Who replaced Bunge as Minister of Finance. Nikolai Khristoforovich Bunge

Publicist and statesman; comes from nobles of the evangelical confession, born. November 11, 1823 in Kyiv, where his father served as a doctor and was considered an experienced physician, mainly in childhood diseases; He received his education at the 1st Kyiv gymnasium and at the University of St. Vladimir, where he completed the course in 1845 with a candidate's degree in jurisprudence. On October 31 of the same year, B. was appointed teacher of the laws of government administration at the Lyceum of Prince Bezborodko, and after defending his master’s thesis in 1847: “A study of the principles of trade legislation of Peter the Great” (“Domestic Notes”, 1850, vol. LXVIII, no. 1) was approved on December 19, 1847 as a professor at the Lyceum, in which position he remained until October 31, 1850. In Nizhyn, Bunge joined a small circle of progressive people who had a beneficial influence not only on students, but also on the environment, pedagogical and social.

In the dark outback of the district he appeared as an ardent missionary of European science and citizenship; as a professor, he was actively concerned about raising the level of development of his students: in order to make the treasures of European science accessible to his chosen students, B. gave lessons in foreign languages ​​in his apartment.

B. retained this rare and attractive trait - to love everything young and sense everything gifted in the young, when (in 1850) he became a professor at the University of St. Vladimir, and this is also the key to the extraordinary success of his university lectures. On June 16, 1852, B. was awarded the degree of Doctor of Political Science by Kyiv University for his dissertation: “The Theory of Credit” (Kyiv, 1852) and in the same 1852 he was approved as an extraordinary professor, and in 1854 - as an ordinary professor in the department of political economy and statistics.

In 1865, when the professor of police law N.D. Ivanishev stopped his lectures, the teaching of this subject was temporarily entrusted to B., who in 1869 finally changed the former department of political economy and statistics to the department of police law. Police law does not seem to B. to be an integral science; in the doctrine of security (laws of deanery) he sees a part of state law, and in the doctrine of welfare (laws of improvement) - an applied part of political economy.

In accordance with this, in his course “Police Law” (5th issue, Kyiv, 1873-77), which remained unfinished and in which he managed to present only some departments of improvement, the economic point of view prevails.

But when presenting the theory of economic issues, the author does not limit himself to general principles alone, since, in his opinion, the study of general laws alone, without connection with the facts in which these laws are found, easily degenerates into dry and abstract scholasticism, which may be of interest to specialists, but powerless to resolve life's issues.

In addition to the initiated course on police law, B. also published for his students “A Course in Statistics” (Kyiv, 1865; 2nd ed., 1876) and “Fundamentals of Political Economy” (Kyiv, 1870). B.'s university activities were not limited to teaching.

In the difficult days of university life, when universities were deprived of self-government, B., in the position of rector by appointment (from 1859-1862), stood with dignity at the head of Kyiv University.

But even after the return of voting rights to universities, B. was twice elected rector of the same Kyiv University and held this position from 1871-1875 and from 1878-1880. In 1876, B. was confirmed with the rank of Honored Professor: in 1880 .he left the University.

B. was one of those learned professors who do not confine themselves to the blank walls of their office.

Possessing a bright and broad mind, he could not help but respond to the social issues that life brought to the fore.

The result of his responsiveness was a whole series of more or less thorough articles that he published in various periodicals, starting in 1852. These were articles related to the then expected peasant reform (in "Otech. Zapiski", 1858, No. 8 and in " Russk. Vestnik 1859, No. 2 and 8), to the spreading new type of industrial enterprises in the form of joint-stock companies (in the "Magazine for Shareholders", 1855 and 1858) and many others, among which one cannot fail to note his comments on the structure. educational part at universities (in "Russian Bulletin", 1858, vol. XVII) and on banking policy (in "Collection of State Knowledge", vol. I, 1874) His research was also of important practical importance: "Commodity warehouses". and warrants" (Kyiv, 1871); but special attention was paid to his research on ways to restore our correct monetary circulation, shocked, among other things, by the excessive issue of paper money. These include the following works: "On the restoration of metal circulation in Russia" ( Kyiv, 1877); “On the restoration of a constant monetary unit in Russia” (Kyiv, 1878) and articles in the “Collection of State Knowledge”, vol. VI, 1878 and vol. VIII, 1880. In addition, B. translated and supplemented the work. A. Wagner: “Russian paper money” (Kyiv, 1871). The scientific and literary activities of the gifted financier early attracted the attention of the government.

Back in 1859, when the peasant reform was maturing, B., together with our most experienced financiers, was invited by the Highest Name to participate in the financial commission, which had its duty to find the grounds and methods for the final resolution of the peasant issue through the redemption of plots with the assistance of the government.

