Russian Economy General News: #7

So what country's economy has grown from 1.2 trillion to 1.5 trillion US$ using the West's measuring stick since January 1st.

franco wrote:So what country's economy has grown from 1.2 trillion to 1.5 trillion US$  using the West's measuring stick  since January 1st.

I was just wondering about that. How much would it with 2013's exchange rate? Around 2 trillion? Gotta love those Australia, Canada and Spain memes. What's next, Italy?

But nominal GDP obviously pefectly measures the sizes of different economies. Price levels in every single country are the same as in the US, Russia imports and buys all its weapons (and everything else!) in dollars, the US economic influence is on the rise and the Chinese economy didn't grow at all during the last few years. Absolutely flawless.

I like your sarcasm.

https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92668/

The Central Bank of Russia in March increased its gold holdings by 1.5% or about 25 tons per month

Sergei Glazyev Interview to Tass Today

http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/4202084

miketheterrible wrote:https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92668/

The Central Bank of Russia in March increased its gold holdings by 1.5% or about 25 tons per month

They should buy gold more aggresively then they are doing right now , Buy all the gold russia produces and buy as much as you can from global market.

Russia for its size and economy should atleast have 5000 T of gold , Even pidly Germany has 4000 T of gold.

CBR is beholden to USD and have upped buying the green buck more than gold.

Austin wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92668/

The Central Bank of Russia in March increased its gold holdings by 1.5% or about 25 tons per month

They should buy gold more aggresively then they are doing right now , Buy all the gold russia produces and buy as much as you can from global market.

Russia for its size and economy should atleast have 5000 T of gold , Even pidly Germany has 4000 T of gold.

CBR is beholden to USD and have upped buying the green buck more than gold.

So why dont we just demand them to stop?  we cant.  Is Putin 5th column?  Seriously, none of us are economists.  I view some of what Glaznyov says as wrong (his view on floating ruble) and others as right.  Currently, Russia's economy is growing despite sanctions an lack of cheap credit.  I dont think his view of cheap credit is correct as it sees Russia in the mess it was in years ago where industries relied on debt to survive. That was noticeable when private debt in Russia is half a trillion.

Issue with buying lots of gold fast, is it will make the prices skyrocket.  As well, buying USD when it fluctuates so much isn't a bad move, as the money can be used for foreign trade and purchasing Gold.

Did you know that lots of nations, when even at war with US, use US currency to purchase goods?  This is a tactic used for decades.

miketheterrible wrote:

Issue with buying lots of gold fast, is it will make the prices skyrocket.  As well, buying USD when it fluctuates so much isn't a bad move, as the money can be used for foreign trade and purchasing Gold.

Did you know that lots of nations, when even at war with US, use US currency to purchase goods?  This is a tactic used for decades.

the redemability of dollar papers depending on the willingness of the US to honor this papers.

And it doesn!t honor them , example iran.

Singular_Transform wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:

Issue with buying lots of gold fast, is it will make the prices skyrocket.  As well, buying USD when it fluctuates so much isn't a bad move, as the money can be used for foreign trade and purchasing Gold.

Did you know that lots of nations, when even at war with US, use US currency to purchase goods?  This is a tactic used for decades.

the redemability of dollar papers depending on the willingness of the US to honor this papers.

And it doesn!t honor them , example iran.

Do it to Iran is one thing, do it to Russia is another.  It has unforeseen consequences when it was done to Iran.  Those consequences are that other nations start to really actively look at alternatives to trade among each other.  The fact that the Central Bank of Russia still (unfortunately) operate under the IMF, US has its obligations to international trade to be able to release those USD's and to honor any bonds that other nations hold on it.  If lets say Russia gets banned altogether, then yes, Russia loses $80B in USD, but it will force Russia to abandon USD altogether, and entice other nations to do the same.  Which that unforeseen consequence will be America's undoing.  What most of you seem to forget is that US dollar is still strong and is a great investment regardless how you look at it.  Euro and Pound took a pounding while USD has stayed pretty stable.  It is a safe investment compared to even gold at the moment (Gold fluctuates way too much as of lately, tied a lot to Oil (for whatever reason).

https://www.bullionvault.com/gold-price-chart.do

Even if US today freezes payment of USD that Russia has in its forex $80 billion or so , Russia wont be able to do much short of declaring a war.

