Expenditure obligations, their types. Distinction of expenditure obligations of public legal entities

Register of expenditure obligations - a list of obligations to be fulfilled in the current year. If the obligations are in effect in a particular financial year.

Register of expenditure obligations - used in drafting the budget vault (scroll) laws, other regulatory legal acts , municipal legal acts, stipulating public regulatory obligations and/or legal basis for other expenditure obligations indicating the relevant provisions (articles, parts, clauses, sub-clauses, paragraphs) of laws and other regulatory legal acts, municipal legal acts with an assessment of the volume of budgetary allocations required to fulfill the obligations included in the register .

The register is maintained by the Ministry of Finance and the financial authority of the subject.

Must include spending powers... (under Part 3 of Article 87 of the BC - reference).

Expenditure obligations are fulfilled at the expense of own income and sources of financing the deficit.

In cases established by the Federal Law, the expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation are fulfilled at the expense of the Civil Air Fund. The expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation are fulfilled at the expense of the Pension Fund only within the limits of funds transferred to the Russian Federation as transfers, and the obligations of the Pension Fund are fulfilled at the expense of insurance contributions. The Russian Federation acts as a guarantor in relation to the Pension Fund when insured events occur. But in cases where the Russian Federation transfers funds unrelated to insured events (additional payments to pensioners), then the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation performs the expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation for these transfers.

Thus, there is essentially a transfer of the powers of the Russian Federation to the Civil Air Fund along with the money.

In cases under the Federal Law on the TGVF, the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation adopted in accordance with them, the expenditure obligations of the subject of the Russian Federation can be fulfilled at the expense of the corresponding budgets of the TGVF. The subject's expenditure obligation is at the expense of the territorial fund. The Russian Federation can transfer powers to a subject, and then the funds of the FGVF are transferred to the TGVF to fulfill the expenditure obligations of the subject (???). This will not be on the exam, this is O.A.’s doctoral dissertation.

Classification of expenses

Previously, there was a classification of expenses into functional, economic and departmental (in the law on the Federal Budget). Functional - according to the functions of public entities, economic - according to economic content, departmental - according to the main managers.

Structure of the budget classification code (BCC) of expenses:

Chief manager (3) – a ministry, agency, service that is recognized as the main manager. At one time, the Academy of Sciences and Moscow State University had the status of the main manager, although not the authorities. Main managers are persons who have the authority to distribute funds between managers and recipients (according to the budget schedule).

Section (2)

Subsection (2)

Target article (7)

Type of expenses (3)

Article KOSGU (3).

Budget allocations

In order for the expenditure obligation to acquire the character of a budgetary one, the legislator introduces the category of “budgetary appropriations” (formerly “forms of expenditures”). Budgetary allocations are the maximum amount of funds provided in the corresponding financial year to fulfill budgetary obligations.

The volume of expenses incurred from the budget to finance those expenditure obligations of a public entity that are subject to execution in the corresponding financial year.

The list of types of budget allocations is exhaustive and cannot be used for other purposes. It cannot be formed in the budget law.

Art. 69 BC – budgetary allocations (list). There:

Providing government (mun) services, performing work, etc.

Social security of the population

Budgetary investments of legal entities (except for institutions).

Subsidies for legal entities, individual entrepreneurs, individuals

Transfers

Transfers to subjects of international law

Servicing government (mun) debt

Execution of judicial acts on claims against public entities.

Example of application - Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus of 03/06/2007 No. F08-140/2007. Since the transaction could not be financially secured due to the nature of the appropriations not typical for public education, the transaction was declared void (in another case).

Expenditure obligations should be understood as arising on the basis of a law, other regulatory legal act, contract or agreement, the obligations of a public legal entity (the Russian Federation, a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, a municipal entity) or a budgetary institution acting on its behalf to provide to an individual or legal entity, another public entity. legal education, subject of international law, funds from the appropriate budget.