Then, again called to St. Petersburg to participate in the discussion of the new university charter (1863), Bunge received an assignment to teach the science of finance and political economy to the late heir Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich.

The basis of the lectures that he gave to his royal student from September 3, 1863 to June 11, 1864, B. based the book by Karl von Gock, translated into Russian: “Taxes and State Debts” (Kyiv, 1865), about which one of the biographers B. said that “a country whose ruler would have adopted Gok’s views on taxes and state management could be happy.” Upon his return to Kyiv, B., without leaving university studies, accepted the position offered to him as manager of the Kiev office of the state bank. Standing thus at the very source of credit. operations, B. got the opportunity to test the instructions of the theory of finance in practice.

B.'s accession in 1880 to the post of Comrade Minister of Finance, and soon after that, in 1881, Minister of Finance, was met with complete sympathy and great hopes.

His six-year administration of the Ministry of Finance (1881-86) coincided with a very difficult financial period.

Some revival in industrial life and in the receipt of state revenues, noticed after the war, subsided already in 1880, and then a reaction came.

In addition, two years in a row - 1884 and especially 1885 - were marked by an almost universal crop failure of grain and herbs in the empire, which in turn caused adverse consequences for industry and trade, the closure of many factories and plants in the industrial region, trade bankruptcies and reduction of foreign holidays.

Already his first state commission (1881), the new Minister of Finance brought a deficit of 50 million rubles, and since then the deficits have not stopped throughout the administration of his ministry - a phenomenon almost unknown to the previous decade (1871-1880), when only The painting in 1878 was completed with a deficit of 21 million rubles, although even then, when paintings were executed, instead of the expected excess of income over expenses, there was sometimes a shortage.

But based on this or that information from the list, one cannot yet judge the activities of the Ministry of Finance.

The touchstone for this activity can be measures to find ways to achieve uniform and fair taxation of taxpayers, as well as care for the productive forces of the people, this main source of state power and wealth.

In both respects, the management of N. X. Bunge was marked by events of paramount importance.

Already at the beginning of the last reign, the question was raised about the need to abolish the ancient distinction between tax-paying and non-tax-paying classes; but only N. X. Bunge finally moved from projects and assumptions to actual implementation and carried out the abolition of the poll tax and the conversion of the quitrent tax into redemption payments.

But the main merit of N. H. Bunge, as Minister of Finance, is to indicate the path that our financial legislation should follow in its further development.

This path is the establishment of an income tax, which is currently recognized as the most fair and expedient method of taxation, and which was first officially indicated in our country in the most comprehensive report attached to the list for 1884. But N. X. Bunge, fearing a shock to the existing economic relations, did not dare to immediately draft a general income tax, but for the first time was content with establishing a number of private taxes that had the significance of transitional measures preparing the introduction of a general income tax.

This includes: a tax on income from interest-bearing securities, interest and distribution fees from industrial enterprises, and partly a tax on property transferred free of charge.

The establishment of the tax inspectorate also had the significance of a preparatory measure for the introduction of a general income tax, which, in addition to this significance in the future, justified its existence, since in the first year of its establishment it more than doubled the costs of its maintenance simply by the more correct receipt of trade taxes .

Already these first steps to attract sufficient classes to participate in the tax burden, in connection with the abolition of the poll tax and the reduction of redemption payments, should have had a beneficial effect on the productive forces of the people; but N. X. Bunge also took direct measures for the economic success of the country.

These include the establishment of the Peasant Land Bank, the law of June 1, 1882, which took the first and successful step towards the regulation of factory labor in the interests of workers, and the rules of April 26. 1883, which marked the beginning of a more regular structure of city and private banks.

Less favorable results were produced by his customs policy, which made so many concessions to protectionism, his drinking reform of 1885, the establishment of the Noble Land Bank and some other private measures. Few ministers have had to endure so many attacks from the press (especially from the Moskovskiye Vedomosti), and few have dealt with them so calmly, without resorting to the protection of punitive administrative power and limiting themselves to official denials of a strictly factual nature.

In January 1887, N. X. Bunge left the post of Minister of Finance and was appointed chairman of the Committee of Ministers.

N. X. Bunge was elected as an honorary member of various societies and universities: St. Petersburg, Novorossiysk, St. Vladimir and the Academy of Sciences; in 1890 he accepted the title of ordinary academician in political economy and published the book: “Public Accounting and Financial Reporting in England” (St. Petersburg, 1890), in the compilation of which the author, along with the literature of the subject, used a number of practical information delivered to him by agents of our ministries in Paris and London. (Brockhaus) Bunge, Nikolai Khristianovich (addition to the article) - economist and statesman; died in 1895 (Brockhaus) Bunge, Nikolai Khristianovich - Russian statesman (since 1887 chairman of the Committee of Ministers) and economist; genus. in 1823, d. in 1895. As Minister of Finance, B. spoke out in 1882 with sharp and justified criticism of the work developed by the gr. Ignatiev’s bill aimed at limiting Jews in some very important rights, and it was thanks to Bunge that the “Temporary Rules” of 1882 carried out only part of the repressive measures proposed by Count. Ignatiev. - Wed. Hesse, "Gr. Ignatiev and "Temporary Rules", "Pravo", 1908 No. 31. (European enc.) Bunge, Nikolai Christianovich (1823-1895) - economist, Minister of Finance of Tsarist Russia.

