How to identify misappropriation of public funds. Misuse of budgetary funds in budgetary and autonomous institutions

The legal basis for regulating financial relations with the use of state assets is established by the norms of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation. According to the provisions of the RF BC, the recipients of appropriations from the budget are responsible for their intended use. When facts of misuse are established, administrative or criminal sanctions are applied to the recipient.

Legal characteristic

The definition of what a budget is is given in Art. 6 BC RF:

The budget is a form of formation and spending of a fund of funds intended for financial support of the tasks and functions of the state and local self-government.

The concept of misuse of budgetary funds was introduced by Art. 306.4 of the RF BC:

Misappropriation of budgetary funds is recognized as the direction of budgetary funds of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation and the payment of monetary obligations for purposes that do not fully or partially correspond to the goals defined by the law (decision) on the budget, consolidated budget list, budget list, budget estimate, contract (agreement) or other a document that is the legal basis for the provision of these funds.

It follows from the provisions of the commented article that any allocation of money from the budget occurs for specific purposes, and violation of the prescribed purpose means misuse.

The structure of the budget system

The definition of the structure of the budget system in Russia is enshrined in the norms of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation. Art. 10 of the RF BC states that:

The budgets of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation include:

• the federal budget and the budgets of state off-budget funds of the Russian Federation;
• budgets of subjects of the Russian Federation and budgets of territorial state off-budget funds;
• local budgets, including:
• budgets of municipal districts, budgets of urban districts, budgets of urban districts with intracity division, budgets of intracity municipalities of federal cities of Moscow, St. Petersburg and Sevastopol;
• budgets of urban and rural settlements, budgets of intracity districts.

The regulation on the use of budgetary funds determines that if after the fulfillment of the target obligations a part of the money remains, then they cannot be used until a new assignment is determined for them.

IMPORTANT! The purpose of using budgetary funds is indicated in the document on the basis of which the money is transferred or in a separate administrative document (estimate / project / plan), which is an addition to the main regulatory act.

Budgetary assets in Russia are:

• subsidies, including municipal and regional;
• grants in the form of subsidies;
• transfers;
• government loans;
• capital investment subsidies.

Thus, any budget appropriation is recognized as budget money.

In parallel with the prohibition of misappropriation of budgetary funds, restrictions have been established on the prohibition to establish the obligation to pay for the services of a particular supplier, subject to the competitive procurement procedure. This means that the final recipient of the money is determined based on the results of the tender.

An example of misappropriation of appropriations is the payment of expenses that are not provided for by the plan of financial and economic activities. Also, for unauthorized movement between budget classification items, the perpetrator will be held accountable. This is possible when listing under a specific article. Misappropriation of budgetary funds is also possible in case of intentional or erroneous payment of an invoice not from the budget that is required. The violations also include spending targeted subsidies for other needs of the institution.

The indicated examples demonstrate that the definition of a specific operation with budget money always occurs individually.

Determination of the corpus delicti

Comments on Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation defines the components of a crime: parties, object and subjects. The subject qualifies during the investigation simply - this is the one who had the right and / or the opportunity to dispose of the funds allocated for use from the budget.

The direct object is the relationship in the sphere of state. authorities and in terms of management of funds related to the budget of any type. An additional object is the violated due to the act of the guilty right of the participants in the relationship in the public sector.

The subjective side is characterized by intent, certainly direct. The motive for committing a crime is not important for qualification.

IMPORTANT! The commented article does not address situations of emergency.

The objective side is a direct set of actions and measures aimed at the misuse of budgetary funds. The crime is of a formal nature and is considered completed from the moment the money is transferred.

The legislator demonstrates a serious attitude to the misappropriation of funds from the budget. It is necessary to distinguish between when an action is considered an offense and when it is a crime. An offense is a situation where budget money is spent in an insignificant amount (up to 1.5 million rubles). If the amount is equal to or more than 1.5 million rubles, then the act is a crime. For an offense, fines and disqualification are provided, and for a crime, punishment can even be imprisonment. Judicial practice has many examples when, when targeted subsidies are used for other purposes, criminal prosecution arises.

Punishment for misuse

Depending on the severity of the act and the degree of material damage of the action, administrative or criminal liability may be applied.

What does the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation say

If the misuse of budgetary funds did not have signs of a criminally punishable act, then the punishment is applied in accordance with Art. 15.14 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation:

imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of twenty thousand to fifty thousand rubles or disqualification for a period of one to three years; for legal entities - from 5 to 25 percent of the amount of funds received from the budget of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation, used for other than their intended purpose.

