Evgeny Gontmakher biography. Evgeniy Gontmakher

home

Kinds

Born in Lvov, Ukrainian SSR. In 1975 he graduated from the Faculty of Geography of Moscow State University. Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor.

Deputy Director of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences.

In 1975-1991 worked at the Central Economic Research Institute (CENII) under the State Planning Committee of the RSFSR (later - the Ministry of Economy of Russia).

In 1992 - Head of the Directorate of the Russian Ministry of Labor.

Head of department in the presidential administration in 1994-1995.

In 1999-2003 - Head of the Department of Social Development of the Government of the Russian Federation.

In 2003-2006 - Vice-President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs.

Since March 2008 - member of the board of the Institute of Contemporary Development (chairman of the board - Igor Yurgens).

Deputy Director of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Member of the Presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress.

Married, has a daughter and son.

In the coming years, the Russian economic system will face a “radical renewal,” provoked by global “challenges and changes,” Dmitry Medvedev said in his article “Russia’s socio-economic development: finding new dynamics,” published in the journal “Economic Issues.” The Prime Minister of the Russian Federation promises to provide Russia with a “significant place in the modern world”: optimization of budget policy, improvement of the investment climate and business environment, improvement of the quality of the state itself and development of the social sphere.

These are dreams. What's really happening?

Let's discuss with Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor Evgeny Gontmakher, Doctor of Geographical Sciences Natalia Zubarevich and head of the department for studying consumption and living standards of the Levada Center Marina Krasilnikova.

Conducts the program Mikhail Sokolov.

Mikhail Sokolov: In the coming years, the Russian economic system will face a “radical renewal,” Dmitry Medvedev said in his article in the journal Voprosy Ekonomiki. The Russian Prime Minister promises to ensure Russia "a significant place in the modern world." Let's try to understand what is happening not in the dreams of the formal leader of United Russia, but in reality.

Our guests today are Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Member of the Committee of Civil Initiatives Evgeniy Gontmakher and head of the department for studying consumption and living standards of the Levada Center Marina Krasilnikova. A geographer, professor, will join us by phone.

The Ministry of Economic Development, during the discussion of the budget, there is such a leak, the budget was discussed with the Prime Minister, predicted the stagnation of the Russian economy for the next three years. Where does the Russian government's optimism come from?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: By the way, I also ask this question, because I don’t see any rational sources for this optimism. Because the same article that you mentioned by our Prime Minister, I read it, at least in the version that was in Rossiyskaya Gazeta, I got the impression that yes, we really need to on the one hand, the economic model, competitiveness in the world, and on the other hand, everything is fine, nothing needs to be changed. It turns out that the results are comforting, everything is fine.

Mikhail Sokolov: So he reported?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: There is only one small detail - the standard of living has fallen, but everything else is fine, import substitution is progressing successfully. It is necessary to reduce the number of officials; the project office should be modeled on the national projects that are in operation.

Mikhail Sokolov: What it is?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: A strategic council under the president has been created, the presidium or executive committee is headed by Medvedev, they are now discussing some new projects, like those that existed.

Mikhail Sokolov: Under Medvedev as president?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Like everything is fine, nothing else really needs to be changed. That is, we have gone through bad times. I don’t know who this optimism is aimed at, maybe the voter, but the voter has already voted.

Mikhail Sokolov: Kicking pretty much.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: In the sense that we already have a Duma, all the optimists are very strong in the Duma. I don't understand, to be honest.

Mikhail Sokolov: What about citizens, according to your latest polls, do they have any grounds for any optimism in the economic field, in their assessment of the economy?

Marina Krasilnikova: No, citizens do not share this optimism either. Let's look at the indicators that Levada Center measures. The first graph we have is the so-called social sentiment index, the temperature of society. It shows us that over the past two years we have been observing a gradual deterioration in public sentiment. This is happening despite a boom in assessments of government power at the beginning of 2014, which somewhat raised the general temperature of sentiment.

Mikhail Sokolov: This is Crimean enthusiasm.

Marina Krasilnikova: Yes, this Crimean enthusiasm raised the general mood, but very quickly the real economic reality returned people’s sentiments to that sluggish negative trend, which actually formed quite a long time ago, around 2010-11. Therefore, there is no particular optimism. And the worst thing is that in this entire structure of public sentiment, the darkest side is the look into the future.

Mikhail Sokolov: That is, they don’t see the future, so they don’t invest in the future?

Marina Krasilnikova: They don’t see the future, they don’t invest in the future, they don’t imagine the future well at all. According to our surveys, approximately a little more than a third of the population say that they do not know at all what will happen to them tomorrow, another third say that they can only plan their lives for the next few months. The prospect, what is called medium-term plans in economic plans, is what is available to a few percent of Russian citizens.