US forze Irans forex of $100 billion or so and no one in world complained about it.


There is no point for CBR to keep forex in USD , either keep it in Euro as Russia can always turn off Gas tap if EU acts smart it has leverage of buy a mix of IMF SDR/Gold/Chinese Bond from $80 billion to spread the risk.

For convinient purpose keeping 10-20 $ USD in forex is fine is not a significant %


Suggest read this interview

Sergei Glazyev Interview to Tass Today

http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/4202084

I did. and I don't agree with everything he is suggesting. A lot of it is bullshit like the cheap credit. What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit. Why is that? Because they figured it was easier to live off of cheap credit and bare minimum production/expansion. Now things are different and companies are having to use their own resources. Glazyiev can say they aren't able to expand but that is pure bullshit, which has been obvious to anyone of us that follows sites like Sdelanounas or others. Russia's industrial production has been up for the first quarter already and agriculture is expanding at rates Russia has not seen since Soviet Union. Yet credit rates are through the roof.

Only thing I agree with him is control of the exchange rates and currency exchange. Out of that, the rest isn't much worth reading. I admire people like KVS and others who are knowledgeable in economics but the west isn't Russia and Russia isn't the west. So the whole cheap credit thing just does not work for Russia. Russia is more competitive now, and advancing, during tough times compared to good times when credit was easily available. Why is that? All to do with the whole business structure in Russia that was shit and is being a little less shit now than before. Still far too much corruption and lack of foresight.

Hate to break it to you Austin, but even countries who have absolutely poor relations with US have a lot of money in USD reserves. Iran is a nobody in terms of international strength compared to Russia. So that is why no one bat an eye to it. Russia on the other hand has a lot more influence and more nations are reliant on Russia's resources than they were on Iran. Lets just say Russia can make it difficult for metallurgy industries, aerospace, space, and other industries for US. Have you noticed US has not blocked Russia's investments into USD? I mean, we keep bleating about near possible war, but it has not happened. Think long and hard about that one.

miketheterrible wrote:I did. and I don't agree with everything he is suggesting.  A lot of it is bullshit like the cheap credit.  What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt.  Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit.  Why is that? Because they figured it was easier to live off of cheap credit and bare minimum production/expansion.  Now things are different and companies are having to use their own resources.  Glazyiev can say they aren't able to expand but that is pure bullshit, which has been obvious to anyone of us that follows sites like Sdelanounas or others.  Russia's industrial production has been up for the first quarter already and agriculture is expanding at rates Russia has not seen since Soviet Union.  Yet credit rates are through the roof.

Credit does not have to be cheap and cheap is relative , Today EU and US have interest rate of less that 1 % , they have wiped out the savers or forced them to invest in high risk areas where gains are higher

The right interest rate historically for many centuries according to Greenspan has been 4-5 % that is good for business and savers.

Russia should aim for credit rate of 4-5 % for the next 10 years , The current rate of 9-10 % is bad for business they would be getting loan at 12 % and above which is insane.

Business should get credit at 4-5 % and Savers should get interest rate of 4 % , inflation should be targetted at 1-2%

Hate to break it to you Austin, but even countries who have absolutely poor relations with US have a lot of money in USD reserves.  Iran is a nobody in terms of international strength compared to Russia.  So that is why no one bat an eye to it.  Russia on the other hand has a lot more influence and more nations are reliant on Russia's resources than they were on Iran.  Lets just say Russia can make it difficult for metallurgy industries, aerospace, space, and other industries for US.  Have you noticed US has not blocked Russia's investments into USD?  I mean, we keep bleating about near possible war, but it has not happened.  Think long and hard about that one.

Most countries have follow the heard model So every one invest in US Tressuries which makes them follow it and US is just living of on the others.

Russia does not need heard mentality , It should keep US Tressuries but in small percentage of its forex 10-12 % at best.

My own country India is offering Long Term Bond of 10 years yeald of ~ 6.5-6.9 % for Foreign Countries , India is a safe and friendly country with Russia and there is low risk in its bond with high interest rate.

