The budget process is the activity of state authorities, local governments and participants in the budget process, regulated by law, in drawing up and reviewing draft budgets, draft budgets of state extra-budgetary funds, approving and executing budgets and budgets of state extra-budgetary funds, as well as monitoring their execution.

IN educational literature No single definition budget process, for example, some authors, speaking of the budget process, include in the definition the activities of public authorities in drafting state extra-budgetary funds, in developing and implementing budget policy.

Table 1

Essence of the budget process

	Definition of the essence of the budget process
Polyak G.B., Finance. Money turnover. Credit.	The set of actions of the executive and representative authorities on the development and implementation of financial and budgetary policy and the management of the budget system
Borovkova V.A., Borovkova V.A., Murashova S.V. Fundamentals of the theory of finance and credit.	The activities of public authorities, local governments and participants in the budget process for the preparation, consideration, approval, execution and control over the execution of draft budgets, projects of state extra-budgetary funds
Drobozina L.A., Finance.	The activities of the authorities in compiling, reviewing, approval and execution of the central and local budgets (in federal states, also budgets of members of the federation). Its content is determined by the state and budget structure of the country, the budgetary rights of the relevant bodies and legal entities.

The budget process includes four stages of budget activity:

• - drafting budgets;
• - consideration and approval of budgets;
• - execution of budgets;
• - preparation of reports on the execution of budgets and their approval.

Participants in the budget process are the entities of public sector management and recipients of budgetary funds defined by the current legislation that are related to the development of the project, consideration, approval of the law (decision) on the budget for the next year, as well as its execution and control over the execution process from the standpoint of the norms of the current budget legislation.

The Budget Code of the Russian Federation defines the following participants in the budget process:

President of the Russian Federation: The President addresses the Federal Assembly with the Budget Address. A procedure has been established according to which the said message must be sent to the relevant authorities no later than March of the year preceding the budget year. The budget message of the President of the Russian Federation is defined as an official document provided for by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, sent to the chambers of parliament and the Government of the Russian Federation outlining the main tasks and priorities of the state budget policy for the next budget year. The president, as a participant in the budget process, actually determines the priorities of the budget policy. At the same time, the proposals of other participants in the budget process - the government, the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation and other bodies - are carefully studied. As a participant in the budget process, the President of the country, in the last instance, signs the laws on the federal budget for the next year, federal laws on the budgets of state extra-budgetary funds, as well as laws on the execution of budgets.

The Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation (parliament), i.e. its two chambers - the State Duma and the Federation Council, as well as local legislative (representative) authorities: The Parliament of the country and local legislative (representative) authorities adopt (approve) the budgets of the corresponding levels, as well as laws (decisions) on the execution of budgets. It is in this area that public financial management really manifests itself, the content of which is an open detailed discussion of all budget parameters in terms of their compliance with spending obligations and the main priorities of budget policy, the regulation of significant flows of financial resources, exceeding a third of GDP - by approving the budget for income and expenditure .

Government of the Russian Federation: Governments of the subjects of the Federation, bodies executive power in the field, responsible for the development and execution of budgets. The Government of the Russian Federation, in particular, in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Federal Constitutional Law "On the Government of the Russian Federation" acts as the body responsible for specifying the budget policy in the draft law on the budget for the next goal. It directs the ministries and departments responsible for budgeting and execution. The role of local executive authorities is similar.

Ministries and departments responsible for the development of the draft budget, departments that are subjects of budget planning, as well as relevant local authorities: A special place among the ministries is occupied by the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation, which is responsible for developing macroeconomic on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation, develops a draft law on the budget and prepares proposals for the Government of the Russian Federation on amending budget legislation. The government is subject to the right of legislative initiative.

Bodies administering the execution of the budget by income: In Russia, such bodies are defined by the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, according to which each type of income has an administrator assigned to it, responsible for the timeliness and completeness of income receipts to the budget, as well as for the return of excessively transferred income to the budget.

The Federal Treasury and its local bodies that carry out cash execution of the budget: These are the most active participants in the budget process, not only involved in budget execution, but also responsible for compiling reports on budget execution and developing recommendations arising from the results of budget execution.

Bodies providing banking services for budget execution - the Central Bank (Bank of Russia) and its local structures: In exceptional cases, budget execution by commercial banks is allowed, which was the norm in the period when there were no such restrictions. But the so-called authorized banks in the 90s actively used budgetary funds in their own interests, delaying their flow to the public sector. This negative trend was gradually overcome.

The main managers, managers and recipients of budgetary funds that make up the organizational unity of the public sector: It is to their addresses that budgetary funds are transferred to bank accounts. Therefore, they are responsible for the legality, targeted and efficient use of budgetary funds.

The Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, the control and accounting bodies of the constituent entities of the Federation that carry out preliminary, subsequent and current financial control, including in the form of an examination of the quality of budget development and execution: They exercise financial control over the legality, targeted and effective use of budget funds.

Other bodies that receive budgetary funds to fulfill orders in the interests of developing the public sector: As an example, we can name large commercial organizations, supplying goods to the public sector, performing work and providing services on the basis of government orders and concluded contracts, and in connection with this, receiving significant amounts of budget funds.

Consistent implementation of the budget process occurs in stages. These stages are called stages. At the federal level, the budget process covers the following stages:

• - Development of a draft budget (by the Ministry of Finance) in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation.
• - Introduction and consideration of the draft budget.
• - Approval of the draft budget.
• - Implementation of the budget for income and expenditure.
• - Consideration and approval of the law on budget execution.

A certain cyclicality of the budget process is obvious. Its full cycle begins with the Budget Address of the President of the Russian Federation and ends with the adoption of the law on budget execution. From the beginning of the next year to its end, a draft law on the budget is developed, submitted for consideration, considered and approved. The entire next year the budget is executed. And one more year is actually spent on preparing, reviewing and approving the report on the execution of the budget, which is adopted in the form of a law some time after the adoption of the law on the budget for the next year. Project development federal budget associated with budget planning. The main contours of this process are schematically presented in Figure 1.

After the draft law on the federal budget is submitted to the parliament for consideration and accepted for consideration in the first reading (lasting 30 days), the concept of the draft budget law is adopted and approved (or not approved). The concept of the budget is a fundamental model of the draft budget for the next year as a reflection of the main priorities of the budget policy of the state (respectively, the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation) and municipalities.

Let us consider in more detail the process and statistics of financing the sphere of culture in the Russian Federation.

The quality and volume of cultural goods are directly related to the financial side of the activities of cultural organizations, and it is these processes that ensure the work of the cultural sector that are the object of modern reforms.

Figure 1 Development of a draft law on the federal budget

Scientists offer various classifications of models for financing the cultural sector. The central criterion in the basis of these classifications is the ratio of private and public funding. Until recently, the financial policy of the Russian state in relation to cultural institutions was based on the principle of "full state support and maximum control".

The bulk of organizations operating in the field of culture in modern Russia belongs to the state and municipal sector. The activities of cultural institutions are financed, as a rule, from the state and local budgets - this is the main source. The statistics of financing the cultural sector are presented in Table 2.

table 2

Financing of the sphere of culture within the framework of the target program "Culture of Russia 2012 - 2018", million rubles

Sources of financing
including:
federal budget
other sources - total
budgets of subjects of the Russian Federation
extrabudgetary sources

The process of cultural development is impossible without the attraction of funds from non-budgetary sources, the use of existing market mechanisms, real support and active assistance of participants in public-private partnerships. Efficient interaction of all authorities, business, scientific and public organizations in the implementation of large-scale cultural projects and programs aimed at the development of individual sub-sectors of culture, the preservation and use cultural heritage, increasing the cultural attractiveness of the regions and improving the quality of services provided in the field of culture.