In 1850 he began lecturing at Kiev University, and in 1852 he took the department of political economy and statistics.

From 1869 he taught mainly a course on police law; from 1890 - academician.

During the period from 1859 to 1880, he repeatedly held the position of rector at Kiev University. In 1863 he took part in the development of the university charter.

He was the manager of the Kyiv branch of the State Bank. He became known in court circles from his studies in finance and political economy with the eldest son of Alexander II; subsequently (1886-89) he lectured to Nicholas II, when he was his heir.

In 1880 he was appointed deputy minister of finance under minister Abaza (see). After the assassination of Alexander II and the decisive turn of the autocracy towards extreme reaction, instead of the resigned Abaza, B. was appointed Minister of Finance in May 1881, as a learned and apolitical person; B. held the position of minister until 1886. In 1887-1895 he was chairman of the committee of ministers.

As a minister, B. pursued a moderate bourgeois policy, maneuvering between the more advanced St. Petersburg-Polish metallurgical and iron-making industries, the backward textile industry of the Moscow-Vladimir region and trading capital.

As Minister of Finance, B. considered his main task to be the ordering of the completely disordered - especially after the Russian-Turkish War (1877-78) - monetary system, which, however, did not give any serious results.

B. did a lot of preparatory work for the introduction of metallic monetary circulation in Russia.

Under him, an attempt was clearly made to bring the budget of tsarist Russia closer to the budget of bourgeois states.

He tries to abolish a number of serfdom and semi-serfdom taxes and introduces a number of direct taxes; under him, redemption payments were reduced (by 12 million rubles), the capitation tax was abolished, and the quitrent tax was transformed.

Removal of some duties from peasants during the agrarian crisis of the 80s. meant the elimination of virtually impossible taxes, and on the other hand, it emancipated the financial elite of the village from the community, from mutual responsibility, etc. Nevertheless, these attempts by B. met with strong opposition, mainly from Pobedonostsev.

In the interests of the industrial bourgeoisie, Belgium pursues a protectionist customs policy.

In connection with the developing labor movement, B. carried out a number of activities in the field of labor legislation, since this did not run counter to the interests of the advanced industrial bourgeoisie. On June 1, 1882, a law was passed regulating the exploitation of child labor. The crisis that gripped the industry since the early 80s raised the question of reducing production; Therefore, B., as a result of the petition of St. Petersburg manufacturers, carried out the abolition of the night work of teenagers and women in textile production (law of June 3, 1885). Under B., the Institute of Factory Inspection was created.

The strike movement of the mid-80s, especially the Morozov strike of 1885, frightened the autocracy, which, in the person of the Minister of Internal Affairs, or rather the police department led by Plehve (see), seeks to take the matter of regulating relations between workers and entrepreneurs into their own hands, and Indeed, very soon B. was forced, under pressure from the right, to cede the initiative in the field of labor legislation to the Ministry of the Interior (law of June 3, 1886). These first attempts at labor legislation, for all their wretchedness, nevertheless restored the factory owners of the Moscow and Vladimir regions against B..

With the strengthening of the “national” policy of Pobedonostsev and Tolstoy, who relied on a bloc of landowners with the bourgeoisie of the central provinces, B. was forced to resign from his post, giving way to I. A. Vyshnegradsky.

As a theorist-economist, B. did not represent anything outstanding, adhering in his theoretical views to the so-called “historical” school. The main scientific works of V.: Course of Statistics, Kyiv, 1865; Foundations of political economy;

Theory of Credit, Kyiv, 1852; Historical outline of economic doctrines and review of various branches of economic activity (several publications).

Commodity warehouses and warrants, Kyiv, 1871; Banking laws and banking policy (Collection of state knowledge, vol. I, St. Petersburg, 1874); On the restoration of metal circulation in Russia, Kyiv, 1877; On the restoration of a constant monetary unit in Russia, Kyiv, 1878; State accounting and financial reporting in England, St. Petersburg, 1890; Essays on political and economic literature, St. Petersburg, 1805. In addition, B. translated and annotated the book by Al. Wagner, Russian paper money, Kyiv, 1871. Lit.: "A remarkable era in the history of Russian finance", St. Petersburg, 1895; Kovanko P., The main reforms carried out by Bunge in the financial system of Russia, Kyiv, 1901. I. Tatarov.