There is a cap of $30 billion on buying Indian Bond but atleast Russia can dump green buck and start buying Indian And Chinese bond

Investments by FPIs in Government Securities: April 3 2017

SEBI circulars are here

Summary: foreigners hold Rs.2.6 lakh crore ($40 billion) of Indian government debt. That is the prescribed limit permitted by RBI ( Central Bank )

Rupee isn't used internationally and USD is usually used as reserve when making purchases abroad that otherwise may not have worked before, especially when ones currency fluctuate a lot. That is when one plays the currency market. Rupee isn't part of it.

miketheterrible wrote:Rupee isn't used internationally and USD is usually used as reserve when making purchases abroad that otherwise may not have worked before, especially when ones currency fluctuate a lot.  That is when one plays the currency market.  Rupee isn't part of it.

Doesnt matter , they can always approach the Indian Central Bank RBI to convert it into other currency after end of maturity period

Russian wont be directly paying USD to buy Indian bonds but would approach Indian Central Bank to convert to Rupee its USD to buy these bonds

Austin is 100% on target. The whole "cheap credit" angle is complete diversionary BS. A CBR rate of 4% is not cheap
credit. Consumers would still see over 10% personal loan rates and credit card rates around 20%. Please stop bringing
up this cheap credit shite since it makes a negative contribution to this thread.

Glazyev is also right about Russia not having accessible credit levels for consumers. Exhibit A proving this is the collapse
in car sales. Big ticket items like cars are not bought for cash up front anywhere in the OECD. So why the different standard
for Russia?

What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit.

This is a lie. Give some numbers or take a hike. You are claiming here that $540 billion in gross private and government debt
in Russia is excessive. On what basis? You make it sound like there should be zero debt in Russia. This is so ignorant
it is breathtaking. Just by the nature of capitalist economics there will be a minimum debt level (well above zero) which
scales with the size of the GDP and reflects the annual innovation turnover. If Russian companies never had to retool for
new models of production then they could run zero debt. Since this is a nonsensical economic regime, they need "cheap
credit" to retool. Some companies require long term debt to avoid bankruptcy and your instant gratification philosophy
is idiotic. For example AMD. It is always swimming in red ink but without it Intel would be a monopoly. As long as AMD
can keep paying the interest on its debt, that is good enough. Zero debt zealotry is gross economic incompetence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States

So the US gross debt (public and private) hit 300% of GDP in 2008. Even with $740 billion 2013 gross debt, the figure
for Russia was about 33% in 2013. And Russia has a debt problem? BTW, the roughly $200 billion drop in Russia's gross
debt after 2014 reflects unloading by all entities that could not afford the servicing with the reduce forex rate. So the
current $540 billion is sustainable since it is obvious that the debt holders are in no hurry to unload. In fact, as posted
by Austin the debt is starting to increase. This is normal since Russia is returning to GDP growth.

India Govt Bond Generic Bid Yield 10 Year

https://www.bloomberg.com/quote/GIND10YR:IND

Interesting Russian 10Y Bond Yeald has fallen from 11 % in Jan 2016 to 7.74 % in April 2017

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/russia/government-bond-yield

kvs wrote:Austin is 100% on target.   The whole "cheap credit" angle is complete diversionary BS.   A CBR rate of 4% is not cheap
credit.  Consumers would still see over 10% personal loan rates and credit card rates around 20%.   Please stop bringing
up this cheap credit shite since it makes a negative contribution to this thread.

Glazyev is also right about Russia not having accessible credit levels for consumers.   Exhibit A proving this is the collapse
in car sales.   Big ticket items like cars are not bought for cash up front anywhere in the OECD.   So why the different standard
for Russia?  

What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit.

