First. The earliest put into action – mode of special economic zones (SEZ) – exists since 2005. But even past since long time (almost 15 years) is insufficient to properly assess the effect of the SEZ. On the influence of the modes, the later, the more impossible to judge in the end. Moreover, the Federal law on territories of priority socio-economic development in a specific period of 13 years starting in 2015, – after which the only possible first evaluation of the impact and effectiveness of such zones. Given the experience of other countries, e.g. China, it can be noted that the positive socio-economic impacts become visible after a long time of receipt first investment. So, too early to draw any clear conclusion about the ineffectiveness, however, as the effectiveness of preferential regimes.
the Second point is marked in the analytical report of the accounts chamber is associated with deep economic and demographic decline in the far Eastern Federal district. In the background, even a full reset of rates on all taxes and deductions to social funds (imagine this fantastic scenario) would not be allowed to raise in the short term stagnating economy of the Russian Federation subjects in the district. High negative values of the migration balance in the far East prefer loud not to call and not to publish. But professional-qualification structure of those leaving are much higher than those who come to the far East, from Central Asia in search of work. This fact further undermined the market of skilled labor, and it is in no way kompensiruet preferences TOR. Statistics growing from year to year in the volume of vacancies in the labour market in the district is well shown in the report of the accounts chamber.
the Third component, which you need to pay attention, connected with the methodology of determining the effectiveness of preferential regimes. How, who and for what a balanced scorecard should assess whether the objectives? For example, the stated modes of TOR was introduced as a reflex to the problems in the economy of DFO. However, the degree of their development and linking with other strategic documents of territorial development leaves much to be desired and brought to mind just now. Therefore, the claim of the chamber of accounts on impossibility to really say how successful preferential regimes, is justified: it is unclear what a start to assess the success (failure) mode.
a Fourth point is interesting from the point of view of the systemic problems associated with the lack of coordination between different authorities (municipalities, regional and Federal), management companies and even by the residents in realizar��and projects on a preferential basis. For example, it is unclear why the majority of investors have not exercised the right to tax benefits, reimbursement of VAT, partial exemption from social contributions. Their properly instructed to receive these benefits? But the whole point of the SEZ in the preferences to reinvest the additional profit into the business! In the analytical review of the accounting chamber “nominated version”, he says, these residents are “sitting on simplified taxation system” either they do not comply with the requirements of the agreement. However, if it is, then the curator of the authorities, which would control the activities of residents absent.
it also raises the question about the reasons for the large number mentioned in the report of loss – making enterprises-residents preferential zones. Why is this happening? It is clear that entrepreneurial activity is risky, but not in the same quantity, if the residents are still “selection”. The system should also include the problem of discrepancies of statistical indicators available for analysis in the Counting chamber of the Federal and regional authorities. Accident, intent, or carelessness?
Finally, it should be noted, referring again to the experiences of countries that have successfully exploited preferential policies for development of areas that they should not be static. The substantive aspect of those regimes required the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions in the external environment. In other words, the degree of preferences – tax credits, the amount of subsidies, requirements for the resident and the other should be adequate to the level of socio-economic development of the territory.
I like the far East just sure that TOR does not provide efficiency due to the weakness of the overall socio-economic and demographic development of regions of the Far East. It is concluded that preferential regimes need to be entered as one of the tools of integrated support and development of the regions, and they need to be more flexible from the point of view settings for a specific outcome.
As noted in the report of the accounting chamber, “realized in the framework of the state program of DFO activities to create an ADZ is aimed mainly at attracting investments by residents and job creation. An integrated solution to the problem of improving the quality of life of citizens in the far Eastern Federal district in the state program are not provided.” It is absolutely true. If you do not raise the quality of life, and to work in areas of advancing socio-economic development will soon be just no one, no matter what benefits may provide this mode.