Criminal liability in Russia

Responsibility for misuse according to the norms of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation occurs subject to the commission of a crime on a large / especially large scale.

Comment! As of June 2018, a large amount is recognized as an amount of budget funds exceeding one million five hundred thousand rubles, and an especially large amount - seven million five hundred thousand rubles.

Punishment for misuse of budgetary funds occurs in accordance with the sanctions of the article:

1. Spending of budgetary funds by an official of the recipient of budgetary funds for purposes that do not meet the conditions for their receipt, determined by the approved budget, budget schedule, notification of budgetary appropriations, estimates of income and expenses, or other document that is the basis for receiving budgetary funds, committed on a large scale:

• fine (100 - 300 thousand rubles);
• – up to 2 years;
• arrest - duration up to six months;
• imprisonment - up to 2 years.

An additional sanction for this crime is:

deprivation of the right to hold certain positions or engage in certain activities for up to three years.

The application of additional punishment occurs at the discretion of the court, regardless of the main one.

Punishable by a fine of 200-500 thousand rubles, or forced labor for up to 5 years, or for up to 5 years. A ban on conducting certain activities for up to three years is also additionally applied.

In addition to direct punishment under Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, other acts of the guilty person may also be charged. The Criminal Code allows for the aggregation of crimes. Misappropriation of budgetary funds may be associated with:

Disclaimer

Exemption from punishment is allowed in cases where the actions of the guilty person were due to extreme necessity.

For example, let's use a situation from judicial practice, when the head of the district received funds for the reconstruction of a football stadium. Part of the money was spent in accordance with the plan, and part remained on the account of the institution due to the onset of cold weather. Due to the sharp deterioration of the weather, it was necessary to urgently carry out repairs and restore water supply in part of the city. To pay for the work, funds provided for the repair of the stadium were used. As a result of the investigation, the actions of the leader were found to be justified, no sanctions were applied.

Arbitrage practice

It is not easy to analyze judicial practice in cases of spending appropriations from the budget. Court case statistics show that the prosecution wins if the case goes to court. As a result of the work of the defense, it is possible to achieve the appointment of a more lenient punishment from those presented in the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. There were no examples of the victory of the accused, excluding cases of actual procedural errors in the conduct of the investigation and the execution of documents.

Judgments under Art. 285.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation can be challenged on a par with other sentences. Case No. 30-O07-15, considered by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on September 25, 2007, can be cited as an example of a successful appeal within the framework of cassation. Suchkov. By its decision of December 20, 2016, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation refused to consider the appeal, commenting that the complaint of A.A. Suchkov does not meet the requirements applicable to complaints accepted for consideration by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation.

Despite the openness and transparency of the distribution of budgetary funds in Russia, the problem of misuse of money from the budget is acute. The severity of sanctions, according to the public, is insufficient to prevent the development of corruption and personal enrichment of responsible persons. Public views may find a response among the deputies.

You can express your opinion regarding the severity of punishment for misappropriation of budget money in the comments to the article.

Misappropriation of budgetary funds is the direction of funds for solving purposes that do not have legal grounds for receiving them. This inefficient spending is a violation of Russian budget legislation. What expenses of the institution are considered inappropriate use of the budget?

What is "misappropriation of public funds"

Misappropriation of public funds is a violation of the budget. According to Art. 306.4 part 1 of the Budget Code (BC RF), the allocation of budget revenues and payment of obligations for tasks that partially or completely do not correspond to those specified in the law on the budget, contract, estimate, and other documents that are the basis for providing these funds.

An offense under Art. 306.1 part 1 of the RF BC recognize non-compliance with the requirements of budget legislation, including regulations that regulate financial relations; agreements in this area. It also includes inaction or action of the main manager, as well as the administrator of financing, the recipient of funds, the authorized body. For the commission of these offenses in Ch. 30 BC provides for the use of appropriate coercive measures.

You violate the law if you violate the conditions for granting subsidies and subventions, incorrectly apply the budget classification code or means:

• for what is not provided for by the budget estimate of a state institution (or provided, but in other amounts);
• to pay for services and works that are not related to the activities of the institution.

Who can be the recipient

The recipient, according to Art. 6 BC, perform:

• public authorities;
• management of off-budget state funds;
• local authorities;
• state institutions;
• municipal administrations, which are under the authority of the administrator.

