Public debt is the debt obligations of the Russian Federation to individuals and legal entities, foreign states and international organizations. Features of legal regulation of public debt Decision on issue

If the budget deficit is chronic, this leads to the emergence and increase of public debt. Since government loans are mainly of a medium- and long-term nature, including government debt securities issued for a period exceeding one year, the state debt accumulates and turns into government debt.

State debt:

This is the sum of budget deficits accumulated over a certain period of time minus budget surpluses;

This is the state's debt to internal and external creditors, accumulated over a certain period of time;

These are the obligations of the state arising as a result of government loans, as well as its guarantees for the obligations of third parties.

There is a distinction between internal and external public debt. State internal debt are obligations arising to domestic creditors, and state external debt- obligations to foreign creditors. There is also a distinction between capital and current public debt. Capital debt represents the entire amount of debt obligations issued and not repaid by the government and the obligations of others guaranteed by it, including accrued interest that must be paid on these obligations. Current debt constitutes upcoming expenses for the payment of income to creditors for all debt obligations assumed by the state, and for the repayment of obligations for which payment has come due.

Public debt can have a positive and negative impact on socio-economic processes. The positive significance of servicing public debt through government borrowing is that they are a non-inflationary source of financing budget deficits at various levels. By issuing debt obligations intended for purchase by individuals and legal entities, the state influences the process of organizing the savings of the population and investing temporarily free financial resources by business entities (as part of the implementation of state investment programs). Typically, government securities are the most reliable and highly liquid, so they are readily purchased by legal entities and individuals. The population receives a convenient and profitable way to organize their savings, and business entities receive highly liquid assets that generate income. By drawing money into the treasury through the government debt market, the state can help normalize money circulation in the country.

Mutual debt obligations of different countries are a factor in strengthening international cooperation and mutual understanding. With the high development of international debt relations, everyone becomes economically interested in general stability in the world.

The negative aspects of the influence of public debt on socio-economic processes are manifested in the fact that with an excessive increase in public debt, the government limits investment opportunities in the national economy. This happens because, by attracting borrowed funds, the state withdraws from the market part of the financial resources that could be used for investment in the real sector of the economy. A high level of borrowing, if it is also combined with a high yield on government securities, leads to large budget expenses for servicing government debt. Often the burden of servicing debt is passed on to future generations, which can lead to a decline in their well-being.

The passion for external borrowing leads to the fact that the state not only becomes overly dependent on the state of domestic finances on the state of international finances, but also loses political independence.

In conditions of a significant increase in public debt and growing budgetary difficulties, the state may resort to refinancing public debt.

Under refinancing refers to the repayment of old debt by making new loans, including the process of issuing new series of government securities, the proceeds from which go to pay interest and repay debt on previous series of government securities.

Refinancing public debt is a fairly common phenomenon in the practice of state fiscal policy. However, the state must use this lever very carefully, that is, it must strive to ensure an optimal combination between short-term, medium-term and long-term loans.

By constantly refinancing the debt, the state can build a “financial pyramid”, which can collapse at a certain stage of development. Then a default situation may arise.

Default(English default - default) - failure to fulfill a loan agreement, that is, failure to timely pay interest or principal on debt obligations, or under the terms of an agreement to issue a bond loan. Default can be declared by companies, individuals, or states (“sovereign default”), unable to service all or part of their obligations.

The main reasons for Russia's default in August 1998 were the huge Russian public debt generated by the collapse of Asian financial markets, the liquidity crisis, low world prices for raw materials, which formed the basis of Russia's exports, as well as the populist economic policy of the state and the construction of the GKO pyramid. The actual default date is August 17, 1998. Its consequences seriously affected the development of the country’s economy as a whole, both negatively and positively. The ruble exchange rate against the dollar fell more than 3 times in six months: from 6 rubles per dollar before the default to 21 rubles per dollar on January 1, 1999. The trust of the population and foreign investors in Russian banks and the state was undermined. A large number of small businesses went bankrupt, many banks burst. The banking system found itself in crisis for at least six months. The population lost a significant part of their savings, and their standard of living fell. However, the devaluation of the ruble allowed the Russian economy to become more competitive, increasing export opportunities and reducing imports, and therefore expanding domestic demand.

The state in 1998 had three options to overcome the crisis:

Print money and pay out state bonds, triggering the inflation mechanism;

Default on external debt;

Default on domestic debt.

The third option was chosen. The supposed reasons are as follows: the experience of hyperinflation in the early 90s was quite recent, the launch of a new inflationary spiral was not considered acceptable. Non-payment of external debt was also considered unacceptable for Russia, as it threatened withdrawal from international organizations, cessation of receiving external loans and foreign investments, and seizure of the state's foreign assets.