Economic views of N.Kh. Bunge. Nikolai Christianovich Bunge (1823-95)

Nikolai Khristianovich Bunge is a famous economist and statesman. In the early 1880s, Bunge was called to public service, where he served first as Associate Minister of Finance (1880-1881), then Minister of Finance (1881-1886) and Chairman of the Committee of Ministers (1887-95). As finance minister, Bunge carried out many reforms aimed at modernizing the Russian economy, including strengthening the monetary system.

N.H. Bunge left a huge number of published works, including on the issue of money, banks and credit. In his doctoral dissertation “The Theory of Credit” (1852), he wrote about the importance of credit for the consolidation and rational use of capital, to stimulate the development of productive forces and resolve social contradictions. At the same time, he considered the mobilization of “idle capital” in banks and directing them to “where they will deliver the greatest economic benefits” as “the multiplication of capital.” Bunge, 1852, p. 141-144

Bunge noted the important role of credit in the creation of new means of payment, which not only reduce circulation costs, but also create a completely new base for it. Bunge, 1852, p. 156 He wrote that credit means of circulation, such as “bank deposit notes, bonds, shares, especially bills of exchange and bank notes replacing bills of exchange” differ from other instruments of exchange (intermediaries) in that “they are created by the circulation of the values ​​themselves, and not by production, that their value is purely representative." Bunge, 1852, p. 157 These features of “credit negotiable notes” give them important advantages over money.

Bunge expressed confidence that credit would develop and that in the future exchanges would increasingly take place on the basis of credit. He formulated three types of exchange depending on the stage of its development:

1) natural exchange,

2) monetary exchange, and 3) exchange mediated by credit. Bunge, 1852, p. 11 These statements by Bunge are consistent with those later expressed by the German economist Bruno Hildebrand in his work “Natural Economics, Monetary Economics and Credit Economics” (1864).

In various articles published in the late 1850s, Bunge called for the abandonment of the state banking system and the state monopoly in the credit sector. He considered government banks to be bureaucratic institutions that were unable to compete with the energy and competence of private interests. In his work “The Significance of Industrial Partnerships and the Conditions for Their Distribution,” he argued that shares “create the most developed form of private property,” and joint-stock companies are “a happy combination of personal activities with public activities.” Bunge. 1857, p. 16-17

The task of creating a banking system designed to stimulate economic development was clearly formulated during the period of credit reform of 1859-1860, but it was solved only in the 1860-1870s, when the Ministry of Finance was headed by Mikhail Reitern (from 1862 to 1878). ). Reitern actively promoted the development of private credit institutions, and, thanks to his support, a whole system of private commercial banks was formed in Russia in a short time.

Bunge, Nikolai Khristianovich - financier, economist and statesman (1823 - 95), comes from nobles of the evangelical confession, was born in Kyiv, where his father was considered an experienced physician in childhood diseases; He received his education at the 1st Kyiv gymnasium and at the University of St. Vladimir, where he graduated from the course in 1845. At the same time, Bunge was appointed a teacher at the Lyceum of Prince Bezborodko, and after defending his master’s thesis in 1847, “A Study of the Beginnings of the Trade Legislation of Peter the Great” (“ Domestic Notes", 1850) was approved by the Lyceum professor. In the dark outback of Nizhyn he appeared as an ardent missionary of European science and citizenship; as a professor, he was actively concerned about raising the level of development of his listeners: in order to make the treasures of European science accessible to his chosen students, Bunge gave lessons in foreign languages ​​in his apartment. This rare and attractive trait - to love everything young and sense everything gifted in the young - Bunge retained later, when (in 1850) he became a professor at the University of St. Vladimir, and this is the key to the extraordinary success of his university lectures. In 1852, Bunge was awarded the degree of Doctor of Political Sciences by the University of Kyiv for his dissertation “The Theory of Credit” (Kyiv, 1852). In 1869 he changed the department of political economy and statistics to the department of police law. Police law does not seem to Bunge to be an integral science; in the doctrine of security (laws of deanery) he sees a part of state law, and in the doctrine of welfare (laws of improvement) - an applied part of political economy. In accordance with this, in his course “Police Law” (Kyiv, 1873 - 77), which remained unfinished, and in which he managed to outline some departments of improvement, the economic point of view prevails. Bunge's police law corresponds to what is now known as economic policy. When presenting the theory of economic policy, the author does not limit himself to general principles alone, since, in his opinion, the study of general laws alone without connection with the facts in which these laws are found easily degenerates into dry and abstract scholasticism, which may be of interest to specialists, but is powerless resolve life issues. Bunge also published for his students “A Course in Statistics” (Kyiv, 1865; 2nd ed., 1876) and “Foundations of Political Economy” (ib., 1870). During the difficult days of university life, when universities were deprived of self-government, Bunge served as rector by appointment (from 1859 - 1862). ) stood with dignity at the head of Kyiv University. But even after the return of voting rights to universities, Bunke was twice elected rector of the same Kyiv University and held this position from 1871 to 1875 and from 1878 to 1880. In 1880, he left the university. Bunge was one of those professors who do not confine themselves to the blank walls of their office. Possessing a bright and broad mind, he could not help but respond to the social issues that life brought to the fore. The result was a whole series of articles that he published in various periodicals, starting in 1852. These were articles related to the then expected peasant reform (in "Domestic Notes", 1858, and in "Russian Bulletin" 1859, No. 2 and 8 ), to the spreading new type of industrial enterprises in the form of joint-stock companies (in the "Magazine for Shareholders", 1855 and 1858) and many others, among which one cannot fail to note his comments on the structure of the educational department at universities (in the "Russian Bulletin" 1858. , vol. XVII) and banking policy (in the "Collection of State Knowledge", vol. I, 1874). His study “Commodity Warehouses and Warrants” (Kyiv, 1871) was also of great practical importance; But Bunge’s research on ways to restore correct monetary circulation in our country, shocked by the excessive issue of paper money, attracted special attention. These include the works: “On the restoration of metal circulation in Russia” (Kyiv, 1877); “On the restoration of a constant monetary unit in Russia” (Kyiv, 1878) and articles in the “Collection of State Knowledge”, vol.

