The relationship between economic security and public debt. The impact of debt on the economic security of the country. "State University of Management"

11.07.2024

An important area of management activity is public debt management.

Management of the public debt of the Russian Federation is carried out by the Government of the Russian Federation or the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation authorized by it.

Management of the public debt of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation is carried out by the highest executive body of state power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or the financial body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation in accordance with the law of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

Management of municipal debt is carried out by the executive and administrative body of the municipality (local administration) in accordance with the charter of the municipality.

Public debt, like finance, can be a lever and an object of management. As a lever of control, public debt provides the opportunity for legislative (representative) and executive authorities to influence money circulation, the financial market, investment, production, employment, the population’s organization of their savings and many other economic processes.

The state determines the relationship between various types of debt activities (government borrowing, loans, guarantees), the structure of types of debt activities by maturity and profitability, the mechanism for constructing specific government loans, loans and guarantees, the procedure for issuing and circulating government loans, the procedure for providing government loans, the procedure for providing state guarantees and fulfillment of financial obligations under them. The state establishes all other necessary practical aspects of the functioning of the public debt.

In the process of managing the public debt of the Russian Federation, the following general tasks are solved:

- maintaining the amount of internal and external public debt at a level that ensures the preservation of the economic security of the country, the fulfillment by authorities of their obligations without causing significant damage to the financing of socio-economic development programs;
- minimizing the cost of debt by extending the borrowing period and reducing the yield of government securities, moving to other markets and switching attention to other groups of investors;
- maintaining the reputation of the Russian state as a first-class borrower based on the impeccable fulfillment of financial obligations to investors;
- maintaining stability and predictability of the government debt market;
- achieving effective and targeted use of funds borrowed by the state and borrowings guaranteed by it;
- diversification of debt obligations by borrowing terms, profitability, forms of income payment and other parameters to meet the needs of different groups of investors;
- coordination of actions of federal bodies, bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments in the country’s debt market.

Public debt management can be strategic or operational. Perspective issues of development of public debt are within the competence of the Federal Assembly, the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation, legislative (representative) and executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Executive bodies prepare draft federal and regional laws (the Federal Assembly and the President of the Russian Federation, representative bodies and heads of administrations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation also have legislative initiative), the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation and the legislative bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation adopt them, and the President of the Russian Federation and heads of regional administrations reject them or sign them.

Operational management of public debt is carried out by the Government of the Russian Federation and its special body - the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, as well as the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and Vnesheconombank as agents of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation. These bodies determine the general conditions for the issuance of individual loans, the procedure for the issue and circulation of debt obligations, the time of issue of the next loan and the conditions for its functioning, organize the primary placement and secondary market of government securities, organize and carry out the payment of income and repayment of debt obligations, organize and carry out the issuance of government (budget) loans and government guarantees, carry out control actions and other measures for the operational management of public debt.

Public debt management should be understood as a set of measures to regulate its volume and structure, determine the conditions and implement new borrowings, regulate the government borrowing market, implement measures for anti-crisis management of problem debts, service and repay debt, determine the conditions and provide government guarantees, and monitor the effective use of borrowed funds.

Traditionally, in economic theory, the problem of optimal management of public debt is considered mainly within the framework of two types of models: an equilibrium model of dynamic taxation, which involves maximizing the welfare function of a representative consumer, and a model with direct minimization of the social loss function. In addition to these two groups of functions used in theoretical studies, from a practical point of view, the type of objective function of the debt management authority can be divided into two types: minimizing budget risk as much as possible with a minimum debt service cost and minimizing the service cost. First, let's look at the key theoretical models within the first subclassification.

Public debt management must be carried out on a scientific basis. This means that the authorities, based on scientific data on global and regional patterns and trends in the development of debt relations, taking into account the national historical features of the functioning of public debt, knowing the medium-term and long-term tasks of the country’s socio-economic development, develop a concept for the development of debt relations in general, features of use individual debt instruments, a mechanism for the functioning of public debt that allows you to get as close as possible to achieving your goals. This means that effective management of public debt can only be implemented on the basis of a debt policy that is adequate to the corresponding level of development of the country.

The state's debt policy, therefore, is a scientifically based concept for the development of state debt relations and individual elements of state debt, as well as a system of state measures to use them in the interests of achieving the set objectives of the country's socio-economic development.

The problems of ensuring the economic security of the country, stable economic development of the state and society are faced by many countries of the world, especially during times of crisis. The current socio-economic situation in Russia determines the extreme relevance of the state's targeted activities in the sphere of ensuring the economic security of the country and Russian society.

The realization of Russia's national interests in most cases is possible only if there are sufficient economic opportunities and sustainable economic development. Thus, we can say that economic security has a decisive place in the overall system of national security.

Economic security is a set of internal and external conditions conducive to the effective dynamic growth of the national economy, its ability to satisfy the needs of society, the state, the individual, to ensure competitiveness in external and internal markets, insuring against various types of threats and losses.

The economic security of the country must be ensured, first of all, by the efficiency of the economy itself, that is, along with protective measures carried out by the state, it must protect itself on the basis of high labor productivity, product quality, etc. Ensuring the economic security of the country is not the prerogative of any one government department or service. It must be supported by the entire system of government bodies, all links and structures of the economy.

In 2000, the Concept of National Security of the Russian Federation was adopted - a system of views on ensuring the security of the individual, society and state in the Russian Federation from external and internal threats in all spheres of life. The Concept formulates the most important directions of state policy of the Russian Federation.

The concept defines the fundamental starting points for the country's national security, which should become the basis for the formation of the state's domestic and foreign policy. It provides an analysis of Russia's place in the world community, defines its national interests, processes and phenomena that threaten them.

The primary role in ensuring Russia's national security is played by the protection of the country's national interests in the economic sphere. Ultimately, ensuring all elements of national security: defense, environmental, information, foreign policy and others - depends on the economic capabilities of the country. At the same time, the development of a program of priority and long-term measures to ensure Russia’s economic security and practical steps in this direction must be based on a clear understanding of modern threats.

In accordance with the National Security Concept, “in the economic sphere, threats are complex in nature and are caused, first of all, by a significant reduction in gross domestic product, a decrease in investment, innovation activity and scientific and technical potential, stagnation of the agricultural sector, imbalance of the banking system, growth of external and internal government debt, a tendency to predominate in export supplies of fuel, raw materials and energy components, and in import supplies - food and consumer goods, including basic necessities." The state of the domestic economy, the imperfection of the system of organization of state power and civil society, the socio-political polarization of Russian society and the criminalization of public relations, the growth of organized crime and the increase in the scale of terrorism, the aggravation of interethnic and complicated international relations create a wide range of internal and external threats to the national security of the country. The weakening of the country's scientific, technical and technological potential, the reduction of research in strategically important areas of scientific and technological development, the outflow of specialists and intellectual property abroad threaten Russia with the loss of its leading positions in the world, the degradation of high-tech industries, increased external technological dependence and the undermining of Russia's defense capability.

Negative processes in the economy underlie the separatist aspirations of a number of constituent entities of the Russian Federation. This leads to increased political instability, weakening of the single economic space of Russia and its most important components - production, technological and transport links, financial, banking, credit and tax systems.

Currently, it is necessary to develop the domestic Russian market, increase the solvency of the population, and increase the well-being of the population by all means.

Property management efficiency needs to be improved in both the private and public sectors.

It is necessary to reduce the existing bias of the national economy in favor of the export-oriented sector of the economy by placing large-scale government orders in the military-industrial complex, nuclear, mechanical engineering, aviation and aerospace, chemical and pharmaceutical, and electronic industries, ensuring the creation of goods with high added value.

Competition between the state and the private sector for monetary resources leads to rising interest rates, which in turn suppresses private investment spending; that is, the repression effect manifests itself here. When the economy is close to full employment, the crowding out effect can be very large. In this regard, even those economists who readily recognize the short-term stimulating effect of budget deficits on business activity, express concern that in the long term the deficit leads to a slowdown in economic growth. They point out that the deficit is used to finance social benefit programs and public sector production of consumer goods through investment in plant modernization and new equipment. The popular belief is that deficits push the economy down a path of slower long-term growth.

The private sector produces both consumer and investment (capital) goods. If the increase in public sector output comes at the expense of consumer goods, then the full burden of this in the form of lower living standards will fall on the shoulders of the present generation, since it will not affect the current level of investment, nor, therefore, the size of the “national factory” that future generations will inherit . If an increase in production in the public sector leads to a reduction in the production of investment goods, then this will not in any way affect the level of consumption (standard of living) of the current generation. But the children and grandchildren of this generation will have a smaller stock of fixed assets (accumulated capital) and a lower income in the future.

The external debt of Russian private companies has reached alarming proportions

After all, a country’s external debt consists of two parts: public and private debt. Typically the focus is primarily on government debt. After all, failure to fulfill one’s obligations on a sovereign debt when external creditors refuse to extend it and the inability to obtain additional financing means a so-called state default with all the ensuing consequences - depletion of foreign exchange reserves, currency devaluation, a decline in the country’s image, and sometimes the introduction of external control. This is usually done by the International Monetary Fund, which usually does not stand on ceremony with debtors.

