Today I would like to talk about such an unpleasant term for many Russian people as Privatization. What does Privatization mean?? Before continuing, I recommend reading a few more informative articles, for example, what is Lockout, what does Logistics mean, how to understand the word Lobby? This term was borrowed from English" Private", and is translated as "private". By the way, this Latin word gave birth to another American concept, like " privacy", But that is another story.
Roughly speaking, we all know what “nationalization” is, and “privatization” is the opposite process. This phenomenon gained enormous “popularity” in the 90s among newly minted bankers, entrepreneurs and bandits. Everyone began to receive pieces of state property as their own.

This process has gone so far that now there are huge areas fenced with barbed wire, for example, beautiful places near the lake, beaches on the sea, some " commerce"seized these tidbits for themselves. In general, 90 -e for Russia were the most terrible time in a hundred years, because even during the Great Patriotic War not as many people died as under Chubais and Gaidar, and the damage to the economy was much greater. How is this even possible, has anyone thought about this?

Privatization- is a form of property transformation, which is the process of selling/transferring state-owned property into private hands

Speaking in simple words, privatization means the transfer of property controlled by one or another state structure into private “hairy” hands.
It is usually stated that a private owner will handle his property much better than the state, while business efficiency will increase, the quality of the product will improve, and at the same time it will save the state from unnecessary “headaches.” However, “it was smooth on paper, but they forgot about the ravines.” Everything in reality is completely different, businessmen They are interested in filling their pockets, so they do not invest in property that they got for free or for pennies, they squeeze all the “juices” out of it in order to later get rid of it as if it were an unnecessary thing. You can cite the example of the United States, they haven’t done major repairs for 50 years, just like the buildings they built under Hoover are still standing. They just do cheap cosmetic repairs, cover up the cracks, hang banner, and everything is ready. The infrastructure in the US is worn out 70 %, no one hides this, but it is not customary to talk about it. This is how private owners take care of their business, and in the 90s everyone listened to this heresy like sheep and agreed, because it sounds quite logical. The truth is now it is clear what their words and assurances are worth.

One of characteristic features market economy is a variety of forms of ownership. It is no coincidence that when transferring the Russian economy to a market economy, one of the main tasks was the denationalization and privatization of property.

Under denationalization understand the abbreviation specific gravity state property in its total volume. During the functioning of the command-administrative economic system in our country, state property occupied a monopoly position in the structure of ownership of the means of production and resources (up to 95% of the volume of property). Nowadays the situation has changed radically. The main direction of denationalization was the privatization of state and municipal property.

Property is the process of transforming state property into private property of individuals and legal entities. The process of widespread privatization in Russia was initiated by the Law of the Russian Federation of July 3, 1991 No. 1531-1 “On the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in Russian Federation"(now no longer in force) and the first State Program for the Privatization of State and Municipal Enterprises in the Russian Federation for 1992 (approved by Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 11, 1992 No. 2980-1) (now no longer in force).

In these and others government documents the following were identified privatization goals:

• ensuring equality in the functioning of various forms of ownership;
• demonopolization of production;
• balancing the incomes of different groups and segments of the population;
• redistribution of income and property, creation of a class of owners;
• development stock market.

In addition, the specified Law and subsequent regulatory documents were installed methods of privatization:

• sale of enterprises, as well as assets of liquidated enterprises through competition;
• sale of enterprises at auction;
• sale of shares (shares) in the capital of enterprises (corporatization);
• repurchase of property of leased enterprises.

Stages of privatization in Russia

The goals and objectives of privatization in Russia were achieved in two stages.

First stage took place from the beginning of 1992 to the end of 1994. The features of this stage were:

• ultra-high rates of privatization (for example, in 1994, an average of 75% of trade and consumer service enterprises were privatized);
• introduction of a system of free privatization checks payable to bearer (popularly such checks were called vouchers).

This system ensured that half of the state property was allocated free of charge to private individuals. A clear disadvantage of this method of privatization was its low profitability.

Second phase Privatization began in 1995 and continues to this day. Its main tasks were defined in the Program of the Government of the Russian Federation “Reforms and development of the Russian economy in 1995-1997” (approved by Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation dated April 28, 1995 No. 439) and Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated July 22, 1994 No. 1535 “On the Main provisions of the State Program for the Privatization of State and Municipal Enterprises in the Russian Federation after July 1, 1994.” Finally, the most significant adjustments to the privatization process were made by the provisions of the Federal Law of July 21, 1997 No. 123-FE “On the privatization of state property and on the principles of privatization of municipal property in the Russian Federation” (now repealed). This Law consolidated a qualitatively new nature of privatization. In particular, it focuses on the transition from the predominantly gratuitous transfer of state property to its sale at prices determined by the market; it is indicated that privatization should help improve the efficiency of domestic enterprises; it was determined that when alienating state property, the social aspects of the problem should also be taken into account.

In general, as the domestic experience of denationalization and privatization of property has shown, the process of transforming property relations is complex and contradictory, and the state should play an active role in it. It is this, along with solving the main tasks of privatization, that should ensure a balance of interests of individuals and the entire society.

Socio-economic consequences of privatization in Russia

In the 20th century The privatization of state property has become widespread, affecting almost all major countries. The first mention of privatization dates back to the 13th century. in England.

Privatization means the transfer of ownership rights from the state to private individuals on the terms of the complete sale of state-owned firms to private individuals or the sale of part of the assets and delegation of rights to dispose of state property.

In accordance with Federal Law “On the privatization of state and municipal property» privatization of state and municipal property means alienation for compensation of property owned by the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation or municipalities property in the ownership of individuals and legal entities. From these definitions it follows that the main feature of privatization is its remunerative nature. Some authors distinguish between the definitions of “privatization” and “denationalization”; the latter is understood as the transfer from the state to individuals and legal entities, partially or completely (including through privatization) of functions direct control business entities. Privatization is of a paid nature, and denationalization can take different forms.

- this is the process of denationalization of ownership of the means of production, property, housing, land, . This phenomenon is carried out through the gratuitous transfer or sale of state property into the ownership of interested parties with the formation on this basis of private, joint-stock or corporate property.

Privatization in Russia- a more extensive and system-forming phenomenon, in contrast to the usual sale of state-owned firms. Russia is characterized by two complementary parallel processes: the gradual liberation of the state from certain functions of the regulator of property relations that are not performed by it within the framework of market economy(Here we're talking about on the process of reducing the capabilities of the state as a legal object of property legal relations) and the formation of new legal and economic structures and mechanisms, without which it is difficult to fully implement the private property system. It must be taken into account that the latter process is a complement to the first and occurs following the self-elimination of the state. The state, while reducing its own, must remain to control and regulate the transferred property and.