All of them have the right to accept or fulfill financial obligations from a representative of a public legal organization at the expense of the relevant fund. In this case, the state institution does not act as a recipient. Thus, the effect of the provisions of Part 1 of Art. 306.1 BC does not apply. But you need to take into account part 2 of this article, which also mentions the misuse of budget funds.

Responsibility for this part arises for inaction or action that violates the RF Budget Code, other regulatory documents regulating financial relations. Coercive measures in this situation can be applied to subjects who are not their participants. Consequently, the misuse of budgetary funds by a state institution also violates the law.

What is "KOSGU"

The Classification of General Government Operations (CGOS) is a grouping of activities performed in the government sector at the government level. It involves the use of codes, the procedure for which is established by the Ministry of Finance and defined in the RF BC (Article 23). Each of the articles of this classifier is a possible direction of spending finances. The cost of funds according to the codes of KOSGU is necessarily accompanied by the conclusion of an agreement in writing.

If the auditors have suspicions of misuse of finances, it is necessary to consider all the reasons and circumstances that prompted the offender to act in this way. So, if the costs are illiterately attributed to Art. KOSGU, an offense is not considered misuse when:

• the spending of funds is due to the budget estimate, planning and other documentation of the main manager;
• there was no malicious intent in the offender's actions.

There are situations when there is no article of KOSGU for the costs of the institution; that is why the list of the classifier is open. In this case, you can attribute the costs, guided by any other provision of the law - this action will not be considered an offense. In addition, the institution will avoid liability if it detects and corrects its errors in time, for example, by sending a letter to the treasury.

Responsibility for misuse of budgetary funds under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Budget Code of the Russian Federation

Consider what kind of responsibility is due for the misuse of budget money in different codes.

The procedure for bringing to responsibility under the Code of Administrative Offenses

1. Collection of information by inspection bodies (verification activities). This stage takes place before the initiation of an administrative violation case.

2. Registration of a protocol on an administrative offense. In particular, in accordance with Art. 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, it is drawn up by officials of bodies that have full authority to consider relevant cases. These are representatives of Rosfinnadzor, as well as employees of other structures whose duties include preliminary financial and budgetary supervision (verifying employees of the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation), according to Art. 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. Basis - Art. 28.3 of this Code. As a rule, a protocol is drawn up immediately after the discovery of an offense (Article 28.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses). In the event that it is necessary to further clarify the circumstances of the case or information about the institution or its head, the documentation is drawn up within 2 days from the date of detection of the violation. The protocol is addressed to the Rosfinnadzor body within 3 days from the time of preparation (Article 28.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

3. A case on an administrative violation is being considered, as a result of which an appropriate act is issued. Rosfinnadzor studies the case within 15 days from the receipt of the protocol (Article 29.6 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation). If at this time petitions are received from the participants (there is a need to clarify additional circumstances of the case), this period is extended, but not more than 30 days.

Administrative responsibility: punishment

In accordance with Art. 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation for the misuse of budgetary funds for officials, the following punishment is established:

• disqualification for 1–3 years;
• an administrative fine in the amount of 20-50 thousand rubles.

Legal entities are also subject to sanctions. They will have to pay from 5% to 25% of the amount that is misdirected.

In accordance with Article 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, only certain structures can be held liable, which include neither the tax, nor the police, nor the prosecutor's office. According to Art. 23.7 of the Code of Administrative Offenses, the case under this composition is considered by the federal executive body in charge of control and supervision in the budgetary sphere (Rosfinnadzor).

The decision to impose an administrative penalty for violation of budget legislation (under Article 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) is issued no later than 1 year from the date of its commission. This period is provided in accordance with Art. 4.5 of this Code. Later, the proceedings on the case (Article 24.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) are impossible, and the inspectors will no longer be able to determine the punishment for the institution. The decision to bring to administrative responsibility can be challenged in court.

Criminal liability

In addition to administrative, criminal liability is also possible for misuse of budgetary funds. The condition for it is the amount of budget funds spent for other purposes than 1.5 million rubles (Article 285.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). The wording of the composition of the criminal act under this article is similar to that specified in the Code of Administrative Offenses. However, in such a situation, the perpetrator faces not only the payment of a fine in the amount of 100-300 thousand rubles, but also:

• arrest up to 6 months;
• imprisonment for up to 2 years;
• forced labor for up to 2 years.

In the event that the misappropriation of budgetary funds was committed by a group of persons by prior agreement or on an especially large scale, the punishment will be more serious:

• a fine from 200 thousand to 500 thousand rubles or in the amount of earnings or other income for 1-3 years;
• forced labor - up to 5 years;
• conviction - up to 5 years.