The question arises: can domestic public debt lead to state bankruptcy? The answer to this question is a clear no, since the government can always resort to refinancing the debt, tightening taxation and issuing new money to cover the amount of debt.

The state may also resort to restructuring(re-registration) of debt. This is one of the methods of managing public debt, using which the debtor seeks a revision of the original schedule for repayment and servicing of public debt. In accordance with the new schedule, the debtor is given a grace period during which only interest is paid and the repayment period for the principal amount is increased. Restructuring may be accompanied by writing off part of the principal amount, consolidation (change in terms) of previously issued debt obligations. Debt restructuring is used primarily as a management method in a situation of debt crisis. At the same time, additional financial resources appear to ensure economic growth and repay public debt in the future, but at the same time access to sources of financial resources, especially to international financial markets, is limited.

The procedure, conditions and timing of the restructuring of public internal debt in the Russian Federation are determined by decisions of state authorities and local governments after negotiations and consultations with creditors. According to the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, the restructuring of internal debt means the repayment of debt obligations by issuing new debt obligations in the amount repayable with the establishment of other service conditions and repayment terms for the loan being placed. Loan restructuring can be carried out with a partial write-off (reduction) of the principal amount. The conditions for restructuring external debt are determined, as a rule, by international financial organizations. These include, in particular: the state being on the verge of bankruptcy; consent to the adoption of a savings and stabilization program approved and financed by the International Monetary Fund; inadmissibility of discrimination against creditors. At the same time, the main principle of restructuring is an “equal approach” to the debts of the debtor state to creditors (states, banks, other financial institutions). In 1997 Russia reached an agreement on the restructuring of government debt with the Paris Club of Creditors, and in February 2000, Russia reached an agreement on the restructuring of government debt with the London Club of Creditors.

The reasons for a budget deficit can be very different. These include wars, economic downturns, tax cuts, and sometimes a lack of political will and determination to cut spending and save budgets. Inflation, irrational tax and investment-credit policies have a negative impact on the budget. A budget deficit in itself is not always a negative phenomenon; moreover, its presence can stimulate economic development, but this largely depends on the method of financing it. It can be covered in several ways: by issuing money, borrowing from the central bank, borrowing from the private sector and external borrowing.

Issuing money is considered the easiest way to cover the budget deficit. But excess emissions can cause uncontrolled inflation and depreciate savings and the national currency.

The state can also tighten tax policy, but this is an unpopular measure that people try to avoid.

Government loans, compared to the two above-mentioned methods, are a more preferable source of financing the budget deficit. This is not as destructive for the economy as emission, because such, for example, internal loans consist of temporarily free funds of the population and organizations, respectively, aggregate demand and the amount of money in the economy does not increase. But there is still a negative impact on the economy. Government securities divert part of free cash flows; An increase in government demand for funds leads to an increase in interest rates, and the consequence of this is a reduction in investment in the real sector of the economy.

Government loans can be classified according to the following criteria: by subjects of borrowing relations (loans placed by central and territorial authorities); by circulation on the market (market ones, which are freely bought and sold, and non-market ones, which cannot change their owners); by currency of borrowings (domestic and external); depending on the period of raising funds (short-term - up to 1 year), medium-term (from 1 to 5 years), long-term (from 5 years and above); by the method of determining income (with fixed or floating income); by security (mortgage and non-mortgage); by the nature of the income paid (winning, interest, non-losing) and other characteristics1.

Internal and external loans.

In the most general terms, external debt is the debt owed to foreign states, organizations and individuals, while internal debt is the debt of the state to its population. In accordance with the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, the volume of state internal debt of the Russian Federation includes: the nominal amount of debt on government securities of the Russian Federation, the obligations for which are expressed in the currency of the Russian Federation; the volume of principal debt on loans received by the Russian Federation, and the obligations for which are expressed in the currency of the Russian Federation; the volume of principal debt on budget loans received by the Russian Federation; the volume of obligations under government guarantees expressed in the currency of the Russian Federation; the volume of other (except for those indicated) debt obligations of the Russian Federation, payment of which in the currency of the Russian Federation is provided for by federal laws before the entry into force of this Code2.

The consequences of government debt for the economy.

Economic researchers distinguish two points of view on the consequences of public debt for the economy. The first is that public debt has an extremely negative effect on the country's economy. It is associated, firstly, with the so-called debt burden - the population is forced to pay the state taxes necessary to service the debt. Secondly, by borrowing money, the state forces private borrowers out of the credit market. Proponents of the opposite idea believe that there is no debt burden or crowding out of private borrowers.