Private external debt does not seem to face such severe consequences - after all, it is the debt of individual private companies, which themselves must deal with their problems. But this is only an external impression. In fact, excessive growth of private external debt can have very negative consequences for the country.

The decrease in Russia's public debt was accompanied by a rapid increase in the external debt of Russian private companies, which exceeded $500.7 billion as of the same date. Russian banks did their best, whose debt increased to $162.9 billion in 2011 alone. Borrowings from the non-banking sector increased in 2011 by 11.7%, reaching $337.9 billion.

How dangerous is the current situation?

First, debts must be paid with substantial interest. Loans are obtained, as a rule, at 7-10% per annum, which means the need for annual interest payments of about 20 billion dollars at the current level of private debt, not counting the repayment of the initial loan amounts. These are very significant losses for the country.

Secondly, and this is the most important thing, foreign creditors receive greater rights against debtors in the event of difficulties in repaying loans. This happens, and with a considerable number of Russian companies taking out loans abroad, it will definitely happen. The creditor has a priority right to the property and assets of the debtor, including the ownership of the company may be transferred to him, in whole or in part. Thus, production and entire industries that are important for the country may come under the control of foreign capital. Even if we are not talking about complete foreign control over individual Russian enterprises and especially industries, then in any case the growth of the influence of foreign capital will become inevitable. If you look at the list of Russian borrowers, it becomes obvious that it is unwise to ignore such a danger, since they represent the backbone of the Russian economy. Among the largest borrowers are such leading companies as Gazprom, Rosneft, the largest Russian banks, etc. The oil and gas sector accounts for more than half of all private debt. Foreign capital control over such companies is highly undesirable. If leading Russian companies have difficulty repaying their loans, the state will be forced to come to the rescue, regardless of whether these companies are state-owned or private. Consequently, the total amount of potential external government obligations of Russia is actually greater than what appears in the statistics.

Why did such a situation arise, given that the country has not just a lot of foreign currency, but a lot?

In 2011, external debt increased by $56.3 billion. The debt structure was dominated by private sector borrowing. Liabilities of banks and other sectors increased from 442.4 to 500.8 billion dollars.

As of January 1, 2012, the foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank of Russia amounted to $498.6 billion, and the funds of the Stabilization Fund - $112 billion. These figures are constantly changing upward.

Experts are sounding the alarm. The situation with private sector debts, especially considering that we are talking mainly about enterprises and banks where the state has a share, is acute.

The reason is high inflation within the country, which, according to official estimates, is 8%-10% per annum, and according to unofficial estimates, it is significantly higher. Credit institutions are forced to keep the interest rate on their loans even higher, otherwise they will operate at a loss (they will return their loans from debtors in money with depreciated purchasing power). The uncertainty of prospects with inflation rates forces credit institutions to inflate interest rates and focus on “short-term” money. After all, errors in forecasts for inflation rates can lead to large losses for borrowers or lenders.

Given the abundance of general credit resources in Russia, there is a large deficit in “long-term” investment money that would be provided for long periods and on conditions acceptable to recipients. Without a sharp expansion of capital investment, it is impossible to ensure high rates of economic growth.

“Long” money turned out to be easier and more profitable for companies to borrow abroad in foreign currency, primarily in dollars. One of the additional considerations that apparently guided many Russian banks and companies in their policy of focusing on foreign dollar loans is the expectation of a further depreciation of the dollar in the future. It is beneficial for the debtor to pay his obligations in a depreciating currency. True, it is not customary to talk about such calculations “in polite society”: it is unethical to irritate Americans with discussions about the current fundamental weakness of the US dollar.

Another motive explaining the massive attraction of foreign loan capital by some Russian companies is the calculation of hidden insurance against possible attempts by the state to tighten control over private business. If the state pressure on business, in the opinion of the owners of some companies that have received foreign loans, becomes “excessive,” it will be possible to organize a more active presence of foreigners in the capital of these companies, using the mechanisms of debt relations in order to “hide” from their own state behind the backs of foreign corporations. It is more difficult for the Russian state to influence foreign capital than to influence domestic companies. Here you can encounter strong resistance from the West along government lines, which is unsafe.

Of course, no one admits to having such a motivation even “at gunpoint.” Unpatriotic. However, the interests of private companies, as is known, may not coincide with the interests of their own state. And what does “own state” mean in the era of globalization and the dominance of TNCs? Is it always possible to draw a clear line here? Sometimes such motivation is typical even for state-owned companies, although to a lesser extent. The corporate interests of state-owned companies can sometimes diverge from the national ones.

The main way is to make internal borrowing more profitable for them than external borrowing. The means for this are available. The foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank and the Stabilization Fund, recently renamed the Reserve Fund and the Fund for Future Generations, exceed half a trillion dollars and continue to increase. Why should they work primarily for the economies of other countries, and not for Russia? Why is it not possible, on the basis of these funds through special state investment funds, to provide Russian companies on a large scale with preferential investment loans, say, at 5-6% per annum? After all, foreign exchange reserves and funds of the Stabilization Fund are invested mainly in foreign securities at 2% -4% per annum. It will be beneficial for the state and companies. Risk of non-repayment of government loans issued by individual companies? (One of the Ministry of Finance’s arguments against such a credit policy). But with a large number of companies being financed and the correct credit policy, the risk will be small. And most importantly, in the end, the national gain will far outweigh the damage from possible non-repayment of loans.

The external debt of the state (from the English external debt), as defined by the IMF, is the total volume of obligations assumed by residents of one country to citizens of another in the form of principal and accrued interest, which are payable within a certain period. Funds raised in this way, on the one hand, become the country’s financial resources and can be used for the development of promising sectors of the economy. On the other hand, the presence of external debt, and especially overdue debt, significantly increases the likelihood of a crisis. Therefore, it is important not only to be able to attract free financial resources, but also to effectively manage them to obtain maximum returns. Let's look at the relative and absolute size of monetary obligations of the Russian Federation and other countries of the world.

Subjects of borrowing

The settlement of external debt is the primary task of any national government. This is due, first of all, to the fact that the presence of overdue debt can deny a country access to all global credit markets, forcing it to agree to attract financial resources on unfavorable terms proposed by the IMF and the World Bank. The official external debt of most countries is in the hands of the Paris and London Clubs, the IMF and the World Bank.

The main subjects of the loan can be:

Government or local authorities.
Banks, funds, insurance companies and other financial institutions.
Large national enterprises.

External borrowing instruments include direct appeals to relevant global financial institutions, as well as the issuance of government bonds that can be purchased by non-residents.

External debt of the Russian Federation

After the collapse of the USSR, the Russian Federation assumed the obligation to service the debt of the now independent republics, except for Ukraine. Thus, the external debt of the Russian Federation as of 1993 amounted to about 70 billion US dollars. According to the agreement with the Paris Club, Russia had to pay 2.5 billion every year. As of 2014, the debt stood at US$599.5 billion. Compared to the previous reporting period, it decreased by 19%. Most of it is the debt of national enterprises and the banking sector. The external debt of the Russian Federation is 23% of GDP. For comparison: Japan - 400%, Ireland - 390%, Singapore - 382%, Portugal - 358%, Belgium - 327%, and neighboring Ukraine - 81%. It should be noted that the external debt of the USSR was paid by Russia in June 2006, and private obligations of enterprises continue to be paid to this day.

External debt of countries

As of 2015, 9 countries have a ratio of total debt to non-residents to their GDP that exceeds 300%. This means that in order to pay off their foreign debt, they would need three years to sell all their final goods at market prices, reducing consumption to zero, which is basically impossible. Moreover, 40% of countries have debt that exceeds their GDP. The top ten includes: Japan, Iceland, Singapore, Portugal, Belgium, the Netherlands, Greece, Spain, Denmark, Sweden and France. Each subsequent global financial crisis or industrial downturn could worsen the situation, bringing these developed countries to the brink of bankruptcy.

Problems of economic security

According to European Union law, the external debt of member countries cannot exceed 60% of their GDP. But today only half of the EU member states fulfill this requirement. This situation could lead to a financial crisis. This is due to the burden of servicing the loan if the country is not a major global exporter, like the United States, and political pressure. However, we should not forget that the largest economies were built precisely by attracting free funds from non-residents. Therefore, the security problem is primarily related to the ineffective use of received resources.

External debt analysis

According to the IMF methodology, the following indicators are used to assess the state’s debt to foreign creditors:

the ratio of total debt to exports of services and goods;
share of liabilities in gross national income;
ratio of interest to GNI;
private division of government reserves into external debt;
share of obligations to international organizations in the total amount.

It is believed that the ratio of debt to exports should be in the range of 200-250%, and interest on it - 20-25%. It should be noted that in such calculations only state-guaranteed obligations are taken into account.