Expenditure obligations are closely related to budgetary obligations. Thus, expenditure obligations become budgetary obligations from the date of entry into force of the federal law (decision) on the budget for the next financial year, in which the corresponding expenses are fixed. In other words, budget obligations are expenditure obligations legislated in the financial planning act.

Within the framework of expenditure obligations, public and public regulatory obligations are distinguished.

Thus, public obligations include expenditure obligations of a public legal entity arising on the basis of a law, other regulatory legal act to an individual or legal entity, other public legal entity, subject to execution in the amount established by the relevant law, other regulatory legal act or having the amount established by the said law. , the act of determining the procedure for its determination (calculation, indexation).

In turn, public regulatory obligations are public obligations to an individual that are subject to execution in monetary form in the amount established by the relevant law or other regulatory legal act or have an established procedure for its indexation.

At the same time, public regulatory obligations do not include obligations to make payments to an individual provided for by the status of state (municipal) employees, as well as the status of persons holding government positions in the Russian Federation, government positions in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, municipal positions, employees of budgetary institutions, military personnel those undergoing military service upon conscription (having the status of military personnel undergoing military service upon conscription), persons studying (pupils) in state (municipal) educational institutions.

For the purpose of proper control over the implementation of expenditure obligations, state and municipal authorities are charged with maintaining registers of expenditure obligations in accordance with the procedure established by the relevant executive body and submitting them to a higher executive authority.

The register is a list of regulatory legal acts, municipal legal acts used when drawing up a draft budget (with the obligatory indication of the relevant articles, parts, clauses, sub-clauses, paragraphs of legal acts), stipulating public regulatory obligations and (or) legal grounds for other expenditure obligations.

The register of expenditure obligations also requires an assessment of the volume of budgetary allocations necessary to fulfill the obligations included in the register.

Depending on the source of financing, there are three types of expenditure obligations:

expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation;

expenditure obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation;

expenditure obligations of the municipality.

Thus, the expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation include

obligations that are fulfilled at the expense of own income and sources of financing the federal budget deficit.

These expenditure obligations arise on the basis of:

adoption of federal laws and (or) normative legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation when federal bodies of state power exercise powers on subjects of jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and (or) powers on subjects of joint jurisdiction not covered in accordance with the Federal Law “On General Principles of Organization of Legislative (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” to the powers of government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

conclusion by the Russian Federation (on behalf of the Russian Federation) of treaties (agreements) in the exercise by federal government bodies of powers on subjects of jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and (or) powers on subjects of joint jurisdiction not covered in accordance with the Federal Law “On General Principles of Organization of Legislative (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation” to the powers of government bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

conclusion of treaties (agreements) on behalf of the Russian Federation by federal budgetary institutions;

adoption of federal laws and (or) regulatory legal acts of the President of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Russian Federation, providing for the provision of interbudgetary transfers from the federal budget, including:

a) subventions to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation for the fulfillment of expenditure obligations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in connection with the exercise by public authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation of the individual state powers of the Russian Federation transferred to them;

b) subventions to the budgets of constituent entities of the Russian Federation to provide subventions to local budgets for the fulfillment of expenditure obligations of municipalities in connection with the vesting of local government bodies with certain state powers of the Russian Federation.

In turn, the expenditure obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation include obligations that are fulfilled at the expense of its own income and sources of covering the budget deficit of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as funds from territorial extra-budgetary funds.

The grounds for the occurrence of these expenditure obligations are:

adoption of laws and (or) other regulatory legal acts of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as the conclusion by a constituent entity of the Russian Federation (on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation) of treaties (agreements) in the exercise of powers by government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation on subjects of jurisdiction of constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

adoption of laws and (or) other regulatory legal acts of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, as well as conclusion by a constituent entity of the Russian Federation (on behalf of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation) of treaties (agreements) in the exercise of powers by government bodies of constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the subjects of joint jurisdiction specified in clause 2 and 5 tbsp. 263 of the Federal Law “On the general principles of organization of legislative (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation”;

conclusion of contracts (agreements) on behalf of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation by budgetary institutions of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation;

adoption of laws and (or) other regulatory legal acts of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation providing for the provision of inter-budgetary transfers from the budget of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, including subventions to local budgets for the fulfillment of expenditure obligations of municipalities in connection with the vesting of local governments with certain state powers of constituent entities of the Russian Federation;

adoption of laws and (or) other normative legal acts of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation when the state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation exercise the powers of the Russian Federation delegated to them.