VI, 1878, and volume XIII, 1880. Bunge also translated and expanded A. Wagner’s work “Russian Paper Money” (Kyiv, 1871). In 1859, when the peasant reform was maturing, Bunge was invited to participate in the financial commission, whose purpose was to find the grounds and methods for the final resolution of the peasant issue through the redemption of plots with the assistance of the government. Called again to St. Petersburg to participate in the discussion of the new university charter (1863), Bunge received an assignment to teach the science of finance and political economy to the heir, Tsarevich Nikolai Alexandrovich. Bunge based these lectures on Carl von Gock’s book “Taxes and State Debts” (Kyiv, 1865), which he translated into Russian. Upon returning to Kyiv, Bunge, without leaving university studies, accepted the position of manager of the Kiev office of the state bank. Thus, standing at the very source of credit operations, Bunge had the opportunity to test in practice the instructions of the theory of finance. From that time on, his voice acquired decisive importance in financial matters. Bunge's accession to the post of Comrade Minister of Finance in 1880 and soon afterwards in 1881 as Minister of Finance was met with sympathy and great hopes. - Bunge is the Minister of Finance. Bunge had to take over the management of the ministry under very difficult circumstances. The reaction that occurred after March 1, 1881 was also reflected in the financial condition of the country. In addition, two years in a row - 1884 and especially 1885 - were marked by almost universal crop failure, and this caused adverse consequences for industry and trade. Bunge's first budget of 1881 had to be reduced to a deficit of over 50 million rubles. The amount of the national debt on January 1, 1881 reached over 6 billion, and it was inevitable that a number of new loans would be concluded. One of Bunge's first actions was the issue of a 6% gold annuity in 1883, which, due to the extremely high interest rate, met with an unfriendly attitude in society. The state of the credit ruble exchange rate was very unsatisfactory. In 1881, the average price of the ruble was 65.8 kopecks in gold, in 1886 - 58.9; the balance of payments was extremely unfavorable, and on foreign exchanges, especially in Berlin, speculation was carried out with Russian funds and credit rubles, against which Bunge, guided by a system of non-interference in exchange relations, did not take appropriate measures. In one of his first all-submissive reports (1883), Bunge defined his financial program as follows: “A careful study of the weaknesses of our political system indicates the need to ensure the correct growth of industry with sufficient protection for it: to strengthen credit institutions on principles proven by experience, while also helping to reduce the cost credit; to strengthen the profitability of railway enterprises in the interests of the people and the state, establishing proper control over them; to strengthen credit monetary circulation through a set of gradually implemented measures aimed at achieving this goal, to introduce changes in the tax system, consistent with strict justice and promising an increase in income without burdening tax payers. ; finally, to restore the excess of income over expenses (without which improvement of finances is unthinkable) by limiting excessive loans and maintaining reasonable frugality in all sectors of management." Of this program, Bunge certainly failed to meet the excess of revenues over expenses, due to the significant costs of urgent repayment of government loans. In all other respects, the time of Bunge's management was truly an outstanding era in the history of Russian finance. One of the first financial measures was the reduction of redemption payments, which Bunge considered necessary to improve the well-being of the rural population, and which was urgently caused by the fact that, in general, more was collected from the peasants than was paid under the obligations of the redemption operation. The reduction was made in the amount of 1 ruble from each per capita allotment subject to redemption payments in