Over the past years, such participation has been ensured at the federal, regional and local levels, including through the implementation of relevant targeted programs in the field of culture.

In particular, in most subjects of the Russian Federation, concepts, strategies and regional programs for the development of culture have been developed, which provide for joint funding and participation in the implementation of a number of activities within the framework of the overall federal strategy for the development of culture. The development of regional concepts for the development of the sphere of culture should be continued for the medium-term prospective period. To date, a certain positive experience has also been accumulated in the use of a program-targeted method of managing the cultural sector using public-private partnership mechanisms, which makes it possible to solve a set of tasks set for the development of a competitive market for services in the field of culture based on interdepartmental coordination of the activities of executive authorities at all levels, business and other interested parties.

Attracting extra-budgetary investments has shown itself positively in the creation and distribution of an artistic product in the field of theatrical, musical and circus art, as well as supported by the production of cinematic products.

Extrabudgetary sources are planned to be directed to support creative projects of young authors in the field of contemporary art, organization and holding of all-Russian performing competitions, debut projects of young authors and performers, as well as to support projects in the field of folk art and art. The role of extra-budgetary investments will be high in carrying out actions related to Russia's participation in international cultural process, events to support the touring activities of domestic performers abroad and the participation of leading foreign creative teams in Russian festivals and promotions.

It is planned to continue further interaction of various participants within the framework of public-private partnership. Attracting extrabudgetary funds for these purposes will contribute to the most favorable scenario for the development of the cultural sector in Russia in the future.

In most developed European countries, as in Russia, budget financing remains one of the main forms of support for the sphere of culture and art. However, the costs of these needs general expenses budgets of countries make up a relatively small part - from 0.2% to 2.5%.

The model of state financing of culture is formed in each country on the basis of the choice of methods, forms and mechanisms of financial policy. Its formation is strongly influenced by such factors as traditional national cultural preferences, as well as the development of charity, sponsorship and patronage. The system of financing culture and art is determined by the degree of centralization government controlled and the nature of intergovernmental relations. In unitary states, such as Sweden, the central budget continues to play a major role, while in federal Germany its economic functions are mainly limited to subsidizing broadcasting and foreign cultural events. Support for culture and art from the state budget is carried out through several channels:

• - in the form of direct financing;
• - with the help of general and targeted transfers to subnational budgets;
• - on the basis of joint participation of authorities of different levels in financing;
• - through independent intermediary structures;
• - using partnership mechanisms, on the basis of mixed public-private financing.

Direct funding of cultural organizations takes place in all countries, but the most a large share accounts for it in the budgets of European unitary states. It is carried out in the form of full financing of current costs and capital investments, special targeted transfers, as well as in the form of grants.

The oldest method of state support for culture - full direct funding - has already been abandoned in most countries. This method of subsidizing is retained only for some national museums, archives, libraries or to support national broadcasting. The most common form of direct state support is grants, which are paid to both organizations and individual cultural workers. The conditions for their provision vary considerably from country to country.

A variety of grants distinguishes the Swedish system of funding for culture and the arts. Here, cultural organizations can apply for a contractual grant (its amount is determined by an agreement concluded for a year between state bodies and a cultural organization), a grant paid according to the results of work in accordance with subsidy standards, in proportion to the volume of goods and services, or for the so-called basic (formula ) grant.

The latter must cover a certain share (usually 55%) of the standard costs for wages approved for each category of organizations (theaters, orchestras, regional museums and libraries). The grant has nothing to do with the actual expenses of the organizations for wages and the number of their staff, determined by them independently. It guarantees only a certain level of employment in the cultural sectors in this region.

State financing of culture through the system of subnational budgets in all countries is carried out by transferring general and targeted transfers to regional and local budgets. The general transfer differs from the target one in that it does not bind the recipient with spending conditions, in fact, simply increasing his budget revenues.

Funding for culture through partnerships between the state and corporate sponsors is becoming an increasingly prominent form of subsidies in Europe, facilitating a significant influx of funds from the private sector. Only a part of the funds allocated to support culture and art is distributed in European countries through the budgets of the ministries of culture. To improve the efficiency of budget financing, interdepartmental programs for subsidizing culture are being created.

With the development of commercial activities of cultural organizations, bank loans and credit benefits began to play an increasingly prominent role in their financing. The state assists them in obtaining bank loans by providing loan guarantees.

Since 2005, the new budget policy has been extended to the financing of culture. The main form of financial support for culture and art in the Netherlands was not annual, as before, but four-year one-time or block subsidies to cultural institutions. They are distributed on a competitive basis and are provided immediately for four years (and not in tranches by years). This form of subsidy gives cultural institutions more freedom in pursuing their artistic and commercial policies. They can keep any operating profit for additional activity or, to cover an operating deficit, make up the deficit of a particular year or season at the expense of other years (seasons) during the entire four-year period of the grant. Cultural institutions get the opportunity, for example, to accumulate funds during the first two years in order to start developing a new direction of activity in the third year - if this direction was declared in the project for which the funds were received. Thus, cultural institutions have the right to freely dispose of the entire amount of the subsidy, but only within the framework of the project for which it was allocated.

Activity characteristics budget institutions

The status of a budgetary institution is regulated

Federal Law of January 12, 1996 No. 7-FZ "On Non-Commercial Organizations". Article 9.2 of the law gives the following definition of a budget institution:

A budgetary institution is a non-profit organization established by the Russian Federation, a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or a municipality to perform work or provide services in order to ensure the implementation of the powers of state authorities (state bodies) or local governments provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation in the fields of science, education, healthcare, culture, social protection, employment of the population, physical culture and sports, as well as in other areas.

The law establishes that budgetary institutions carry out their activities on the basis of a state task formed by the founder. At the same time, a budgetary institution does not have the right to evade the fulfillment of a state task. The issues of the formation of the state task will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter.

The change in the order of funding for budgetary institutions creates some guarantees for maintaining the declared amounts of funding, since in the case of estimated funding, the amount of funds received by the institution is tied to the actual budget revenues.

Budgetary institutions have been granted the right to provide paid services that go beyond the state assignment. However, at the same time, the law establishes that a budgetary institution has the right to do so only insofar as such activities are consistent with the achievement of the statutory goals and objectives. That is, services (works) provided for a fee must correspond to the main type of activity of the institution. At the same time, the procedure for determining fees for the services of budgetary institutions is established by the founder, that is, institutions do not receive complete freedom in this matter.

Also, certain features are characteristic of property management of budgetary institutions. In particular, budgetary institutions cannot dispose of either the property transferred by the founder or the property acquired at the expense of entrepreneurial income. The exception is especially valuable movable property acquired at the expense of entrepreneurial income. At the same time, if the property is leased by the institution, then state funding for its maintenance is terminated.

A budgetary institution, in accordance with Law No. 83-FZ, has the right to attract loans and conclude financial leasing agreements and does not have the right to purchase securities and place funds on bank deposits. At the same time, Law No. 7-FZ establishes that a budgetary institution has the right to conclude large transactions only with the prior consent of the founder.

A major transaction is a transaction or several interconnected transactions related to the disposal of funds, the alienation of other property (which a budgetary institution has the right to dispose of independently), as well as the transfer of such property for use or pledge, provided that the price of such a transaction or the value of the alienated or of the transferred property exceeds 10% of the book value of the assets of a budgetary institution, determined according to its financial statements as of the last reporting date.

A budget institution carries out its monetary transactions through personal accounts opened with a territorial body of the Federal Treasury or a financial body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation (municipal formation). Operations with funds received by budgetary institutions from the relevant budget of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation in the form of subsidies for other purposes (except for the fulfillment of a state task) and in the form of budgetary appropriations for the implementation of budgetary investments in state-owned capital construction projects are recorded on a separate personal account of a budgetary institution.