Expenditure obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation are established by the state authorities of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation independently and are fulfilled at the expense of their own income and sources of financing the budget deficit of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

The only exception is that expenses associated with the exercise by constituent entities of the Russian Federation of powers delegated by the Russian Federation are carried out at the expense and within the limits of subventions from the federal budget.

In order to ensure the differentiation of subjects of jurisdiction and, as a consequence, expenditure obligations, the Budget Code of the Russian Federation established a ban on the establishment and execution by public authorities of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation of expenditure obligations related to the resolution of issues within the competence of federal public authorities, unless otherwise expressly provided for by federal legislation.

At the same time, in order to exclude the establishment of budget expenditures unsecured by financial resources, public authorities of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation have the right to establish and fulfill expenditure obligations related to the resolution of issues not within the competence of federal public authorities, local governments and not excluded from the competence of public authorities of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation by federal laws or laws of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, only if there are appropriate funds from the budget of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

The expenditure obligations of a municipality constitute obligations that are fulfilled at the expense of its own income and sources of covering the budget deficit of the municipality.

Their occurrence is closely related to the following circumstances:

1) adoption of municipal legal acts on issues of local importance and other issues that, in accordance with federal laws, local government bodies have the right to decide, as well as the conclusion by the municipal entity (on behalf of the municipal entity) of contracts (agreements) on these issues;

adoption of municipal legal acts when local government bodies exercise certain state powers delegated to them;

conclusion of contracts (agreements) on behalf of the municipality by municipal budgetary institutions.

Expenditure obligations of a municipality are established by local government bodies independently and are fulfilled at the expense of their own income and sources of financing the deficit of the corresponding local budget, with the exception of expenditure obligations accepted and fulfilled when local government bodies exercise certain state powers delegated to them. In this case, expenditure obligations are fulfilled at the expense and within the limits of subventions from the budget of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

Expenditure obligations are reflected in the register of expenditure obligations. The register of expenditure obligations, in accordance with the Budget Code, is understood as a set (list) of regulatory legal acts and contracts and agreements concluded by state authorities and local governments that provide for the occurrence of expenditure obligations to be fulfilled at the expense of the relevant budgets.

The special role of this document is that only those expenses are subject to financing from the budget, the obligations for which are included in the register of expenditure obligations. Accordingly, this document should be comprehensive and updated regularly.

Data from the register of expenditure obligations are used in the formation of a long-term financial plan, the development of draft budgets, as well as in determining the volume of the budget for existing obligations and the budget for accepted obligations in the planning period.

The register of expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation is maintained in the manner established by the Government of the Russian Federation.

The register of expenditure obligations of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation is maintained in the manner established by the executive body of state power of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation.

The register of expenditure obligations of the municipality is maintained in the manner established by the local administration.

The movement of financial resources is subject to strict control and accounting, especially if it concerns budget funds, since this is taxpayers’ money, which must work effectively for the benefit of the Russian Federation, and, accordingly, its citizens. For a systematic, centralized approach and rational use of the amounts available in the treasury, a register of expenditure obligations of the municipality is provided. The rules for maintaining relevant documentation in 2018 are described in the relevant laws.

Register, its concept and essence

The concept of what a register for registering expenditure obligations is, and what the essence of this document is, is given by the domestic bookmaker. The main purpose of the register, in accordance with norm 87 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, is to draw up a draft budget. It itself consists of a list of laws and other regulations at various levels (from municipal to federal). Compiling a list of this kind becomes the basis for public normative and other expenditure obligations.

If any of the obligations are not provided for in the register, then there can be no talk of financing from the treasury. This requires a careful approach to its compilation, because the list contained is closed, and the document must be kept up to date in a timely manner, i.e. updated.