The first direction developed in the work of classical economists. The classical model of economics assumes that the main driver is not demand, but supply, and the economy self-adjusts. Consequently, there is no need for the state function of stabilization, which means there is no need for loans. Adam Smith shared a negative attitude towards the national debt. Putting individual entrepreneurial interests above the interests of the state, he emphasized that the state, unlike a private borrower, is more wasteful and manages capital less efficiently. When a state borrows, the resource it withdraws from the economy is lost, both in the case of internal and external debt. Therefore, Adam Smith puts forward the demand for a balanced budget, that is, a budget without a deficit.

One of the most thorough studies within the framework of this concept was done by Pierre Paul Leroy-Beaulieu. He built the following model of internal debt: the consequence of loans is the imposition of taxes on citizens, which are then distributed among the rentiers in the form of interest. At first glance, the welfare of the nation does not change - some citizens, called rentiers, receive interest from other citizens, called taxpayers.

Let's assume that the loan is cancelled. Taxpayers will not pay tax, but rentiers will invest their capital differently and will receive approximately the same interest. Each party is then left with an amount that, if borrowed, would belong to only one party. Therefore, the absence of borrowing makes the nation richer. However, according to Leroy-Beaulieu, there is a case when a loan can be beneficial. This occurs when it is used for well planned and economically executed public works. Then capital is not destroyed, but is transformed into a public good: the construction of a bridge, a transport network, and so on.

The second view of government debt is often associated with the so-called Ricardian equivalence. David Ricardo did not consider public debt a positive thing, but he does believe that debt does not impose a tax burden on future generations. Ricardo assumed that future taxes associated with current borrowings are capitalized by rational citizens at the moment the debt is incurred. That is, as a result of the loan, taxes do not increase, they are distributed over time.

Further, the Keynesian school put forward its objections to the classical view of public debt. Keynes's followers differed from the classics on three points.

First, they did not believe that creating debt meant creating a debt burden for future generations (at least in the case of domestic debt). They attributed this to the fact that, even taking into account the fact that the descendants will have to pay off the debt, they will also receive benefits from this debt, since the state will have to pay them interest and the repayment amount.

Second, public debt is not the same as private debt. When a private borrower borrows, he is forced to take great care in managing his finances so as not to drive himself into bankruptcy.

The probability of a state's bankruptcy is close to zero, no matter how large its internal debt may be, since creditors live in the same country as taxpayers.

Third, there is a big difference between domestic and foreign debt. In the case of external debt, the views of the Keynesians are close to the ideas of the classics. But domestic debt is not so bad because of the above two objections. Based on this, Keynes' followers propose replacing the balanced budget rule with a rule according to which budget expenditures are equal to the sum of taxes and domestic debt.

Modern economic theory takes the view that the consequences of debt must be assessed over a time horizon.

In the short term, the economy is Keynesian. The deficit provokes an increase in aggregate demand, which entails an increase in national income.

In the long term, the economy is classical. Deficits inhibit national income growth and discourage private investment.

Public debt management and servicing.

The public debt management system is a set of budgetary, financial, accounting, organizational and other measures aimed at effectively regulating public debt and reducing the impact of the debt burden on the country’s economy, in particular, paying income to creditors and repaying loans, changing the terms of already issued loans, determining conditions and issue of new government securities.

There are the following measures in the field of public debt management: conversion, consolidation, unification, exchange of bonds at a regressive ratio, deferment of repayment and cancellation of loans, refinancing and debt restructuring.

Conversion- This is a decrease or increase in the amount of interest paid on loans.

Consolidation– changes in loan terms related to their terms. As a rule, the state is interested in increasing the loan term. Usually, together with consolidation, unification of securities is carried out.

Unification- this is the combination of several loans into one, when bonds of previously issued loans are exchanged for bonds of a new loan. This measure is being taken to reduce the number of types of circulating securities to reduce the cost of servicing them. In some cases, bonds are exchanged using a regressive ratio.

A bond exchange under a regressive ratio is a situation where several previously issued bonds are equated to one new bond.

Cancellation of public debt- this is the state’s refusal of obligations on issued loans (internal, external or for the entire public debt). Cancellation can occur in the event of state bankruptcy, or the refusal of the new political government to recognize the debts of the previous authorities.

Under refinancing refers to the repayment of old government debt by issuing new loans. Therefore, the area of ​​public debt management associated with determining the conditions and issuing new loans is of particular importance. Intergovernmental loans are usually non-bonded. Their conditions are specified in special agreements. But intergovernmental loans are possible only if the country has a good reputation in the financial market.

Restructuring– repayment of debt obligations with the establishment of other conditions for servicing debt obligations and repayment terms (revision of payment terms, writing off part of the debt). Debt restructuring is carried out with the consent of creditors.