Great Russian localities and 16 kopecks per ruble in Little Russian localities. The total amount of the reduction was up to 12 million rubles per year. In 1885, Bunge entered the State Council with the idea of ​​a universal (except for Siberia) abolition from January 1, 1886 of the poll tax, which had been the cornerstone of our financial system since the time of Peter the Great. This measure was supposed to reduce the resources of the state treasury by 57 million rubles, part of which was supposed to be compensated by increasing the tax on alcohol (up to 9 kopecks per degree), and part by increasing the quitrent tax from state peasants (which the government refused to increase by 20 in 1886). years). The State Council, however, decided to transfer the state peasants to redemption, which in reality was nothing more than a disguised increase in the quitrent tax. The law of June 12, 1886 established compulsory redemption for state peasants. The abolition of the poll tax should have entailed the abolition of mutual responsibility. And in 1885, Bunge, in his presentation to the State Council, pointing out the ruinous consequences of this method of collecting taxes, which causes, on the one hand, “attachment of peasants to the land by the passport system”, on the other, “the desire for unauthorized absence to seek better earnings,” spoke out in favor of abolishing mutual responsibility. The State Council did not agree with Bunge's arguments, and mutual responsibility was left for taxes that replaced the poll tax. In any case, we owe the abolition of the poll tax and the reduction in redemption payments of the landowners exclusively to Bunga, who took an extremely bold step by refusing income of up to 70 million rubles at a time when the budget was running a deficit. This significant decrease in income forced Bunge to turn to other sources and - above all - to increasing taxes. Thus, under Bung, taxes were increased, except for the tax on alcohol (first to 8 kopecks according to the law of May 19, 1881, then to 9 kopecks per degree, according to the law of May 18, 1885), on sugar (May 12, 1881) , on tobacco (May 18, 1882); Stamp duty was increased (January 19, 1882), customs rates were increased on many imported items, and transit through Transcaucasia was closed; a tax on gold mining was introduced, additional and variable fees were established on commercial and industrial enterprises (laws of July 5, 1884 and January 5, 1885), the tax on real estate in cities was increased (May 13, 1883), and the land tax was increased, a tax on income from monetary capital and a tax on the transfer of property without compensation (donation and inheritance tax) were introduced, taxes on foreign passports were increased, and the sale of drinks was regulated. Along with these tax reforms, Bunge took care of the introduction of the institution of tax inspectors, which was supposed to ensure a more correct receipt of taxes. The new state credit institutions established under Bung were of great importance for the further economic development of Russia. Based on the point of view that the economic disorder of the peasants occurs mainly as a result of the insufficiency and low productivity of their land plots, and the acquisition of other lands into ownership seems extremely difficult for the peasants due to the inability to use long-term credit, Bunge developed a project for a state mortgage bank to assist peasants in their acquisition of land. The bank's charter was approved by the Highest on May 18, 1882. Loans were to be issued in 51/2% mortgage sheets, called 51/2% state certificates of the peasant land bank. By its very charter, the bank was supposed to be only an intermediary between peasants and landowners who were already making a deal on their own initiative. And from the very beginning, the purpose of the bank, as stated by the motives of the state council, should have been to assist wealthy peasants with some income, but not those with little land. The bank began operations on April 10, 1883, and by the end of Bunge's ministry, by 1886, had at its disposal a reserve capital