The essence of privatization

The essence of privatization can be expressed in a broad and narrow sense. In a broad sense, privatization is understood as a reduction or slowdown in the rate of expansion of the public sector of the economy, accompanied by an increase in the share of the private sector. In a narrower sense, privatization represents the full or partial transfer of ownership rights to state-owned means of production, property assets, capital to joint-stock companies or private individuals. Privatization should mainly contribute to increased competition in the country's economy as a whole and increase the efficiency of use of business assets.

Thus, the main content of privatization can include the transformation of producers and enterprises that are based on one or another technical and production complex of a centrally planned economy to entities that are based on capital. Capital carries added value and increases changes in important functions, life cycles, financial distribution, structural changes former state enterprises.

Objectives of privatization

Through the privatization of state property, many problems are solved:

• increasing the efficiency of enterprises
• reducing government spending at taxpayers' expense
• increase in budget revenues
• liquidation or possible reduction of internal and external debt
• struggle with the market
• expansion of the debt capital market
• increase in population
• involving employees in company capital management
• decline in trade unionism
• creation of an extensive social base of small and medium-sized owners and much more.

Consequently, the main essence of the privatization concept is production efficiency, which confirms that some businesses are more successfully run by the private sector. Privatization should help strengthen the country's economy as a whole.

Conduct and results of privatization in Russia

When considering the results of privatization, it is necessary to take into account the economic and social sphere. Russian privatization was widespread not only in its content, but in its structure and scale. It was designed to provide not only the problem of increasing the efficiency of individual enterprises, but a fundamental change in property relations, i.e., to solve the problem of changing the economic basis of society.

From the very beginning of Russian reforms, rapid and comprehensive privatization was placed at the forefront, necessary to create the foundations of democracy and the market. For many reasons, it was not possible to give it a civilized character. The country was overwhelmed by uncontrolled privatization, when state property, practically without breaking the law, began to simply be transferred to private individuals.

As a result of privatization in Russia, a non-state sector of the economy was formed in a short time, market institutions and a new corporate sector of the economy (securities market, joint stock companies, banks, a system of institutional investors, Insurance companies), legal ownership rights to privatized property were distributed, while social conflicts were minimized.

A number of strategic goals of privatization were not achieved, despite the fact that by the end of the 90s. XX century The problem of changing forms of ownership in general has already been solved:

• a wide layer of effective private owners has not been formed;
• there was no increase in the efficiency of enterprises as a result of structural restructuring of the economy;
• the investments that were attracted during the privatization process turned out to be insufficient for the technical, social and industrial development of enterprises;
• in some industries, enterprises failed to maintain their competitive position in the global and domestic markets.

In practice, the privatization of state property in Russia was such that, in fact, private systems of central planning were created, private monopolies, which replaced central planning of the state.

Russia during privatization sharply decreased. This circumstance was caused by an understatement of the value of the assets of the privatized enterprises, which led to the incorrect setting of the price of the privatization transaction and the federal budget not receiving funds for the sold property (figure).

The valuation methodology used during privatization did not allow for a realistic assessment of the value of the alienated state assets. In some cases, no assessment was actually carried out at all. The efficiency of enterprises as a result of privatization was reduced.

Formal denationalization and the transfer of analysis and control over property to private hands did not lead to the achievement of the intended goals that were defined in the state privatization program. Some of the goals were to form an “effective owner”, create a social and stable market economy of the country.

Privatization has revealed a lot of loopholes for illegal actions and corruption, which negatively affected the economy subsequently. Violations led to the creation of a narrow layer of wealthy owners, which increased the contradictions between the population.

The social and economic efficiency of privatization in Russia turned out to be low. The interests and rights of the majority of the population and the principle of equality of citizens were not respected when carrying out mass privatization. Privatization sharply increased the stratification of society (table).

As can be seen from the table, according to real cash income Russian citizens only in 2007 exceeded the level of 1990. The number of the population living below the poverty line remains consistently high and amounts to about 1/5 of the country's population. However, there are positive prospects that are gradually expanding the country's middle class.

Providing benefits to employees of organizations during the privatization of state-owned enterprises, especially highly profitable ones associated with the exploitation of Russia’s national resources (petrochemicals, oil and gas industry, forestry, mining, pulp and paper industry, non-ferrous metallurgy), led to unjustified enrichment of the leadership and management of such enterprises and a sharp decline standard of living of other segments of the population not associated with these industries (education, social sphere, healthcare, science, culture).

As part of the privatization of enterprises, political, economic and social aspects are closely intertwined.

According to " decile» coefficient, which shows the ratio of incomes of 10% of the richest and poorest population of the country, in USSR in 1990. from was 4.4, i.e. the income of the rich layer exceeded the income of the poor by 4.4 times. The corresponding figure in Russia for 1998 was 22.7. As a result, there has been great growth social inequality compared to the countries of Central and of Eastern Europe.

The majority of the population did not have the capital to purchase at their market prices. If the enterprises were sold much lower than their real value, then this acquisition was not of high value for the owner. Profits were seized by the owners and exported abroad, which did not allow updating the outdated funds of the enterprise.

As a result of privatization in Russia, employees of privatized enterprises did not receive social security, the development of social infrastructure facilities decreased, and in some cases their destruction was accelerated. In most cases, organizations and local authorities refused current financing of “non-core assets”. Employees of organizations that depended on budget funding found themselves in a very difficult condition - these are: teachers, scientists, doctors, police, military, etc. The main source of financing for the public sector of the economy is budget funds, which were directed mainly to priority running costs and remuneration of employees of enterprises.

As a result of privatization, the commodity deficit was overcome and internal conversion of the ruble was ensured.

During the transition to a market economy, privatization should be carried out in cooperation with all government agencies and general economic reforms. Privatization should help increase competition in the country's economy as a whole.

Privatization, which takes place in a complete absence of a market, plays an important role in the formation of a competitive market during the transition from a planned to a market economy. But in any case, it is necessary to take into account the global experience of privatization. Mandatory when carrying out privatization is effective management, attracting investment and the formation or preservation of the middle strata. National security and the impact on future countries must be considered.

• Privatization is a form of property transformation, which is the process of transfer and sale (full or partial) of state (municipal) property into private hands. At least two parties participate in privatization, and one of the parties is necessarily an organization, even such as the state.

  Denationalization and privatization are not unambiguous, although closely related concepts:

  Denationalization should be understood as the process of abolishing state monopoly, the formation of a diverse mixed economy, its decentralization, and the liberation of the state from the functions of direct economic management. Thus, denationalization means, on the one hand, a transition from command-administrative to economic methods leadership, and on the other - the forms and content of property relations. In turn, the denationalization of direct property relations can be reduced to three main interrelated aspects; firstly, to the creation of diverse types of farms; secondly, to transform farms that remain under state control, freeing them from administrative command dictates; thirdly, to privatization, that is, the transfer of part of state property to the disposal of collectives and individual citizens. Consequently, privatization should be considered as a form of denationalization. However, denationalization is possible without privatization. In this case, there is not a change of owner, but a process of decentralization within the state management of property.