The objectives of public debt management include: maintaining the volume of public debt at an economically safe level; maintaining the cost of servicing public debt; ensuring the fulfillment of state obligations in full at a lower cost in the medium and long term.

The following table shows the objectives of public debt management in different countries.

In order to determine how effective credit management is, it is necessary to compare the amount of excess receipts over expenses under the public credit system to the amount of expenses. Based on external public debt, it is possible to determine its service ratio. This is the ratio of all debt payments to the country's foreign exchange earnings from exports of goods and services, expressed as a percentage. A safe level of public debt servicing is considered to be up to 25%.

International experience in implementing state debt policy.

In order to determine current trends in debt policy, it is necessary to see the level of distribution of public debt across countries of the world. On the map with IMF data for October 2014, we see that the percentage of public debt in relation to GDP is distributed extremely unevenly. Debtor countries can be divided into two groups: debtor countries with a high standard of living and developed economies and debtor countries with undeveloped economies.

Let's start with the first group.

At the beginning of 2014, the United States had the largest public debt, then countries (developed) were distributed in the following order:

USA – 17.61 trillion. dollars

Japan – 9.87 trillion. dollars

China – 3.89 trillion. dollars

Germany – 2.60 trillion. dollars

Italy – 2.33 trillion. dollars

France – 2.11 trillion. dollars

Great Britain – 2.06 trillion. dollars

Brazil – 1.32 trillion. dollars

Spain – 1.23 trillion. dollars

Canada – 1.2 trillion. dollars

Moreover, if we evaluate public debt to GDP, the list will be slightly different:

Japan – 242.3%

Greece – 174%

Italy – 133.1%

Portugal – 125.3%

Ireland – 121.0%

USA – 107.3%

Singapore - 106.2%

Belgium – 101.2%

Spain – 99.1%

UK – 95.6%

Japan occupies the leading position in both the first and second lists. It should be noted that Japan's government debt is largely domestic. Its growth began after the oil crisis of 1973. In order to overcome the crisis, the Japanese government privatized state corporations, but in the early 90s the economy entered a period of stagnation. Reforms to overcome the problems required budgetary injections, and the deficit grew. After the Fukushima accident on March 11, 2011, nuclear power plants in Japan were closed, and energy production had to be redirected to other resources, primarily imported. A large number of people of retirement age and traditional social policy imply developed social programs, which also require funds. All this leads to an increase in budget expenditures. The main priority of the economic policy of the new Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was to expand demand in the domestic market and fiscal reforms (in particular, increasing taxes). However, government debt continued to grow, growing by 1.4% in April-June 2014 and reaching a new record high of 1 quadrillion 39 trillion yen ($10.2 trillion). In June 2014, the Bank for International Settlements published a report estimating that a 2 percentage point increase in 10-year government bond yields would cause the cost of debt servicing to exceed tax revenues.

Half of the lines in both lists are occupied by European Union countries, in which a large-scale increase in debts and budget deficits led to a debt crisis.

There are three levels of reasons for the European debt crisis: firstly, the impact of the global financial and economic crisis, secondly, internal European integration contradictions, thirdly, the worsening of the situation in the most vulnerable countries with a large number of internal economic problems.

The global financial and economic crisis was triggered by excess liquidity resulting from the US Federal Reserve's "cheap money" policy, as well as the accumulation of savings in fast-growing Asian countries. Subsequently, the interest rate decreased, loans began to become cheaper, which stimulated the growth of the debt market.

In the EU, the peculiarities of the association itself played a role. From more developed countries, primarily from Germany, the flow of capital was directed to “peripheral” countries - Spain, Greece, Ireland, Portugal. The influx of money provoked rapid growth in wages, expansion of domestic demand and rising prices. At the same time, wage growth outpaced the growth of labor productivity, the share of exports remained small, and imports, on the contrary, increased. The result was an increase in external debt. The global crisis put an end to the influx of external financing. The price of loans began to rise. By then, peripheral countries had already accumulated deficits. The sovereign debt crisis began with the crisis of the Greek government bond market in 2010. The dynamics of its development can be traced according to the following graph:

Why did the situation get out of control? The answer lies in the peculiarities of the structure of the European Union. The documentary basis of the economic and monetary union until 2010 was made up of the following documents: Treaty of Maastricht, Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Lisbon Treaty on Growth and Jobs(in 2010 replaced by the strategic program “Europe 2020”) and Stability and Growth Pact.

IN Maastricht Treaty criteria were indicated that made it possible to check the country’s readiness for membership in the union. We are talking about a certain level of inflation - no more than 1.5 percentage points higher than the indicators of the three EU countries with the lowest rates, the size of the budget deficit - a maximum of 3% of the country's GDP, the level of public debt - no higher than 60% of GDP.