The maintenance of the register was regulated by 621 government regulations in 2014. This applies to the federal, local or regional level, here the procedure is approved by a document of the required rank. By-laws of this kind are required to be adopted in every rural settlement and municipality.

The general rules for maintaining and providing registers by the entire vertical of entities are concentrated in Order of the Ministry of Finance No. 49n in 2012.

The register keeps records of all budget funds

Responsible for maintaining registers

The preparation and maintenance of a set of financial obligations is within the competence of government agencies, as well as local self-government. At the federal level, the register of expenditure obligations subject to fulfillment is maintained by the Cabinet of Ministers represented by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.

At the subject level, this is the local highest executive authority, for example, the metropolitan government, if we are talking about the central federal district. As for municipalities, these functions are performed by their own local administration.

Expenditure obligations are realized from own funds or from sources to cover the deficit. The law defines cases when raising funds for appropriate purposes is permissible from the Civil Air Fund.

Funds from the State Fund of Funds can be spent by the country to pay off obligations only in the amounts that are allocated to it as transfers, and the obligations of the State Fund of the Russian Federation itself are carried out through insurance contributions, and Russia is the guarantor of the fund’s obligations if an insured event occurs.

Register accumulation

Municipal entities, reporting on the work done in the field of budget execution, prepare reports based on information provided by:

• Controlled areas.
• City districts.
• Settlements of all levels, etc.

The final document is sent to the Ministry of Finance of the entity in which the entity is included. As a result of this procedure, information is accumulated and a single register is created for all regional municipalities. The obligations of a subject of the Russian Federation are centralized on the basis of the information submitted by the main managers and the budget funds allocated to it.

At the level of the Russian Federation, information is accumulated through the submission by the financial authorities of its subjects of their registers and codes of municipalities to the country’s Ministry of Finance. The deadline for completing actions is limited to 01/06 of the corresponding accounting year. The form for filling out and submitting information is set out in Appendices 1 and 2 to Order 103n of the country’s main financial authority dated 07/01/2015.

The general register is formed on the basis of reporting by region

Due to the fact that the register of expenditure obligations of the regional budget consists exclusively of expenses carried out within it, it does not include information on other regions, as well as obligations of the entire country.

Then, within 30 days, the Department of Interbudgetary Relations of the relevant ministry processes the received data and compiles a set of relevant registers, broken down by each subject, by planned expenses and the amounts spent on their implementation.

Country registries are formed in the same way. The Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation takes as a basis the data from the registers of the main managers of budget funds throughout Russia. The list of expenses of funds is compiled by their governing bodies.

This document is preliminary until it is approved. The final register of the country is maintained in digital format through a specialized government system “Electronic Budget”.

Forms of financial support

The recording of accounted transactions to provide funds to subordinate institutions is directly dependent on the form of their provision. So, the founder brings the subsidies:

• which must compensate for regulatory costs arising from the provision of government services and the performance of work under government orders;
• for other needs;
• for capital investments.

In addition, they are informed about the established limits of obligations for cases where the unit has the powers of a government body: for investments in the budget (equated to a state customer) or when fulfilling public obligations to the population.

Accounting for all funds spent must be maintained in accordance with established rules

Accounting for financial assistance for government assignments

By virtue of Article 4 of Federal Law No. 174 of 2006, as well as Article 9.2 of Federal Law No. 7 of 1996, subsidies that compensate for the costs of providing state and municipal services are provided on the basis of state assignments. At the same time, a corresponding agreement is signed with the recipient and the subsequent manager.

The list and standards for using expense types are unified throughout the vertical. Accordingly, the following codes are applied: 611 and 621 “subsidies that should compensate for regulatory costs arising from the provision of government services and the performance of work under government orders.”

As for the accounting of accounts intended for government assignments in the accounting departments of subordinate structures that are budgetary or autonomous, according to the KOSGU, 241 positions are provided for them “Free transfers...”. This means that they must be registered on accounts associated with the following codes: 401.20.241, 302.41. Such instructions were given by the Finance Ministry in order No. 65n of 2013.