  Denationalization can take fundamentally different forms, which can be classified according to a number of characteristics: access to acquisitions only for employees or for everyone; implementing a mechanism for redistributing property in the form of money or special checks; sales techniques; modifications in the organizational structures of enterprises and the degree of participation of certain stock market participants and institutional investors in privatization and other characteristics. In reality, most of these options are usually used in combination.

  Privatization usually refers to the transfer of public property controlled by one or another government agency to the private sector. Federal Law of December 21, 2001 N 178-FZ “On the privatization of state and municipal property” privatization of state and municipal property is understood as the paid alienation of property owned by the Russian Federation (federal property), constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipalities, into the ownership of individuals and (or) legal entities.

  The reverse process is called nationalization or municipalization.

1. The concept of privatization and denationalization

Section 1. Concept of privatization securities

2. Methods and forms privatization

- Privatization as a subject of scientific research

Voucher privatization

3. Cost-effectiveness

4. Privatization, socialization of production and property

5. Methods of monetary privatization

6. Stages of privatization 7. Features of privatization in the Russian Federation - The concept of privatization in Russian Federation- Goals of Russian privatization - privatization

Voucher stage of privatization

Monetary stage of privatization - The problem of recreating the institution of property

8. Mechanisms for financing the privatization process

IPIO shares

Private placement and sale

Financial institutions and institutional investors

Buyout of enterprises by managers and employees

Mass privatization

Non-standard forms of financing privatization

9. Privatization of monopolists

Profit regulation

Setting a price ceiling

Privatization is a form of property transformation that is process transfer of state (municipal) property into private hands (denationalization).

Privatization- this is one of the directions of denationalization of property, which consists in transferring it into the private ownership of individual citizens and legal entities. persons

Back process called nationalization or municipalization.

A special case of privatization carried out in Russian Federation in the 1990s - 2000s, - privatization of housing (transfer of state or municipal housing into the ownership of citizens) in accordance with the law of the Russian Federation “On the privatization of housing stock in Russia”.

For special purposes, which are used as a means of payment for the acquisition of privatization objects.

Privatization securities are vouchers. These securities also refer to securities that confirm the right of their owners to part of the privatized state property. The most famous and so far the only example of privatization securities are privatization checks (vouchers).

Privatization securities are securities, produced in accordance with by law on privatization (1991) and providing their owners with the right to acquire state property during the privatization process.

The concept of privatization securities

Can be issued directly on behalf of Russia, as well as by certain Russian executive body- seller of federal property. Privatization securities have a limited scope of use. Owners are given the right to purchase, using the privatization securities at their disposal, property alienated during the privatization process, including shares of the privatized enterprises.

Privatization securities represent securities certifying a citizen’s right to receive a certain amount of state property. As a rule, privatization securities appeared in states that changed the political and economic structure of society.

The privatization process can take various forms, most often the privatization securities that the population receives are accumulated in check investment funds, which pay their shareholders from their profits.

In Russia in the early nineties, every resident of the country received a privatization check- "" with a denomination of 10,000 rubles. At the same time, legislative acts were adopted, according to which most of the shares of privatized enterprises should have been exchanged for vouchers. In addition, vouchers could be bought or sold at market prices, and could also be exchanged for other securities. Some people bought vouchers at very low prices price in order to exchange them for shares of various enterprises.

Many banks acted as depository repositories, where privatization securities were accumulated, and also independently participated in check competitions, acquiring state property.

Privatization checks were impersonal and had a certain validity period; most often, people exchanged vouchers for shares in those enterprises where they had worked for a long time. In some cases, upon dismissal, people were forced to sell their shares at a low price. price to the management of the enterprise, in addition, shares of some enterprises were bought up by individuals and organizations to carry out raider attacks.

To exchange privatization securities for shares of enterprises, voucher public auctions were organized, at which shares of enterprises were exchanged for vouchers at a certain rate. In some cases checks public auction were organized in such a way that most of the securities passed into the hands of certain owners.

Unfortunately, most Russians were unable to use securities wisely. Many check funds failed after a while, and the interest that could be earned on the shares received in exchange for the vouchers was too low.

Some economists have argued that voucher will allow many people in one or two years to buy a personal one or start their own business; in fact, voucher privatization led to the creation of a class of oligarchs who were able to competently “privatize” large enterprises that brought the most.

Privatization securities havePrivatization securities. Owners are given the right to purchase property, including shares of privatized enterprises, using the privatization securities at their disposal.

Privatization securities issuePrivatization securitiesissue of privatization of state assets of the entire population countries, and not just businessmen or direct employees of the privatized enterprise. In our country they were called privatization checks or “vouchers” and were issued to every citizen of Russia as a bearer security, which could be the only means of payment for shares during the privatization of enterprises. Legislatively on the territory of Russia it was established that from thirty-five to ninety percent shares of privatized enterprises could only be sold for “vouchers”, and therefore they began to be actively purchased from the population businessmen or organizations. As a result, not believing in the real value of privatization securities, the majority of the Russian population sold their “vouchers” for next to nothing to professional businessmen and the most promising shares of leading enterprises were unavailable to them.

Privatization securities may be government securities with a designated purpose for bearer (that is, not registered, therefore, if lost, they are not restored), have a nominal value in the country’s currency and are used as a means of payment for shared participation in the property of privatized objects. The domestic experience of issuing money of this type of securities was regulated by the relevant legislative act - this was a decree of the President of Russia and a resolution of the Supreme Council of Russia on the implementation of the State Program on the privatization of state and municipal property dated October 9, 1992.

The system for using privatization securities should be based on the following positions: “privatization securities voucher” is a state one that has special purpose and can be used in the privatization of state and municipal facilities, housing stock, land plots, for the purchase of shares in an investment fund;

Every citizen of the country has the right to receive free privatization papers, which he can use for payment securities confirming the acquisition of a share of ownership of the privatization object;

- release privatization securities can only be produced by state institutions; privatization securities; the validity period of the value of privatization securities may be limited;

Privatization securities have an equivalent nominal value in currency states;

During the validity period of privatization securities, they can be freely sold and purchased by citizens (as well as organizations) at a negotiated price.

Sale of shares of privatized state and municipal property on competition, where as a means payment only “vouchers” were accepted, called check. On such a check tender shares of privatized enterprises are exchanged at a certain rate for privatization checks. The cost of shares, equivalent to privatization checks, is determined depending on the quantitative demand among auction participants and the “vouchers” they present.