In addition, the court has the right to prohibit an official (group of persons) from engaging in certain activities for up to 3 years or to stay in office for 3 years.

These sanctions are also applicable in case of misuse of funds on a large scale (an amount that exceeds 1.5 million rubles). Moreover, the amount of funds from 7.5 million rubles will be considered especially large.

Budget responsibility

In accordance with Art. 289 of the RF BC, if the funds were spent for other purposes, they can be withdrawn. Previously, another punishment was used - blocking expenses, but since 2010 this provision of the law has become invalid.

Examples of violations of misuse of budgetary funds

Misappropriation of budgetary funds is qualified only in the situation if the institution has already incurred cash expenses.

Here are some examples of offences:

• payment for services and works that are not related to the activities of the institution;
• payment of utilities for consumers (for example, tenants) without reimbursement of these costs;
• financing of construction projects and facilities for which it does not occur in the prescribed manner, as well as costs not provided for by the project and estimate;
• provision of targeted budget funds, reserve funds of the executive government (local governments);
• implementation of certain programs for the purposes provided for by other sections of the relevant budget.

The procedure for appealing the decision of Rosfinnadzor

If the management does not agree with the decision of the inspectors and believes that the funds were spent properly, it can be appealed in accordance with the procedure provided for by the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (Article 30). The appeal should be submitted to the court or regulatory authority within 10 days from the date of receipt of the relevant decision. The recipient of the complaint must send it to the judge with all the materials provided by the management within 3 days. The court will consider the documents within the time period established by law - 2 months and make one of the following decisions:

• the complaint is not satisfied, the decision remains in force;
• the decision is canceled if the ground on which it was made is not proven;
• the decision is canceled, and the case is subject to return to the supervisory authority for consideration again. This decision is applicable if significant violations of the requirements of the Code of Administrative Offenses are revealed during the audit.

Thus, the RF BC gives a precise definition of misappropriation of funds, and the punishment for committing this violation is provided for by the Code of Administrative Offenses and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Penalties, professional disqualification, prison term are the types of liability that the state has the right to assign to guilty persons.

When asking questions to specialists on the pages of the Pravoved.RU portal, clients can only count on professional answers. Our experts advise based solely on current legislation.

According to Art. 38 BC earmarked means that the appropriate appropriations and limits of obligations are communicated to specific entities. At the same time, the directions in which they will be spent are indicated. The main recipients of budgetary funds act as subjects. Let us further consider the features of the distribution of limits of obligations and appropriations, as well as for violation of the current financial legislation.

Normative base

The decision/law on the budget determines the distribution of appropriations for each main administrator. This is done in the context of codes of subsections, articles, sections, classifications of costs, reflecting the directions of financing. Misappropriation of budgetary funds is defined in Art. 306.4 BC. Part 1 states that it should be understood as the direction of appropriations and payment of obligations that are not provided for in the decision / law, estimate, contract or other document that acts as a legal basis for their provision.

Recipient of budgetary funds

It is an authorized body endowed with a number of special powers. In particular, he has the right to accept / fulfill obligations on behalf of a public legal entity at the expense of appropriations. Control over it is established by the manager of budgetary funds. The structure that accepts / fulfills obligations can be a state body. authorities, government fund, local self-government or territorial administration, public institution. The recipient of budgetary funds is also the treasury. It is at the highest level in the hierarchy. At the same time, the treasury also acts as the main manager of budgetary funds.

Government sector

He acts as the primary recipient of budgetary funds. This means that the structures that make up it are responsible for the correct distribution of the adopted appropriations. In the public sector, there are enterprises of non-manufacturing, national economic production sectors, as well as those providing obligatory services. The former specialize in meeting the key needs of the population. In particular, such enterprises are institutions of healthcare, education, culture, etc. Their financing is carried out according to estimates. In such organizations, the direct recipient of budgetary funds is the head or chief. accountant. Similar persons are responsible for accepting financing in manufacturing enterprises. For the head and chief accountant, the key responsibility in the financial sector is the targeted use of budget funds.

Important point

It should be noted that in accordance with the second part of Art. 306.1, an action / inaction that violates the BC and other legal acts regulating financial relations committed by an entity that is not a participant in the budget process implies liability. Appropriate measures are established by law. The application of a specific punishment is carried out depending on the seriousness of the committed violation.