A government institution can function in any area, including culture. Its activity consists in the provision of state and municipal services, the performance of work, the performance of state and municipal functions, and is carried out on the basis of a budget estimate.

In accordance with Federal Law No. 83-FZ, a state or municipal organization acts as a state cultural institution, whose activities are aimed at performing work and providing services to ensure the exercise of the powers of state authorities or self-government.

Its main source of funding is the funds of the relevant budget based on the budget estimate.

↯ Attention! New samples are available for download:,

What is the purpose of the state institution of culture

This type of institution is created not only to perform certain types of work and provide services. Its mission is to perform state functions. This indicates the possibility of their functioning both in the field of culture and art, and in any other non-profit area.

The main goal of the activities of the state cultural institution is to meet the cultural needs of the population. This goal can be achieved by solving a number of tasks:

• regular study of the needs in the cultural and leisure sphere and the sphere of folk art;
• providing methodological guidance to organizations whose activities are aimed at providing services in the field of leisure, culture and art;
• organization, development and implementation of innovative forms of cultural and educational activities;
• training of personnel on conservation and development
• traditional cultures of all ethnic groups that live on the territory of the municipality;
• organizing and holding mass and collective events, including exhibitions, competitions, festivals and much more.

The activities of state cultural institutions are carried out in various directions: information-analytical, methodological, research, educational, and so on. This allows you to successfully implement tasks and achieve your goals.

Employees of such institutions carry out activities of a research and methodological nature, for example, folklore and ethnographic expeditions, practical conferences or the publication of methodological manuals.

They are engaged in studying the state and development trends of various categories of amateur club associations, disseminate practical experience, provide methodological assistance in developing scenarios, and provide advice on the preparation of the necessary documentation. The list of events that are held on the basis of state-owned cultural institutions is distinguished by a variety of forms and topics.

What is the difference between a public institution

The state institution of culture has some features that distinguish it from autonomous and budgetary organizations. First of all, it concerns. All activities of this institution are financed from the budget on the basis of the budget estimate. And this is to some extent an advantage that state-owned cultural organizations receive in return for the maximum restriction in the manifestation of any initiative.

It is worth noting that, according to the law, a public institution, like organizations of other types, has the right to engage in activities that bring additional income. One of the most common forms of income in this case is both receipts from paid services and voluntary donations from legal entities and individuals, as well as rental payments.

At the same time, all income received as a result of such activities should only go to the appropriate budget of the budget system of the Russian Federation. That is, their disposal is not the competence of the institution.

As you know, public institutions are liable for their obligations with the funds at their disposal. If these resources are insufficient, then subsidiary liability the obligations of these organizations are borne by the founder.

All operations related to budgetary funds are carried out through personal accounts opened for this organization in the treasury bodies. Monetary obligations on the part of the institution, indicated in the executive document, must be fulfilled within the limits of budget obligations.

There are no subsidies for this type of institution.

If it is necessary to conclude a contract, then only the founder can do this. There are also other restrictions, for example:

In addition, it has limitations in terms of the use of property, which was transferred by the founder on the basis of operational management rights. This means that a state-owned organization cannot dispose of movable and immovable property of value without obtaining the consent of the founder.

In order to achieve the statutory goals of the institution, the owner finances its activities from the budget of the appropriate level. Every year, the law on the federal budget provides for the financing of subordinate budgetary institutions created by them as part of the expenditures of the main managers of budgetary funds.

Budget allocations allocated to finance state and municipal cultural institutions, in the formation of budgets of all levels are allocated in a separate line (cultural development fund). The funds also receive funds received from enterprises, organizations and citizens, income from lotteries, auctions, exhibitions and other public events, sales of securities and other receipts that do not contradict the legislation of the Russian Federation. The funds of cultural development funds are spent for the purposes provided for by the regulations on these funds, which are approved by the state administration bodies of the Russian Federation.

As of September 1, 2006, the consolidated budget expenditures under the section "Culture, Art and Cinematography" amounted to 29 billion rubles. 14 billion rubles were spent on culture.

To understand the features of modern mechanisms of budget financing of cultural institutions and the prospects for their change, it is of fundamental importance to analyze the experience of transformations that have been carried out over the past 15 years.

A consequence of the political and economic reforms of the early 90s. was the decentralization of funding for culture. And, although the level of decentralization of budgetary spending on culture was high before, the very practice of financing has changed radically. If before 1992 all appropriations for culture in local budgets were coordinated with the Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation, and then with the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation, then in 1992 local authorities became virtually independent in making decisions on the distribution of funds from their budgets.

The Law "On Culture" (1992) contained an attempt to unequivocally define the state's obligations in financing the sphere of culture. The principle of a normative approach to the formation of appropriations for culture in the budgets of all levels was proclaimed. At least 2% of federal budget funds and at least 6% of regional and local budget funds should go for these purposes. But, as in the case of education funding, these norms were not met.

As for the actual mechanisms of budgetary financing of cultural institutions, then up to the mid-90s. there were no radical changes. The new management system, which was enshrined in the Law "On Culture" and a number of other documents, has been in place since the mid-1990s. gradually began to be dismantled with the help of various kinds guidelines, explanations and instructions. And as a result of the introduction of the Budget Code and the treasury system of budget execution, the economic independence of cultural organizations turned out to be less than what they had in a planned economy.

In order to achieve the statutory goals of a cultural organization, the owner finances its activities from the budget of the appropriate level. Most of the budget funds are allocated for the current activities of cultural organizations by articles:

1. 1501/410/273 and 1501/411/273 - maintenance of especially valuable objects of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation;

2. 1501/410/283 - maintenance of museums and permanent exhibitions;

3. 1501/410/284 - content of libraries;

4. 1501/41/281 - state support for theaters, concert organizations and other performing arts organizations;

5. 1501/410/288 - state support for circus organizations.

Financing of the current activities of theaters, concert organizations, museums, libraries, clubs, zoos, parks of culture and recreation, which in their organizational and legal form are institutions, is carried out on the basis of the estimated principle. For each of them, an estimate of expenses is approved, which reflects all types of expenses, divided according to the items of economic classification of budget expenses. Funds allocated from the budget for the current activities of the institution are credited to a personal account opened with the treasury. The latter exercise control over the expenditure of these funds in accordance with their intended purpose. The above cultural organizations do not have the right to independently redistribute them between different items of expenditure. The budget schedule can be changed by the Ministry of Finance (or other relevant financial authority) during the year at the request of the Ministry of Culture (or other relevant executive authority), prepared at the request of a cultural organization.

The company "Rosgostsirk" is a unitary enterprise. She receives subsidies from the federal budget "in one line" under Art. 1501/410/288, which are credited to her current account. Then these funds are distributed among individual circus organizations and credited to their settlement accounts. Some of them are unitary enterprises, and some are budgetary institutions. First, the company allocates funds for current activities “in one line”, the second - on the basis of an estimate of income and expenses, but not as detailed as theaters, concert organizations, clubs, parks and other institutions in the field of culture. Circus organizations that have the status of institutions have not switched to the treasury system. Control over the spending of the funds allocated to them is carried out by the management of the company.

In addition to budget financing of the current activities of cultural organizations, there is targeted budget financing:

1. under article 1501/410/287 - other institutions and events in the field of culture and art (from the centralized fund of the Ministry of Culture);

2. under article 1501/631/711 - Federal target program "Culture of Russia" (subprogram "Development of culture and preservation of the cultural heritage of Russia").