Mikhail Sokolov: I think that we will now compare what is in the Levada Center polls and in our completely unrepresentative polls. We presented the same phrase of Dmitry Medvedev about radical renewal to Muscovites. Let's see what they told us.

Mikhail Sokolov: Whose opinion of those who spoke here seemed to you the most widespread and representative?

Marina Krasilnikova: The most common and representative opinion was formulated as follows: I hope, but I don’t believe. Because indeed, the upward gap in assessments of the actions of the president and the government in shaping public sentiment actually reflects not only and not so much a real assessment of what is being done by the heads of state, but the fact that people in many ways feel deprived of the opportunity to independently plan their future, build their own personal future on their own, because they do not have the resources for this and they do not see a suitable infrastructure for this, economic, social, and so on. Therefore, the only thing left for them is to hope for someone. Because we will not completely close the image of the future.

But this image of the future becomes absolutely amorphous, so that there is something good, but what is unclear. Current assessments of what is happening now in the country do not provide explanatory structures for the formation of a positive image, which one still wants to have. That’s why it’s like this: I hope, because I want everything to be good, but based on today’s realities, I don’t really believe in it.

Mikhail Sokolov: An indicator such as loans, if people take out loans, it means they are planning something for the future. It seems to me that you are measuring something in relation to these sentiments. Are they ready to really invest at least in their own future?

Marina Krasilnikova: People's willingness to buy on credit has gone down sharply in recent years, namely since 2014, because people say that now is not the right time for this, because they are completely unsure of what will happen tomorrow. Our surveys show that more than half of our respondents say that our financial situation and their families have worsened, and do not expect improvements in the near future. During this time, people not only reduced purchases on credit, people generally reduced their purchases.

We can demonstrate this on the graph of the consumer sentiment index - this is an indicator measured in all market economies, which shows the willingness of people to spend money here and now.

As we can see in this chart, consumer optimism is quite low right now. The maximum that was reached before the 2008 crisis remains a historical maximum; we are still very far from the level of consumer optimism that was 8 years ago. What does it mean that people don't want to buy? This means that trade is curtailed, which means that the national economy is not growing due to this factor.

Mikhail Sokolov: The share of retail trade in August was minus 6% compared to August 2015.

Marina Krasilnikova: Absolutely right. Our macroeconomic modeling, which we did at the Levada Center and calculated how consumer sentiment affects the dynamics of trade turnover, shows that the increase in consumer sentiment itself gives approximately 0.2% of the increase in trade turnover, even though there will be no cash income change. And accordingly, the deterioration in consumer sentiment further strengthens the factor of declining incomes that we see. We have been experiencing a decline in real cash incomes of the population for almost two years now.

Mikhail Sokolov: I saw an optimistic figure here, Medvedev says that inflation will not go beyond 6%, somewhere it was even 4%. How realistic is this or are these just psychotherapeutic measures to calm people down?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Inflation is actually being suppressed. The trend, for example, this year compared to last year, last year was almost 12%, if we are talking about the official level that was announced, this year it will, of course, be less and next year too.

I wanted to remember from the same article by Medvedev, there is such an interesting phrase about the prospects for demand, he said: we will not support economic growth by increasing demand. We do have some suggestions.

Mikhail Sokolov: Stolypin club?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: For example. Guys, let's give people money, they will go to stores, everything will move forward, the economy will produce more.

Mikhail Sokolov: Do you think this project is over, the Growth Party has failed?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: The Growth Party failed a long time ago, from the very beginning. I mean the so-called Stolypin Club program, based on what is written in this article very harshly, that no emissions, no interest rates on loans matter for business development, demand should not be stimulated as a driver of economic growth. These are the main points they put forward.

Mikhail Sokolov: This is good news, then?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: For me, as a person who monitors the situation, I consider this news to be good.

Mikhail Sokolov: That is, this adventure will not happen, but what will happen then?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: And no one knows this. If Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev wrote in a sluggish mode, everything will be fine.

Mikhail Sokolov: Is this a reform program?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: No, this is absolutely not in line with the reform program. I have the following questions: why is nothing written there about budget policy, for example, about defense spending? There is no word about it. I understand that defense is the prerogative of the president, but Dmitry Anatolyevich could write: “Yes, of course, the president decides, but we believe...” He writes there that money must be invested in education and healthcare, he writes correctly.

Mikhail Sokolov: But where to get them?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: This raises the question: a tough budget policy, there will be no emissions, we are suppressing inflation, and of course we are not expanding the budget deficit, which is correct, from my point of view. The question arises: where will you get money for education and healthcare? He writes about investments in infrastructure. As they say, the bedside table is empty, which means something needs to be taken away from somewhere.