Storage, circulation and use of privatization securities in non-cash form is carried out by depositories, which may be privatization securities or licensed by the country's Ministry of Finance as an investment institution.

The concept of privatization and denationalization

Economic relations regarding appropriation are fluid. This means that forms of ownership can change into each other. This is done by various methods.

Privatization (Latin privatus - private) - transfer of state or municipal property for a fee or free of charge into private ownership. Privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the Russian Federation means the acquisition by citizens, joint-stock companies (partnerships) from the state and local authorities of ownership of: enterprises and their divisions, separated into independent enterprises; tangible and intangible assets enterprises; shares (shares, stocks) of the state and local authorities authorities in capital joint stock companies(partnerships); shares (shares, shares) owned by privatized enterprises in capital other enterprises. The objects of privatization can be: large, small and medium-sized industrial enterprises and trade, service sector enterprises, housing stock, housing construction, enterprises Agriculture etc.

Privatization may be of a hidden nature, for example, of state property for a long period of time by private individuals or companies; may be partial, when, for example, only part of the shares are sold; can be carried out in the form of denationalization and reprivatization.

The scale of privatization in a particular country depends on how widely the method was used in them nationalization private sector in the previous period. In countries where the method nationalization was rarely used (USA, Germany), the tendency towards privatization was weak. In those countries where the process of nationalization has gone relatively far (England, France), privatization is carried out on a large scale.

In the modern Russian Federation, privatization has acquired a wide scope. Its mechanism has been determined by law about privatization. It laid the foundations for privatization.

1. Three forms of privatization are defined: sale enterprises with competition, By auction, by corporatizing them.

2. Two government structures have been created. The first is committees for the management of state (municipal) property. The second is property funds. The functions of the former included the preparation of privatization plans and the implementation of activities related to the preparation of enterprises for privatization. The latter carried out the sale of enterprises at tenders and the sale of their shares.

3. The objects of privatization and their monetary value are determined. Particular importance was attached to the value of property. It was decided to evaluate enterprises based on the residual value of fixed assets.

Privatization is part of a broader process - the denationalization of the economy. Denationalization is a transition from predominantly state-directive regulation of production to its regulation primarily on the basis market mechanisms. The results of denationalization: firstly, the structure of ownership is changing in favor of private ownership and a reduction in public ownership. Secondly, the economic role and functions of the state are changing: it ceases to be a business entity and begins to regulate economic processes not through directives, but through changes economic conditions life; mandatory government assignments are giving way to a public procurement system; the state relieves itself of the functions of distributing available resources; state government is gradually being eliminated monopoly in foreign economic activity.

The difference between privatization and denationalization comes down to the fact that the first reflects the process of a radical transformation of property relations, and the second becomes a phenomenon aimed at destroying state dictate and creating conditions for the functioning of the economy as a sphere of social activity of people independent of the state.

N. Ridley, the “chief architect” and conductor of the British privatization program, argued that privatization is indeed a means of making the economy more efficient, because state-owned enterprises work for themselves, and not for the consumer. They are financed not by the government, but by the state, which gives rise to dependency. The private sector does business more efficiently because Failure to recognize his activities by the acquirer threatens him with bankruptcy. When privatizing unprofitable enterprises, Ridley recommends writing them off and getting the owners interested in making them profitable.

Privatization is a long process. In Japan it was carried out for 10 years, in Western Europe for 10-15 years. The government of the Russian Federation, in a strong-willed manner, planned to privatize 50-60% of state-owned enterprises only in 1992. When carrying out privatization, a lot of preparatory work is needed to break up monopolistic associations of enterprises, create a number of companies, and an effective pricing mechanism, with the help of which the value of the enterprise could be more reliably assessed. It is advisable to start privatization from the food segment, trade and services. To prevent state property from going to criminal circles, from the point of view of economic theory it is important to create many competitors.

The state is recommended to consider restrictions for foreigners in the privatization of strategic industries (energy supply, water supply, oil, defense, etc.). However, today it is extremely necessary to attract foreign capital to others industry National economy, otherwise it will be difficult to get out of the crisis. There is no reason to fear that the Western companies will buy shares from us at low prices and become owners of a significant share of our national wealth. With modern political and economic instability, they are not rushing to join us.

Basic principles of privatization of state and municipal property:

Privatization of state and municipal property is based on the recognition of the equality of buyers of state and municipal property and the openness of the activities of state bodies authorities and local governments.

State and municipal property is alienated into the ownership of individuals and (or) legal entities exclusively on a reimbursable basis (for a fee or through the transfer into state or municipal ownership of shares of open joint-stock companies, the charter of which includes state or municipal property).

Privatization of municipal property is carried out by local government bodies independently in the manner prescribed by this Federal Law.

Economic reforms carried out since the early 1990s. XX century in the Russian Federation and Eastern countries Europe, have as their ultimate goal the formation of a modern competitive market economy. However, the consequences of the rule of the administrative-command system do not allow solving this problem in a short time. deadlines.

Privatization usually refers to the transfer of public property controlled by one or another government agency to the private sector. The Russian Federation “On the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the Russian Federation” dated July 3, 1991 means by privatization “the acquisition by citizens, joint-stock companies (partnerships) from the state and local Councils of People’s Deputies into private ownership of enterprises, workshops, production facilities, sites, and other divisions, allocated to independent enterprises; equipment, buildings, structures, licenses, patents and other tangible and intangible assets liquidated enterprises and their divisions; shares (shares, stocks) of the state and local Councils of People's Deputies in the capital of joint-stock companies (partnerships); shares (shares, shares) owned by privatized enterprises in the capital of other joint-stock companies (partnerships), as well as associations, concerns, unions and others associations».

In accordance with the Federal Law of December 21, 2001 No. 178-FZ “On the privatization of state and municipal property,” the privatization of state and municipal property means the alienation of property owned by Russia (hereinafter referred to as federal property), subjects of Russia, and municipalities for a fee. , in the ownership of individuals and (or) legal persons.

Denationalization can take fundamentally different forms, which can be classified according to a number of characteristics: access to acquisitions only for employees or for everyone; implementing a mechanism for redistributing property in the form of money or special checks; sales techniques; modifications in the organizational structures of enterprises and the degree of participation of certain stock market participants and institutional investors in privatization and other signs. In reality, most of these options are usually used in combination.

Methods and forms of privatization

There are various ways to transfer property rights from the hands of the state to the hands of private individuals. The choice of one path or another depends on political, economic and social realities, as well as on the priorities in each specific country.

Leader of Privatization Britannia proposed the following methods of privatization: sale and free distribution of shares; service contracts; sale of public housing to tenants; refusal of state monopolist in order to develop competition. In total, world experience includes 22 different methods of partial and complete transfer of state property and functions to the private sector.