The accounting of obligations is based only on documents that objectively prove their acceptance. For example, such a document would be an agreement on the provision of assistance from the treasury, regulating the procedure and conditions for the transfer of such payments. The amount of accounted income is determined by the amount specified in the agreement; it is this amount that must be included in the reporting on the date specified in the document. The fact of the transfer itself does not matter. An obligation accepted for execution is reflected on the day the funds are credited according to the schedule specified in the agreement.

You can learn about the law of obligations from the video:

Attention! Due to recent changes in legislation, the legal information in this article may be out of date!

Our lawyer can advise you free of charge - write your question in the form below:

Free consultation with a lawyer

Request a call back

Marina Klishina, manager of the Center for Budget Relations Research
Vladimir Shishov, analyst at the Center for Budget Relations Research

The Register of Expenditure Obligations (ROR), when introduced into budgetary practice, was positioned as a document that made it possible to pursue budgetary policy based on balancing the obligations to pay funds from the budget with the real financial capabilities to fulfill these obligations.
More than two and a half years have passed since the legislative establishment of the need to compile registers of expenditure obligations in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation. The practice of applying these norms has been formed. Now it is already possible to draw the first conclusions about whether the RPO can perform the function of assessing the value of state (municipal) obligations, about the relationship between the RPO and the budget process, about the degree of necessity of this tool.
Before Federal Law No. 63-FZ amended the Budget Code, the expenditure obligation in the Code was defined as “the obligation of the Russian Federation, a subject of the Russian Federation, or a municipal entity, stipulated by law, other regulatory legal act, treaty or agreement, to provide individuals or legal entities with state authorities, local governments, foreign states, international organizations and other subjects of international law, funds from the corresponding budget (state extra-budgetary fund, territorial state extra-budgetary fund).” This definition contained a number of ambiguities: for example, it was not established what the smallest unit of expenditure obligation is (an employment contract with an individual government employee, a separate construction project, a separate type of payments to certain categories of citizens, etc.); what does “conditioned” mean and what specific legal act (or set of legal acts and contracts) should be considered as stipulating the expenditure obligation; at what point does an expense obligation arise, etc.
Clause 2 of Art. 87 of the Budget Code of the Russian Federation (before amendments), the register of expenditure obligations was understood as a set (list) of regulatory legal acts and contracts and agreements concluded by public authorities (local government bodies) (individual articles, clauses, subclauses, paragraphs of regulatory legal acts, contracts and agreements ), providing for the emergence of expenditure obligations to be fulfilled at the expense of funds from the relevant budgets. Discrepancies in the conceptual apparatus gave rise to additional questions, for example, how should they be structured in the register of expenditure obligations - by expenditure obligations or by legal acts stipulating such obligations?
The issue of structuring the expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities in RPOs was resolved in fundamentally different ways. The Guidelines for compiling registers of expenditure obligations of budget planning subjects and state extra-budgetary funds, developed by the Ministry of Finance of Russia in accordance with Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of July 16, 2004 No. 440 “On the procedure for maintaining a register of expenditure obligations of the Russian Federation”, provided for the identification of several types of expenditure obligations, including:
- to ensure state functions of the legislative and judicial authorities;
- for the provision of public services;
- providing transfers to the population;
- for the provision of budget investments to legal entities that are not federal government agencies and federal state unitary enterprises;
- on providing interbudgetary transfers;
- established by interstate (international) treaties and agreements;
- for servicing and repaying the public debt of the Russian Federation.
The Guidelines also established requirements for the allocation of individual expenditure obligations.
The approach to structuring the expenditure obligations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities was different. Order No. 67n of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 27, 2006 provided for the allocation of:
- expenditure obligations of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation - in accordance with the structure of powers of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on subjects of joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, established in clause 2 of Art. 26.3 of the Federal Law of October 6, 1999 No. 184-FZ “On the general principles of organization of legislative (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation”; in this case, one power defined by law or part thereof is one expenditure obligation;