l at 467.7 thousand rubles. Along with this bank, a noble bank was also opened, which was established specifically “to help the nobility.” According to Bunge's idea, the bank was supposed to issue loans only to those noble landowners who themselves managed their land. But the State Council accepted Bunge's project, eliminating any restriction. Under Bung, the construction of state-owned railways was greatly expanded. For this purpose, under Bunga, up to 133.6 million rubles were spent; The treasury built railways with a total length of 3461 miles. In addition, several lines of private companies were purchased for the treasury. Bunge himself doubted that “the conversion of railways into state property would immediately enrich the treasury,” but he saw that “over time, railways could become the same branch of the state economy as mail and telegraphs.” Despite the lack of a plan for the purchase of private roads and state railway construction and the huge deficits from the operation of railways, it was Bunge who contributed greatly to the streamlining of our railway policy, and with it Russian finances in general. Bunge's management of the Ministry of Finance was marked by the triumph of protectionism. Bunge's activities coincided with the nationalist course of domestic policy. The ideal of independence of the national economy, its liberation from foreign domination, preached with particular energy by the Moskovsky Vedomosti and then by Mendeleev, led to demands for increased duties. A certain influence on the protectionist direction of foreign trade policy under Bunge was exerted by the general rise of the customs-protective wave that swept across Europe and in particular in Germany, causing significant changes in the tariff system in 1879. In 1881, a 10% increase was made on the entire tariff. On June 16, 1884, there was an increase in the duty on cast iron, which was then joined by corresponding increases on rolled iron, steel, machinery, etc. In 1884, a general duty on coal was also established with differential taxation of coal imported through the Black Sea ports and western land border. One of Bunge's great merits as Minister of Finance is his desire to introduce an income tax in our country. Acute financial need in the late 70s and early 80s, caused partly by the Turkish war, partly by the reduction of a number of state resources due to tax reforms, and partly by general poor financial management, put a fundamental tax reform on the agenda. In his most comprehensive report for 1884, Bunge categorically and definitely recognized income tax as the most expedient and fair method of taxation. But, fearing a strong breakdown in economic relations, he did not dare to immediately begin introducing an income tax and for the first time established a number of private taxes, which had the meaning of measures preparing the introduction of one income tax. Among Bunge's reforms, it is necessary to indicate the first step towards the regulation of factory labor, expressed in the law of June 1, 1882, the beginning of a more correct organization of city and private banks, laid down by the rules of April 26, 1883, and the drinking reform of 1885. Few ministers had to endure so many attacks from the press, especially the Moskovskiye Vedomosti, and few treated them so calmly, without resorting to the defense of the punitive administration and limiting themselves to official denials of a strictly factual nature. In January 1887, Bunge resigned as Minister of Finance and was appointed chairman of the Committee of Ministers. Bunge was elected as an honorary member of various societies and universities: St. Petersburg, Novorossiysk, St. Vladimir and the Academy of Sciences; in 1890 he was elected an ordinary academician in political economy and published the book “Public Accounting and Financial Reporting in England” (St. Petersburg, 1890), which is interesting material for the study of budget law. In compiling this book, the author has benefited from a whole range of practical information supplied to him by our financial agents in Paris and London.

e. - Bunge - economist. Bunge considered competition to be the main factor in economic life. Not completely agreeing with any of the classics and finding significant irregularities in views like Hell. Smith, Ricardo, Malthus, Mill, as well as Carey and Bastiat, he adhered to an eclectic point of view, mainly adhering to the theories of Malthus and Mill. He considered supply and demand to be the main regulator of economic phenomena and explained almost all economic phenomena with them. Bunge's socio-political views were fully consistent with this view. Bunge recognized the enormous beneficial influence behind rivalry. Without competition there would be a huge decline in strength. Rivalry turns out to be disastrous when unequal forces enter into the struggle, on the one hand, united, supported by monopolies, privileges, and enormous capital, and on the other hand, fragmented, deprived of any support and unsecured in their activities. Evil, according to Bunge, lies not in competition, but in its insufficient balance. Nevertheless, Bunge did not see anything enslaving or humiliating in the purchase of living labor, i.e., in hiring labor, since this purchase is associated with mutual benefit. Bunge allowed state intervention in economic life only on a small scale and in extreme cases. This point of view did not, however, prevent Bunge from recognizing the advisability of government intervention in the field of trade policy and in the field of “measures related to strengthening the welfare of factory workers.” Bunge's practical measures while he was Minister of Finance established his reputation as a strict protectionist. In his theoretical views, which he outlined in the course “Police Law,” Bunge is not, however, an unconditional protectionist. According to Bunge, customs duties constitute a tax and should be considered mainly as to how to file. They should depend as little as possible on trade agreements and should be taken into account with the general system of taxes, with their influence on production, trade and consumption. Encouraging industry can and should take place. But a protective tariff and benefits, common to all persons, give incentives indiscriminately and are therefore not always desirable. Benefits often indicate waste in the state economy. A liberal customs tariff promotes increased consumption, but low customs duties with high taxes are undesirable. As for the laws regarding workers, it was precisely based on the recognition of the beneficial effects of competition that Bunge believed that freedom of transactions would be violated if workers did not have the right to enter into agreements among themselves regarding the setting of wages. Disagreeing with representatives of the liberal school who objected to the benefits of strikes, Bunge, however, did not see in workers’ unions the makings for the proper development of social life and considered trade unions a step backward compared to medieval guilds. Considering the task of legislation in the field of economic life to be the protection of freedom of transactions, Bunge did not allow any restriction of private property rights. In his opinion, the injustice of the initial acquisition has been smoothed out over time, because the owner invests his labor, his capital in the land and pays taxes from the land. Economic freedom not only contributed to raising humanity to the highest level of well-being, but in the future it should also serve as an indispensable factor of development. Capitalist production and the dominance of competition give man hope for a better future and make him free. In his methodological views, Bunge aligned himself with the historical-statistical direction in political economy, but introduced a number of restrictions into it. Disagreeing with Roscher, Bunge believed that the historical direction could introduce unprincipled “opportunism” into science and practical life; he found dangerous the absence of any principles, foundations, rules and the adoption of historical examples for guidance, with an attempt to follow them in cases mistakenly recognized as similar to those already lived by humanity. Requiring great caution in