The modification of documents that followed in 2005 significantly softened budget policy, which was used by national governments, led to an increase in public debt and the level of budget deficits in a number of countries and ended in a crisis.

In order to overcome the crisis, it was necessary to globally revise intra-European policies. In particular, emphasis was placed on thorough macroeconomic monitoring of countries belonging to the European Union. Today, in case of deviations from the approved criteria, the European Commission issues recommendations for corrective actions that are associated with certain cost-saving measures. If after five months the results are unsatisfactory, sanctions are imposed on the country (which was not the case in the previous legal framework). In case of excess deficit, the country makes an interest deposit of 0.2–0.5% of GDP. If measures are not taken, the country stops receiving interest. If EU recommendations continue to be ignored, the deposit turns into a fine. It can be assumed that if such rules had existed before 2010, Europe would either have avoided the crisis, or it would have been much milder.

However, skeptics point to significant shortcomings of such policies, which include the partial loss of sovereignty of participating countries, slowing economic growth associated with austerity and fines, as well as popular protests, which also do not contribute to stability and prosperity.

The second selected group is debtor countries with undeveloped economies. Unlike highly developed countries, where the bulk of the debt is made up of internal borrowing, in the second case it is mainly external debt: creditors are other states, foreign banks, and so on. Among the largest debtors are countries in Africa and Latin America. The debts of most African countries were among the least secured. In particular, many of them owed money to the USSR for arms supplies. In July 2008, $16 billion of African countries' debts were written off by Russia.

As for Latin America, after a series of crises in the 80s and 90s, the external debt of the largest countries in the region has grown and continues to grow.

US national debt.

The United States has the largest public debt in the world. Today, the US national debt is more than 18 trillion. dollars. Why has the US accumulated such a huge debt, and why is it causing concern around the world? To understand this, it is necessary to understand the history of its formation and its structure.

It can be immediately noted that debts are divided into two groups: Federal Government Accounts and Public. Federal Government Accounts are “non-market debts”, the holders of which are various off-budget social funds and budgetary organizations. These debts are not traded on the market, they are caused by internal borrowing in the public sector. Public Debt – “market debts”. Their holders are buyers of US Treasury debt securities on the financial market, primarily treasury securities and treasury bills.

Market debts are in turn divided into Fed debts and other debts. The share of debt held in Treasuries is growing rapidly. In 2008, in the total volume of public debt, debt issued by treasury securities accounted for 65.2%. And in mid-2013, the share of treasury securities in government debt increased to 75%8.

Holders of US Treasury securities can be both residents and non-residents. Residents are holders of the financial and non-financial sector. The Federal Reserve System belongs to the financial sector. Other financial organizations include investment funds, non-state pension and social funds, depository and credit organizations (banks), and insurance companies. Over the past six years, the Federal Reserve's share has grown most significantly: from 2008 (7.8%) to mid-2013 it increased to 16.6%. This growth was facilitated by “quantitative easing” programs aimed at purchasing “junk” bonds in the US financial market to replace them with Treasury bonds. These measures and a number of others were aimed at maintaining the US banking system during the crisis of 2007–2009. The Obama administration continued its policy of supporting distressed financial institutions and problem mortgage borrowers. The most powerful manifestation of this policy was the adoption of a new law on state support - Recovery and Reinvestment Act dated February 17, 2009 (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009). According to this law, $787 billion was allocated over two years for programs to support the American economy, overcome the crisis and restore economic growth. In general, in order to overcome the crisis, the state invested about 5 trillion into the economy. $9.

As for US debts from non-residents, these are mainly securities on the balance sheets of central banks and ministries of finance of other countries. These are the so-called official holders of marketable US government debt. Private investors are much less willing to invest in US Treasuries due to their low yield. The main holders of US Treasuries outside America are China and Japan. Many Western European countries are also holders of US treasury securities. Such a large scale of investment by European countries in US Treasury bonds at first glance seems strange in the context of the European debt crisis. Many experts consider this a manifestation of Europe's dependence on the United States. However, let's not forget that the main advantage of US Treasury securities is reliability. In their entire history there has been no delay or refusal to pay interest. For investors, this is an almost risk-free instrument for reliable long-term savings. In 2008, the United States had a need for a very large volume of output - not 200–400 billion dollars, but 1,400 billion dollars (this is exactly how much was issued in 2009). But at the same time, global turmoil has made them a particularly attractive asset due to their reliability. This may explain the purchases of US government securities by European countries during the crisis.