Along with existing privatization methods, a number of new ones have been established:

Transformation of state and municipal unitary enterprises into OJSCs, 100% of the shares of which are in state and municipal ownership;

Contribution of state and municipal property to the authorized capitals of business companies;

Alienation of shares in state and municipal ownership by the owner of state and municipal securities.

The process of corporatization cannot be bypassed as a method of privatization at the first stage. In this case, the investment funds created at that time, which formed securities (such as shares), played a huge role. With their help, joint-stock enterprises have become the main predominant organizational form in the Russian Federation today. The funds provided guidance in order to understand the vast ocean of securities of corporatized enterprises. In general, by June 1, 1993, over 17 thousand large and medium-sized enterprises and divisions were in one or another stage of corporatization (or corporatization). In the process of corporatization, checks also played an important role. public auction(for example, in December 1992 - June 1993, a total of 2,108 Russian joint stock companies, representing almost all major industry economy and with the number of employed 2.38 million people. Total authorized capital these enterprises (par value of shares at old prices) amounted to 104 billion rubles, including 22.3 billion that were offered for voucher public auctions). Among the main participants in check sales under the hammer were labor collectives, small investors, check investment funds and large institutional and private investors.

The current privatization model of 1992 included certain basic ideas - an emphasis on free, preferential privatization for labor collectives.

Paid privatization, providing for the complete purchase of property at market price, was the path most consistent with the formation of a market economy. However, the repurchase of shares was carried out very slowly, so it was impossible to quickly replenish the state budget through it. Paid privatization has become widespread in Hungary.

Free privatization, meaning the issuance of coupons, bonds, and investment deposits to citizens. Its necessity was justified by two points. It was considered, firstly, as a way to restore social justice, allowing the population to return property taken from them, and secondly, as “forced” privatization, carried out to accelerate the transformation of property in conditions of the psychological unpreparedness of the population to invest their funds in securities. In one form or another, it was used in the Russian Federation, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Romania.

Preferential privatization, which provides discounts and benefits to certain categories of the population (work collectives). These are especially large Discounts and there were benefits in the Russian Federation and Yugoslavia. In addition, in a number of states the process of reprivatization has become widespread - the repatriation of property to previous owners or their heirs (Czechoslovakia).

Formal privatization. This form of privatization involves the transfer of a state-owned enterprise to a private form. Formal privatization does not change anything in property relations, neither in the capital ratio of the enterprise, nor in access to technical knowledge or management resources. Here we can also talk about organizational privatization, in which there are no significant changes in the distribution of tasks between the state and private individuals. In such cases, formal privatization is considered as a necessary preparatory stage for material privatization.

Real privatization. The state-owned enterprise is being sold by a private strategic investor. This form of privatization occurs primarily at the municipal level.

Open and limited auction. Using this method, you can reach a wide range of potential investors. When choosing an investor is not of paramount importance; Other criteria may also play an important role. Unlike mass privatization, there can be a significant influx of investment.

Auction. The goal of this method is to sell the business at the highest price. This does not take into account the characteristics or profile of investors. Public auctions made it possible to bring the property valuation closer to the real, market value, but the property valuation at this stage was main problem. This was an important feature of the process, which was also an effective way to combat corruption. With other methods, direct sales, it was difficult to even imagine the possible scale of corruption - it would be colossal. Direct sale. For strategic reasons, preference is given to negotiating directly with individual investors. The most important role here is played by the correct determination of the real value of the enterprise.

Management-Buy-In: A business is purchased by the management of a third-party business. In this case, the new owners carry out a complete or partial change of the previous management.

Privatization as a subject of scientific research

Having examined various options for privatization in developing and post-socialist countries (mainly using the examples of the Russian Federation and Egypt), Russian economist S.Z. Gafurov emphasized that “privatization is a complex phenomenon that should be considered using scientific methods developed in economics and sociology , theory of state and law, social psychology and other social disciplines. When considering the results of privatization in the Russian Federation, Egypt, as well as in other countries, it is necessary to take into account both the economic and social spheres. Privatization in itself is not a mechanism that certainly increases the efficiency of a market economy. In the context of the transition from a centrally planned to a market economy, it can have a positive impact only if general economic reforms are carried out. The use of privatization for economic development in developing countries reflects the pressure of global market and international financial institutions. However, accelerated voucher privatization can have a positive impact on the economy only in small countries. As the experience of privatization in the Russian Federation and Egypt in the social sphere shows, privatization sharply increases the stratification of society, and especially quickly when using check mechanisms in the absence of an acceptable functioning stock exchange . If the government carrying out privatization sets itself the task of accelerating the creation and development of a new financial bourgeoisie, then it will be an effective tool. However, these new elite strata will not be stable enough to ensure social stability and will not necessarily contribute to the development of the economy as a whole without privatization measures.

Voucher privatization

The voucher concept, characteristic of former socialist countries, is based on the fact that state property is a combination or sum of the property rights of all citizens - owners, and the division of state property equally among all residents of the country is the simplest form of denationalization.

From the point of view of the theory of gaming behavior, it can be noted that in these conditions the parties perceive the situation voucher privatization(that is, the appearance of securities expressing a certain final value of privatized enterprises, or the division of the final common property) as a game with a closed sum, that is, they create a situation where their behavior is aimed not at the development of the national economy as a whole, but at increasing their share in even at the cost of a general economic downturn. In this situation, the state should play the role of a defender of the interests of the aggregate of elite groups as a whole against individual subgroups or their individual members, that is, the role of the state through its redistributive functions should increase in the form of fiscal authorities, financial control authorities, etc., which leads to a general increase in influence states in society. And this contradicts the main goal of denationalization - reducing this influence.

Involving new social groups (voucher and financial players, etc.) in management real economy with voucher privatization leads to acute conflicts between the old (directors and traditional banking and financial groups) and new elites, and consequently to political and general instability. Conflicts of interest make it difficult to achieve consensus on an overall increase in national income.

The most significant disadvantage of the voucher mechanism is that it violates the normal work everyone financial instruments society. From a financial circulation point of view, voucher represents a security, and on the other hand, it is not directly related to the monetary mechanism and is not taken into account by financial statistics in indices. In conditions where the country’s monetary and fiscal authorities are technically unable to take into account the real impact of new securities on monetary circulation and promptly respond to it (which is most often typical for large countries), the introduction of privatization checks into circulation, which are not supported by anything in the real sector, in the absence of an investment boom, it destroys not only the circulation of market corporate securities with a catastrophic drop in share prices due to the excess of aggregate supply over demand, but also other areas of money circulation.