The inability to service external debt and political dependence on creditor countries is not a threat to economic security as long as the state is able to effectively use the funds raised. Therefore, it is up to the national government whether a foreign loan becomes a threat or a new opportunity for development.

Considering the complexity and multi-significance of the category “finance” and its derivative concepts, one of which (in the context of national economic security) is “financial security”, the conceptual interpretations of the latter also have significant diversity (Table 6.1).

Table 6.1

Diversity of definitions of the concept “Financial security”

Source
Economic security of Russia. General course: textbook / ed. V.K. Senchagova. - 3rd ed., revised. and additional - M.: BINOM. Knowledge Laboratory, 2009. P. 269	Ensuring such development of the financial system and financial relations and processes in the economy, which creates the necessary financial conditions for the socio-economic and financial stability of the country's development, maintaining the integrity and unity of the financial system (including monetary, budgetary, credit, tax and currency systems), successful overcoming internal and external threats to Russia in the financial sector
Lvdiysky, V. I. Shadow economy and eco-	On a state scale, this is a state of the financial system that ensures the stable functioning of the system of connections and relations between non-regional

1 Suetin A. A. Financial economics... P. 8.

Source
nomic security of the state / V. I. Avdiysky, V. A. Yes yes lko. - 2nd ed., add. - M.: ALFA-M, 2010. P. 261	economic entities, and with the world market. Ensuring financial security in states with a market organization of the economy is carried out through the implementation of fiscal, monetary and credit policies, and currency regulation, which together determine the state in the financial sector and the conditions for the functioning of the real sector of the economy. Ensuring financial security directly depends on the creation of legislatively established conditions for economic activity and state control, which necessitates a clear definition of the functions and competence of each entity ensuring financial security
Kochergina, T. E. Economic security. - Rostov n/d: Phoenix, 2007. P. 262	Creation of such conditions for the functioning of the financial system under which: 1) the possibility of redistributing financial flows into areas of their use not established by legislative regulations is extremely small; 2) the possibility of obvious abuse of financial resources is reduced to a minimum. Financial security is characterized, first of all, by the state’s ability to ensure sustainability and stability of the country’s financial and economic development. Economic interests in this area are focused on the stability of monetary circulation, the stability and convertibility of the national currency, the profitability of financial transactions, compliance with accounting and tax discipline, moderate inflation, the creditworthiness of borrowers, etc.
Economic security: textbook / ed. 11. V. Manokhina. - M.: INFRA-M, 2014. P. 290	The state and readiness of the state’s financial system for timely and reliable financial support of economic needs in an amount sufficient to maintain the required level of economic and military security of the country. The concept and strategy of financial security must be reflected in the concept and state strategy of economic security, in economic, budgetary and monetary policies, etc.

To remove a number of debatable issues in determining financial security, it seems advisable to use a structural-substantive approach when fixing it categorically, according to which financial security can be presented as the unity of its three structural subconcepts.

1. Financial security as a relatively independent component of economic security reflects the degree and level of security of the functioning and development of the financial system itself as a set of macro-financial indicators that characterize the effectiveness of the country's fiscal, monetary, foreign exchange and investment policies.
2. Financial security as qualitative characteristics of all components of national and economic security characterizes the extent, quality and direction of its influence on the dynamics of changes in the main indicators of other types of national and economic security. Moreover, one of the most important aspects of such influence is the degree of monetization (demonetization) of various components of the Russian economy. Thus, through the prism of the category “financial security”, it is possible to identify the consequences of the influence of the degree of monetization (demonetization) of the economy on the effectiveness of ensuring industrial, military, energy, social, food and other types of national and economic security.
3. Financial security as mechanism for accelerating Russia's development in the context of ensuring its national and economic security acts as a system of measures to create a program-targeted focus on creating the security of the financial system for sustainable and accelerated growth of the country’s economy in the interests of its national security.

In general conceptual terms, the following definition of the category “financial security” can be given.

Financial security is the method, form and result of the constant resolution and reproduction of the contradiction between the growth (decline) of the economy and its financial security in favor of the formation of a trend towards safe economic growth of the country.

The complexity of studying financial security as a specific qualitative characteristic of the financial system (the first option of its structural characteristics), as well as its impact on economic development (the third option), is greatly complicated by both the lack of a more or less consolidated understanding among economists of the essence of the financial system itself, and differences in assessing the correlation between its development and other economic indicators.

Thus, a number of foreign scientists conclude that even in developed countries there is no clear correspondence between the levels of economic and financial development. Financial depth as the ratio of financial assets to GDP and the degree of development of financial intermediation (the share of assets of financial intermediaries in financial assets) does not always characterize the success of economic development. There is no reason to expect that there is a linear and positive relationship between financial depth and the degree of financial intermediation, on the one hand, and increases in equality, on the other. Financial depth and the degree of financial intermediation are useful when the economy develops and becomes more complex, but they are not positive indicators in themselves.

Although, naturally, there is a connection between the levels of financial and economic development of a country, it does not give clear results. E. Bergolf and P. Bolton, who studied this connection in transition economies, did not find a direct correlation between financial development and growth. Moreover, the expansion of the financial and credit sector in a number of countries has softened budget constraints and thereby undermined growth 1 .

An important conceptual aspect for understanding the mechanism for strengthening the financial security of a country is the determination of its priority areas, which are to a certain extent determined by the type or architecture of the financial system existing in the country. Methodological approaches to defining financial architecture in the early 1970s. developed by J.R. Hicks, distinguishing the institutional forms of the financial system into two types: market economy (auto-economy) and the economics of debt ( overdraft economy)

In modern economic theory, there are two types of financial systems:

market-based (or market-oriented) financial system of financing;
a financial system based on banks (bank-centric) and debt financing.

The first type (also called the American or Anglo-Saxon model) is characteristic of the United States, Great Britain, and former British colonies, including Canada, Australia, Hong Kong and Singapore. The legal basis for the functioning of such a financial system is the English common law system ( common law), adapted to better protect the rights of individual shareholders. It is believed that a financial system based on a strong stock market is more flexible and suitable for risky investment transactions and projects.

The second financial system is based on the French legal tradition ( civil law) and exists in most European countries and Japan. Here, the banking sector and financial and credit institutions have a decisive influence on the decisions made by non-financial companies.

In Anglo-Saxon model countries, market capitalization (ie the market value of all listed companies) roughly corresponds to the total volume of bank loans issued. At the same time, the volume of bank lending in economies operating on the basis of the French legal tradition is 2 times or more greater than their market capitalization.

In Russia since the 1990s. Attempts have been made repeatedly to introduce a market-based financial sector model based on greater diversification of ownership. At the same time, most Western economists believed that a system based on banks rather than on the stock market was better suited for transition economies, since creating the latter would require much more time and effort than creating a market banking system. As a result, attempts to copy Anglo-American practice failed (including due to the consequences of privatization in the 1990s).

The optimal model for Russia would be a mixed model of financial sector development, based on combining the advantages of both systems while limiting their speculative components. At the same time, in the short and medium term, a real transition through the capital market from a bank-based financial system to mass financing seems unlikely. This is due to the total dominance of the banking system over non-banking financial institutions in our economy, both in terms of the scale of financial transactions and the size of financial assets. The growth of this dominance was further intensified as a result of the crisis of 2007-2009.

Increased instability in global and regional financial markets in the 1990s. prompted scientists to pay attention to the study of the dynamics and contradictions in the development of financial markets, which allowed them to conclude that the financial sector is actually separated from the real economy (decoupling hypothesis). Thus, at the end of the 20th century. the financial sector has turned into a self-sufficient sphere of reproduction, functioning and developing according to its own laws. The main reasons for this were globalization and liberalization of financial markets based on increased internationalization of the world economy, as well as the explosive growth (based on the use of the Internet) of new financial technologies and financial instruments, including derivatives. Indented - paragraph was too long.

All this led to the “refusal” of the financial market from its main function - to reflect the financial state of development of the real sector of the economy. Moreover, the financial sector is increasingly becoming a source of misleading signals for the real sector. Situations become typical when market participants and regulators are guided by information of “suggestive and manipulative properties (ratings, unfounded forecasts, pressure from lobbyists, ideological labels and cliches, economic boycotts, sanctions, falsely interpreted public goods, etc.)” transmitted by interested parties. players

As a result, criteria for the efficiency of the real sector are replaced by financial criteria, which can often be diametrically opposed to the first. This is especially evident between the medium and long-term needs of the real sector for investment resources and the short-term, momentary benefits of financial institutions, which is largely characteristic of the domestic financial market.

For example, in 2006, during the initial public offering (English IPO - initial public offerings) Russian companies raised about $17 billion, and approximately the same amount through the placement of t ruble bonds. At the same time, of the money received from the issue of shares, only $2.5 billion, or 14.7%, was invested in fixed capital, and out of $17 billion, “bond money,” only 0 was spent in real investments. 4% ($60 million).