Mikhail Sokolov: Will they take it from the Reserve Fund?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: This is no longer serious. The reserve fund will probably run out next year. There is a National Welfare Fund, which can also be uncorked. What Medvedev wrote is not a program of economic reforms, these are some pieces.

Mikhail Sokolov: We want to understand what they will do.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: I don't think they know it themselves. To be honest, the people who make decisions in our country are Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Three days ago, he said at a meeting with members of the government: we need to reform everything, but so that, God forbid, there are no symptoms of shock therapy.

Mikhail Sokolov: Cut off the dog's tail piece by piece. It must be very painful.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: I think, if you look at what will continue, the degradation of social services will continue, there will be a decline in the standard of living, from my point of view, this will go on for quite a long time, but slowly, they will try to do this very gradually, counting on the population adapting. It will, of course, be dissatisfied, but it will not be, as we saw now in the survey, but we still hope.

Mikhail Sokolov: I wanted to ask Natalya Vasilyevna, as a regionalist and economic geographer, to explain to us a little what is happening with the regions, with regional budgets.

Since today, in a semi-closed session at the Security Council, the draft principles of state policy for regional development were discussed, I will later quote something from Putin’s speech, but first you just tell us. Our fellow citizens already live quite poorly in the regions, but will they live even poorer?

Not yet. Compared to the results of 2015, the first half of 2016 is a little different. Budget revenues increased by approximately 2.5-3%, and expenses by 5%. If last year they cut education, culture, and housing and communal services, this year the pre-election period did not allow this to be done. Expenditures on education in nominal terms and on health care increased by 2-3%, which is lower than the inflation rate, on social security by 6%, on benefits by 8%.

And the second positive growth of 7% is housing and communal services. This means that the authorities have made two priorities for themselves: the first is to try their best not to increase housing and communal services tariffs, this is very painful. How to compensate? Increase budget support.

And secondly, to maximize benefit payments to the population. But this is pre-election politics, it will end. I would be very interested in testing the results of the year, because I have a suspicion that starting in October these expenses will shrink. Because the situation with the budget deficit has not gotten better.

Yes, the picture is beautiful, formally there is a surplus, but it is ensured in fact, with a gigantic surplus in Moscow of almost 180 billion, a large surplus in Sakhalin of about 70 billion and 15-20 billion each in the same Khanty-Mansiysk District, Tyumen Region, Moscow Region, St. Petersburg. Somewhere around 6-7 subjects set the final plus, and the number of regions with a deficit is even slightly higher, which in the first half of last year was 52, not 50. By December it will be significantly worse. That is, the situation is not deteriorating sharply, it is frozen, and the money spent in the first half of the year was with great anticipation of the pre-election situation. But in October there will be a pullback.

This means that the hellish crisis did not happen, temporary repairs for the elections were completed, but the same trend will continue, the regions will not have more money - this is completely understandable, incomes are almost not growing. For now, we are reaching plus 8 in regional budgets at the expense of personal income tax, because salaries are rising a little, and therefore personal tax is rising, but nothing else is particularly good. And the saddest thing: in the first half of the year, transfers to federal subjects decreased by 12%. That is, guys, spin yourself.

Mikhail Sokolov: I can’t help but ask you about the election results. There is, as Dmitry Oreshkin says, a special voting zone, where approximately 10 million people vote in a controlled manner for Putin, for United Russia, somewhere around 90%, almost like in Chechnya, somewhere a little less. This zone of the North Caucasus, Volga region, Tyva, does it get the right vote for this?

My numbers are very simple - not everyone gets it. If we look at the dynamics of transfers, Chechnya received well, for the first half of the year, plus 14%. But, excuse me, this is an individual gift to Kadyrov; a person must be elected well. Plus 30% of Ingushetia. But if you think, they added something in advance to Tatarstan, Bashkiria, or we now have new Russian regions with the same interesting voting structure of 70% turnout, 70% for United Russia, unfortunately, this is now both Tula and Ryazan region, Voronezh, to my sadness and surprise, no, nothing was added in advance. Let's see at the end of the year.

But usually such gifts were made through a subsidy for balance, in any case, it was born as a bonus after the elections in the mid-2000s. But to be honest, for the last 5-7 years it has had a different function - it is a fire brigade that donates money in difficult situations, distributes it to many. I don’t think it’s such a linear relationship – vote correctly and you’ll get a bonus. This was true once upon a time, but now everything is so complicated in the economy that there is no time for bonuses. And especially certain comrades receive bonuses without any kind; they will receive them anyway.