Misappropriation of public funds

Possible violations of BC may consist of:

1. Direction of proceeds to pay for expenses not provided for in the plan of financial and economic operations for the corresponding year.
2. Unauthorized transfer of funds under articles. In particular, this refers to cases where the management of the organization decides to allocate budgetary funds received to finance one need for other needs.
3. The direction of financing to cover costs that should be made at the expense of proceeds from funds of another level.
4. The use of funds to pay for expenses reimbursed by money from extra-budgetary funds.
5. Payment for services and works not related to the activities of the institution, rendering assistance to commercial enterprises, including for their creation or covering their costs.
6. Financing of facilities and construction not included in the plan, expenses not provided for in the estimate documentation.

Other serious violations are revealed in the practice of supervisory authorities.

Administrative responsibility

The Budget Code establishes that the measures provided for in the norms may be applied to violators of the legislation in force in the field of finance. Depending on the consequences, liability may be administrative or criminal. In the first case, if the responsible entity violated the Budget Code, Art. 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses. The norm establishes responsibility for allocating appropriations to cover costs that are not provided for in the law / decision, summary list, estimate, agreement / contract or other document that serves as the basis for providing the appropriate amounts. At the same time, for the application of administrative punishment, the act must contain no signs of a crime. Violators in accordance with Art. 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses threatens a fine in the amount of:

• 20-50 thousand rubles - for officials;
• 5-20% of the amount of funds that were received from the budget and used for other purposes.

For officials, a monetary penalty may be replaced by disqualification for 1-3 years.

Nuance

In accordance with Art. 78.1 BC (part 1), subsidies are provided for financing their implementation. They are calculated based on the standard costs for the provision of services to organizations and citizens, as well as for the maintenance of property. Subsidies may also be provided for other purposes. The rules for deductions are established by the Government, the executive structure of the regional government or local self-government. For example, subsidies for other purposes are provided to institutions according to the rules determined in agreement with the Ministry of Finance by the structures that exercise the powers and functions of the founder. This procedure should include provisions on the conditions, terms, amount, directions for the distribution of amounts. It follows from this that the agreement that the institution concludes with the founder acts as a legal basis for the allocation of budgetary funds.

Criminal penalty

In addition to administrative provisions, they are also provided for under the Criminal Code. Appropriate measures are fixed in Art. 285.1. In part one, punishment is imposed for spending funds by officials for purposes that do not meet the conditions for their adoption, approved by law / decision, estimate, and committed on a large scale. For such an act, punishments are established in the form of:

1. A fine in the amount of 100-300 thousand rubles. or equal to income for 1-2 years.
2. Forced labor for not more than 2 years or imprisonment for the same period. Additionally, a ban may be imposed on filling a number of posts or conducting certain types of activities for 3 years
3. Arrest up to six months.

A large amount is considered to be an amount of more than 1.5 million rubles. The second part of the norm provides for liability for these acts committed with aggravating circumstances.

Challenging the test results

It is worth saying that cases when an organization does not agree with the conclusions of the inspection are not uncommon. In accordance with the general rules, it is possible to challenge the results of misappropriation of appropriations in court and in a claim procedure. In the first case, the organization should use the provisions of Article 198 of the APC (part 1). To appeal against the decision of the inspectors, it is necessary to send a claim demanding that the document be declared invalid. The pre-trial procedure is regulated, as a rule, by normative acts that establish the rules for the implementation of their activities by the control bodies. For example, according to the provisions of the Administrative Regulations of Rosfinnadzor, the audited organization can send a written objection to the act within five days from the date of its receipt. The report should indicate which conclusions the institution does not agree with. The objection must be motivated. To justify your position, you should refer to the norms of the law.

Conclusion

According to Art. 18 BC for the formation and execution of budgets, a special classification is used. It is presented as a grouping of income, costs and sources of deficit coverage. It includes, among other things, KOSGU - a set of operations performed in the public sector. management. For effective planning and distribution of income, issues related to the reflection of costs by item may be regulated by the estimate, state. task, methodological recommendations of the manager of funds. As the Ministry of Finance points out in letter No. 02‑07‑10/534 dated February 27, 2012, when considering violations that are identified by the control authorities, all circumstances should be objectively, comprehensively and fully established as a whole. In addition, it is necessary to determine the conditions and reasons for misappropriation in each individual case.

If the state has allocated money from the budget to the organization for certain purposes, it will closely control that they are used exclusively for their intended purpose. To use budget money for other tasks is already a serious offense. How to qualify such actions? Who is held liable if violations are committed by a budgetary organization or an organization that received a subsidy? How is it determined whether misuse has taken place? We discuss in the article.