Using the deductive method, Bunge insisted that political economy adopt the method of positive knowledge, observation and experience. In addition to the “Historical Outline of Economic Doctrines,” first published in 1868 and giving a brief summary of the teachings of the most prominent economic thinkers, ranging from the mercantilists to the historical school, Bunge gave a detailed exposition in extensive articles specifically of Carey’s teachings (“The Theory of the Consent of Private Interests - the first political-economic doctrine of Carey", 1858) and J.-St. Mill ("J. St. Mill as an Economist", 1868). These articles, together with a small extract from Schmoller's articles on Menger, were attached to the "Historical Outline of Economic Doctrines" and, with significant critical additions, changes and amendments, were published in 1895 under the general title "Essays on Political-Economic Literature." This was Bunge's last work. - Wed: P. Migulin, “Russian State Credit” (I volume, Kharkov, 1899); Kovalko, “The most important reforms carried out by N.H. Bunge in the financial system of Russia” (Kyiv, 1901); I. Taburno, “Sketch overview of the financial and economic state of Russia over the past 20 years (1882 - 1901)” (St. Petersburg, 1904); M. Sobolev, “History of customs policy in Russia” (St. Petersburg, 1911); "Historical background on the introduction of income tax" (official publication); Schulze-Gevernitz, "Essays on the public economy and economic policy of Russia" (1901). S. Zagorsky.

The goal of Bunge's financial policy was to establish budget balance, but his mind was never able to achieve this.

1881. – Bunge becomes Minister of Finance. Carries out a “tax reform”: the need for reform was due to the difficult situation in which the peasantry found itself (lack of the necessary increase in arable land, all kinds of payments, lack of opportunity for the technical evolution of the agricultural sector). The peasants were simply forced to rent land from the nobles. IN 1881. – redemption payments were reduced, 1885. - complete abolition of the poll tax - the state lost revenue of 55 million rubles per year, which was balanced by an increase in duties on imported goods and indirect taxes. Bunge considered an income tax to be the most appropriate, but he failed to implement this idea.

1882. - establishment of a peasant land bank, cat. provided peasants with a loan to purchase noble land. This loan had to be partially repaid 2 times a year; in case of triple delay, the land was simply confiscated from the peasant.

We can say that as a result of the reform, the nobles received practically no money: firstly, the state deducted debts from the ransom amount, and secondly, the rest of the ransom was issued in the form of government securities, and not in money (and banks accepted these securities at price below face value). In connection with the deterioration of the position of the nobility, it was proposed to create a Noble Bank, which would issue money to the nobles for production purposes (Bunge project). 1885. –The Noble Bank opened, it issued a privileged loan to the nobility (6.5% and then 4% per year) regardless of their occupation.

Railway construction: Bunge is betting on the construction of the railway. mainly at the expense of the treasury. There were only 5 private companies capable of working effectively. The rest of the railways. began to buy into the treasury. Bunge justified this approach by the need to maintain domestic industry. 1884 – Ekaterininskaya railway (now Donetskaya), connected Krivoy Rog and Donbass. This made it possible to create a new metallurgical base here (19000 - 25 plants).

1887 – Vyshnegradsky became minister of finance. His entire financial policy was subordinated to one task: providing credit notes with gold and silver. The main sources were external loans (due to low interest rates) and the active balance of payments. The main export goods were bread and sugar. It was beneficial that 1887-1889. in Europe they were very unproductive, but surprisingly productive in Russia. In addition, a number of fees were established from peasants (collected in the fall). 1891-1892 - crop failures and famine in Russia, which practically nullified all Vyshnegradsky’s efforts, since he had to buy bread abroad. 1888 – the state budget became deficit-free for the first time, which has not been the case for quite some time. Vyshnegradsky strengthened the budget, both with the help of indirect taxes and with the help of duties. 1891 – the customs tariff, which was strictly protectionist in nature.

Author of many scientific works, expert of the Editorial Commissions on the preparation of the reform of 1861 and the resolution of the peasant question. Bunge gained experience in financial activities and a reputation as a talented administrator in the 60s, successfully managing, as already mentioned, the Kyiv office of the State Bank.

Nikolai Bunge's program was distinguished by its social orientation, for he saw a deep connection between improving the financial situation of the country and increasing the well-being of the people, and included the development of factory legislation, the creation of workers' associations, and attracting workers to participate in the profits of enterprises. His political ideal was an autocratic monarchy based on the rule of law, transparency and the development of local public initiative.