Mikhail Sokolov: So I want to say to the Russian people: gentlemen and comrades, vote correctly, don’t vote correctly, you will still get what you know, that is, you will not receive anything except, as Natalya Zubareich correctly said, these very named comrades who were the first to stand in line.

Natalya Vasilyevna, a meeting of the Security Council and some very vague words from Vladimir Putin: “We need to improve the system of interbudgetary relations, achieve sustainable financial support for the powers of the authorities of the constituent entities of the Federation and municipalities. In general, the system of interbudgetary relations is, of course, one of the key ones. Let’s consider it at a separate meeting with the participation of representatives of the government and regions. It is necessary to improve the system of targeted subsidies and subsidies." I can’t translate this into normal Russian, but can you?

Can. Everything that has been said is correct, a lot needs to be corrected - this is true. But since I know what is really happening and what the trends are, I will tell you them. In recent “fat years,” I mean before 2014 and even before 2014, the main additional funding was received by geopolitically priority regions. Not those who are the poorest, but those who are the North Caucasus, and even then not all, the Far East, not necessarily all, but in general, and Crimea as the latest story. Crimea has already been cut, it was cut well in the first half of the year.

Mikhail Sokolov: That's why they didn't do well in the elections.

Again, we need to speak very carefully, because half a year is not a year yet; transfers can be moved to the second half of the year.

But compared to 2015, transfers to the city of Sevastopol decreased by 50%, and to the Republic of Crimea by almost a quarter. I believe they will shift them to the second half of the year. But this is a kind of sign that this territory has ceased to be a priority, it remains geopolitically important, but as a political priority, so what, they will vote anyway.

Therefore, we need to look at what is behind these words. The words are streamlined and, in principle, correct. But if again this is a distribution to individual people for being so good, or for the fact that they shoot there, that’s one story, if this is an increase in the share of subsidies in the structure of transfers, subsidies for equalization, which is still considered according to the formula , if these terrible other inter-budgetary transfers finally go away, when Moscow is given half the budget of some average Russian region, then St. Petersburg will also receive a good figure. Why? By the way, that's what we agreed on.

If this is reduced, I will be very happy. Because the first task of inter-budgetary policy is to increase its transparency and sharply reduce the number of subsidies, which are managed by ministries; they do not want to give up this function. Because whoever distributes the money has the power.

Mikhail Sokolov: Perhaps you, as a specialist in social issues, can add what is happening at the regional level, will we find something good or is it completely bad?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: I want to recall the figure that Putin cited today at this Security Council meeting, that the differences in the budgetary provision of the regions reach 30 times in Russia. As one of my acquaintances said several years ago, even before the start of all these events in Crimea and others, that in general Russia is the United Nations, where there are African countries and there are countries like Europe - Moscow, the Khanty-Mansiysk Okrug, for example, and others.

I must say that for security, when it comes to the Security Council, this is very dangerous. Because Russia actually broke up into several, Natasha wrote at one time “four Russias”, it was a very interesting concept, into several clusters where people even live differently not only in terms of how much money they have. Today I saw a petition on the Internet, they ask me to sign, in the Krasnodar Territory people are moaning that there are not enough schools, children go in three shifts. It would seem that the Krasnodar Territory is not the Republic of Tyva, the Krasnodar Territory is the richest potential region, a good climate, and so on.

Mikhail Sokolov: Sochi.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Yes, Sochi. And children go to school in three shifts, people are desperately trying to turn to Putin. It turns out that the internal situation is somehow developing in the Krasnodar Territory, that, all other things being equal, in some other region of Russia there are completely different orders, there is a completely different level of social intensity. This is about the question of social status.

Everything is very fragmented. Maybe that’s why the Security Council met, I don’t know, because somehow they talk about spiritual bonds, I would say that let us consolidate Russia economically, consolidate it socially - this is much more important.

Mikhail Sokolov: Mr. Patrushev was frightening with some Finnish separatists in Karelia, there were no Finns left there anymore. He has such a role, he must come up with threats and then prevent them.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Maybe they carry passports that say they are Karelians?

Mikhail Sokolov: Don't know. Do Russians realize this feudal fragmentation, the fact that Russia is different? Are there any grievances against Moscow, against the center, or are people willing to tolerate it? Let Moscow spend 200 billion on new sidewalks, and we will live without sewerage.

Marina Krasilnikova: Of course, this resentment and confrontation between the center, province, periphery, city and village, it certainly existed historically, there is nothing new here. But I would say that this resentment is gradually fading into the background, I don’t want to say that it doesn’t exist, but it is being replaced by momentary problems, and most importantly, it is being replaced by the fact that both there and there people feel essentially quite unprotected and helpless, oriented towards some abstract supreme power that should help. She, of course, will help the capital faster than us, but in the capital they also do not rely on themselves, but appeal to the very hopes that we talked about.