So, the US national debt is growing, which means the cost of servicing it is increasing, and behind it the budget deficit. In order to avoid a technical default, the US government is forced to increase the “ceiling” of the national debt for new and new borrowings. This raises serious concerns and also serves as a card in the political game between the Republican and Democratic parties. The first ones advocate saving and establishing a hard “ceiling” of the national debt, which will be reviewed next time on March 16, 2015.

Government debt of the Russian Federation.

As of December 1, 2014, the internal debt of the Russian Federation was 4,427,138.353 million rubles, and the external debt was 5,3972.2 million US dollars.

Russia's external debt consists of: loans from the Paris Club of creditors; USSR loans under bilateral agreements; loans issued to Russia since 1992 under bilateral agreements; loans from international financial organizations; market loans (Eurobonds).

The amount of debts inherited from the USSR was about 90 billion dollars. These were the shares of all the union republics, which Russia took upon itself in exchange for the republics’ refusal of their share of the external assets of the USSR. The largest amount of debt was owed to the Paris and London Club of Creditors. At the Paris Club, almost all of the USSR's debt was formed in the 80s as a result of falling oil prices. The restructuring of this debt was facilitated by Russia's accession to the Paris Club in 1997: a grace period was defined until 2020, during which the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation had to pay only part of the interest and only after its end - the principal amount of the debt. But in August 2006, thanks to high oil prices, the debt was paid in full ahead of schedule.

Until 2010, Russia also paid the debts of the USSR to the London Club, which included private banks and exporting companies, which, with the collapse of the USSR, found themselves in the position of a creditor in relation to Russian importers. In 2010 this debt was fully paid.

Since June 1, 1992, Russia has been a member of the International Monetary Fund. Cooperation with the Foundation was carried out on the basis of regular targeted programs. Lending continued until August 17, 1998, when the Russian authorities were forced to make decisions on de facto declaring a default on domestic government debt (in terms of GKOs and OFZs with maturities until December 31, 1999), establishing a 90-day moratorium on payments on foreign financial obligations of commercial banks and the implementation of measures in the currency field, which led to a fourfold devaluation of the ruble against the dollar and other foreign currencies. The loan package to help Russia was temporarily frozen. Another tranche from the IMF was received in July 1999, and since 2000 Russia has never applied for a loan from the IMF.

From 2004 to 2006, there was a steady decline in public debt, however, after the 2008 crisis, it began to grow again.

Today we are again going through a massive decline in energy prices. But, firstly, Russia now has a relatively small public debt, and secondly, there are funds accumulated over the years of surplus - funds from the Federal Reserve and the National Welfare Fund. The document “Main Directions of the State Debt Policy of the Russian Federation for 2013–2015” assumed possible negative consequences of the political situation, economic shocks and other possible negative factors. Therefore, debt policy was aimed at:

– ensuring a balanced federal budget while maintaining a high degree of debt sustainability;

– development of the government securities market;

– ensuring optimal access to sources of borrowed capital10.

It was planned to increase the number of types of debt instruments and gradually increase domestic debt in order to avoid a serious burden on its servicing. However, reality adjusted the forecasts. Oil has fallen far below forecast levels, the state of the economy and the influence of political factors lead to a budget deficit. Accordingly, domestic public debt will increase.

Today the state issues the following types of securities.

1) Federal loan bonds that provide interest payments on coupons. OFZs are issued by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation and are divided into OFZ AD - with debt amortization, providing for periodic repayment of the principal amount of the debt, and OFZ PD - with constant income, when the coupon is paid once a year and is fixed for the entire circulation period.

2) Government savings bonds. The latter are available with a fixed interest rate and with a constant interest rate. GSOs are not traded on the secondary market and are not intended for foreign investors. They are issued for insurance organizations, pension and investment funds, management companies, as well as extra-budgetary funds.

3) OVZ – bonds of internal loans of the Russian Federation. OVZs issued to date mature in 2018.

In the draft federal budget for 2015–2017, the Ministry of Finance forecasts the level of internal public debt of the Russian Federation at the end of 2015 in the amount of 7.4 trillion rubles, and external public debt - 64 billion rubles. The internal government debt of the Russian Federation at the end of 2016 is expected to be 7.9 trillion rubles, at the end of 2017 - 8.7 trillion rubles. The upper limit of the external public debt of the Russian Federation as of January 1, 2017 is set at 71.5 billion US dollars (55 billion euros); as of January 1, 2018 - 77 billion US dollars (59.2 billion euros).

Regarding a possible default in Russia in 2015, there are two opposing points of view. Optimists, primarily official sources, say that there is no talk of a default thanks to accumulated foreign exchange reserves. Pessimists, including Saxo Bank, predict a default in 2015, the cause of which will be economic instability. It is expected that foreign exchange reserves will be quickly spent to compensate for losses from sanctions.