This is a lie.   Give some numbers or take a hike.   You are claiming here that $540 billion in gross private and government debt
in Russia is excessive.   On what basis?    You make it sound like there should be zero debt in Russia.   This is so ignorant
it is breathtaking.   Just by the nature of capitalist economics there will be a minimum debt level (well above zero) which
scales with the size of the GDP and reflects the annual innovation turnover.   If Russian companies never had to retool for
new models of production then they could run zero debt.   Since this is a nonsensical economic regime, they need "cheap
credit" to retool.    Some companies require long term debt to avoid bankruptcy and your instant gratification philosophy
is idiotic.   For example AMD.   It is always swimming in red ink but without it Intel would be a monopoly.   As long as AMD
can keep paying the interest on its debt, that is good enough.   Zero debt zealotry is gross economic incompetence.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States

So the US gross debt (public and private) hit 300% of GDP in 2008.   Even with $740 billion 2013 gross debt, the figure
for Russia was about 33% in 2013.   And Russia has a debt problem?  BTW, the roughly $200 billion drop in Russia's gross
debt after 2014 reflects unloading by all entities that could not afford the servicing with the reduce forex rate.   So the
current $540 billion is sustainable since it is obvious that the debt holders are in no hurry to unload.   In fact, as posted
by Austin the debt is starting to increase.   This is normal since Russia is returning to GDP growth.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/russia/external-debt

name me a company that was growing like it is now, under the cheap credit of Russia.  Have you ever noticed the fact that Russian companies like Rostelsmash wasn't even hitting foreign markets till now?  Have you noticed that Russian brands were not even being talked about till now? Have you noticed that only 10% of Russia's businesses were even looking at export till now?  Have you noticed that Russia went from major importer of various foods till now?

Why is that?  It has to do with gross incompetence (as you would say) about the business model of Russia.  You can't prove it because you don't know any Russian businesses and their foreign success.  I know of 1 but that is because I know of their activity here.

If you think a debt riddance on a company is good so long as you can just do basic servicing on a debt, isn't good.  It isn't healthy.  It means that the company isn't really growing and is stagnant.  AMD is just that.  They are always trying to push a new product as something super duper in hopes to get themselves out of the mess they are in.  Hence why you always hear of rumors about Dubai or someone else wanting to buy out the company.  Half a trillion USD for Russian businesses in Russia is NOT healthy, especially to total size of Russia's economy in USD terms.  Russian private debt is a lot, and if you think that comparing it to US economy and how they should do it shows you are talking shit.  Go onto zerohedge and ask the guys there if their business model of borrowing and just surviving off of being able to service lowest part the debt is healthy.  There is a reason why there are articles every day talking about America's incoming recession and debt bubble burst.  And there is a word you know of - debt bubble.  Guess what? IT is happening in Russia with the housing market and utility market in Russia hence why everyone's favorite prosecutor from Crimea is now doing an investigation on it in Omsk and the rest.

If you think that the whole cheap credit thing is good and healthy and will advance Russia, you are wrong.  Russia is advancing through its own means and this is obvious from current market situations in the country and Rostec.

Japan has been stagnant for 20 years and they rely on cheap domestic credit, hence why internal debt is over 200% of its GDP.  Japan isn't a healthy economy.

Cheap credit should only apply to certain aspects of the economy like: A company wanting to start a new production (not expand an existing one), buying a car (even then, cars are grossly overpriced and this is thanks to speculators so you are playing exactly into speculators hands. If you are old enough, then you would know you could purchase a brand new 1970 Ford Mach 1 at the price of $7000 CAD brand new back then, and that was do-able even for someone working in a food stand at the MTS center in Winnipeg), other aspects.

Russia has low personal debt, but it has high corporate debt. Something they shouldn't be living off of. This is only a recent history kind of thing, and the whole idea of just handing out money isn't good. You are falling right into Reagan's Voodoo economics.

REPLAY: An Interview With Jim Rickards & Keith McCullough on HedgeyeTV

^^ Listen to that interview it is very nice and informative

In this book Death of Money ,Jim Rickards recommends the following portfolio it keep it somewhat crash proof in Economic Crisis

The superstructure of a robust all-weather portfolio to preserve wealth in the coming collapse and mitigate an ice-nine asset freeze looks like this:

Physical gold and silver, 10 percent (coins and bars, no numismatics)
Cash, 30 percent (some in physical notes)
Real estate, 20 percent (income producing or agricultural)
Fine art fund, 5 percent (museum quality only)
Angel and early venture capital, 10 percent (FinTech, natural resource, water)
Hedge funds, 5 percent (global macro, long-short equity, or arbitrage)
Bonds, 10 percent (high-quality sovereigns only)
Stocks, 10 percent (natural resource, mining, energy, utilities, tech only)

A family business should not be counted among investible assets. It should be held outside this portfolio. All of these assets, except cash, stocks, and bonds, can be held by direct title in physical or contractual form without reliance on banks brokers, exchanges, or digital records. Those assets cannot be hacked. Some are illiquid. Most are immune from ice-nine lockdowns. This allocation offers protection from inflation, deflation, and panics.

