and public enterprises are contradictory. Federal SUEs show significantly better results than private firms in return on sales, liquidity and financial stability though return on labor and capital (labor productivity and return on assets) is lower in the SUEs. At the same time corporations with a majority block of shares in the hands of the federal government (which are similar to the SUEs in many aspects) are the worst performers among all types of firms with state participation. Authors attempt to explain these contradictions.

Management of State Unitary Enterprises

The author explores the ways of increasing unitary enterprises' performance. Among them are: the division of functions of subjects of management; the complete stock-taking and certification of enterprises' property, the rise of responsibility of managers. The author also puts the question about the introduction of obligatory payments for the use of state property.