3. Targeted budget financing of cultural organizations is carried out on the basis of an agreement (up to 200 thousand rubles) or a state contract (over 200 thousand rubles). The allocated funds also go to the personal account of the organization in the treasury bodies and are spent according to the estimate approved by the Ministry of Culture (or other relevant executive authority).

Financial resources of institutions in the field of culture from extrabudgetary sources, as well as funds received from the owner, are reflected in personal accounts in the treasury, and are spent exclusively according to the estimate. The estimate of income and expenditure on extra-budgetary funds reflects the volumes and sources of financial receipts, as well as the directions of their use in accordance with the articles of the economic classification of budget expenditures. The estimate for extra-budgetary funds, as well as for budget earmarked funds, is approved by the Ministry of Culture or other relevant executive authority and may change in agreement with them. The control of targeted spending of funds is carried out by the treasury bodies.

Estimates reflecting the income of a cultural organization from the budget and from entrepreneurial and other income-generating activities are combined into a single estimate of income and expenses. At the same time, accounting and reporting for each type of financial receipts is carried out according to an independent balance sheet.

State and municipal cultural institutions are allowed to conduct entrepreneurial activities provided for by their charter.

The following list of types of entrepreneurial activity has been established:

1. for the sale and leasing of fixed assets and property of a cultural organization for purposes not related to cultural activities;

2. trade in purchased goods, equipment;

3. for the provision of intermediary services;

4. on equity participation in the activities of commercial enterprises, institutions and organizations (including culture);

5. acquisition of shares, bonds, other securities and receipt of income (dividends, interest) on them;

6. for the implementation of income-generating operations, works, services not provided for by the charter /1, 15/.

The activities of cultural institutions for the implementation of the works, services and products provided for by the charter are classified as entrepreneurial only to the extent that the income received from this activity is not invested directly in this organization for the needs of ensuring, developing and improving the main statutory activities.

Paid Forms cultural activities cultural and educational institutions, theaters, philharmonic societies, folk groups and performers are not considered as entrepreneurial if the income from them is fully spent on their development and improvement.

Prices (tariffs) for paid services and products, including ticket prices, are set by cultural institutions independently.

When organizing paid events, cultural institutions are obliged to establish benefits for children of preschool age, students, disabled people, military servicemen. The procedure for establishing benefits for these categories of the population is established by the relevant legislative authorities.

Financing the costs associated with free admission museums once a month by persons under the age of 18 is carried out within the limits of the funds provided for the financing of museums and permanent exhibitions in the departmental structure of federal budget expenditures.

To ensure the social protection of citizens, state regulation of prices for the products of enterprises replicating cultural and informational goods and occupying a monopoly position in the market is allowed.

The constituent parts of the system of state and municipal institutions cultures are extremely heterogeneous in terms of the structure of the sources of funding for their activities. The work of archives, libraries, and organizations involved in the protection of monuments is almost entirely supported by funding from the state or charitable organizations. In museum and club activities, a more prominent role is played by receipts from entrance tickets, the sale of various services and souvenir products. But the main thing is budget financing. The activities of theaters, philharmonic and folk groups provided by a combination of public funding, private donations, ticket revenues, etc.

Meanwhile, the principles and mechanism of financing of the vast majority of cultural organizations do not differ from any state institution. Currently, the main form of budget financing of state and municipal cultural institutions is budget financing. It provides government organizations with financial resources to carry out their activities. But at the same time, there is no direct connection between the size of allocated appropriations and the achieved results of this activity. The connection turns out to be indirect - through the size of total expenditures minus extrabudgetary receipts. Estimated funding greatly limits the ability of organizations to make independent economic decisions on spending the funds received.

Over the past 15 years, cultural institutions have been pushed to conduct active entrepreneurial activities, and to replace budget allocations with extra-budgetary income. Extra-budgetary revenues from core activities, from the sale of non-core types of goods and services did grow, but the share of extra-budgetary funds in the total income of cultural institutions remains low.

The reduction of public spending on culture is combined with the low efficiency of their use. There is a widespread practice of allocating budget funds to support cultural organizations without clear obligations on their part and without monitoring the results of the use of budget allocations. Competitive distribution of budgetary funds is used sporadically, and its procedures are non-transparent and cause fair criticism. The methods of shared financing of cultural projects and programs from budgets that have proven themselves abroad are almost never used. different levels. Any proposals to create cross-funding systems for certain types of cultural activities are rejected, while such systems are used in many countries with developed market economies and those with economies in transition.

Financing of cultural institutions

Introduction…………………………………………………………………………….4

Chapter 1. Budget financing of culture and art…………………5

1.2. The procedure for calculating the costs of institutions…………………………….…..…8

1.3. Organization of planning and financing of expenses

for institutions of culture and art…………………………………….…..12

Chapter 2. Paid Services and Funding Sources

cultural institutions………………………………………………………....18

2.1. The system of paid services in the field of culture……………………………....18

2.2. Funding sources………………………………………….…..20

2.3. Funding of culture from the federal budget in 2005…….…24

Conclusion…………………………………………………………….…....….29

List of references………………………………………........30

Introduction

Relevance of the topic. Performing a set of tasks for the ideological and social services of the population, aimed at the expanded reproduction of society, culture is one of the main contenders for the state budget. At the same time, culture has a significant commercial potential and, if used skillfully, can make a significant contribution to the development of the domestic economy. Concert activities can serve as an example. The combination of budgetary financing of culture with elements of self-financing fits well into the structure of the modern market mechanism.

Discrimination of culture, which has become established as an instrument of financial policy, and the continued practice of a residual approach to financing cultural activities at the federal, regional and municipal levels does not allow for the efficient use of budgetary funds and is, in essence, an absolutely hopeless policy of "putting out the fire."

Culture cannot and should not be considered by the state as a "social sphere", occupying a place between

orots, the disabled and internally displaced persons. The state invests in culture not at all for philanthropic reasons, but because, in the end, these are the most profitable investments that give returns in the form of a civilized society with a high ability to modernize and develop, in the form of a citizen who is willing and able to work creatively.

Being today not rich enough to make cheap purchases, the Russian state, for reasons of self-preservation, should adequately participate in the preservation and development of cultural potential nation.

Russia is going through great difficulties today not only in the field of state structure, but also in the sphere of economy and finance. The successful implementation of economic reform is largely due to the achievement of financial stabilization.

However, for the correct implementation of the tasks assigned to the financial policy, a clear and deep approach to understanding the essence, goals and mechanism for implementing the financial policy, as well as the elements that make it up, is required. Of particular interest is the experience of implementing financial measures abroad. For the formation of the Russian budgetary system, it will undoubtedly be useful to use the wide experience of other states that have already created quite successfully functioning budgetary bodies.

The object of this research term paper is the financial support of budgetary institutions, subjects - financing of cultural institutions.

The purpose of the course work: to consider the features of the financing of cultural institutions in the conditions of a market business model.

Objectives of the course work:

To characterize the features of budget financing of cultural institutions;

Consider non-budgetary sources of funding for culture;

To analyze the data on the financing of culture from the federal budget in 2005.

Structure of the work: introduction, two chapters, conclusion, bibliography.

Chapter 1. Budget financing of culture and art

The functions of culture in terms of their socio-economic content consist in the spiritual enrichment of a person and the impact through this on the final economic results. The cultural complex is a set of enterprises, institutions and organizations that solve specific tasks for the development and self-realization of the individual, the humanization of society and the preservation of the identity of peoples. The legal basis for the preservation and development of national culture is a whole series of laws of the Russian Federation, among which the leading role is given to the Law of the Russian Federation of October 9, 1992 No. 3612-1 “Fundamentals of the legislation of the Russian Federation on culture”. The activities of libraries, museums, theaters, and the film industry are regulated by additionally adopted special laws.