- expenditure obligations of municipalities - in accordance with the structure of issues of local importance of municipalities of the corresponding type and the powers of local government bodies established by Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ “On the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation”; one expenditure obligation corresponded to one issue of local importance (or part thereof), one authority (part of the authority) of local government bodies.
The considered option allowed the subjects of the Russian Federation to present data in a unified format acceptable for further information and analysis, and provided an information base for assessing the cost of exercising certain powers of the subjects of the Russian Federation on subjects of joint jurisdiction and issues of local importance, which was fully consistent with the ideology of delimitation of subjects of competence and powers .
At the same time, there were certain difficulties, namely:
- the difficulty of distributing budget expenditures for specific powers and issues of local importance and subsequent verification of its correctness in the conditions of deliberate incomparability of codes for classification of budget expenditures of the Russian Federation with lists of powers and issues of local importance;
- insufficiently high-quality compilation of lists of powers and issues of local importance, reflected in federal laws No. 184-FZ and 131-FZ and allowing for the intersection of sets, disproportionate detail or aggregation of individual powers and issues of local importance;
- the absence in the forms of RRO of a subject of the Russian Federation and the set of RRO of municipalities provided for submission to the Ministry of Finance of Russia, of other expenditure obligations, in addition to those aimed at fulfilling powers on subjects of joint jurisdiction of the subjects of the Russian Federation, as well as for resolving issues of local importance and fulfilling the powers of local governments.
In the forms of RRO of the Russian Federation established at the federal level, as well as in the forms for submitting to the Ministry of Finance of Russia data from the RRO of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the set of registers of municipalities, it is provided for the inclusion of information on the volume of funds required to fulfill expenditure obligations, and codes for the budget classification of expenses, which creates the conditions for the use of RPO for the purpose of assessing the value of state (municipal) obligations.
However, as practice shows, drawing up a financial statement based on an analysis of the entire array of legal acts that are subject to application in the relevant public entity in order to identify legal acts, contracts and agreements that give rise to expenditure obligations is a dead end due to the lack of clarity of wording in legal acts (especially those adopted a long time ago) and the ambiguity of the rules for “translating” their norms into the volume of budget financing. The lack of qualified specialists at the regional and municipal levels to carry out such work in a short time also prevents the choice of this option.
As a result, the reverse approach is used: the expenses provided for in the budget are distributed in the RPO among expenditure obligations, and then legal acts are selected for them.
Moreover, law enforcement officials often express concern that if they follow the first, theoretically more correct path, the GRBS that make up the RRO will declare excessively large needs for budget financing, determined by their wishes, and not by legal norms. And although the ways to solve such a problem are obvious (refusal to accept the “wishes” of the GRBS that are not justified from a legal point of view, amendments to legal acts that do not sufficiently transparently establish the need to provide budget financing, repeal of some legal acts), in practice they are usually not used.
The situation considered indicates that the register of expenditure obligations can play its prescribed role only if there is a clear understanding of the composition of legal acts, agreements, public education contracts that determine expenditure obligations. For example, the role of RPO in ensuring regular financing of capital expenditures can be extremely positive, when the annual reflection of the need for financial resources for all previously made decisions on the provision of budget investments helps prevent cases of non-financing and the emergence of long-term construction. However, in such a situation, attention is focused only on certain blocks of expenditure obligations.
Whereas a complete analysis of the entire existing array of legal acts seems extremely labor-intensive. And even a mechanism aimed at timely accounting of obligations that follow from newly adopted acts (when a new legal act is studied to determine whether it stipulates expenditure obligations and then included in the RPO) has not taken root in practice.
The ratio of work on the formation of cash registers with the organization of the budget process depends on the ratio of the timing of the formation of registers of expenditure obligations with the timing of drawing up draft budgets and their approval.