Features of the concept of misuse of funds

The distribution of public funds is under the jurisdiction of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation.

Art. 38 of this code says that the allocation of funds from the budget of any level cannot occur without a precise indication of the purpose of financing. And part 1 of Art. 306.4 of the RF BC precisely defines misappropriation of funds from the budget- sending them and paying them obligations for wholly or partly other purposes than indicated in the document defining the appropriation:

• budget law;
• consolidated budget list;
• budget estimate;
• grant agreement;
• agreement;
• in another legal document.

Thus, the violation itself consists in the action or inaction of the manager of budget money and the recipient of funds, which entailed a discrepancy between the goals of expenditures and the above normative acts.

Consequences of Misappropriation

In addition to liability for the offense, which we will discuss below, this identified action has legal and factual consequences. They depend on the level and form of the committed misuse of money provided by the budget:

1. Violation of the purpose was committed by one of the financial authorities or representatives:
   • chief manager;
   • manager;
   • beneficiary of the budget.

If a part of the financial powers of the violator is revealed, it is transferred to the commissioner for a particular budget.

2. Mistakes in inter-budget financing: money from another is directed to the purposes of one budget. Mistakenly deposited finances will be recovered from the budget that received them illegally, plus a fee for their use. The program of these financial transfers may also be suspended or reduced.

Types of misuse of public finances

This offense can be classified by types of participants:

• the admission of misuse by participants in the budget process;
• violation of the purposes of directing funds from the budget by autonomous institutions.

NOTE! Despite the fact that in the 2nd case, the budget money, before being used, actually becomes the funds of autonomous institutions (transfers to their current accounts), their use for the purposes stated in the agreement (contract) remains strictly mandatory and controlled. These are no longer “budget funds”, but still “funds from the budget”, which are subject to the requirements of administrative legislation regarding budget violations (Article 15.14 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

Options for funds from the budget “for the wrong purposes”

Groups of examples of costs "out of purpose" were born from practice. Inspection measures that control the use of public finances have identified the following types of the most common violations that can be attributed to inappropriate spending:

• according to the plan of economic activity for a particular financial year, the costs were not provided, but were committed;
• the level of the financing budget is confused, for example, obligations that are the goals of financing by the municipal budget are repaid at the expense of funds from the federal;
• budget money paid for the purposes calculated for extra-budgetary sources;
• this money financed the costs of another organization;
• the money is used to pay for services that are outside the activities of the funded organization;
• tenants used the budget money and did not reimburse these expenses;
• the cost of financing facilities without an accepted design estimate;
• violation of the conditions for granting subsidies;
• financing by sections of the budget was shifted: the funds of some sections funded the goals of other sections;
• profit from investing budgetary funds is not used according to the financial and economic plan;
• incorrect movement of finances according to articles and sub-articles of the budget classification, which distributes operations by sectors of government.

Subsidies misapplied

When budget money is allocated on the basis of an agreement (agreement), they talk about subsidizing. Violation of the contract in the positions of the agreed funding targets is not uncommon. Judicial practice highlights such common cases of misdirection of state subsidies:

1. Paying for the wrong services. The terms of the subsidy or government assignment stipulated the targeting of the services paid for by the subsidy, and the money was spent on something that was not specified in the agreement. For example, an educational institution paid for employees' insurance policies with subsidized money: the state order includes only education services, and not legal services, which had to be paid from extrabudgetary funds.
2. Payment for services not rendered. The work according to the documents has been completed, which is confirmed by the acceptance certificate, the budget money for its payment has been written off. The audit finds out that in fact the contractor did not provide the mentioned services - in whole or in part. There is an administrative violation of the person who signed the act, due to which the subsidy was not used for its intended purpose. In this case, it is not so important whether these services corresponded to the goals of the subsidy: after all, the funds, no doubt, were spent unreasonably in any case, and therefore illegally.
3. Paying for the upkeep of someone else's property. The institution pays with state money for the maintenance of property that does not belong to it. The state task provides for the costs of maintaining property attached to the organization, directly related to the target activity. But if you prove in court that the costs of unattached property are regular and related to the state task, you can achieve recognition of the illegality of the violation.

Who is guilty

Any violation is subject to liability. On whom is it assigned in case of improper spending of budget funds?

First of all, the organization itself. Legal entities can be fined and their activities suspended.

Secondly, to a specific official. A person can receive fines, be sent to forced labor, be deprived of the right to occupy specific positions, or even be deprived of liberty for a period specified by law.