For me, the experience of the 2008 crisis in terms of changes in public sentiment, the social sentiment index, was very indicative. It consists of different components, there are assessments of power, there are assessments of one’s own position. Before the 2008 crisis, the most affluent people in Russian society—about a third of Russian society—demonstrated a completely different structure of social optimism. Their social optimism was based on assessments of what was happening to them, what was happening to their family, what they expected from their future; there they drew their main optimism, in contrast to the least affluent segments of the population, for whom optimism was equated with hopes for power .

It turned out that the margin of safety of the wealthy part of Russian society was very small; as soon as economic difficulties arose, the entire population began to think approximately the same way: we ourselves cannot do anything, but we must rely on the authorities, there is nothing else left for us. This desire to stand under the protection of the state and appeal to it, this paternalism immediately manifested itself in the broadest strata of Russian society and united everyone - residents of the provinces, residents of the capitals, rich, poor, and so on.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: A significant portion of our employees simply receive salaries from the state. State employees, doctors, teachers, cultural workers, social security workers – that’s more than 10 million people. We have a couple of million officials, including municipal and regional ones. Plus take family members, they also depend on it. The military, the police, the military-industrial complex, which is now supplied with orders very heavily, I would say, employees of state corporations, the same Gazprom, Rosneft, although formally these are joint-stock companies, but you and I understand perfectly well that these are quasi-state corporations .

Therefore, our state controls more than 60% of the economy directly or indirectly - this is a well-known fact. As an economist, it is absolutely not surprising to me that as soon as troubled times come, people turn to the breadwinner: well, you give it to me from your hand, please give it to me. These people are not in the mood, even if there were conditions for doing business, let’s say they aren’t, these people are not in the mood to go into business or do anything else. We have a state-type economy, hence this paternalism. Plus pensioners.

Mikhail Sokolov: Pensioners were offended; their pensions were not indexed this year. Were they happy? Once I saw that they agreed with this.

Marina Krasilnikova: They, of course, were more often indignant than happy. But in general, a week after the announcement of the decision on a one-time payment instead of indexation, we conducted an all-Russian survey and asked people: have they even heard about this decision? It turned out that on average almost half had not heard anything about it. We reasonably thought that maybe not everyone is interested in this, although it is strange why a person at the beginning of his working life is not interested in what is happening with the pension system. We identified a group of non-working pensioners for whom pensions are the only source of income, and it turned out that one in five of them had not heard anything. People are not interested in this.

Mikhail Sokolov: Maybe they weren't told?

Marina Krasilnikova: This is another side of how the state works, how the social system of the state works. The state, which is concerned about the supposedly low financial literacy of the population, nevertheless does not seek to popularize and convey to stakeholders decisions that directly affect these stakeholders.

Mikhail Sokolov: It seems to me that propaganda tools were simply at work here. They are told about Ukraine, about Donbass, about Poroshenko, about something else, about the elections in the United States, how bad everything is there, what a crisis in Europe, and then they quickly say: you will be paid 5 thousand rubles, not to mention that they will not pay about 35 thousand debts. People think that they will be paid 5 thousand, but they don’t even know about these 35 thousand that were stolen.

Marina Krasilnikova: Indeed, even those who knew about it were less interested in this event than the Olympic Games. This decision, to my disappointment, made about a quarter of pensioners happy. This speaks of such an unlimited readiness for long-suffering, which is the basis that allows the government to now slowly, gradually reduce with complete impunity the standard of living of the mass Russian population.

Mikhail Sokolov: Or maybe they are just like in a besieged fortress: orders are not discussed, the enemy is at the gate, the commandant ordered to give money for food, please give it, we will defend ourselves. Is there such a mood?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: It seems to me that partly there is. Although after Crimea there was a surge.

Mikhail Sokolov: After Crimea, they thought that “if there is more land, then we will live richer, but in reality we have to pay for land.”

Marina Krasilnikova: There were not economic considerations, there were emotional considerations, there was a healed, healed trauma from the collapse of a great state.

Mikhail Sokolov: The dose of the drug was administered, and now it has been removed.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Now our propaganda has moved onto a different note, in an article, by the way, by the same Medvedev it is written several times: in the West, in fact, everything is bad too, the global crisis continues.

Mikhail Sokolov: Although there has been growth for a long time.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: It is Russia with its negative growth rates that looks funny, I would say shameful, against the backdrop of positive growth rates, albeit small, 2-3%, that exist in the United States and Europe. In this article he emphasizes in every possible way: guys, everyone is bad all over the world, what do you want?

Mikhail Sokolov: The Prime Minister habitually lies.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: He writes, for example: there is no ideal pension system in the world, we haven’t found an ideal pension system, what do you want?