For the federal level, it is provided for the formation by subjects of budget planning and state extra-budgetary funds of three RROs (preliminary - no later than February 15; planned - no later than July 1; updated - no later than five days after the adoption in the third reading of the federal law on the federal budget for the next fiscal year). However, the advisability of drawing up this document three times and precisely within these periods from the point of view of the timing of drawing up the draft federal budget is not fully clear.
Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 67n provides for the submission to the Ministry of Finance of Russia of the RROs of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and the set of RROs of municipalities before May 1 and before December 1, which contradicts the main stages of the budget process at the regional and municipal levels, since after May 1 forecasts of socio-economic development are still being adjusted , and therefore, even if there are relatively accurate methods for calculating the volume of budget expenditures to fulfill expenditure obligations, the initial data may not be accurate enough.
In addition, by December 1, neither laws on the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, nor decisions on the budgets of municipalities, nor legal acts stipulating the inclusion of new expenditure obligations in the budgets have yet been adopted, and therefore the RPOs prepared by December 1 will practically not differ from RROs formed by May 1.
Taking into account the above, it is advisable to create registers of expenditure obligations in slightly different periods:
- at the initial stages of drawing up a draft budget, but after receiving relatively accurate data on forecasts of socio-economic development - so that the volumes of budget financing reflected in the registers can be used without radical changes in drawing up the draft budget;
- after the adoption of laws (decisions) on the budget and regulatory legal acts, the conclusion of contracts, agreements that give rise to expenditure obligations - so that all newly accepted expenditure obligations are reflected in the register of expenditure obligations.
However, the practical value of drawing up a second RPO can also be questioned, since this document is of interest mainly from the point of view of analyzing the volume and structure of deviations from the previously compiled RPO, as well as from the point of view of the composition of newly accepted expenditure obligations. In the budget process, the second RPO can be used only indirectly - as a basis for drawing up the first RPO for the next three-year period.
Of all the results-based budgeting tools, the departmental target programs (DTPs) and the medium-term financial plan (MTFP) are most closely related to the RPO. The RPO reflects expenses caused by regulatory legal acts. VCPs also represent specially structured obligations arising from existing legal acts, concluded contracts and agreements. An important question in this case arises only with information flows in the case of automation of work on compiling RPO and TCP.
As for the relationship with the TFP, provided that the drafting quality is adequate, the RPO should contain information on the expenditure requirements for the fulfillment of existing expenditure obligations, which can be used in the course of medium-term financial planning, in particular to determine the volume of the budget for accepted obligations. At the same time, the requirements established in the new edition of the Budget Code for the detail of TFP planning (down to target items and types of expenses) require the same detailed reflection of expenditure needs in the cash register.
Since, as practice shows, a formal approach to the preparation of RPOs currently prevails - based on the volumes of funding provided for in the budget, and not from the existing legal framework - the described mechanism for using RPOs in the preparation of TFP cannot fully perform its functions.
Thus, today the RPO does not solve the task assigned to it. At the same time, neither at the federal, nor at the regional, nor at the municipal levels there is a consensus (including not basic principles, but detailed mechanisms and procedures) on how to apply this document in the budget process.
In the Budget Code of the Russian Federation (as amended by Federal Law No. 63-FZ), the conceptual apparatus associated with expenditure obligations and cash balances has undergone changes of a technical rather than an ideological nature. The role of the RRO of the Russian Federation has increased - now this document must be submitted to the State Duma along with the draft federal budget; The state (municipal) assignment must include an extract from the RRO. The preservation and even clarification of the rules regarding RPO in the Budget Code indicates that the preparation of RPO still plays a significant role in the budget process.
With all the problems identified above, it cannot be denied that the RRO has brought and continues to bring benefits: it contributes to additional systematization of legal acts, significantly improves the legal culture of GRBS specialists and financial authorities, and allows solving local problems (for example, incomplete financing of construction projects and facilities) in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities creates a basis for assessing the powers exercised.
Undoubtedly, in the future, at the federal level, it is necessary to raise the question of the advisability of creating a register of expenditure obligations. However, in the context of the preservation of RPO and the lack of choice, it is necessary to look for ways to use it in the most diverse manner in the budget process.