Such an official is most often the head as responsible for economic issues. His signature is required on all important financial documents - without it, they will not entail legal action. But sometimes, instead of the head of the paper, an authorized person, for example, a deputy, signs. If the right to sign is transferred to him officially, then he will have to answer in case of violations.

IMPORTANT! Legal liability for violation of the purpose of the use of budgetary funds rests with the person whose signature on the financial documents caused the corresponding action.

Forms of responsibility

This type of violation provides for two types of liability: administrative and criminal.

Administrative penalties for "non-targeting"

Sanctions for the use of budgetary funds for other purposes are provided for in Art. 15.14 Administrative Code of the Russian Federation. If there are no signs of a criminal act in the violation:

• the organization will get off with a fine, which will be from 5 to 20% of non-targeted money;
• the official will be disqualified for 1-3 years or fined 20-50 thousand rubles.

Criminal penalties for non-compliance with budgetary goals

Such crimes are dealt with in Art. 285.1 "Misappropriation of budgetary funds" of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. According to it, for the guilty official, the following can be applied:

• fine from 100 to 300 thousand rubles;
• a fine in the amount of his salary or other annual or two-year income;
• forced labor with excommunication from certain positions for 1-3 years;
• arrest up to six months;
• imprisonment for up to 2 years with or without deprivation of the right to certain activities for the next 3 years (or without such a ban).

The punishment will be tougher if the “non-targeting” was carried out by a group of people or its size turned out to be especially large (7.5 million rubles or more were spent from the budget):

• the fine will increase to 200-500 thousand rubles;
• duration of forced labor - up to 5 years;
• terms of imprisonment - up to 5 years.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION! The letter of the law classifies “non-targeting” as an offense only if the intent to commit it is proven. Otherwise, an error occurs. If the inspectors made a decision about a budget offense, and it was committed unintentionally, then the legality of the sanctions can be challenged in court.

The intended use of budget revenues is established by virtue of Art. 38 BC. It means bringing appropriations and limits of obligations to specific recipients, indicating the directions of their distribution. Consider further cases of misuse of budgetary funds.

Terminology

Misappropriation of budget funds is a budget violation. Explanations are given in part 1 of Art. 306.4 BC. According to the provisions of the article, the direction of budget revenues and the payment of obligations for purposes that fully or partially do not correspond to those defined in the decision (law) on the budget, estimate, signature, contract or other document that acts as the basis for providing these funds is recognized as non-targeted. Violation under Art. 306.1, part 1 of the BC, failure to comply with the requirements of the Code, legislative and other regulatory acts regulating financial legal relations, agreements and other acts in force in this area is recognized. It is also considered the inaction/action of the chief manager, administrator of funding sources, authorized body, recipient of funds. For the commission of these violations in Ch. 30 BC provides for the use of appropriate coercive measures.

Recipients

The concept of these subjects is explained in Art. 6 BC. The beneficiaries are:

• State authorities.
• Management of state funds (extrabudgetary).
• Local authority.
• The municipal administration, which is under the jurisdiction of the manager.

All of them should have the right to accept or fulfill financial obligations on behalf of a public legal organization at the expense of the relevant fund. The budget institution does not act as a recipient. Therefore, it is not subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Art. 306.1 BC. However, it is necessary to take into account part 2 of this article, which also mentions the misuse of budget funds. Responsibility for this part arises for inaction / action that violates the BC, other regulatory documents governing financial legal relations. In this case, coercive measures can be applied to subjects that do not act as their participants. From this it follows that the misuse of budgetary funds by a budgetary institution is also prosecuted by law.

Types of violations

A fine for misuse of budgetary funds may be imposed for:

KOSGU

In accordance with Art. 18, paragraph 1 of the BC, for the preparation and subsequent execution of income and expenditure items, a budget classification is used. It is presented as a grouping of revenues, costs and sources of covering deficits. It also includes a classification for operations in the public administration sector (KOSGU). The procedure for its application is approved by the Ministry of Finance. In particular, lists of expenses are established for financial departments, which should be attributed to certain sub-items and articles of KOSGU.

The grouping of operations in this classification is carried out depending on their content. At the same time, in each of the articles and sub-articles there is a brief description of the process. As for the costs, operations in them are characterized by lists of directions for spending finances. For effective planning and proper execution of the budget, issues related to the reflection of costs under articles or sub-articles of KOSGU can be regulated by the budget estimate, state assignment, methodological instructions (recommendations) of the manager and other documents that act as the basis for receiving appropriate revenues.