Economic efficiency

Privatization by itself cannot guarantee economic progress. It only enhances the competitiveness of the economic sphere, which includes a combination of private and state ownership of the means of production in the broad sense of the word. Attempts to consider the causes of the severe economic consequences of forced Russian privatization as a purely economic phenomenon, according to the majority of Russian researchers, allow us to assert the relative nature of privatization as a tool for increasing economic efficiency.

But as a means of changing the social stratification of society, it (especially in its voucher form) is a super-effective tool. The “invisible hand of the market”, characteristic of a market economy, and the centralized one cannot, from the point of view of privatization supporters, work together better than each of them separately. On the technical side, they argue, the combination of both economic systems causes acute inflationary processes. Their opponents suggest that the state, at the macroeconomic level, whether together with the market or without the market, manages the economy more effectively than the state itself. The efficiency of the economy is, ultimately, the degree to which the needs of the population are met. And enterprises are valuable in themselves, if only because they produce material assets for the people, so it is unwise to allow them to close, which implies “shock therapy.”

The basic principle from which the concept of privatization derives is the proposition that there are limits to the government's ability to improve production efficiency, and that some enterprises are more effectively managed by the private sector. This principle is based primarily on empirical evidence, based on the fact that some countries that have relied on the private sector for economic growth have done better than some other countries that have relied on the public sector. In theory, this principle was based on the fact that the public sector is generally protected from competition either through special acts, or subsidies, subsidies and fiscal, customs and other measures. In addition, state-owned enterprises, as a rule, lack the basic property of a market economy - the incentive to maximize arrived.

In combination with centralized planning, the state sector of the economy creates a number of new problems - a decrease in the regulatory function of prices, excessive employment and lack of communication income workers with the results of their labor, weighting industry due to the maintenance of morally, but not physically outdated equipment, which, by the way, leads to an increase in the share of heavy physical and unskilled labor due to work on outdated equipment. " Government regulation and social reformism,” argued the Russian economist E. T. Gaidar, “make it possible to avoid the explosion of the lower classes, but by themselves they do not lead to economic progress.” It is also argued that state-owned enterprises inevitably generate conflicts of interest between the elected political leadership and the management of state-owned enterprises.

Thus, privatization theorists implicitly assume that microeconomic efficiency is more important than the general macroeconomic efficiency characteristic of state-owned enterprises. economic growth. This conclusion seems more than controversial. In fact, with a broader understanding of economics as the science of allocating resources in order to achieve maximum consumption, it immediately strikes the eye that the optimal enterprise for a competitive market economy must have unused production reserves to compensate for a possible unexpected increase in demand or decrease offers(for example, in the event of the destruction of competing enterprises as a result of a natural disaster), the aggregated amount of which, as can be shown mathematically using methods of inventory management theory, will always be greater than the centralized reserves common to the economic sector. E. Mandel empirically showed that the real efficiency of utilization of production factors in the USSR was at least 1/5 greater than in the capitalist world.

Privatization, socialization of production and property

Privatization processes at the end of the 20th century acquired special proportions in countries that, according to the UN classification, belonged to states with centrally planned economies and developing countries. Changes in property relations are not only the core of economic reform, but also the central problem of those profound changes in society that are characteristic of the entire 20th century.

IN general case privatization is not directly related to the problem of ownership. The concept of property has two meanings. From a legal point of view, property is the ownership of property or, in the ordinary sense, the property itself. On the other hand, in the economic sense, the concept of property includes the entire set of economic relations of society. Property as a social relationship not only gives certain rights, but also imposes obligations on the owner in relation to society and the supposed representative of its interests - the state. Property relations are in no way limited to the formal transfer of it from the hands of the state to the hands of non-state structures or private individuals. For example, we can talk about the privatization of land in conditions of both the presence and absence of the concept of legal private ownership of land.

Privatization is not necessarily a process directed against the socialization of production in the broad sense. In general, it concerns only the forms of such socialization and the mechanism for its implementation, which simply takes indirect forms.

Methods of monetary privatization

There are several basic technical methods for conducting monetary privatization:

direct open sale of shares (in full or with the state retaining a share) of state-owned enterprises. This mechanism was chosen, for example, in Egypt, Hungary and Jamaica. It requires the prior corporatization of state-owned enterprises. Its significant drawback is the fact that in conditions of underdeveloped stock market public sale of shares is expensive and technically difficult when there is a risk of social discontent with privatization;

auction sale of shares to the public. It was used in Mexico, Hungary and partially, for example, during the privatization of Eastern Tobacco in Egypt;

liquidation of an enterprise and sale of its property in order to pay off debts. This extreme method was used in Poland when selling off industrial enterprises;

disaggregation of large industrial conglomerates with their subsequent sale in parts. The separation of previous organizational structures followed by privatization has often occurred in the Russian Federation;

transfer of the enterprise into the hands of the workforce. The most famous example is programs like “ESOP” in USA;

leasing and subcontracting of government property by private sector enterprises.

Stages of privatization

The following approaches to the stages and forms of privatization are most widespread:

1. Small privatization, extending to small and medium-sized enterprises in the field of trade, public catering, and consumer services. Their sale was carried out mainly at competitions, commercial auctions and provided for a full redemption.

2. Greater privatization, extended to large enterprises, presupposed their corporatization with the subsequent sale of shares.

In the mid-90s. Privatization was carried out with the help of various financial institutions (investment funds, holdings, investment companies). It made it possible to quickly withdraw enterprises from state form property and transfer it financial institutions organized on a commercial basis.

Speaking about the stages of privatization in the Russian Federation, one should distinguish between two main ones: the first is the voucher stage (or more precisely, mass privatization in the Russian Federation, since the process of property privatization began earlier than the privatization (or) stage). In terms of duration, this stage lasted in the Russian Federation for about 3 years. If speak about legal aspect the first stage of privatization, then normative act, indicating the beginning of the process of denationalization and privatization in the Russian Federation, was, which determined and established the organizational and legal basis for the transformation of ownership relations for the means of production in the Russian Federation through the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in order to create an effective socially oriented market economy.

Features of privatization in the Russian Federation The concept of privatization in the Russian Federation

The concept of privatization of state and municipal enterprises was given in the law of the Russian Federation “On Privatization” dated July 3, 1991, which states that “privatization of state and municipal enterprises is the acquisition by citizens, joint-stock companies (partnerships) from the state and local councils of people’s deputies into private property of enterprises, workshops, production facilities, sites, and other divisions of these enterprises (operating and liquidated by decision of bodies authorized to make such decisions on behalf of the owner); shares (shares, shares) of the state and local councils of people's deputies in the capital of joint-stock companies (partnerships), as well as joint ventures, private banks, associations, concerns, unions and others trusts, enterprises".

Regarding the privatization of land and housing funds, as well as socio-cultural institutions, objects of cultural and natural population, then it is regulated by other legislative acts Russia and the republics within Russia.