Marina Krasilnikova: If we do everything to turn the pension system into a poverty benefit system, then so will the attitude towards this pension. One of the reasons why people are happy is because the pension is not seen as something that is earned by each person during his working life. This is the money that the state gives.

Mikhail Sokolov: It seems to me that in general, in recent years, it has turned out that the level of pensions, again, as in Soviet times, does not depend on labor contribution, the upper part of people is cut off, points have been introduced. Nobody understands how much he actually earned.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: The cost of the point is approved by the government every year.

Mikhail Sokolov: So it's a scam. Savings savings were also confiscated.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Funded pensions were virtually destroyed.

Mikhail Sokolov: They promise again in some reasoning for next year in the forecast of the Ministry of Economic Development that from 2017 the pension will be indexed to inflation, by 5.8%. Will they be able to index or not? Or again, maybe they will promise to index, and then again replace it with a one-time payment?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Next year, in 2017, we begin a new election cycle.

Mikhail Sokolov: Maybe it will end in 2017, there are also rumors.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: What, by the way, Natalya Zubarevich said, they actually added money in the first half of this year for social security, for some things, just in case, let the voter be satisfied. For example, I have no doubt that on February 1, 2017, they will be indexed by inflation. This year it will be, judging by official forecasts, 6-7%. Naturally, again they will not give it to working pensioners.

Mikhail Sokolov: By the way, they are not going to give 5 thousand to those pensioners who are abroad. Second class citizens, it turns out.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Do you know what the basis is? And they don’t have such price increases. They have deflation there, so why give it to them, their life has improved, on the contrary.

Mikhail Sokolov: That is, go away, live there, it’s better there.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: And here these 5 thousand are given as compensation such as inflation. This is very funny. You don't understand logic at all anymore.

Mikhail Sokolov: Is there any legal consideration as to whether it is possible to rank different categories of citizens in this way? Maybe in one country there is wild inflation, somewhere in Africa, and in another there is real deflation, somewhere in Japan. It's a very vulnerable moment.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: In 2017, indexation, I think, will be in full. 2018 is hard to say. If the presidential elections do take place in March 2018, then on February 1, 2018, I think they will still give pensioners some kind of gift; they will have nowhere to go.

Mikhail Sokolov: What if earlier?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: If earlier, then a completely different policy awaits us. If suddenly the presidential elections are postponed to next year, naturally, Putin will be re-elected, of which there is no doubt, or someone from Putin, then I think a really tough period will come absolutely. No matter what they say, Medvedev wrote in the article that there can be no talk of any mobilization policy, it will be an absolutely mobilization policy, when people will be cut off, I think taxes will be increased. All these horrors that have been rumored lately are unlikely to happen in 2017, but in 2018 the time will come for this.

Mikhail Sokolov: I noticed that today Vladimir Putin, on the issue of the Krasnodar Territory, gave instructions to introduce a resort fee, that is, this is an additional tax on citizens who go on vacation.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: A tax on the rich, as it were.

Mikhail Sokolov: Those who are rich, it seems, don’t really like to relax in Crimea and Sochi.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: I understand. Now many decisions are made based on a kind of populism. Who is going is clear to an ordinary Russian person from the provinces who has no money. He himself does not go to any resorts, he sits in his own garden.

Marina Krasilnikova: The first thing people began to save on was travel and vacations.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: In Sochi or Crimea, these are the rich ones.

Marina Krasilnikova: By the way, this is not a cheap vacation at all, Crimea and Sochi, as it turned out upon closer examination.

Mikhail Sokolov: Property tax, for example, which will be paid based on cadastral value, is a serious thing. There is little discontent in big cities, would you like to add more?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Long-suffering, as Marina Dmitrievna said, is very great among people. Here, by the way, pensioners come under the biggest blow, because we have such cases in cities when a husband and wife are pensioners and live, for example, in a three-room apartment, they got it back in Soviet times, the children have moved away and so on. From their pension, which is now about 13 thousand rubles on average, it is true that for now there is a benefit that pensioners do not pay property tax, but I think that again in some way this will definitely be abolished. This will be quite a lot of money. What is associated with summer cottages, second real estate. I'm not even talking about young families.

Mikhail Sokolov: How much is big money?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: It's all regional. As far as I understand, there are certain restrictions. Some people already believed that a two-room apartment in a residential area of Moscow, for it, if assessed by cadastral value, people would pay 30-40 thousand a year.

Mikhail Sokolov: They will start suing, of course, but the judicial system, of course, is in general.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: By the way, when I looked into my personal account at the Federal Tax Service, I saw that my apartment was already valued differently, before it was at BTI value, now it is already valued at market value.