Importantly, investors must be vigilant and nimble. The time will come when the cash allocation needs to be moved quickly into another category, perhaps land, gold, or art. Likewise bonds may need to be sold once inflation emerges. This is not a “set it and forget it” portfolio. Still, it’s a good starting place for uncertain times.

Ministry of Finance of the RF budget revenues from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 percentage point GDP

Economy & Business April 22, 8:53 update date: April 22, 9:21 UTC + 3
oil reserves structure is changing and more and more share passes on as reserves, said Finance Minister Ilya Trunin

Share
2 2
KRASNOYARSK, April 22. / TASS /. The revenues of the Russian budget from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 p. P. Of GDP due to the changes in the structure of oil reserves and allowances, he told reporters Deputy Finance Minister Ilya Trunin within the Krasnoyarsk Economic Forum.

"If you do not change rates, the 2025 revenue will be reduced by 1 percentage point of GDP structure of oil reserves is changing and more and more share passes on. (As reserves - TASS approx.) Firstly, the sector's share in GDP ceteris paribus reduced. and secondly, the preferential rates applied more widely because of exhaustion ", - he said.

According to the law on the budget for 2017 is scheduled arrival of about 5 trillion rubles oil and gas revenues (37%) of the 13.5 trillion rubles total. The proportion was about the same last year - 35.7%. Earlier, when the oil price was approximately $ 100 per barrel, the share of oil and gas revenues in the budget of more than 50%.


Подробнее на ТАСС:
http://tass.ru/ekonomika/4203476

Austin wrote:Ministry of Finance of the RF budget revenues from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 percentage point GDP

Economy & Business April 22, 8:53 update date: April 22, 9:21 UTC + 3
oil reserves structure is changing and more and more share passes on as reserves, said Finance Minister Ilya Trunin

Share
2 2
KRASNOYARSK, April 22. / TASS /. The revenues of the Russian budget from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 p. P. Of GDP due to the changes in the structure of oil reserves and allowances, he told reporters Deputy Finance Minister Ilya Trunin within the Krasnoyarsk Economic Forum.

"If you do not change rates, the 2025 revenue will be reduced by 1 percentage point of GDP structure of oil reserves is changing and more and more share passes on. (As reserves - TASS approx.) Firstly, the sector's share in GDP ceteris paribus reduced. and secondly, the preferential rates applied more widely because of exhaustion ", - he said.

According to the law on the budget for 2017 is scheduled arrival of about 5 trillion rubles oil and gas revenues (37%) of the 13.5 trillion rubles total. The proportion was about the same last year - 35.7%. Earlier, when the oil price was approximately $ 100 per barrel, the share of oil and gas revenues in the budget of more than 50%.


Подробнее на ТАСС:
http://tass.ru/ekonomika/4203476

They keep referring to some narrow definition of the federal budget as "the budget". BS. I swear TASS, Sputnik, etc. are all infested
with 5th column elements. The only meaningful budget number that should be used for Russia is its consolidated budget:

https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/share-of-oil-and-gas-in-russias-tax-revenue-dropped-to-21/

Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”

I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.

It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.

We know the Russian Ministry of Finance is infested with 5th column elements like the CBR.

There may be an ulterior to this reading KVS. It is true that oil and gas is small to overall revenue of the nation, but to the federal budget it is higher (although, dropped a lot in the recent years). So there may be some kind of push to lean off the federal budget structure off of oil and gas revenues and get from revenues elsewhere. Awaragroup pointed out the fact of were the taxation is not going to (federal budget) so that means they will have to seek it elsewhere.