In world (including Russian) financial markets by the time of the crisis of 2007-2009. acute imbalances have arisen not only between the financial and real sectors, but also between the level of development of global finance and the state of the system for their regulation. The latter was increasingly lagging behind the growth of the financial depth of the world economy.

Global financial assets, ____, ___

The indicator-------was 103% in 1980, 210%

World GDP

in 1990, 351% in 2007

Russian experts state: “The sphere of financial innovation and securitization, the “shadow banking system”, in which regulation was either absent or was sharply weakened, expanded sharply... “Financial power” was over-concentrated (US dollar as a world reserve currency, IMF, Federal Reserve system). The global financial architecture was largely unipolar, built around the Anglo-Saxon model (the New York/Chicago - London - offshore triangle). The liberalization of capital accounts, the expansion of the number of convertible currencies over the years of deregulation created the conditions for the unpredictable movement of “hot” money, financial infections, capital flight, and manipulation of the markets of small open economies. The potential for risks and volatility built into global finance has grown."

After the crisis, an attempt was made to change and intensify the transition to a multi-level, multi-polar and deeper system of global financial regulation. The main ideas of such regulation are as follows:

moving into the regulatory zone and ensuring transparency of all “parallel”, gray, “unsupervised” segments of global finance that carry high systemic risks;
prevention of financial overheating and “soap bubbles”; on this basis - weakening of cyclical overheating of the world and national economies and, conversely, mitigation of recessions, “warming up” economies during cyclical declines;
reducing the “pro-cyclicality” of the financial system, “deleveraging”: reducing financial leverage (excessive growth of assets and debts of financial institutions in relation to their own funds in the recovery phase of the economic cycle); maintaining the liquidity of financial institutions as risks increase;
strengthening incentives to finance sustainable economic growth, to accumulate “long-term money”, to grow capital over long horizons instead of speculative short-term excesses;
prevention of excess concentrations and regulation of systemic risk.

In essence, these ideas represent an attempt to create a certain system of control and regulatory mechanism for the financial sector as the basis of a new paradigm of global financial security (albeit for a select few).

For Russian economic security, it is possible to determine the main components that characterize its financial security (Table 6.2).

Table 6.2

Some macro-financial thresholds for financial

Indicator	Meaning
Indicators reflecting the sustainability of the state budget
Budget Deficit Ratio (IN) to GDP (GDP)	GDP~ 3%*
Government debt ratio (G.D.)to GDP	COP 6™*
External debt ratio ( G.D. e) to GDP	GDP-3™*
Domestic debt ratio ( G.D.,) to GDP	GDP-3™*
Share of expenditures on servicing public debt ( BE gd) in relation to the total volume of federal budget expenditures ( BE)
Indicators reflecting the level of debt burden of enterprises and organizations
Debt ratio of non-financial enterprises ( NFD) to their revenue ( NFP)
The ratio of short-term debt of non-financial enterprises ( NFD sl) to long-term (NFD	NFD st +NFD„ ~ 7 ™’ NFD,.
Ratio of external debt of the banking sector (EB) to its total assets (V L)	BA i3™
The ratio of short-term (VTs.,) and long-term debt of banks (BD/,)

Indicator	Meaning
Level of adequacy of gold and foreign exchange reserves
Level of monetary support (IN) gold and foreign exchange reserves ( GER)	70% IN> GER
Indicator of adequacy of gold and foreign exchange reserves	ACER> A B
Indicator of the minimum (threshold) level of gold and foreign exchange reserves	GERmin " g 1V H + DPA- Where 1V C- cost of imports for one quarter; DPA- the amount required to repay short-term (up to one year) debt of the state, banking and corporate sectors and interest payments on it
Indicators of macro-financial conditions for the functioning of the economy
Level of monetization of the economy	Where M2X- money supply (M2), including deposits in foreign currency
Changes in the volume and structure of money supply and demand in the economy	AM2i + 10%, where M2 is the money supply (M2); i- inflation rate
Critical level of change in the real interest rate (g) for credit resources and deposits
Economic profitability (R)
Profitability of key industries ECONOMY(P/,1,)	R k > i
The relationship between profitability and interest rates	P>r l >r d > i, Where t"f - interest rates on loans, r d - interest rates on deposits
Annual inflation rate	i25%
Indicators characterizing the relationship between savings and investments in the economy
Fixed capital investment ratio (If) to GDP
Ratio of investments (/) and savings (S) in the economy
Structure of savings in national (/,„.) and foreign currency (/ус)	m> 70%, or 1 * tic" fc* nc* fc

Banking indicators

Bank capital adequacy ratio	Where Sun- own capital of banks; RA- risk-weighted assets
Ratio of total assets of the banking system (VA) to GDP
Average terms for attracting and placing funds - loans and deposits	Tds - T And, Where TDS- deadlines for attracting deposits; T and - loan issuance terms
Term structure of loans and deposits	L.+ D Kf 4t + D st+A+A 7 + D ,"‘-FT ^ 70%, + D st+Ut+A Where L st + D sl- loans and deposits for a period of up to one year; L /t + D /t- loans and deposits for a period exceeding one year
Ratio of foreign total banking position to total equity capital of the banking system	Where EA- foreign assets; EL. - foreign liabilities, EC - equity capital of the banking system
The ratio of the dynamics of the share of banking sector assets in GDP to the level of monetization of the economy	L-L/2 0>1 D) M2, ’ where A is the share of banking sector assets in GDP in the current period; L 0 - in the past period, M2, - monetization of the economy (M2) in the current period, M2 0- in the past period

Indicators reflecting the state and processes in financial markets

Threshold value of critical change in stock index

1 g kg1 >5%,

Where i RTS j- growth (decrease) of the RTS index

The volume of the market for production financial instruments (P/2) in relation to the volume of the market for primary financial instruments (/-U)

g/7" - 20%, or rj FLl rj FI | + FI2 FI | + FI 2

Share of foreign portfolio investments in securities (Ips) in relation to foreign investment in general

Growth rate of stock market capitalization (SAR) in relation to GDP growth rate

CAP "( >10%,

CDP, _i - internal capital investments, TRF- capital transfers account balance, ER- foreign exchange reserves of the state.

Despite the fact that presented in table. 6.2 Macro-financial thresholds for financial security were developed in the second half of the 2000s; they remain fundamentally relevant to the current economic situation. At the same time, some indicators require adjustment. For example, the requirements for the level of economic monetization and inflation have changed. Thus, according to S. Yu. Glazyev, the monetization rate at the end of the year should be at least 75%, and the maximum critical value of inflation should not exceed 15%. Therefore, it is natural that the methodology for substantiating the system of threshold indicators of financial security is constantly developing and improving.

Public debt is of particular importance for financial security.

Public debt is an obligation arising from government borrowings, guarantees for the obligations of third parties, and other obligations in accordance with the types of debt obligations established by the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, assumed by the Russian Federation, a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or a municipal entity 1.

The methodological basis for analyzing public debt from the point of view of financial security is disclosed and analyzed in the work of D. S. Zuev “Development of a system for managing debt obligations of the region.”

Relatively simple, so-called standard, methods of managing public debt include the following:

debt refinancing - issuing new bond issues and attracting loans in order to repay and service existing debt obligations;
prolongation (deferment) of debt - postponement of repayment and servicing of existing debt obligations;
debt conversion - the exchange of debt obligations in order to pay off a debt, as a result of which the amount of income paid to the creditor changes;
debt consolidation - combining several previously issued loans into one new loan;
debt cancellation - refusal to fulfill debt obligations in whole or in part;
debt restructuring (novation) - termination of debt obligations based on an agreement and replacing them with new debt obligations with different terms of repayment and servicing.

Non-standard methods of managing public debt, which are widely used in world practice, include: debt repurchase, debt exchange (“swap” transactions) and repo transactions.

Both standard and non-standard methods of debt management have certain advantages and disadvantages for the borrower (Table 6.3).

Table 6.3

Classification of advantages and disadvantages of various methods of public debt management 1

	Advantages for the borrower	Disadvantages for the borrower
Standard Methods
Refinancing	Replacement of budget sources of repayment and debt servicing with new borrowings	Debt accumulation;
Prolongation (postponement)	Budget savings	Debt accumulation; formation of peak debt payments; growing debt burden on the budget
Conversion	increasing confidence in the reliability of the borrower on the part of the lender in the event of an increase in interest income	Decreased confidence in the borrower's debt obligations on the part of the lender in the event of a decrease in interest income; possibility of losing part of state property
Consolidation	Uniform distribution of the debt burden on the budget	Replacement of budgetary sources of debt repayment and servicing with new borrowings
Unification	Changes in profitability and maturity of debt; uniform distribution of the debt burden on the budget	Budget savings
Cancellation	Budget savings	Ensuring that debt is replaced with less onerous types of obligations; increasing confidence in the borrower's reliability on the part of the lender in case of increase in interest income; Possibility of attracting significant investments into the economy
Restructuring	Increasing the ability to fulfill debt obligations; possibility of partial debt write-off (reduction)	Increased cost of servicing debt obligations

1 Zuev D. S. Development of a management system... P. 37-39.

	Advantages for the borrower	Disadvantages for the borrower
Non-standard methods
	Debt reduction; increasing market capacity and liquidity; risk reduction and savings on interest costs	Increased costs in case of debt repurchase at a price exceeding the nominal value
	Changing the income payment schedule; reducing the short-term debt burden on the budget; providing a long-term source of financing budget expenditures; increasing the competitiveness of domestic industry	Outflow of capital from the country; loss of part of state property
	Temporary reduction of the debt burden on the budget; reducing debt servicing costs; regulation of budget liquidity	The risk of failure to fulfill the second part of the transaction; insufficient budget funds to finance the budget deficit

One of the main threats to Russia's financial security is the growth of its total external debt. Since 1990, the main driver of external debt growth has been the state. By the end of 1998, this debt amounted to 52% of GDP or almost $140 billion (excluding debt to non-residents on the market of government short-term bonds and federal loan bonds (GKOs and OFZs)). As a result of the devaluation at the end of 1999, the public debt of the Russian Federation increased to 68% of GDP. As a result of measures taken by the government, it began to decline steadily, and by April 1, 2009 it amounted to 2.2% of GDP, or $26.2 billion.