Mikhail Sokolov: Will you sue? Are you satisfied with the level of taxation?

Evgeniy Gontmakher: As a pensioner, I no longer cry, but apparently I’m not crying yet. Therefore, I observe a little from the side. I’m just interested in this, that is, the cost of my apartment has increased tenfold.

Mikhail Sokolov: Marina, what do you think, people in the cities who will now begin to face new and new tax payments, they showed in the elections that there is some discontent, some did not go to the polls, in general the level of support for United Russia and in the millions of people who are for they voted for it, and in percentage, if we discard the falsification, in fact, if we exclude Chechnya and other things, it turned out to be 38-40%. That is, in reality it is lower than it was. How can they behave? Is there any potential for protests, some kind of activity, petitions at least?

Marina Krasilnikova: Now this potential is small. After 2011-12, people en masse chose the strategy of leaving the political civil sphere completely. In general, there are really no skills for collective civil resolution of issues that are important to people. I again want to return to this example with pensions and remember 2005, when benefits were monetized.

The decisions that led to the fact that from January 1, people were no longer allowed to travel for free in transport according to their needs, these decisions were made six months before, there were political opposition forces that tried to attract public attention to these decisions, somehow form a civil protest about this. But the population was not interested in this; the population is ready to react only for vital reasons, as one of my colleagues said. Not in those cases when, instead of indexing your pension, they add 5 thousand rubles to you, here everything happens within the framework of the same agreement, they gave money, but they gave a little less, they always give less, but here there was a different story with monetization benefits, there was a violation of the normative value system, there was an agreement that it was free. And then it worked. The amount of property tax payments currently exists; they have been gradually increasing in recent years.

Mikhail Sokolov: What if it increases 10 times at once?

Marina Krasilnikova: If it increases 10 times at once, then mass non-payments will begin sooner than some kind of collective outrage. And if this is a transitional period and gradually, then it is highly likely one way or another.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: Non-payments will still begin. Incomes are declining, people will simply have nothing to pay, the budget will not collect the amount they expect.

Mikhail Sokolov: Or there may be such a reaction: people will be squeezed, and they, as they say, will start to spin around, earn something, rent out a room in this apartment to someone, something else. I was interested in Putin’s speech, who said that self-employed people should be exempt from taxes for two years. Firstly, they do not light up, they are already exempt from taxes, and secondly, as far as I understand, no one is going to repeal the article of the criminal code for illegal business, and without this it turns out that the person has come out of the shadows, and they can charge him with the previous one that he was doing something like that and didn’t pay taxes. Without removing the repressive component, it looks like a hook baited for fools.

Marina Krasilnikova: In general, I would like to say that the attempt to tax all small businesses is probably out of desperation. You can pay attention to international practice, according to which the smallest business is not really taxed or at a zero rate. The same, by the way, applies to property; property in many economies is taxed, but there is a very large amount of non-taxable property, which covers a significant part of the population of these countries. Property begins to be taxed when it goes beyond the average size.

Mikhail Sokolov: But in Russia they want below average.

Marina Krasilnikova: But here they want to be below average, so why tax those who are above average.

Mikhail Sokolov: What will be the economic behavior of people who are involved in small businesses, in the smallest, although small and medium-sized ones have already gone bankrupt, you don’t even have to be interested in them.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: As far as I understand, this proposal from Putin does not apply to individual entrepreneurs, individual entrepreneurs, especially small businesses where several people work and pay simplified taxes. There is simplification and imputation, two such mechanisms. If he had said, let’s abolish taxes for a couple of years, perhaps it would have been more of a positive measure, although this is not a trend, but still.

Because, indeed, the government is now talking a lot about the need to raise taxes, and then suddenly the president would say that let’s remove it from this sector. No, he really spoke about this tiny business, which even now does not bring practically anything to the treasury in terms of income and will not bring it. This, it seems to me, is another political statement, a nod towards business: guys, you see, we care about you. At the same time, they are seriously discussing the issue of increasing VAT and increasing income taxes, and this primarily affects large and medium-sized businesses. I don’t know when this will be adopted, but most likely, after the presidential elections, something from this series will happen.

Mikhail Sokolov: Could the income tax be increased in this situation?

Marina Krasilnikova: In this sense, the payment of income tax does not pass through the consciousness of an ordinary employee.

Mikhail Sokolov: That is, it will be annoying, you will have to write declarations, and so on?

Marina Krasilnikova: People don't understand why they need this.

Evgeniy Gontmakher: This will not have a fiscal effect, because an additional process of going into the shadows will immediately begin. I think that the treasury, if it receives any additional money, will only receive a few pennies. The negative effect will far exceed the fiscal benefit.