Conclusion.

1) Public debt is an instrument that has become most widely used recently, although it is assessed ambiguously by theorists. The classical school gives this instrument negative assessments; Keynesianism fully allows its use if the debt is internal. The attitude towards external debt is clearly negative, since it slows down economic development.

2) Public debt management is a fairly expensive item in the state budget. Consists of issuing government securities, servicing existing debts and restructuring them when possible. But even the most skillful debt management cannot eliminate the need to pay it off, which falls on the shoulders of either living or future generations. The inability to pay debts causes irreparable damage to the country's economy, as it undermines the confidence of investors and the population.

3) An increase in public debt may be justified in the case of the implementation of large government projects that will subsequently bring greater public benefit. Or in critical conditions, for example, during war.

4) States can be divided into those that borrow in critical situations, and those that attract additional resources to improve the standard of living of the population or for certain political purposes. The former include the poorest countries in Africa and Latin America, the latter – developed and developing economies.

5) Even countries with developed economies are experiencing serious economic and political problems in the case of excessively inflated public debt, and are taking the most intensive measures aimed at reducing it. In the coursework, a similar situation is considered using the example of Japan and the European Union. In both cases, governments are ready to take unpopular measures - such as austerity policies, reductions in social benefits, even partial loss of sovereignty - to reduce public debt. And this is not surprising. After all, this is not only a growing budget deficit, but, in the case of external debt, it is also a weapon of political pressure.

6) The main interest is the situation with the US government debt. Today it is the largest public debt in the world, which is constantly growing. Some authors, pointing out that the United States attracts resources from all over the world into its economy, suspect some kind of evil will of a certain circle of people, developing a conspiracy theory. One of the main questions is what might happen if the US government refuses to raise the debt ceiling and declares a technical default. Opinions differ here - optimists believe that with high GDP and certain austerity measures, the United States will be able to cope with its borrowings. Pessimists suggest that it could end in World War III, recalling that such a situation with the national debt looks like a repeat of the economic problems that the United States faced before World War II.

But no matter how the situation develops, in any case, its influence will spread far beyond the American economy, and no one doubts this.

7) Russian public debt and the dynamics of its growth are strictly interconnected with oil and energy prices. The relationship here is the opposite - when energy prices rise, the government pays off its debts. When energy prices fall, government debt rises. Both the USSR and the Russian Federation, at certain periods of their existence, created quite large external debt. Today, the economic situation is the most unfavorable, and the government is following the path of developing public internal debt. This seems to be the only possible way out of the situation, since the economy has accumulated certain funds over the period of sustainable development that the state can borrow and use to solve pressing problems. If these funds are used to modernize industry and agriculture and introduce innovations, then our country has a chance to receive an additional impetus for development. Some factors (the budget for the defense complex, which drags down the entire economy; the reorganization of the banking system, etc.) allow us to hope for this optimistic option.

Anastasia Blucher

Literature:

Nikolaeva T.P. Budget system of the Russian Federation: educational and practical manual. Ed. EAOI Center, 2010
Alekhin B.I. State debt. A manual for students of the Academy of Budget and Treasury. M., 2007
Seregina S.F., Larionova M.L. The European debt crisis and new directions for reforming EU economic policy mechanisms. Russian economic journal. 2012, no. 6
Katasonov V.Yu. Who does the US owe? http://www.fondsk.ru
Main directions of the state debt policy of the Russian Federation for 2013–2015. www.minfin.ru
Budget Code of the Russian Federation. Article 98

1. Debt repayment and interest payments are made at the expense of budgetary funds, that is, at the expense of taxpayers: thus, there is a flow of income to the owners of government securities, as a rule, wealthy sections of society.
2. When the state acts to reduce public debt by increasing taxes, macroeconomic dependencies are included: a reduction in aggregate demand leads to a decrease in the equilibrium net national product (NNP); incentives for investment on the part of entrepreneurs are reduced, and investment in the economy is reduced.
3. There is an effect of “crowding out investments” of private entrepreneurs. This phenomenon is caused by the fact that the state, entering the loan market in order to cover the budget deficit or debt, increases competition in the money market, as a result of which interest rates on money capital increase. This deprives the private sector of some investment, and a decrease in investment spending reduces the equilibrium NNP.