The inclusion of material assets in the appropriate group of non-financial assets (stocks or fixed assets) is within the competence of a budgetary institution. It makes one or another decision, guided by instruction No. 157n. This takes into account the purpose of the values ​​and the order of their operation.

Clarifications of the Ministry of Finance

In case of misuse of budget funds identified by regulatory authorities, it is necessary to objectively, comprehensively and fully establish the circumstances in their totality. Such an order is present in the letter of the Ministry of Finance. In addition, the ministry insists on clarifying all the reasons and conditions that contributed to the attribution of costs to certain sub-items / items in each individual situation.

Exceptions

In the event that an incorrect attribution of expenses by the recipient to sub-items / items of KOSGU after performing a comprehensive analysis is detected, this violation is not considered as misuse of budget funds if:

1. The costs are determined by the estimate or justifications attached to it, documents confirming the limits of obligations, planning and other acts of the chief manager using the information of KOSGU.
2. It is proven that the recipient committed the erroneous actions unintentionally.

Misuse of budgetary funds: responsibility

It is established in the Code of Administrative Offenses. In particular, under Art. 15.14 for the misuse of budgetary funds, the punishment for officials is as follows:

1. Disqualification for 1-3 years.
2. Administrative penalty. Its size is 20-50 thousand rubles.

Sanctions also apply to legal entities. They will have to pay from 5 to 25% of the amount sent for other purposes.

Subsidies

They rely on budgetary institutions in accordance with Art. 78.1, part 1 BC. Subsidies are used to finance the execution of state or municipal tasks. These revenues are calculated taking into account the standard costs for the provision of relevant services by organizations and the maintenance of property. Subsidies may also be provided for other purposes. The procedure in accordance with which such financing is carried out is approved by the government, the highest executive structure, the administration of the Moscow Region or authorized bodies of state power and territorial administration.

Subsidies for other purposes, except for capital investments, are provided in the manner agreed with the Ministry of Finance. Financing is carried out by bodies that have the powers and functions of the founders. In accordance with the approved procedure, special provisions are provided that indicate the goals, conditions, amount, rules and terms for the allocation of funds. The agreement concluded between the recipient and the manager, thus, acts as the basis for the provision of financing.

PFCD

The above agreement is not the only document that can confirm the misuse of budget funds. The Russian Federation, acting as a legal state, establishes fairly strict requirements and rules in the regulations relating to the financial sector. In particular, the work of state-funded organizations is carried out in accordance with the PFHD (plan for financial and economic activities). The requirements for this document are established by order of the Ministry of Finance. In accordance with them, the PFCD should include sections such as:

1. Data on the activities of the municipal / state institution, including information on the types and purposes, the list of services / works performed for a fee.
2. Indicators of the financial position of the organization. This section provides information about assets, liabilities as of the last reporting day preceding the date of the plan formation.
3. Indicators of receipts and payments (planned).
4. Measures for the strategic development of the organization.

Thus, the actual actions should coincide with the planned ones. Misappropriation of budgetary funds is revealed when comparing the information of the PFCD and the actual situation.

UK

In addition to administrative, criminal sanctions are also provided for the misuse of budgetary funds. In particular, they are established in Art. 285.1, part 1 of the Criminal Code. The wording of the corpus delicti under this article is similar to that given in the Code of Administrative Offenses. However, in this case, for the misuse of budgetary funds, the guilty person faces not only the payment of 100-300 thousand rubles to the state, but also:

1. Arrest up to six months.
2. Imprisonment for up to 2 years.
3. Forced labor for up to 2 years.

In addition, the court may prohibit an official from engaging in specific activities or holding a specific position for 3 years. It should be noted that these sanctions are applied in case of misuse of funds on a large scale. An amount exceeding 1.5 million rubles is recognized as it. Especially large will be considered the amount of 7.5 million rubles.

Appealing the conclusions of the controlling services

Often the position of the audited institution does not coincide with the opinion of the authorized supervisory authorities on the issue of the legality of spending funds. Contestation of the conclusions of the control service is allowed both in the pre-trial procedure and directly in court. The first is usually prescribed in the regulatory documents regulating the activities of financial supervisory authorities.

In particular, the audited organization may submit written objections to the decisions of the supervisory services no later than 5 days (working) from the date of receipt of the conclusion. In its application, the institution must indicate the specific page of the act with which it does not agree. In addition, the objection contains articles of legislation proving the correctness of the organization. Notes can also be arranged in a table. In one column the conclusions of the controllers will be stated, and in the other - the position of the audited organization. If this does not work, the case will be dealt with in court.