The current legislation in the field of culture provides that the state undertakes to ensure that cultural activities, cultural values ​​and benefits are accessible to citizens, for this purpose the state intends to:

To carry out budgetary financing of state and, if necessary, non-state cultural organizations;

Stimulate budget financing by providing tax incentives to enterprises and individuals investing their funds for these purposes;

Establish a special tax regime non-profit organizations culture;

To promote the development of charity in the field of culture;

Provide support to low-income citizens.

Depending on the owner, cultural institutions can be state, municipal, non-state, with a mixed form of ownership. State and municipal institutions are created by the founder (founders), register their charters and draw up contractual obligations of the parties indicating the procedure for using material financial resources. When funding institutions according to established standards, the right to receive additional sources of funding is not limited. It should be noted that, unlike education for cultural institutions, the government of the Russian Federation did not approve standard provisions regulating the procedure for their activities and financing. At the same time, budget financing is the basis of state guarantees for the preservation and development of culture in the Russian Federation. Currently, there are several proposals for calculating the amount of funds needed for these purposes:

Based on the norm of budget financing per person and population;

Based on a percentage of the amount of national income generated in the region;

Based on a given percentage of total budget spending.

This approach is adopted in the Federal Law on the Fundamentals of Russian Legislation on Culture. It is indicated that at least 2% of the federal budget and 6% of the territorial budgets should be directed to culture. The need for regular clarification of the volume of financing is provided for in order to compensate for additional costs due to inflationary processes.

In real practice, neither the federal nor the regional authorities comply with the requirements of the law due to budget deficits. Methods for determining socially necessary costs (budget appropriations) are based on the fact that it is not cultural activities as such that are financed, but specific cultural organizations (institutions). Budget funds are allocated to those institutions that are not focused on commercial forms of activity, although they use market elements of management.

As in other areas of social significance, budgetary cultural institutions are subject to strict regulation and detailing of current expenses.

Table 1 presents a grouping of the economic structure of expenditures financed from budgetary funds by the "culture" sector.

The data in Table 1 make it possible to determine the content of expenditures in terms of types of activities and forms of financing. It should be borne in mind that the composition of the industry's expenses can be represented through sources of financing, budget levels, areas of activity, etc.

As an example, consider the main types of federal budget expenditures for 2003. In total for the year, Section 15 “Culture, Art and Cinematography” approved 14 billion rubles, of which 12 billion rubles were allocated for culture and art, while 7.5 billion rubles were allocated. aimed at maintaining especially valuable objects of the cultural population of the peoples of Russia, museums, libraries and other institutions; 3.1 billion rubles - on state support circuses, theaters, philharmonic societies; 1.4 billion rubles allocated for the implementation of the federal target program "Culture of Russia". Expenses in the amount of 2 billion rubles. are also mainly intended for the implementation of training programs.

Section 16 “Mass Media” provides for 12 billion rubles. Basically, these funds are intended for state support in the form of subsidies and subventions for state television and radio companies, publishing houses, editorial offices of newspapers and magazines, etc. mass media.

The classification of activities of institutions and organizations is important for resolving the issue of state financing of domestic culture. The grouping of functions into socially significant and entertaining-leisure ones makes it possible to determine the degree of state participation in covering the costs of the industry. Of course, socially significant activities are subject to financing, and the possible level of commercialization of the services provided is determined.

Thus, public policy in the field of culture is primarily aimed at ensuring necessary conditions for the implementation of the constitutional rights of citizens of the Russian Federation to freedom of creativity, participation in cultural life and the use of cultural institutions, access of the population to cultural values.

1.2. The procedure for calculating the costs of institutions

The principle of the unity of the budget system proclaimed by the Budget Code of the Russian Federation, which is ensured by a single legal framework, a single budget classification and unity of forms of budget documentation, directly affected the system of culture. According to the provisions of Art.161. The Budget Code of the Russian Federation, a significant part of state cultural organizations received the status of budgetary institutions, since their activities are financed on the basis of an estimate of income and expenses. In culture, as in other areas social sphere, there is not a normative, but an item-by-item principle of allocation of budgetary funds. Each article has its own specific methodology. Museums present the greatest difficulty in assessing future expenditures and determining the required amount of budgetary funding due to the extremely wide variety of conditions for their activities and the unpredictability of income. Despite the fact that the composition of expenses is quite specific, they are not amenable to formalization and rationing.

When determining the cost of wages, the staffing of museum specialists cannot be reduced to a common denominator. For example, the number of curators of a museum fund depends on its structure, composition of objects, their value, condition; the number of caretakers - from the area of ​​the exhibition halls, the degree of accessibility of the exhibits, the presence of a security alarm. A similar situation is developing with the planning of funds for the purchase of museum exhibits and the design of expositions, with the acquisition of library collections in libraries, the acquisition of props and materials for events, etc. Whatever amount of funds is calculated by the institution, when approving the estimate, its actual execution over a number of years and the volume of the budget are taken into account.

An important condition for the functioning of museums and obtaining the right to budget funding is the licensing of their activities. In accordance with the law, the charters of state museums must be approved by the government of the Russian Federation. A certain place in the series of documents that ensure the safety of valuables should be occupied by the State Catalog of the Museum Fund.

The planning of budget expenditures, both for museums and for other types of cultural institutions and organizations, is preceded by determining the ability of the institution to receive income to ensure self-financing, clarifying the cultural and historical significance of the object, determining the range of social groups population using the services of this cultural institution. As a rule, financing from budgetary sources is carried out in cases where institutions cannot guarantee the growth of their own income by providing paid services to the population. Their main activity has a pronounced nature of public goods, in particular the activities of state libraries. Equity financing from the budget can be carried out for the development of material and technical and information technologies that ensure the receipt of high own incomes by cultural organizations in the future.

When calculating the amount of budget funding for theaters and concert organizations, the volume of expected income is also determined, which depends on the number of spectators served and the average ticket price. To calculate the number of spectators, you need capacity auditorium multiply by the number of planned performances and their average attendance. All performances are divided into morning, afternoon and evening. Ticket prices depend on the time of the performance. In addition to income from performances, theaters can receive income from the provision of services to the population. The methodology for calculating costs for the main items of expenditure does not have any particularities. The wage fund for artistic and artistic personnel is divided into the wage fund for full-time employees and invited ones. Expenses for new productions, sale of tickets, advertising, and other expenses are regulated by the volume of income and budget receipts. Budgetary funds are usually allocated in the form of subsidies. The theater estimate is a financial plan consisting of two sections: income and receipts; expenses and deductions. The first section takes into account income from fees for core activities, other income, budget subsidies. In the second - all expenses, regardless of the sources of their coverage.

Unlike theaters, concert activity includes various genres - pop, philharmonic, etc. State financial support is provided to the philharmonic direction, since due to its specificity it is the most unprofitable. Calculations and justifications for financing concert organizations are similar to theatrical ones.

In the most important state document - the Action Plan of the Government of the Russian Federation in the field of social policy and modernization of the economy for 2000-2001. the need to introduce contractual methods of financing cultural institutions was substantiated. This means that the practice of relations between the state founder and the performer of services in the field of art includes contractual relations with the condition of providing budgetary funds according to a stable standard. At the same time, the question of the criteria for choosing the unit of normalization remains debatable. With a wide variety of cultural institutions and organizations that are not similar to each other, it is difficult to determine both the unit of regulation and the cost of a budgetary service. Thus, in theaters, the volume of services can be expressed in the number of spectators served and in the number of performances. It is impossible not to notice that the market value of cultural services does not always indicate its artistic level. At the same time, audience demand is the best indicator of theater performance. Establishing a tight link between public funding and viewership can be a disincentive, indicating the need for a tailor-made approach to projected costs.