In the 1990s. corporate debt (the amount of external debt of banks and non-financial companies) was 5 times less than the state debt. But starting in 2003, it began to grow rapidly and reached its peak of $504.4 billion at the end of the third quarter of 2008, when the economic crisis erupted. By mid-summer 2010, the size of corporate external debt had decreased by almost $100 billion, and then began to grow rapidly again and in the first half of 2013 reached $628.4 billion, or more than 30% of GDP (which, however, is less level in 2009, when it amounted to 35.4% of GDP). At the same time, in the structure of this debt, the debt of the non-banking sector accounted for more than $418 billion, and the net debt (reduced by the value of foreign assets) exceeded $200 billion.

It should be taken into account that starting from 2012, the Bank of Russia has been publishing data on corporate external debt, broken down by state participation. Thus, if this share exceeds 50%, then this debt is included in the indicator “External debt of the public sector in an expanded definition.” If less than 50%, it is private sector debt.

The structure of the external debt of Russian state-owned companies is relatively transparent, since the main part of it is public debt in the form of bonds and officially published data on loans received by these companies.

Thus, on average, 3/4 of the external debt of the state non-banking sector falls on just four companies: Gazprom, Rosneft, Transneft and Russian Railways.

Unlike the public corporate sector, the external debt of the private sector is highly complex and ambiguous, due to the extreme opacity within corporate financial flows coming from foreign (mostly offshore) jurisdictions.

According to calculations by specialists in external corporate debt and chief analyst of Sberbank M. Matovnikov, almost 60% of the total external debt of the private sector was raised from companies associated with shareholders of Russian companies, i.e. These are debts “to ourselves.” In his article, M. Matovnikov notes: “... these loans do not fully represent the real money attracted to Russia. A significant part of this debt (at least its ruble part) could have been created artificially, including for the purpose of tax optimization of quasi-dividend payments. Article 296 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation allows interest expenses to be attributed to expenses on borrowed loans in rubles... That is, with an equal amount of debt for ruble loans, an amount 2.25 times larger can be attributed to expenses.”

Thus, a large share of foreign debt of the non-financial sector is fictitious, since it is actually attracted not for investment purposes, but for tax optimization purposes. As a result, dividends received by company shareholders take the form of interest payments on loans and reduce taxable profits in Russia. And foreign loans in rubles also allow you to save on taxes.

About 20% of external debt are debts in rubles, which on October 1, 2014 (at the exchange rate of that time) corresponded to $155 billion. As a result of the collapsed devaluation of the ruble in the fourth quarter of 2014, these debts decreased by 30% to 108 billion rubles .

According to M. Matovnikov’s calculations, in the structure of foreign currency debt the share of intracorporate debt is more than $100 billion. For banks, this share is not large - out of $171 billion, their debt as of January 1, 2015, only $7 billion was accounted for by intracorporate debt. At the same time, out of the total debt of companies of $376 billion, as of January 1, 2015, $70 billion was ruble debt and about $100 billion was intracorporate foreign currency debt. Thus, about 45% of the external debt of the non-banking sector at the beginning of 2015 accounted for internal corporate obligations - debts “to ourselves”.

In accordance with the debt repayment schedule published by the Bank of Russia, banks had to repay $15.1 billion in external debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. At the same time, according to the assessment of the balance of payments for this quarter published by the Bank of Russia, the balance of repayments and borrowings external debt by banks amounted to $18.4 billion. This figure is close to the volume of reduction in external debt of banks for this period (by $21 billion), which was published by the Bank of Russia and which includes the revaluation of ruble debt of banks. Consequently, banks pay off approximately the same amount of debt as they officially owe.

Unlike banks, companies repay only 25% of the expected volume. Thus, according to the schedule, they were supposed to repay $41.5 billion in external debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. But according to the balance of payments, the net result of repayment and raising funds amounted to only $11.5 billion. At the same time, the external debt of the non-banking sector decreased by $46 billion, which was largely facilitated by a revaluation of ruble debt by $35 billion. Corporations are scheduled to repay $87.5 billion in 2015.

The total external debt as of January 1, 2015 amounted to $597.3 billion. In the first quarter of 2015, payments on external debt amounted to $42.7 billion. In the second quarter, they decreased to $22.6 billion. Of this, for the principal debt accounts for $17 billion, interest - $5.6 billion.

As of November 1, 2015, external public debt amounted to $39.6 billion, internal debt - $71 billion.

The dynamics of Russia's external debt over the past three years are presented in table. 6.4.

Table 6.4

External debt of the Russian Federation 1

The reduction in Russia's total debt in 2014 by almost $130 billion is certainly a very positive trend for the country's national economic security.

At the same time, the continuing net outflow of capital within the private sector remains an extremely negative trend. This export in recent years amounted to:

2008 - $133.6 billion;
2009 - $57.5 billion;
2010 - $30.8 billion;
2011 - $81.4 billion;
2012 - $53.9 billion;
2013 - $59.7 billion;
2014 - $155 billion

In order to ensure the economic security of the Russian Federation and prevent the threat of a collapse of the financial market in the current conditions of aggravated international situation, it is advisable to resort to tough measures to reduce the export of capital. To this end, the following actions must be taken.

Discourage capital flight by introducing a VAT (value added tax) tax on dubious non-cash cross-border transactions in foreign currency. If the legality of these operations is confirmed (supply of imported goods, provision of services, confirmation of payment of interest or repayment of a loan, if it is issued for a period of at least a year, dividends and other legal income on invested capital), the paid VAT is returned. Before the introduction of such a tax, reserve money according to the VAT norm for all questionable cross-border transactions for a period of one year or until their legality is confirmed. Export of money in cash foreign currency in the equivalent of more than 1 million rubles. also impose a capital flight tax.
Refund VAT to exporters only after receipt of export proceeds.
Stop including bad debts of non-residents to Russian enterprises in non-operating expenses and file claims against managers for compensation for damage to the enterprise and the state if such debts are identified.
Introduce restrictions on the volume of off-balance sheet foreign assets and obligations to non-residents on derivatives of Russian organizations, prohibit investments of Russian enterprises in foreign securities of states that have imposed economic sanctions against Russia.
Introduce advance notice of capital export operations, set restrictions on increasing the foreign exchange position of commercial banks.
Regulatory fixation of mandatory initial public offerings of shares of domestic issuers on Russian trading platforms.
Create a unified information system for currency and tax control, including electronic declaration of transaction passports with their transfer to the databases of all currency and tax control authorities.
Introduce licensing by the Bank of Russia of cross-border operations for the export of capital in foreign currency. Expand the powers and responsibilities of the Federal Service for Financial Monitoring of the Russian Federation, giving it the right to suspend any cross-border transactions of Russian and foreign legal entities conducted in possible violation of currency and anti-money laundering laws.
In order to stop the internal outflow of capital, prohibit the opening of new deposit accounts in foreign currency, as well as the accumulation of money in previously opened accounts. Limit the operation of the system for guaranteeing bank deposits of citizens only to deposits in rubles.
To stop the export of capital through insurance channels, stop concluding insurance contracts in foreign currency. Create a reinsurance company based on the Export Insurance Agency of Russia; provide it with a dominant position in the market for reinsurance of risks of Russian residents.
In order to de-dollarize the economy, establish increased reserve standards and risk assessment for banking operations in foreign currency, as well as introduce a tax on the acquisition of foreign currency or securities denominated in foreign currency, and attracting foreign speculative investments.
To reduce the outflow of capital in servicing foreign economic activity, stimulate imports and exports in rubles, refrain from introducing restrictions on cross-border transactions in rubles, and create conditions for the recognition of the ruble as a reserve currency by the monetary authorities of other countries. At the same time, provide for the allocation of tied ruble loans to states importing Russian products to maintain trade turnover, and use credit-currency swaps for these purposes.