The goals, priorities and restrictions for privatization in the Russian Federation were established by the state privatization program.

Official privatization is associated with two very important circumstances. Firstly, already in 1991 the reformist wing gained the upper hand in the CPSU. At the April 1991 Plenum of the CPSU Central Committee, a decision was made to support privatization. But the August events of the same year led to the ban of the CPSU and the open transfer of power to anti-communist forces. At the head of these forces stood a part of the party-economic nomenklatura, which relied on the official, i.e. an open transition to the transformation of socialist public property into private capitalist property, which radically changed the place, social and legal role of representatives of the ruling class in their relationship to property. The second faction of the CPSU, formed in the Communist Party of the RSFSR, headed by I.K. Polozkov in June 1990, advocated maintaining the old system.

The third faction, which emerged from the bottom of the CPSU in the summer of 1991 and came to power in the Russian Federation as a result of the events of August 1991, were ideologists and representatives of the new bourgeoisie. The latter were interested primarily in consolidating their victory; direct the privatization process in a direction that is beneficial to it; to lay the foundations for the formation of those social forces that will become their future support in the inevitable struggle with the remnants of the nomenklatura, whose actual positions in all spheres of society remained very strong; create the preconditions for the economic revival of the country on the basis of the power of private property.

Under those conditions, the adoption of an official decision on privatization was clearly insufficient to implement the decision itself. An extremely unfavorable situation has developed: the collapse of the old allied governing bodies, the collapse consumer market, lack of gold and foreign exchange reserves, the threat of famine, loss of controllability of the national economy, loss of old ideological and ideological supports in all layers of society and the population, lack of massive support from abroad - this is not a complete list of the problems facing the new government.

On the other hand, all these difficulties were countered by two factors that played a decisive role. Firstly, there was an obvious desire of the previously dominant class of the nomenklatura, in the conditions of the rapid collapse of old restrictions, to privatize de facto, and then de jure, state property objects created by the hard work of many generations. It is a unique historical opportunity in as soon as possible to seize and legally formalize state property into private property is the reason for the rapid, relatively easy and bloodless collapse of an outdated (dying) system. The majority of the ruling class chose to legally “change clothes” and, in a matter of historical moments, appear in the guise of a private owner of what previously belonged to them only as a class as a whole. Secondly, the presence of huge export potential (primarily the oil and gas complex) is Lifebuoy Russian economy, a lifesaver for both old and new authorities.

Fight around state program privatization reflects the struggle of various forces both within the new government and between the new and old nomenklatura. At the same time, the complexity of developing and politically agreeing on options for privatization programs, creating the necessary legal and administrative forms, and time constraints could not but have an impact on the preparation time and quality of the adopted privatization program. During 1992, preparations for state privatization were completed. A decision was made on two stages of privatization - voucher (free) and cash (paid).

Goals of Russian privatization

The main goals of privatization in 1992 were:

Formation of a layer of private owners contributing to the creation of a socially oriented market economy;

Increasing the efficiency of enterprises;

Social protection of the population and development of social infrastructure using funds received from privatization;

Assisting in the process of stabilizing the financial situation in the Russian Federation;

Creation competitive environment and promoting the demonopolization of the national economy;

Attracting foreign investment.

It should be noted that the goals set for the privatization program were largely contradictory and did not take into account the prevailing macroeconomic situation and social situation.

State Privatization Program

This scheme also meets development goals: the basic infrastructure service is expanded, and the presence of relatively stable shares contributes to the development of the capital market. benefits from the proceeds from the management contract and from ownership of the growing enterprise that he controls; the process of price regulation is also predictable. Employees of the company benefit from the inclusion of provisions in this agreement to protect their jobs, as well as from the increased demand for employees due to the expansion of the network.

Sources

ru.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia - the free encyclopedia

infousa.ru InfoUSA

sebedom.ru/ Sebedom RU

The beginning of the 90s of the last century was marked by the mass privatization of state property and state housing stock, and certain deadlines were established that limited the effect of free privatization of housing. They have already changed several times, so today many citizens are asking the question: “What kind of deadline privatization of apartments?

Definition

What is privatization? According to the current Housing Code of the Russian Federation, citizens' right of ownership of housing can arise as a result of its free privatization, that is, the transfer of state or municipal housing into private ownership through a special legal procedure. After privatization, the owner of housing (usually an apartment) has the right to dispose of it, that is, to give, sell, bequeath, mortgage, etc. You can participate in the privatization of housing only once in your life.

In the same way, any operations with land plots are possible only after the privatization of the land has taken place, the procedure for which is established by the Land Code of the Russian Federation. Citizens who use land plots for a specific purpose indefinitely or with the right of lifelong inheritance have the opportunity to privatize them free of charge.

The state of the housing privatization process in Russia

Today, approximately a third of the housing stock in Russia has not yet been privatized. At the same time, municipal housing has mostly already been transferred into private hands. Therefore, local authorities do not have a social housing fund at their disposal to provide it to low-income people on the waiting list, residents of dilapidated buildings and other categories of citizens entitled to receive it. Thus, those on the waiting list are doomed to long years of waiting, despite the fact that the non-privatized part of the housing stock could become the basis for the formation of a social housing stock due to the natural decrease in the number of tenants. It is precisely these considerations that have constantly forced many legislators to oppose extending the privatization deadline.

When will privatization end?

The free privatization of housing began in 1992. At first, this process was generally open-ended. However, the adopted new Housing Code of the Russian Federation established its end date - January 1, 2007, which is even before the onset of current year was shifted three times: first - to 03/01/10, then - to 03/01/13, and finally - to 03/01/15.

At the end of February of this year, one of the leaders of the faction of the A Just Russia party in the State Duma, Ivan Grachev, said that his faction was in favor of extending privatization for another three years - until 03/01/18. However, this proposal was opposed by the faction of the United Russia party. As a result of inter-factional negotiations, a compromise was found, as a result of which the terms of privatization of residential premises occupied by citizens on terms social hiring, were extended only until 03/01/16.

What caused the latest shift in the end of privatization?

What is housing privatization? This is a way to support citizens in difficult economic times. After all, not all Russians managed to exercise their right in previous years. No wonder in explanatory note The bill on changing the deadlines states that it is inadmissible to deprive citizens living in dilapidated and dilapidated housing and awaiting resettlement of their legal right to free privatization of housing.

People on the waiting list for social housing may find themselves in the same situation. After all, if they receive it after 03/01/16, then they will not have the right to privatize it, i.e. they will be disadvantaged in their rights compared to those who managed to privatize housing before this date.