1.3. Organization of planning and financing of expenses for cultural and art institutions

Currently, the Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation finances federal agencies and organizations. Their list is determined by the government of the Russian Federation. It includes libraries, museums, theaters, educational institutions of special cultural significance for Russia, and their activities are a benchmark in the field of culture and art.

Budget allocations are allocated for the following purposes:

Remuneration of employees (specialists, creative, managerial, production and support personnel) as members of the staff,

As well as attracted under contracts, the payment of royalties to the authors of works used by the cultural organization;

Acquisition of library funds, formation of new and replenishment of existing museum collections, provision special regime their storage, the acquisition of materials for the restoration of funds, scientific and methodological activities;

Material support for the artistic embodiment of creative ideas (creation of new productions, performances, preparation of concert programs and other types of mass spectacles, organization of festivals, exhibitions, work on the creation and updating of expositions) and maintenance of the material design of productions (programs, numbers), artistic exposures;

Equipping the organization of culture with modern technical means and equipment, including those ensuring the safety of storage funds and the building of the organization of culture;

Carrying out major repairs;

Restoration of historical, cultural and architectural monuments transferred to the use of a cultural organization;

Other costs associated with the main activities of the cultural organization.

The misuse of budgetary allocations allocated for the implementation of the main activities of a cultural organization, including the placement of budgetary allocations on deposit accounts of credit institutions and the purchase of securities for the organization of culture to receive additional income, is prohibited. The receipt of funds from non-budgetary sources is not a basis for reducing the amount of budgetary allocations for a cultural organization.

A massive network of state cultural institutions is financed from regional and local budgets. Depending on their location, libraries, museums, theaters, houses and palaces of culture, and other institutions differ in the scale of their activities, the number of employees, and the coverage of the population. A significant number of small cultural institutions located in rural areas are mainly focused on budget funding. Large municipal cultural institutions have signs of a legal entity, including the presence of an independent estimate of income and expenses. Proceeding from this, the financing of cultural objects can be both consolidated and individual.

The mechanism of the total amount of budgetary funds for financing culture is also constructed differently. All allocations under the budget of a large territorial unit are divided into two parts. The first is intended to finance state institutions, the second - to finance programs and events, as well as to ensure the activities of non-governmental organizations and individuals that contribute to the development of the industry. The second part of the appropriations is a target item of expenditure, in the formation of which the methodology “from the achieved level” is applied, or the allocation of funds is carried out in a certain proportion of the costs of maintaining the industry. At the expense of this article, cultural programs and events of both state and non-state institutions culture. In this case, the program-target method of substantiation and allocation of funds is used. This method can be classified as innovative. As a priority areas of activity to be financed, as a rule, the following are considered:

Preservation and restoration of historical, cultural and architectural monuments;

Preservation of folk traditions (support of the folklore ensemble, centers of arts and crafts, amateur art, etc.);

Development of regional cultures small peoples(creation of centers of national cultures, holding national festivals, etc.);

Development of children's creativity and support for young talents;

Organization of family recreation and creation of conditions for a healthy lifestyle.

In conditions of limited funding, when developing a program, some major socially significant and socially necessary goal is selected that can be achieved. different performers. In order to increase the efficiency of allocated funds in a competitive environment, competitive consideration of proposals from potential contractors is used. Options for financing programs from various sources. In this case, the cultural management body takes a share in the financing. When evaluating the effectiveness of the proposed set of conditions formulated by the customer, calculations and justifications are subjected to an independent examination. With the participation of experts, funding priorities are also determined, for which expert councils are created under the main manager of funds. It consists of specialists with professional authority in the field of culture. This council evaluates each cultural institution with maximum objectivity and makes recommendations to the main manager of budgetary funds and the allocation of funds for the implementation of certain activities.

The solution of the issue, as a rule, is based on a system of criteria, including expediency, economic efficiency, reliability of implementation, social significance, cultural continuity, technological feasibility, creative readiness, methodological validity.

When institutions and organizations prepare applications for the right to receive state and municipal orders in the field of culture, it is important to single out the type of activity, independently formulate and evaluate the compliance of the event with the established priorities and funding criteria.

IN last years the principle of applying the so-called social and creative order is being introduced into the economic and organizational-creative life of the governing bodies and the organization of culture. With this method of financing, equal opportunities are created for all subjects of cultural activity to receive budgetary funds. The procedure for transferring funds is similar to the procedure for financing programs. However distinctive feature when concluding contracts for the implementation of a socio-creative order is that it is divided into two parts. The main part is fixed and cannot be changed either by the culture management body or by the performer. The opportunistic part is not fixed, as it represents a fairly wide range of events and cultural services. The agreement provides for certain tolerances for the replacement of some measures with others that are adequate in form or content. It is allowed to make changes in terms of order fulfillment in case of changing resource conditions.

With regard to the costs associated with the strengthening and development of the material and technical base of cultural facilities, a special funding procedure applies. It is based on competitions, the procedure for which is regulated by the Budget Code of the Russian Federation.

Let us briefly dwell on the order of interaction of culture, physical culture and sports with the media. For example, public services on television and radio broadcasting provide funding for theater and entertainment, health and sports programs at the expense of the federal budget, the budgets of the Russian Federation and their own sources. Television companies and radio companies of other forms of ownership - at their own expense, taking into account the fact that broadcasting events through television and radio broadcasting channels, filming and photographing, making recordings of their image and sound recording is carried out only with the appropriate permissions. Advertising of goods, products and services during entertainment and sports events is also allowed with the permission of the organizers, since this is associated with the receipt of advertising income in the form of a sponsorship contribution.

Public funding of the media is usually provided in the form of grants provided on a gratuitous and non-repayable basis, and is regulated by special legislation. The allocation of grants is carried out to pay for socially significant information and journalistic materials on social problems, the production of educational programs in the field of culture and popular science materials, the production printed matter intended for the visually or hearing impaired, etc. Competitive consideration of applications and their expert evaluation are mandatory conditions prior to the allocation of budget funding.

Chapter 2. Paid Services and Sources of Financing of Cultural Institutions

2.1. The system of paid services in the field of culture

An important feature of the financing mechanism was the consolidation of funds from various sources, including the budget, into a single income of the institution and the use of this income regardless of the source of funding. Moreover, funds coming from other sources do not reduce the amount of budget allocations. Thus, the principle was consolidated, according to which budget allocations to cultural institutions are not just state expenses, but a special type of income for institutions, due to the social significance of their activities.

Many cultural institutions, especially those with a material and technical base, expanded the range of services provided for a fee, began to pursue a more flexible pricing policy. As a result, the share of own funds in total income reached an average of 25%.

However, I would like to point out that additional income in many cases were obtained, firstly, by replacing free services with paid ones, which led to a significant reduction in circles, a decrease in cultural events for rural residents, and secondly, due to non-core activities.

Cultural organizations make extensive use of their right to set their own prices. However, very often their pricing policy is aimed mainly at strengthening their own financial position. A sharp increase in prices for cultural services, even taking into account inflation, has Negative influence on the availability of cultural services for the general population.

Consider the dynamics of receiving additional appropriations by the Committee for Culture and Art (Fig. 1)

Fig.1 The ratio of the shares of income from circles, discotheques and cultural events in the total profit for 2000-2004

In the diagram below, you can see that the largest share in general, the amount of profit is income from circles (32%), the next place in terms of profitability is disco and cultural events (29% respectively). These three directions are promising in the development of proposals to improve the efficiency of culture.