In the context of an unprecedented aggravation of relations with Western countries for modern Russia, the risks and threats of a significant expansion and strengthening of foreign economic sanctions against our country, including measures to arrest, freeze and even confiscate state property and assets of quasi-state organizations, have sharply increased. Currently, these risks and threats are turning from potential into real and are already beginning to damage not only the economy, but also the international prestige of the Russian Federation. A striking example here is the blocking of foreign accounts of a number of Russian enterprises and the seizure of property of the Russian Federation by some Western countries in connection with Russia’s failure to comply with a court decision on the payment of $50 billion by former shareholders of the Yukos company.

In this situation, it is especially important to carry out various kinds of measures to ensure the safety of state property abroad and, first of all, its most liquid part - the international reserves of Russia, which, in addition to the gold and foreign exchange reserves of the Bank of Russia, include funds from state sovereign funds - the Reserve Fund and the National Fund welfare.

In order to prevent damage to national economic security, it is necessary to implement the following measures to protect and diversify the foreign exchange reserves and assets of the state.

It is necessary to transfer funds and accounts of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, the Bank of Russia, as well as state-controlled companies and banks (Gazprom, Rosneft, Russian Railways, Sberbank, VTB, Rosselkhozbank, Gazprombank, Vnesheconombank, Russian Technologies, Rusnano it .d.) from countries that have applied sanctions against Russia to the territory of states neutral in relation to the Russian Federation. The opening of correspondent accounts of Russian banks in banks of countries that have refused to join the sanctions regime will make it possible to carry out settlements and payments in foreign currency and service foreign economic transactions even if the United States and EU countries decide to take extreme measures, showing open Russophobia and adherence to Cold War methods .
Carry out a currency-credit swap between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the monetary regulators of countries that are not members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and have not joined the sanctions. A currency swap in foreign currencies with friendly and neutral countries will allow Russia to gain access to the money necessary to finance foreign trade, investment and other transactions in the face of currency sanctions and restrictions from the West.
Sell 100% of government bonds of states that have joined the sanctions against our country. First of all, this applies to government and quasi-government debt securities of NATO member countries: the USA, Great Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, etc. It makes sense to transfer funds received from the sale of government bonds of foreign countries from correspondent accounts in American and European banks to banks in countries that have abstained from sanctions (China, India, Kazakhstan, etc.). This will significantly increase the degree of protection of Russian state assets in terms of international reserves.
Reduce the share of dollar instruments in the structure of international reserves from today's 44% to the minimum required level of 10%. Reduce the share of the euro in the structure of international reserves from 40 to 10%. These funds should be placed in foreign currency accounts outside the US and EU countries in order to minimize the risks of freezing and seizure of state assets. Foreign exchange diversification of Russia's international reserves should be carried out both in terms of assets owned by the Bank of Russia (about $270 billion) and in terms of assets owned by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation in the form of funds from the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund (about $200 billion). At least 40% of Russia’s international reserves must be placed in the currencies and securities of countries acting as potential and current geopolitical allies and partners of Russia that have refrained from the sanctions regime (China, India, Malaysia, Kazakhstan, etc.).
Place 40% of gold and foreign exchange reserves in gold and other precious metals and stones, increasing the physical volume of gold on the balance sheet of the Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation by 3 times - up to 3-3.5 thousand tons. By this indicator, Russia should take second place in world after the USA, whose gold reserves are estimated at 8.5 thousand tons.
Carry out a significant reduction in the export of precious metals and stones to countries that have joined the sanctions against Russia. Develop and launch a mechanism for public procurement of precious metals and stones through the state order system by replenishing the assets of the Bank of Russia and Gokhran of Russia.
Redirect part of the ruble emission for the purchase of precious metals as one of the types of targeted monetary emission aimed at financing the development of a strategically important branch of Russian industry - the production of precious metals and stones.
A comprehensive and comprehensive government audit and revision of the gold reserves are needed, both in terms of precious metals and stones owned by the Bank of Russia, and in terms of valuables belonging to the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation (Gokhran). The physical return of Russia's gold reserves to the territory of the Russian Federation from safekeeping in foreign banks will avoid the freezing and seizure of the state gold reserve, and will also increase the stability of international reserves in general.

A number of other measures that need to be taken to ensure the financial security of the country are presented in the next chapter.

See: Chandrasekhar S. R. Financial Policies. N.Y.: UN DESA, 2007.
Bergolf Bolton R. The Great Divide and Beyond - Financial Architecture in Transition //CEPR Discussion Paper. 2003. No. 3476 (February). 2 Glazyev S. Yu. Overcome the recession // However. 2015. April - May.
Zhukovsky V. Ten steps to self-sufficiency // However. 2014. August - September.

Introduction

1. Financial security of the state and methodological approaches to its assessment 13

1.1. The essence and importance of financial security in the economic security system of the state 13

1.2. The main stages of the formation and development of the financial security system of the Russian Federation 39

1.3. Methodological basis for assessing threats to the financial security of Russia 47

2. Russian public debt as a threat to the financial security of the state 86

2.1. Public debt as a threat factor to Russia’s financial security 86

2.2. Analysis of the financial policy of the Russian Federation and public debt for the period 1992 - 2003 129

2.3. The impact of public debt on the financial security system of Russia 140

3. Public debt management in the system of ensuring financial security of the Russian Federation 158

3.1. Possibilities for optimizing financial flows when implementing the state's debt financial policy 158

3.2. Improving the process of managing public debt in the system of ensuring financial security of Russia 169

Conclusion 188

Bibliography 200

Appendix 1 215

Appendix 2 216

Appendix 3 221

Introduction to the work

Relevance of the research topic. The power and national security of a state are characterized, first of all, by the state of the country’s economy, and therefore its financial system. The main conditions for ensuring security are increased controllability of financial processes and effective regulation of economic development. The financial system and financial relations in the Russian Federation are not sufficiently reliably protected from the influence of various types of threats. Thus, the National Security Concept of the Russian Federation highlights threats directly related to financial relations, namely, the growth of external and internal public debt, a decrease in investment activity, and others.

The system of public borrowing is the most civilized form of attracting free financial resources at the disposal of public authorities and management bodies to perform their functions and public investment in the absence of their own financial resources. However, their impact on the country's economy is not clear. If used ineffectively, government loans shift the debt and tax burden onto business entities and the population of the country, both in the present and in the future. In addition, public financial debt can significantly limit economic growth and increase social tension, as the amount of funds allocated for investment and development of the social sphere is reduced; the state’s dependence on creditors, in particular foreign states and international monetary and financial organizations, is increasing when making economic and politically independent decisions.

In this regard, modern economic reality has put forward the task of maintaining the financial security of Russia to ensure the sustainable development of the economic system by identifying and monitoring threats to financial security, distributing financial resources to maintain the required level of reproduction, independence and competitiveness in the international finance system.

These prerequisites determined the need to create an effective government mechanism for protection against threats to financial security, and to determine the necessary measures to reduce the negative consequences of threats to the financial interests of the country. Currently, the main directions of Russia's debt policy require, in our opinion, assessment from the standpoint of their compliance with the tasks of reducing the level of threats to the financial security of the state.

Most of the work; published on security problems, is mainly of a theoretical nature and only indirectly affects the problems of financial security, since it is devoted to general economic security. Those that are of practical importance do not take into account the peculiarities of the debt factor associated with the weakening of the financial security of the state. The problem of ensuring security, taking into account the debt component as a threat, first of all, requires scientific and practical solutions in this area;

In this regard, the identified problems are relevant and determine the main content of this dissertation research.

The degree of development of the problem. Issues of theory and practice of the formation and development of a system of economic and financial security were discussed at different times in the works of Russian scientists: L.I. Abalkina, K.L. Astapova, S.A Afontseva, P.Ya. Baklanova, V.V. Burtseva, S.Yu. Glazyeva, AN. Illarionova, V.G. Novikova, A.A. Prokhozheva, V.V. Rudko-Silivanova, V.K. Senchagova and others; Problems of managing public debt and monetary policy were dealt with by: K.L. Astapov, E.V. Balatsky, AP. Vavilov, AL. Vedev, E.A. Zvonova, AN. Illarionov, K.G. Kalinkin, E.A. Kovalishin, A.G. Sarkisyants, A.V. Tretyak, G.Yu. Trofimov, B.A. Kheifets, E.G. Yasin et al.

The work of foreign scientists - E. Atkinson, P. Diamond, E. Dobson, J.M. - is devoted to the issues of the relationship between public debt and monetary policy. Keynes, F. Machlup, D. Ricardo, T. Sargent, D. Stiglitz, N. Wallace, M. Feldstein, J. Ferposson M. Hayes, P. Elworth and others, which were used by the applicant in the dissertation research.

At the same time, the problems of ensuring the financial security of the state, taking into account public debt as a threat factor, are

insufficiently developed and therefore are of interest for further research.

Goals and objectives of the study. The main goal of the dissertation is to study the modern system, ensure the financial security of Russia and substantiate the concept of public debt management to reduce threats to the financial security of the Russian Federation.