Evgeniy Shlemovich Gontmakher

267x400px
Date of Birth:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Place of Birth:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Date of death:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
A place of death:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
A country:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Scientific field:
Place of work:	Deputy Director for Research
Academic degree:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Academic title:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Alma mater:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Scientific adviser:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Notable students:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Known as:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Known as:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Awards and prizes:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Website:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
Signature:	Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).
[[Lua error in Module:Wikidata/Interproject on line 17: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value). \|Works]] in Wikisource
Lua error in Module:Wikidata on line 170: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).

Lua error in Module:CategoryForProfession on line 52: attempt to index field "wikibase" (a nil value).

Evgeniy Shlemovich Gontmakher(born July 6, Lvov) - Russian economist. Deputy Director for Research at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations. Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor. Member of the Board of the Institute of Contemporary Development, Member of the Committee of Civil Initiatives (chaired by A. L. Kudrin).

Biography

Head of department in the presidential administration in 1994-1995.

In 1999-2003 - Head of the Department of Social Development of the Government of the Russian Federation.

In 2003-2006 - vice-president of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs.

Since March 2008 - member of the board (chairman of the board - Igor Yurgens).

Deputy Director of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Member of the Presidium of the Russian Jewish Congress.

Married, has a daughter and son.

Interview

- 10.12.2012

Write a review of the article "Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich"

Notes

Links

. (Russian) - 02/19/2009.
- (video), 06/18/2009
- (video), 11/25/2008

: Incorrect or missing image

To improve this article it is desirable:

Rework the design in accordance with the rules for writing articles.
Wikify the article.
Find and arrange in the form of footnotes links to independent ones that confirm what is written. [[K: Wikipedia: Articles without sources (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]][[K:Wikipedia:Articles without sources (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]]
Add illustrations .[[K:Wikipedia:Articles without images (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]][[K:Wikipedia:Articles without images (country: Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. )]]Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich Lua error: callParserFunction: function "#property" was not found. Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich about the scientist-economist. You can help the project by adding to it.

An excerpt characterizing Gontmakher, Evgeniy Shlemovich

I woke up in the morning in my room, perfectly remembering every detail of what happened the previous night and absolutely knowing that it was not a dream or my imagination, but that it was real and real - as it has always been with me. But even if I really wanted to doubt it, subsequent events would have completely erased my most skeptical childhood thoughts, even if I had any.

My strange “walks” were now repeated every night. I no longer went to bed, but was looking forward to when, finally, everyone in the house would fall asleep and everything around would plunge into the deep silence of the night, so that I could (without fear of being “caught”) once again completely immerse myself in that extraordinary and mysterious , a “different” world that I’m almost used to being in. I was waiting for my new “friends” to appear and for the amazing miracle to be given anew each time. And although I never knew which of them would come, I always knew that they would certainly come... And whichever one of them came, he would again give me another fabulous moment, which I would treasure in my memory for a very long time , like in a closed magic chest, the keys to which only I had...
But one day no one showed up. It was a very dark moonless night. I stood with my forehead pressed against the cold window glass and kept looking at the garden covered with a shimmering snow shroud, trying until my eyes hurt to look for something moving and familiar, feeling deeply lonely and even a little “treacherously” abandoned... It was very sad and bitter , and I wanted to cry. I knew that I was losing something incredibly important and dear to me. And no matter how hard I tried to prove to myself that everything was fine and that they were just “late”, deep down I was very afraid that maybe they would never come again... It was insulting and painful and I just didn’t want to believe it . My childish heart did not want to put up with such a “terrible” loss and did not want to admit that this would still have to happen someday, but I still didn’t know when. And I wildly wanted to push back this unfortunate moment as far as possible!
Suddenly, something outside the window really began to change and flicker in a familiar way! At first I thought that one of my “friends” was finally appearing, but instead of the familiar luminous entities, I saw a strange “crystal” tunnel that began right at my window and went somewhere into the distance. Naturally, my first instinct was to rush there without thinking for a long time... But then it suddenly seemed a little strange that I did not feel that usual warmth and calmness that accompanied every appearance of my “star” friends.
As soon as I thought about this, the “crystal” tunnel began to change and darken before my eyes, turning into a strange, very dark “pipe” with long moving tentacles inside. And a painful, unpleasant pressure squeezed my head, very quickly developing into a wild exploding pain, threatening to crush all my brains. Then for the first time I truly felt how severe and severe a headache could be (which later, only for completely different reasons, would poison my life for nineteen years). I felt truly scared. There was no one who could help me. The whole house was already asleep. But even if I hadn’t slept, I still wouldn’t have been able to explain to anyone what happened here...

Birthday July 06, 1953

Russian economist