THE PARADOXES OF FINANCIAL POLICY IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Fiscal and monetary policy, carried out in the last decade, mostly impedes economic growth rather than promotes it. Despite the persistence of high oil prices in the post-crisis period, federal budget revenues react poorly to the changes in them, being more dependent on the fluctuations of exchange rate and the volume of oil production. Before now funds, accumulated due to oil and gas export revenues, were used only to finance the federal budget deficit and the anti-crisis measures. It seems reasonable that actives of the National Welfare Fund should be used for the benefit of the future generations. At the same time, these resources are spent on infrastructure projects, whose financial plans are not available to the public, so it is impossible to evaluate the effectiveness of any of these projects, or to monitor the use of funds.
Withdrawal of liquidity from the economy is not limited only with the expulsion of oil and gas revenues in sovereign funds. In recent years, the formation of the federal budget deficit has been planned each year and borrowings' plan also is approved annually. Despite of the fact that the actual deficit appeared to be much smaller than planned or even formed surplus, borrowing plans have been realized almost fully. At the same time, the share of the federal budget expenditures in the areas, which can stimulate intensive economic growth, decreases. Available resources in the country are actively seized via fiscal and monetary instruments and are directed to supporting and strengthening existing deformed socio-economic structure.
The current model of fiscal policy exacerbates the distortions, generated in the production structure and income distribution, and complicates the transition to the model of innovative development.

budget, state debt, oil and gas revenues, Reserve Fund, National Welfare Fund, oil price, economic growth

1. См.: Абель Э., Бернанке Б. Макроэкономика. 5-е изд. СПб.: Питер, 2008. С. 310.

2. См.: Разинцева А. Стоит ли России спешить с освоением арктического шельфа / Ведомости, 4 марта 2013 г. / URL: http://www.vedomosti.ru/library/news/9693221/ostorozhno_arktika#ixzz2zyMyaLQ2 (Дата обращения 25.04.2014).

3. См.: «Сведения о размещении средств Фонда национального благосостояния на депозитах в государственной корпорации „Банк развития и внешнеэкономической деятельности (Внешэкономбанк)"» / URL: http://www.minfin.ru/ru/nationalwealthfund/statistics/vnesheconombank/ (Дата обращения 03.04.2014).

4. URL: http://www.vedomosti.ru/politics/news/20361921/fond-ukrainskogo-blagosostoyaniya (Дата обращения 03.04.2014).

5. URL: http://top.rbc.ru/economics/11/02/2014/904490.shtml; http://lenta.ru/news/2014/03/14/billions/ (Дата обращения 03.04.2014).

6. См.: официальный сайт Министерства финансов Норвегии / URL: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/fin/Selected-topics/the-government-pension-fund.html?id=1441.

7. См. пояснительную записку «К Проекту Федерального закона „О федеральном бюджете на 2014 год и плановый период 2014-2016 гг."». СПС «КонсультантПлюс».

8. См. официальный сайт Минфина РФ / URL: http://www.minfin.ru.

9. См., напр.: Аганбегян А.Г. Об особенностях современного мирового финансового кризиса и его особенностях для России // Деньги и кредит. 2008. № 12. С. 3-9;

10. Мау В. Драма 2008 года: от экономического чуда к экономическому кризису // Вопросы экономики. 2009. № 2. С. 4-23.

11. См. официальный сайт Центрального банка РФ / URL: http://www.cbr.ru.

12. Официальный сайт Федерального казначейства / URL:http://www.roskazna.ru.