According With The set goal identified the following tasks research:.

explore and clarify the essence of the concepts “financial security, state” and “system for ensuring the financial security of the state”;

identify and analyze the main stages of the formation and development of the Russian financial security system;

study the possibilities of using methods for assessing threats to financial security, analyze and systematize threats in the field of public finance, as well as determine their impact on the financial interests of the state;

analyze the financial policy of the Russian Federation, the dynamics and structure of public debt to characterize it as a threat to the financial security of the Russian Federation, assess the impact on the stability and efficiency of the public finance system;

characterize the impact of public debt on the financial security of Russia;

identify and justify opportunities for optimizing financial flows in the implementation of the state’s debt financial policy;

analyze existing approaches to public debt management and identify ways to improve the efficiency of debt management within the framework of ensuring the financial security of the Russian Federation.

The subject of the dissertation research is public debt, its qualitative and quantitative assessment in the system of ensuring the financial security of the Russian Federation.

As a research object acts as a system of financial security of the state.

Theoretical and methodological basis research compiled

a dialectical approach to the study of public debt in the system of ensuring financial security of Russia; an evolutionary-systemic approach to the analysis of economic situations and phenomena, theoretical and practical material using the principle of unity of historical and logical approaches. The data analysis was carried out using methods of comparative economic and economic-statistical analysis, the method of analyzing hierarchies, grouping and other general scientific methods of economic research.

Regulatory, legal and information base of the study there were federal laws of the Russian Federation, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation, resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation, resolutions of the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, resolutions of the State Duma of the Russian Federation; statistical and analytical materials of the Security Council of the Russian Federation, the State Committee of the Russian Federation on Statistics (Federal Service of State Statistics of the Russian Federation), the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, the Bank of Russia and the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation. The research is based on regulatory and methodological documents, publications of international organizations, information posted on official and information websites, as well as materials of international conferences dedicated to the problems of ensuring financial and economic security, research results of scientists and specialists for 1992-2003.

The most significant scientific results obtained by the author:

the concept of “financial security of the state” was clarified based on the characteristics of the stability of the financial system (public finances) And compliance with the interests of the state in the financial sector;

the competitive advantages of the public finance system are revealed as factors for ensuring financial security, based on the division of elements that positively and negatively shape the investment image of the Russian economy;

Russia's public debt has been studied from the perspective of a threat to its financial interests; an assessment was made of the debt policy of the Russian Federation from the perspective of its compliance with the task of reducing the level of threats

financial security, and practical recommendations on this problem are identified;

a model for assessing the “public debt” indicator has been developed, based on the author’s approach to taking into account the “virtualization” of Russian public debt and the irrational increase in the debt burden;

To elements scientific novelty The dissertation research includes the following:

the concept of “system for ensuring the financial security of the state” was clarified, as well as “state virtual debt” as a theoretical image of the factors taken into account in the model for assessing public debt;

an approach to determining financial interests and threats to financial security is substantiated, according to which it is determined that public debt is a threat to the financial security of Russia at the present stage of development of the state;

A theoretical model of financially secure debt cooperation and the concept of managing accumulated debt within the framework of a financial security system are proposed as ways to resolve financial contradictions in achieving the Pareto optimal state of the public finance system.

Theoretical significance This research is to develop the scientific foundations of the system for ensuring the financial security of the Russian Federation, including methodological approaches, principles of organization, the possibility of its improvement for the effective functioning of the public finance system in conditions of limited financial resources, and also that the conclusions and proposals can serve as the basis for further research problems associated with the inclusion of the public debt management process in the country's financial security system RF.

Practical significance research lies in the possibility of applying the results obtained by federal and regional authorities and management for the development and improvement of the system

ensuring the financial and economic security of Russia while managing public debt.

Recommendations based on the results of the study, aimed at increasing the efficiency of public debt in the financial security system, were transferred to the Department of Finance of the Primorsky Territory Administration and accepted for implementation.

The results of the research can be used in teaching the disciplines “Economic Security”, “Economic Security of Russia”, “Finance and Credit” and “National Economics” to students of economic specialties of higher educational institutions.

Approbation of research results. The main provisions of the dissertation, conclusions and proposals on the research topic were reported by the author and discussed at meetings of the Department of Finance and Credit of the Far Eastern State University, at a meeting of the Academic Council of the Vladivostok branch of the Russian Customs Academy, as well as at the annual conferences of young scientists of the Institute of Management and Business of the Far Eastern State University (Vladivostok, 2001 - 2004), Far Eastern State Academy of Economics and Management (Vladivostok, 2004), Institute of Economic Research of the Far Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Khabarovsk, 2002), Far Eastern State Technical University (Vladivostok, 2004), Far Eastern Academy of Public Administration under the President of the Russian Federation (Khabarovsk, 2004), Birobidzhan State Pedagogical Institute (2004).

Scope and structure of work. The dissertation consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography and appendices. The main text of the work is presented on 214 pages of typewritten text, includes 26 figures, 19 tables, 3 appendices. The bibliographic list contains 165 titles.

The essence and significance of financial security in the economic security system of the state

In the context of reforming market relations, economic development is increasingly determined by the action of market mechanisms; The state pays significant attention to the problems of safe management of economic processes. Factors such as economic productivity, its sustainability and development, efficiency and competitiveness in the global and domestic markets are closely related to the economic security of the state. Economically efficient activities of the state imply the presence of an economic security system.

Integrity is the fundamental basis for the stability of systems, by which we mean the preservation of properties when external conditions change. From systems theory it follows that the state is a complexly organized open system, the state of integrity of which is determined by the action of many external and internal factors. We support the statement that the concept of system integrity is closely related to the concept of its security, because security is a state or conditions under which someone or something is not in danger. Security can also be understood as the presence of protection from danger or the ability of a system to develop in accordance with the tasks assigned to it, regardless of the influence of external and internal forces; but the cumulative effect on the system of internal and external factors must be taken into account in a timely manner, constantly adapting to it both the system as a whole and its individual elements. The property of uncertainty of economic systems, resulting from the principle of systematicity, is the following statement: a complete description of the components of the system does not fully define the system, while the opposite is also true - a complete description of the system as a whole does not fully determine its individual parts. Thus, it is initially necessary to highlight some of the most important components of the economic system, in particular, the public finance system, to justify its role in the financial and economic development and current activities of the state, its impact on the ability to maintain the integrity of the state and state sovereignty.

The state as an economic system and economic entity functions in accordance with the goals it has set for itself. In the first case, this may be achieving certain macroeconomic indicators, ensuring solutions to socio-economic problems, in the second case, receiving investments, attracting financial and credit resources, and their effective distribution. Any economic entity, like a system, has a certain set of goals, the structure of which is in most cases unique, and the entity functions in accordance with a certain algorithm to achieve its goals. The uncertainty of environmental factors can also affect the stability of the structure of the algorithm itself, which makes some government goals completely unattainable. In this case, they say that there is no certain reliability of the system. Reliability refers to certain properties of a system that allow it to achieve its goal under certain deviations of environmental parameters that influence the system, that is, from those whose future values were determined at the time the decision was made.

Public debt as a threat factor to Russia's financial security

Public debt is divided into internal and external. The internal debt of the state is formed in connection with the attraction of funds from enterprises and the population for the implementation of government programs and orders in the currency of the Russian Federation. The main emphasis of Russian budget legislation is on the currency in which the borrowing was made. It is the national currency of the Russian Federation that is the basis for classifying debt obligations as domestic, regardless of who the creditor is. It seems to us that domestic public debt currently carries almost the same meaning when considering problems and issues of financial security. If, theoretically, the threat to the existence of internal public debt can be neutralized by using the means and instruments of monetary policy, then the main criterion for classifying a debt as external or internal does not make it possible to state who exactly (resident or non-resident) is the creditor of the internal debt. Thus, by leveling the internal debt and protecting itself from civil sanctions, the state can predetermine by its actions state-legal international political, economic, financial sanctions, which can be considered as threats to the economic and financial security of the state.

Significant differences between state external debt and state internal debt also lie in the fact that internal debt contributes to the redistribution of financial resources mainly within the state, and external debt involves the withdrawal and transfer of part of the national income and national wealth to foreign creditors, and quite often the implementation of certain political and economic conditions.

It seems to us that a significant danger of public debt is its transfer to future generations. Society becomes hostage to the government's financial policy. It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of “state debt” and “debt of the economy”. As noted in the “Concept of Strategic Development of Russia until 2010”, the Russian economy, unlike the Russian state, is already solvent (a positive balance of payments of about 50-60 billion dollars per year, constant improvement in the investment position of credit institutions, reduction of debt obligations of Russian corporations).

Thus, society forcibly (regardless of its will) accepts an additional financial burden in addition to accepting its own debt, although not all of it, but a certain part of it - entrepreneurial structures.