To increase profits, it is necessary to establish new types of paid circles, hold discos more often with the involvement of variety artists, etc.

In order to increase the effectiveness of cultural events, first of all, attention should be paid to improving the quality of the repertoire of films and videos offered for viewing.

One of the important alternative sources of funding for culture is the funds of patrons and sponsors.

Today, the cost of sponsors to support culture can only be taken into account in the cost of advertising. The established norms for calculating the maximum size of such expenses do not ensure the development of the sponsor and do not allow potential investors to actively use their funds to support culture and form their image.

One of the additional sources of attracting funds for culture can be the denationalization and privatization of a number of cultural objects.

Under certain conditions, privatization can bring significant benefits to culture, since, firstly, additional resources will come into this area and, secondly, the state will be able to release its own funds and direct them to the maintenance of cultural organizations.

2.2. Sources of financing

The financial resources of the organization of culture are formed at the expense of:

Ø budget allocations and other receipts from the founder;

Ø income from paid forms of cultural activities;

Ø payments for the provision of services under contracts with legal and

individuals;

Ø voluntary donations, subsidies, funds received through

wills;

Ø loans from banks and other credit institutions;

Ø other income and receipts in accordance with

the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Changing the ideology of budgeting at all levels - a gradual transition from planning from the achieved level to planning from real needs. Development by 2003 of federal social standards in the field of culture and methods of normative planning based on them, transition from 2004 to normative methods of planning budgetary expenditures on culture, with access by 2006 to the level of this type of federal budget expenditure of at least 0.15% of GDP and by 2010 - not less than 0.2% of GDP.

At the same time, it is necessary to achieve a real increase in the efficiency of spending budgetary funds allocated to culture, for which the network of budgetary cultural institutions should be optimized, methods of monitoring the targeted and efficient spending of budgetary funds should be improved, and by 2005 a real multi-channel budgetary financing (at all levels) should be formed. introduction by 2010 of a system of targeted transfers from federal to regional and from regional to local budgets; preservation of the right of cultural institutions to independently manage income from their main and entrepreneurial activities without reducing the volume of budget financing, but with offsetting extra-budgetary revenues in the total budget income. Creation in 2001-2002 of a trust fund formed at the expense of funds from the use of federal property in the field of culture, meaning the direction of the fund's funds for the implementation of programs for the preservation of cultural heritage and the development of art.

In Western European countries, the share of spending on culture at the national level is also smaller than at the regional and local levels. But in Russia the share of the federal level (excluding mass media), which dropped to 10% in 1996, turned out to be several times less than in Western countries.

With chronic underfunding, culture is doomed to slow extinction. The continued adoption of an unrealistic budget threatens to have severe social consequences, when more than two-thirds of the budgeted funds do not go to the sphere of culture, when electricity, heating and telephones are turned off in its institutions for non-payment of utility bills, and the beggarly wages of creative workers are not paid for several months. Yet it is culture that largely keeps the fragile balance of Russian society.

Most of the cultural institutions, including those classified as especially valuable objects of the cultural heritage of Russia, found themselves in a difficult situation. At least half of the monuments are in disrepair. About 15 thousand buildings can be completely destroyed in the next 10 years. The work on replenishment of museum collections with works of the past years has almost ceased, the creation of new expositions in federal museums of the subjects of the Federation has been frozen. There is a very difficult situation with ensuring the safety of library collections, we will replenish them with new editions. Almost 90% of books published in Russia are not available in libraries, and the receipts of foreign scientific literature have dropped sharply. Even in the Russian State and Russian National Libraries, compared to 1995, they have halved, which is detrimental to the national interests of our country, since it aggravates its lag in mastering the latest scientific and technological achievements and technologies, creates an information deficit in science, education and ultimately in the economy.

The number of libraries, clubs, parks of culture and recreation, cinemas is declining. True, the network of theaters and museums, on the contrary, has expanded in recent years due to the demonopolization and disaggregation of existing cultural institutions, the emergence of many independent creative teams, mostly in the form of non-governmental non-profit organizations. Except permanent theaters, circuses, museums, galleries create temporary creative teams to implement specific cultural projects. Thanks to this, it has been preserved total number jobs while reducing the average number of employees of one institution.

Analysts believe that Russian culture should also be included in market relations. The beginning of this was laid by its denationalization. But so far not enough has been done to adapt culture to market conditions, attract additional funds from private individuals and corporations to this area, and actively involve our richest cultural heritage in modern economic life.

Non-commercial privatization is the denationalization of socio-cultural institutions by transforming them not into business entities, but into non-profit organizations, primarily foundations and non-profit partnerships. Unlike shareholders and shareholders of partnerships, the founders of non-profit organizations are not entitled to share the profits or property of the latter. Contributions of founders and sponsors and all profits of non-profit organizations must be spent on statutory purposes. Co-founders of such organizations can be citizens and legal entities, as well as state authorities and local self-government.

Individuals and corporations invest in foundations and other non-profit organizations without making a profit from it, for various reasons. Most often, they are driven by the desire to contribute to the development national culture, arts or sciences, sometimes the desire to improve the image of the company, to show consumers that it cares not only about profit, but also about the public interest. Patronage in our country is again becoming prestigious, allowing citizens to defend their own views on art.

In order to increase the efficiency of spending funds on the development of culture, it is necessary to legislatively:

· to ensure the transparency of all sources of income of cultural organizations and the directions of their use, to establish the obligatory publication by the governing bodies of state and municipal cultural organizations of reports on the expenditure of budgetary and extrabudgetary funds, on holding competitions;

· to formalize the procedure for the creation and operation of boards of trustees in state and municipal cultural institutions that would be engaged in public supervision of their financial and economic activities.

2.3. Financing of culture from the federal budget in 2005

The fundamental feature of the federal budget for 2005 is its formation under the conditions of the federal budget launched in 2004. reforming the budget process of the Russian Federation. The essence of the ongoing reforms is to shift the focus of the budget process from managing budgetary resources (costs) to managing results by increasing responsibility and expanding the independence of its participants.

The Government of the Russian Federation will have to prepare and start implementing the reform of the public sector and state institutions, including cultural institutions. At the same time, the task is to eliminate, to the maximum extent possible, excess, secondary federal spending and the corresponding functions of federal executive bodies and to carry them out at the expense of regional and local budgets, as well as the private sector of the economy.

In view of the limited budgetary funds, expenditure obligations that are not secured by sources of financing are cancelled. For the formation of the expenditure part of the federal budget in 2005. influenced by factors such as:

Relative decrease in the level of federal budget revenues in the gross product as a result of tax reform and a real reduction in the tax burden on the economy;

Optimization of budget expenditures, taking into account the delimitation of expenditure obligations between the levels of the budget system of the Russian Federation;

Reforming the system of federal executive bodies;

Changing the system of providing social benefits.

It should be noted that the draft federal budget for 2005 was formed according to the new budget classification of expenditures of the Russian Federation. In accordance with the new functional classification, budget expenditures of the Russian Federation, expenditures on culture, cinematography and the media (television, radio broadcasting, periodicals and publishing houses) are combined in one section - 08 “Culture, cinematography and the media”.

This section will cover the costs of:

To provide services in these areas;

Management of objects intended for cultural purposes;

Organization, holding and / or support of cultural events;

State support and subsidies for the production of films, - radio and television broadcasting, publishing;

Providing grants, subsidies to support individual artists, writers, artists, composers or organizations engaged in cultural activities.

In addition, this section includes the following costs:

To guide, manage and support the spheres of culture, cinematography, mass media;

Development of a general policy, plans, programs and budgets in this area, their management, their coordination and control over implementation, etc.