Now I'm curious if other departments deal with the other revenue sectors or if it is the same ministry but they split it up in 3 categories? I wonder if this is something they always been doing? Yes it gives ammunition to the Retards but lets face it, they will obtain ammunition no matter what. It isn't as damaging though as one thinks because they (Russia) doesn't like to see it as one big pot to get money from, but three individual pots.

A lot has changed from 1998 way of doing economics after the disaster of the Liberal Yeltsin era. I imagine some of these changes that we are now are these exact same mysteries to us but possibly made sense to them to easily manage funding. Maybe, as they said it, is an archaic system. Maybe not needed anymore but like a lot of things, kept due to being used to it. Don't know. I wouldn't say it is 5th column because FSB and various other groups have been really trying to push these people to the curb and successfully done so. Putin isn't some idiot. They won't try to make it obvious they are trying to destroy Russia. The only ones who make it obvious are the Chubais and Herman Gref.

kvs wrote:They keep referring to some narrow definition of the federal budget as "the budget".   BS.   I swear TASS, Sputnik, etc. are all infested
with 5th column elements.    The only meaningful budget number that should be used for Russia is its consolidated budget:

https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/share-of-oil-and-gas-in-russias-tax-revenue-dropped-to-21/

Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”

I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.

It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.

We know the Russian Ministry of Finance is infested with 5th column elements like the CBR.  

Just to clarify if I got that right if he is trying to say that Russian Fedral Budget must include the regional federal and state social security funds etc as takes flow into these budgets in one form of the other and so much be called cosolidated budged.

Such thing does not happen in India , We have Federal Budget or Budget of Union Government as we call it here and then we have State Budget which is budget of individual State of India , there is also Muncipal Budget which is huge but lets leave that aside......During Budget Formulation they have separate Union and State budget , There is nothing like consolidated Budget of both.

Union Budget have their own revenue and expenditure , State have their own Revenue and expenditure , There are taxes from Companies , Products , Individuals that flow into both the budget sometimes the Union Government will tax X on some produce and State will Tax Y on the same product so it becomes revenue for both but we dont have different Union and State Budget.

Austin wrote:

kvs wrote:They keep referring to some narrow definition of the federal budget as "the budget".   BS.   I swear TASS, Sputnik, etc. are all infested
with 5th column elements.    The only meaningful budget number that should be used for Russia is its consolidated budget:

https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/share-of-oil-and-gas-in-russias-tax-revenue-dropped-to-21/

Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”

I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.

It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.

We know the Russian Ministry of Finance is infested with 5th column elements like the CBR.  

Just to clarify if I got that right if he is trying to say that Russian Fedral Budget must include the regional federal and state social security funds etc as takes flow into these budgets in one form of the other and so much be called cosolidated budged.

Such thing does not happen in India , We have Federal Budget or Budget of Union Government as we call it here and then we have State Budget which is budget of individual State of India , there is also Muncipal Budget which is huge but lets leave that aside......During Budget Formulation they have separate Union and State budget , There is nothing like consolidated Budget of both.

Union Budget have their own revenue and expenditure , State have their own Revenue and expenditure , There are taxes from Companies , Products , Individuals that flow into both the budget sometimes the Union Government will tax  X on some produce and State will Tax Y on the same product so it becomes revenue for both  but we dont have different Union and State Budget.

The "federal" budget of Russia does not include income taxes. The federal budget of the USA, Canada and the rest of the OECD do.
Income taxes are the biggest source of tax in many countries so it is TOTAL BS to compare the Russian "federal" budget with the
federal budgets of the rest of the planet. This has nothing to do with whether it is regional or not.

Huh, no kidding? So that explains why it used to be over 50% of oil & gas. Because exports are actually kind of meaningless as a metric and they are all about the comparative advantage anyway... Look at what Australia and Norway exports, and they're not ridiculed (for obvious reasons, of course).

Russia is also supposed to be soooooo centralized by the Dark Lord, but if anything the federal budget has a lower share of the GDP than in the US, it certainly isn't much higher and in dollar terms it's also really low after the devaluation, something like $200 billion.

I'm surprised that anti-Russian propagandaists haven't noticed that... "Look, Putin's whole federal budget is less than 1/3 of the US military spending and it's also smaller than Belgium's (I'm not kidding btw, but it's also totally meaningless)!" Or maybe they have?