There is an opinion that an increase in public debt, in principle, cannot lead to bankruptcy of the state for a number of reasons. It is enough to finance the public debt, and there may be no need to repay it. The state always has sources to repay or refinance debt. In order to comply with the debt service schedule, the government must collect in taxes an amount no less than the amount of debt service payments. We do not share this point of view. Such an approach to government borrowing and debt refinancing ultimately leads to default, since in addition to debt refinancing, the state has a number of other expenses that require exclusive government financing.

Possibilities for optimizing financial flows when implementing the state's debt financial policy

The modern world financial system in the context of globalization is characterized by the increasing interconnectedness of the financial systems of individual states, as well as a certain degree of their autonomy, i.e. independence from the external environment, the degree of involvement in international financial relations.

According to N.P. Gusakova, “there is no external environment for the global system. Its safe development requires only one thing - the sustainable development of all its constituent parts. And the closer and more intense the relationships, the more the overall security depends on the “health” of each organ of a single global organism. For each such organ, its “health” is a function not only of its structural links, but also of the external environment, i.e. The security of each financial system of the global system is a derivative value that also depends on the nature and dynamics of its external dependence. Therefore, economic security, and therefore financial security, should be analyzed not only in terms of sustainability and development, but also in the quality of external dependence. It is on the quality of external dependence, the nature of the relationship between economic entities that their own economic security, and no less the security of the entire global economic system, depends.”

It seems important to us to note that when considering security, it is necessary to focus on the categories of “part” and “whole”. The contradiction lies in the fact that the whole can develop through the suppression of the interests of a part, which is most often found in the modern world, but it can also happen the other way around - the system provides its part with the opportunity to develop. In the first case, a part, trying to free itself from the pressure of the “whole,” develops immunity, which expresses the meaning of ensuring both financial and economic security. However, in the system of international integration, when the world community is characterized by interpenetration and universality of world economic relations, it is difficult to answer the question of where one “part” ends and another begins.

Many researchers agree that in modern conditions of structural transformations in developed countries, the concept of financial security acquires as its most important objective criterion the competitiveness of the national financial system or its leading links in the world market, ensuring the viability of national financial relations in the context of global development. Thus, financial security is always a derivative of the economic and political course chosen by the country. Therefore, measures aimed at achieving financial security by different countries may not only differ, but often be opposite in nature.

Introduction

Chapter 1. Theoretical aspects of the internal and external debt of the Russian Federation and its impact on economic security

1 Russia's internal debt

2 Russia's external debt

3Characteristics of economic security in relation to external and internal debt

Chapter 1 Conclusions

Chapter 2. Analysis of the current state of Russia’s internal and external debt

1 Analysis of the current state of Russia’s internal debt, its problems and impact on economic security

2 Analysis of the current state of Russia’s external debt, its problems and impact on economic security

Chapter 2 Conclusions

Chapter 3. Ways to solve problematic aspects of Russia’s internal and external debt

1 Ways to solve problems of internal debt and improve its management

Chapter 3 Conclusions

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

In modern conditions of executive power, there is not enough tax revenue to cover huge government expenditures, and money emission leads to inflation. The Government's refusal to use loans from the Central Bank of the Russian Federation for these purposes led to the fact that their place was taken by loans within the country and abroad. As a result of a sharp increase in the budget deficit and growing borrowing, Russia's public debt, both internal and external, has increased significantly, so the topic of the course work: “Russia's internal and external debt and its impact on economic security” attracted my attention.

Countries, carrying out economic transformations, always resort to external borrowing, so problems associated with managing external and internal public debt, its regulation, and choosing the right debt policy are very relevant today. Despite the fact that in recent years the situation in the government borrowing market in Russia has changed a lot, and for the better, we should not forget that any wrong step can lead to serious problems in the future. It is possible to correctly assess the situation only by knowing all the features of public debt, its management and having studied the accumulated experience.

The theoretical significance of this topic of the course work for economics is that the amount of external and internal public debt of Russia (especially in relation to GDP) is an important indicator of the country’s economy, since servicing public debt requires funds from the budget and thereby dictates the need to reduce expenses, as a rule, for social needs, which affects the living standards of the population. Therefore, competent management of the size and structure of internal and external public debt is an important socio-economic task that requires a good theoretical justification.

The practical significance of this topic for economics is that the analysis of the current state of Russia’s external and internal debt and determination of the level of its influence on the state of the financial system, monetary circulation and economic security of the country make further research on the topic necessary and timely to identify the best ways to solve emerging economic problems aspects.

The purpose of this course work is to identify the significance of Russia’s internal and external debt and its impact on economic security, analyze and identify problems associated with its functioning in modern Russia, and ways to solve them.

To achieve this goal, the following tasks were identified:

Study, analyze and summarize literature on the topic of work;

Reveal the role and significance of the internal and external debt of the Russian Federation;

Describe economic security in relation to public debt;

Analyze the current state of Russia’s internal and external debt, its problems and impact on economic security;

Suggest and consider ways to solve problematic aspects of this topic issue.

Chapter 1. Theoretical aspects of the internal and external debt of the Russian Federation and its impact on economic security

The problem of debt dependence of the state and, above all, to foreign creditors, has always been of great importance, since the full realization of the sovereignty of the state is possible only with a certain economic independence. Therefore, first of all, it is necessary to consider the concept of “public debt”.

Public debt is an inevitable result of a budget deficit, the causes of which are associated with a decline in production, with an increase in marginal costs, unsecured emission of money, an increase in the costs of financing the military-industrial complex, an increase in the volume of the shadow economy, non-productive expenses, losses, theft, etc.

In the scientific literature, public debt is understood as obligations arising from government borrowings assumed by the Russian Federation, guarantees or guarantees for the obligations of third parties, other obligations, as well as obligations of third parties assumed by the Russian Federation.

Public debt is divided into internal and external. Let's take a closer look at them.

1.1 Russia's domestic debt

.1.1 Concept and meaning of the internal public debt of the Russian Federation

Domestic public debt represents the amount of debt owed to its citizens and enterprises. It exists as the sum of issued and outstanding debt obligations.

The Budget Code of the Russian Federation gives a narrower concept - internal public debt recognizes obligations arising in the currency of the Russian Federation.

The volume of Russia's domestic public debt includes:

Principal nominal amount of debt on government securities;

The volume of principal debt on loans received by Russia;

The volume of principal debt on budget loans and budget credits received by Russia from budgets of other levels;

The volume of obligations under state guarantees provided by the Russian Federation.

Debt obligations of the Russian Federation are repaid within periods determined by the specific terms of the loan and cannot exceed 30 years.

Changing the terms of a government loan issued for circulation, including the terms of payment and the amount of interest payments, the circulation period, is not allowed.

Payment of income from loans and their repayment are one of the main items of budget expenditures. In conditions when public debt reaches a level at which the country is unable to fulfill its debt obligations in a timely manner, the government is forced to resort to their consolidation, i.e. a change in the terms of the loan associated with a change in repayment terms, when short-term obligations are consolidated into long-term and medium-term ones, or conversion - a reduction in the amount of interest paid on the loan or its transformation into long-term foreign investments.

The main purpose of issuing loans in today's Russia is to cover the budget deficit and refinance previous loans. This means that new loans are issued for the amount of debt that must be repaid in a given year. An increase in government spending entails an increase in loans and debt, so government internal debt is closely related to the state budget as a fact of its origin.

Summarizing the above, we can give a brief definition of domestic public debt - this is the total amount of all issued but not yet repaid government loans and unpaid interest on them.

If we use drier terms, internal debt, according to one of the classifications, is a way of replenishing the state treasury by borrowing funds from the population and legal entities registered in the territory of the state and paying taxes to the treasury of this state, under state guarantees by issuing state securities papers

State internal debt is secured by assets at the disposal of the Government of the Russian Federation.

Servicing of the state internal debt of the Russian Federation is carried out by the Bank of Russia and its institutions, unless otherwise provided by the Government of the Russian Federation, through operations for the placement of debt obligations of Russia, their repayment and the payment of income in the form of interest on them or in another form.

1.1.2 Forms and types of internal debt of the Russian Federation

In Russia the following are defined forms internal debt:

government loans made by issuing securities on behalf of the Russian Federation;
agreements on the provision of state guarantees to the Russian Federation;
treaties and agreements on the receipt by the Russian Federation of budget loans and budget credits from the budgets of other levels of the budget system of the Russian Federation;
agreements and agreements concluded on behalf of the Russian Federation on the prolongation and restructuring of debt obligations of the Russian Federation of previous years.

The following can be roughly determined kinds domestic debt obligations: market ones, existing in the form of issue-grade securities, and non-market ones, arising as a result of the execution of the federal budget and issued to finance the resulting debt. Marketable domestic debt obligations of Russia today include:

Østate short-term bonds (GKOs) - registered zero-coupon government securities, issued in non-documentary form, their issue is formalized by a global certificate stored in the Bank of Russia;

Federal loan bonds with a variable coupon (OFZ-PK), with a constant coupon income (OFZ-PD), with a fixed coupon (OFZ-FK) - the first medium-term prices