It should be noted that the volume and structure of spending on culture was not influenced by the measures of the ongoing reform to delineate spending powers and revenue sources between the levels of the budget system of the Russian Federation.

Draft federal budget for 2005. expenses under the section “Culture, cinematography and mass media” are set at 38.5 billion rubles. This exceeds the Federal Law “On the Federal Budget for 2004.” the same indicator by 5.7 billion rubles. or by 17.3%.

Spending on culture, cinematography in 2005 will be higher than in 2004. in nominal terms by 33.9%, in real terms(adjusted for inflation) - by 21.9%.

According to the new budget classification of RF expenditures, expenditures on culture are included in the expenditures of institutions of the Russian Ministry of Defense in the amount of 0.9 billion rubles. In the structure of expenditures of section 08 of the federal budget of 2005. accounted for in the amount of 358.6 million rubles. expenses for the maintenance of employees of the central offices:

Ministry of Culture and Mass Communications of the Russian Federation;

the Federal Service for Supervision of Compliance with Legislation in the Sphere of Mass Communications and the Protection of Cultural Heritage and its territorial bodies;

Federal Agency for Culture and Cinematography;

Federal Agency for Press and Mass Communications.

To conduct scientific research and scientific events in the field of theory and history of art and fiction, protection of library and archival funds, restoration of art and historical monuments 173.3 million rubles are provided.

State capital investments in construction sites and objects of federal property in the “culture” sector are set at 5,288.0 million rubles. The following will be funded:

Federal targeted programs for this industry - 3757.7 million rubles. rub. (71.1%);

Non-program activities - 1530.3 million rubles (28.9%).

State capital investments are provided primarily for the reconstruction and construction of especially valuable objects of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation, theaters, museums, libraries and state television and radio broadcasting companies.

In addition, the allocations have been increased:

For the restoration and overhaul of buildings and structures of cultural and art institutions - by 984.1 million rubles;

Ensuring their fire safety - 204.0 million rubles;

Expansion and development of existing representative offices of RIA Novosti abroad, implementation of projects to create a positive image of Russia abroad - 269.0 million rubles.

Provided by the draft federal budget in 2005. The appropriations will make it possible to provide in the field of culture and art the following expenses:

Fire safety of cultural institutions;

State support for the activities of circus organizations;

Payment of grants from the President of the Russian Federation to support creative projects of national importance in the field of culture and art, also State Prizes Russian Federation in the field of literature and art;

Payment of seven grants of the President of the Russian Federation to leading musical groups, grants of the President of the Russian Federation to support the leading professional teams folk art;

State support for the production and distribution of national films;

Restoration of historical and cultural monuments for religious purposes;

Holding all-Russian anniversary and international cultural events.

The development of measures for the certification of cinemas will continue in order to improve the quality of cinema services for the population, the introduction of a state electronic ticketing system to ensure reliable accounting of the results of the distribution of domestic and foreign films.

Conclusion

In the context of the growing socio-cultural disintegration of society, the aggravation of the contradiction between the reproduction of cultural traditions and the expansion of simplified forms mass culture, the strategic goals of the cultural policy of the state are:

Preservation of the country's cultural potential, ensuring the continuity of the development of Russian culture along with supporting the diversity of cultural life, cultural innovations;

Ensuring the connectivity of the cultural space, creating conditions for the dialogue of subcultures in a multinational state;

Formation of values ​​that ensure the integration of different social and territorial groups as citizens of a single state.

To achieve these goals, it is necessary, while ensuring the stability of budgetary financing of the culture sector, to carry out a significant reform of its organizational and economic mechanism.

By stimulating the growth of private non-profit organizations with tax incentives, promoting the development of multi-founder forms of cultural organizations and encouraging the expansion of sources of income for state and municipal institutions, it is necessary to form a clearer legal framework for the entrepreneurial activities of these organizations, introduce more effective mechanisms for state and public control over its implementation, and ensure " transparency" of financial flows and economic activities in the non-profit sector of the cultural sector.

By developing science and education, culture and healthcare, we contribute to the increase of national wealth - the only source of growth in the level and quality of life.

List of used literature

1. Law of the Russian Federation of October 9, 1992 N 3612-I "Fundamentals of the Legislation of the Russian Federation on Culture" (as amended on June 23, 1999, December 27, 2000, December 30, 2001, December 24, 2002, December 23, 2003, August 22, 2004)2. Vrublevskaya M.V. The budget system of the Russian Federation: textbook / M.V. Vrublevskaya, ed. O.V. Vrublevskaya, M.V. Romanovsky. - 3rd ed., Rev. and revised - M .: Yurait, 2004. - S. 8383. Korneeva V.P. Financing culture from the federal budget in 2005 / V.P. Korneeva // Handbook of the head of a cultural institution. - 2004. - No. 12. - S. 7-124. Kochetkov. V.S. Sources of funding for the sphere of culture.// Finance. - 2004. - No. 3.5. Cultural policy in Russia. History and modernity. Two views on one problem / Otv. Ed. Butenko I.A. Razlogov K.E.-M.: Liberia, 1998 .- 296 p.6. Lushin S.I. Public finances in the new conditions // Finance, 2002, No. 5.7. Muravieva N.Ya. Forms and types of financing in the sphere of culture / N.Ya. Muravyova // Culture: management, economics, law, 2004.- No. 2.- P. 42-448. Mustafina N. Ya. The system of paid services in the sphere of culture // Culture: management, economics, law. - 2004. - No. 2.-S. 449. Pompeev Yu.A. Economics of the socio-cultural sphere: Proc. allowance.-2nd ed. -SPb. , 2003.-96p.10. Government of the Russian Federation. Economic and financial stabilization program. // Questions of Economics, 2002, No. 7.11. Savchenko P. Social priorities: problems and solutions. The Economist - 1998, No. 5.12. Sorochan O. Lessons of financial reforming// Financial business. - 2001. - No. 3. -p.28-31.13. Management, organization and economics of the KPU: a textbook for the CP of the faculties of the institutes of culture, art, pedagogical universities / Bolotnikov I.M., Borisovich K.L. etc. - M .: Education, 1983.14. Financial management: / Ed. prof. E.I. Shokhina. - M.: ID FBK-PRESS, 2002. - 408 p.15. Shikhov A.Yu. "Updating income and expense estimates". Journal BiNO 2 /2004.16. Yandiev M. "A lot changes from the rearrangement of terms." Journal Finance 2/2004

Kochetkov. V.S. Sources of funding for the sphere of culture.// Finance. - 2004. - No. 3.

Cultural policy in Russia. History and modernity. Two views on one problem / Otv. Ed. Butenko I.A. Razlogov K.E.-M.: Liberia, 1998 .- 296 p.

Sorochan O. Lessons of financial reforming// Financial business. - 2001. - No. 3. -p.28-31.

Muravieva N.Ya. Forms and types of financing in the sphere of culture / N.Ya. Muravyov // Culture: management, economics, law, 2004.- No. 2.- P. 42-44

Vrublevskaya M.V. The budget system of the Russian Federation: textbook / M.V. Vrublevskaya, ed. O.V. Vrublevskaya, M.V. Romanovsky. - 3rd ed., Rev. and revised - M .: Yurait, 2004. - S. 468-476

Mustafina N. Ya. The system of paid services in the sphere of culture // Culture: management, economics, law. - 2004. - No. 2.-S. 44

Muravieva N.Ya. Forms and types of financing in the sphere of culture / N.Ya. Muravyova // Culture: management, economics, law, 2004.- No. 2.- P. 42-44; Mustafina N. Ya. The system of paid services in the sphere of culture / N. Ya. Mustafina // Culture: management, economics, law. - 2004. - No. 2.-S. 44