national activities in times of crisis. Intra-republican offset was carried out to repay mutual debts of enterprises and organizations on receivables and payables. Due to the negative consequences resulting from the use of directed loans and offsets, these forms of internal lending are not used in the future.
Public debt management refers to the activities of the state, represented by its authorized bodies, to ensure rational and efficient borrowing and optimize the cost of servicing a public loan; it is carried out in order to avoid macroeconomic difficulties and balance of payments problems in the future. At the same time, monitoring of public debt is carried out as the activity of authorized government bodies to monitor and control the processes of formation, change and servicing of debt.
Public debt service represents the total payments of principal, interest, fees, and penalties on the public debt for a given period.
The limit on Kazakhstan's public debt is legally established - a fixed amount of outstanding loans received by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan on the external and internal markets of borrowed capital and outstanding loans, annually approved in the republican budget, which should not exceed the public debt at the end of the financial year.
Public debt management also includes such methods as: refinancing, conversion, consolidation, unification, exchange of bonds at a regressive ratio, deferment of loan repayment, refusal (cancellation) of public debt.
Refinancing means paying off existing government debt by issuing a new loan. In this case, bonds of a new loan are issued in replacement of previously issued ones in the same value ratio without taking into account exchange rate differences.
Conversion is a change in the terms of a previously issued loan in terms of profitability, either down or up. In the first case, the government acts when there are significant expenses on the debt, in the second - in the presence of inflation or in order to increase the interest of the population in purchasing loan bonds.
Consolidation is a change in the original terms of the loan in terms of terms - with their extension or reduction.
Unification means combining several loans into one, making it easier to manage the government's debt.
The exchange of bonds at a regressive ratio is carried out in the event of deflation of the national monetary unit, and it is unprofitable for the state to pay off loans with more “expensive money” than they had when issuing the loan.
Deferment of loan repayments is applied in cases of significant public debt, as well as in the case of associated financial difficulties, and the government announces the postponement of loan repayments and the payment of income on them to a later date.
Refusal to pay the public debt (cancellation) occurs when the political regime in the country changes and the new government does not recognize the fulfillment of previous obligations for reasons of their illegality. Refusal may be a consequence of state bankruptcy.
The listed methods of managing public debt can be used in various combinations at the same time, for example, conversion, consolidation and unification or conversion and unification, etc.

More on the topic of National debt:

1. Russian public debt and its structure. Management of public debt at the present stage.
2. § 3. The growth of public debt in different countries in connection with the last war, - Public Debt Conn. States, England, France, Italy. - Government debt and currency depreciation. - Inter-Allied debts.
3. 62. Public debt. Methods of managing public debt.
4. Public debt content and structure. Public debt management.

- Copyright - Advocacy - Administrative law - Administrative process - Antimonopoly and competition law - Arbitration (economic) process - Audit - Banking system - Banking law - Business - Accounting - Property law - State law and administration - Civil law and process - Monetary law circulation, finance and credit - Money - Diplomatic and consular law - Contract law - Housing law - Land law - Electoral law - Investment law - Information law - Enforcement proceedings -

The state receives the bulk of monetary resources intended to finance national needs in the form of taxes and obligatory payments. In conditions of declining government revenues, the state is forced to attract funds from other sources to cover its expenses. The main form of government borrowing is government credit.

The functioning of public credit leads to the formation of public debt.

State debt - This is the sum of debts on issued and outstanding government debt obligations, including interest accrued on them.

The national debt is divided into main and current depending on the repayment period.

The main public debt is the entire amount of the state's debt for which payment has not come due and which cannot be presented for payment during a given period.

Current public debt is the state's debt for obligations for which payment has become due.

In modern conditions The executive branch does not have 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.

Significant amounts of public debt reflect the crisis state of the Russian economy. The servicing of state internal debt is entrusted to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. The leading methods of financing public debt are monetary emission and the issuance of government loans.

Fundamental to all classifications of debt is its division into external and internal debt. Internal and external debts have significant differences: External debt- this is the total amount of financial resources borrowed from financial institutions of other countries.

Domestic debt- financial obligations of the state arising in connection with the attraction of funds from non-governmental organizations and the population of the country for the implementation of state programs and orders.

Public debt management is understood as a set of government measures to pay income to creditors and repay loans, change the terms of already issued loans, determine the conditions and issue new government securities.

Let's look at some tools for repaying government debt:

1. Refinancing - is the issue of new loans, the acceptance of new debt obligations in order to cover previously issued debt obligations;

2. Conversion - transformation of debt obligations into new obligations, change in the size of the income portion of accepted obligations;

3. Consolidation- this is a change in the validity period of previously issued debt obligations;

4. Unification- this is the replacement of two or more previously issued state and municipal loans with one new one.

5. Cancellation- This is a waiver of accepted debt obligations in part or in full.

6. Debt restructuring - termination of debt obligations constituting state or municipal debt based on an agreement, with the replacement of these debt obligations with other debt obligations providing for other conditions for servicing and repaying obligations.