In addition, the extension of privatization was the topic of a large number of requests from Crimeans and Sevastopol residents, since they had little time to prepare documents based on Russian standards. And indeed, only one year has passed since the moment when two new entities appeared within the Russian Federation. Obviously, this period was clearly not enough. Today, Crimeans calmly submit relevant applications, which are reviewed within up to 2 months.

The shift in deadlines will reduce queues at government agencies, which will speed up the privatization process itself. And for it to go smoothly, you need to know all the intricacies regarding the registration of social housing into private ownership.

Will housing privatization be extended again?

It is still difficult to predict the future scenario of housing privatization in Russia. The current deadline was adopted as a result of compromise. There are three possible scenarios for resolving the issue:

Pros and cons of housing privatization

A citizen living in a municipal or state housing fund apartment does not have the right to dispose of it. Being state property, the apartment will pass to the municipality in case of non-payment of utilities or after the death of the childless responsible tenant included in the order.

What is apartment privatization? It will give you the opportunity to sell, donate, rent out or mortgage your home to a bank. Finally, an elderly and single apartment owner can enter into a lifelong maintenance agreement with someone (with a dependent or with the payment of rent) in exchange for the transfer of ownership of the apartment after his death.

Any person can be registered or registered into a privatized apartment at the discretion of the owner; it can be bequeathed or inherited in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

A privatized apartment can be redesigned, thus improving your living conditions.

However, privatization also has contraindications.

So, if you live in a dilapidated house and are waiting for resettlement, then there is simply no point in engaging in privatization. After all, even if the privatization of housing stops after 03/01/16, no one has yet canceled the Federal Target Program “Housing”. So residents of emergency buildings social housing will continue to be provided free of charge.

It is also not at all profitable for residents of communal apartments to privatize them, since to get the municipality to move them into apartments social fund housing is much easier than selling a communal apartment or a privatized dorm room.

Owners of privatized apartments pay an annual property tax and pay for the maintenance and repair of common property. Therefore, for single and elderly citizens with minimum income a privatized apartment can become a burden, although these costs are not covered by any trustee under a lifelong maintenance or annuity agreement.

And finally, all heirs can claim a privatized apartment if the owner has not made a will. In order for an apartment to go to a specific person, you need to make a list, and this is quite a troublesome task.

Privatization of an apartment: documents

When carrying out any redevelopment in a non-privatized apartment, they should be legalized according to all established procedures. Otherwise, privatization will not be allowed, and the tenant will have to return the apartment to its original appearance.

Persons directly claiming a share in the ownership of an apartment, or their attorney, must contact the BTI (or MFC) to draw up a privatization agreement with a package of documents, which includes:

• Order or social tenancy agreement for an apartment. If they are not available, these documents are ordered from the EIRC (in those cities where they are created, for example in Moscow).
• A cadastral passport obtained from Rosreestr and a technical passport issued from the BTI.
• Apartment personal account, which indicates that utility bills have been paid and there is no debt on them.
• Documents confirming the identity of each person claiming a share in the ownership of the apartment.
• Everyone who is registered in the apartment must be indicated in the provided extract from the house register.
• Citizens registered in the privatized apartment who previously participated in privatization provide Certificates in Form No. 2 about their non-participation in privatization.
• An extract from Rosreestr issued by the Property Management Department of Rosreestr or the district administration.
• Extract from the Unified State Register of Rights to a privatized apartment.
• Extracts from the Unified State Register of Rights in form No. 3 for each privatization participant with a list of real estate objects in their ownership and the grounds for their acquisition.

If a child with a guardian is registered in a privatized apartment, then the following is provided:

• a document confirming his appointment;
• permission to participate in privatization;
• in the presence of minor children specified in the social tenancy agreement, but discharged from privatized apartment, they are obligatory participants in privatization, and therefore are granted: permission to participate in privatization; extracts from house books from the child’s previous and new place of residence.

If, to carry out a procedure such as privatization of an apartment, documents are submitted by an attorney, then he must have notarized powers of attorney from all those claiming a share in the ownership of the apartment.

After at least two months, the privatization agreement is drawn up in a number of copies equal to the number of privatization participants.

This should be followed by an appeal to Companies House in order to register ownership and obtain the appropriate certificate.

Privatization of land in Russia

In the last quarter of the last century, many Russians acquired dacha plots obtained from their place of work. Then it was enough to become a member of a gardening partnership and receive ownership of a small plot of land, usually 6 acres in area.

But if earlier, in order to transfer a plot to a new owner (the heir of the previous one), you could simply give him a new gardener’s book, and new owner entered into rights, then after the adoption of the RF Land Code in 2001, such a procedure is no longer possible. Today, there are only two options to obtain ownership of land - execution of a lease agreement or privatization of the site.

Under certain conditions, every Russian who uses a plot of land indefinitely or with lifelong inheritance can obtain ownership of it free of charge, subject to the following conditions:

What is the privatization of land plots under the “dacha amnesty”?

This is a special procedure for registering land ownership rights in accordance with Law No. 93 of September 1, 2006, popularly nicknamed the “dacha amnesty,” although it allows you to register not only land plots under dachas, but also obtain ownership of some real estate.

The subject of the “dacha amnesty” is plots of land in gardening partnerships and dacha cooperatives that were provided to their users before the adoption of the Land Code of the Russian Federation. This law has already allowed ten million citizens to go through the procedure of registering their rights to land and building on it in a significantly simplified manner.

But, as has often happened in our recent history, rich in changes in legislation, not everyone who wanted it managed to meet the deadlines allotted for the “amnesty”. Therefore, the State Duma, as in the case of the privatization of apartments, followed the beaten path and extended the “amnesty” until 03/01/2018. At the same time, legislators made an additional gift to Russians in the form of declaring an indefinite simplified registration procedure for certain categories of property falling under Law No. 93. These are, first of all, gardening and summer cottage plots, as well as those buildings on them, the construction of which did not require get permission.

Paid privatization of land

If land plot does not fall under the procedure for simplified registration of rights to it, then it has to be purchased from the state. There may be different variants and procedures related to the type of permitted use of the land. The redemption price can also be different: it can vary from the market price, which, of course, is not very profitable, to the cadastral price, and with the use of special reducing factors. Here, of course, one cannot do without consultations with specialized lawyers.

In order not to overpay when buying out, it is important to correctly determine the boundaries of the site, that is, carry out land surveying, and document its dimensions. Land use practice provides many examples when “old” documents list only one area, but after surveying neighboring areas and installing fences, it is reduced by several hundred square meters. And it is impossible to expand the plot to the legal area (the neighbors have already documented the boundaries of their plots, and the land that was yours has already become theirs).

The opposite situations are also common, when the actual area of ​​the purchased plot exceeds that indicated in the available documents. This once again emphasizes the importance of the process of determining the actual size of the land plots being purchased.