DOI: 10.33917/es-5.191.2023.54-63

The Russian economy turned out to be at the forefront of changes occurring in the global economy. Usual paradigms of economic analysis and forecasting are no longer suitable for describing this situation. Macroeconomic indicators in the context of massive redistribution of assets provide an increasingly distor ted picture of the current and strategic advantages of countries and corporations, their economic oppor tunities and risks. The institutional approach, in par ticular the theory of mergers and acquisitions, is becoming more adequate to the present moment. A description of the conflict between Western countries and Russia in its language allows us to see both the mechanisms of transition from its “friendly” absorption in the 1990s to a “hostile” acquisition (essentially, to a raider tak eover in recent years), and new opportunities opening up for Russian economy thanks to a failed at tempt to capture it. Right now, it is impor tant not only to build a policy in order to counter sanctions, but also to formulate new ambitious strategic priorities. This will allow us to tak e advantage of new opportunities in a proper way.

References:

1. Balatskii E.V. Rossiya v epitsentre geopoliticheskoi turbulentnosti: nakoplenie global’nykh protivorechii [Russia in the Epicenter of Geopolitical Turbulence: Accumulation of Global Contradictions]. Ekonomicheskie i sotsial’nye peremeny: fakty, tendentsii, prognoz, 2022, vol. 15, no 4, pp. 42–59, DOI: 10.15838/esc.2022.4.82.3.

2. Doklad Stiglitsa o reforme mezhdunarodnoi valyutno-finansovoi sistemy: uroki global’nogo krizisa [The Stiglitz report Reforming the International Monetary and Financial Systems in the wake of the Global Crisis]. Doklad Komissii finansovykh ekspertov OON. Moscow, Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya, 2012, 324 p.

3. Glaz’ev S.Yu. Poslednyaya mirovaya voina. SShA nachinayut i proigryvayut [The Last World War. USA Starts and Loses]. Moscow, Knizhnyi mir, 2016.

(Kollektsiya Izborskogo kluba.)

4. Yakovets Yu.V. Global’nyi tsivilizatsionnyi krizis — 2020 — start novoi istoricheskoi epokhi: Nauch. doklad. Prilozhenie. Novaya periodizatsiya istorii i budushchego tsivilizatsii, kapitalizma i sotsializma [Global Civilizational Crisis — 2020 — Beginning of a New Historical Era: Scientific Report. Appendix. New Periodization of History and the Future of Civilizations, Capitalism and Socialism]. Moscow, MISK, 2020.

5. Kotlikoff L., Berns S. Pensionnaya sistema pered burei: To, chto nuzhno znat’ kazhdomu o finansovom budushchem svoei strany [The Pension System Before the Storm: What Everyone Needs to Know About Financial Future of the Own Country]. Moscow, Al’pina biznes buks, 2005, 348 p.

6. Shirov A.A., Porfir’ev B.N., Edinak E.A., et al. Potentsial’nye vozmozhnosti rosta rossiiskoi ekonomiki: analiz i prognoz: Nauch. Doklad [Potential for Growth of the Russian Economy: Analysis and Forecast. Scientific Repor t]. Moscow, Artik Print, 2022, 296 p. (Nauchnyi doklad INP RAN), DOI: 10.47711/sr2-2022.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33917/es-6.180.2021.68-75

The article describes the possible use of institutional rent of the largest metallurgical companies associated with their non-market advantages. The author identifies the channels for obtaining such rent, including differences in the tax burden, difference in the rates of involved financial resources for companies operating in different institutional conditions, state support and benefits from peculiarities of the vertical organization of production. Some estimates of institutional rent are obtained and questions are raised about the income and expenses level, fair for the economy, of the companies that receive it. The directions, in which large companies spend the received rent, are highlighted; it is emphasized that withdrawal of “windfall revenues” can be made only after they are compared with non-market expenses of companies, imputed by the state. At the same time, information on such costs is scattered, inaccurate and therefore requires serious assessment and monitoring. The author substantiates an approach wherein the state and big business are interested to seek a mutually beneficial use of the received institutional rent.

Источники:

1. Blokhin A.A. Institutsional’naya renta v mnogourovnevoi ekonomike [Institutional Rent in a Multilevel Economy]. Problemy prognozirovaniya, 2019, no 4, pp. 16–26.

2. Blokhin A.A., Lomakin-Rumyantsev I.V., Naumov S.A. Al’fa-biznes na rossiiskom prodovol’stvennom rynke [Alfa-Business in the Russian Food Market]. Ekonomicheskie strategii, 2019, no 6, pp. 68–77, available at: DOI: https://doi.org/10.33917/es-6.164.2019.68-77.

3. Blokhin A.A., Dranev S.Ya. Razlichiya institutsional’nykh uslovii deyatel’nosti kompanii raznogo razmera na primere chernoi metallurgii [Differences in the Institutional Environment for Companies of Different Sizes by the Case of Ferrous Metallurgy]. Mir novoi ekonomiki, 2019, no 1, pp. 36–47, available at: DOI: https://doi.org/10.26794/2220-6469-2019-13-1-36-47.

4. Prikaz FNS Rossii ot 30 maya 2007 g. N MM-3-06/333@ (v red. ot 10 maya 2012 g.) “Ob utverzhdenii Kontseptsii sistemy planirovaniya vyezdnykh nalogovykh proverok” [Order of the Federal Tax Service of Russia Dated May 30, 2007 No. MM-3-06/333@ (as Amended on May 10, 2012) “On Approval of the Concept of the Planning System for Field Tax Audits”]. Konsul’tantPlyus, available at: http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_55729/fcaa26fb2b72a7ef1b1bdb6904804f9a2a7d2d3c/

5. Informatsiya Federal’noi nalogovoi sluzhby ot 23 maya 2019 g. “Sredneotraslevye pokazateli, kharakterizuyushchie finansovo-khozyaistvennuyu deyatel’nost’ nalogoplatel’shchikov za 2018 god” [Information from the Federal Tax Service of May 23, 2019 “Average Industry Indicators Characterizing Financial and Economic Activities of Taxpayers in 2018”]. Garant.ru, available at: https://www.garant.ru/products/ipo/prime/doc/72147454/

6. Finansovoe zdorov’e stal’noi otrasli 2020. Analiz finansovykh pokazatelei publichnykh kompanii — proizvoditelei stali [Financial Health of the Steel Industry 2020. Financial Performance Analysis of Public Companies — Steel Producers]. Kiev, OOO “GMK Tsentr’, 2020.

DOI: 10.33917/es-6.164.2019.68-77

The example of the food sector shows that concentration trends in Russian business have led to its stratification into three levels with different institutional conditions and the dominance of the upper levels (alpha business) over the lower one (beta and gamma business). The features of the Russian alpha business against the background of a similar world hierarchy, the logic of its transformation and interaction with the government are analyzed. The requirements for the country development strategy based on the functional balance of the different levels of business are determined

The article is investigating structural changes in the economy before these shifts are reflected in well-known statistical indicators. It dwells on the changes in the economy that occurred in 2011–2015 based on the data from relatively big companies in Russia from SPARK group. The method proposed by the authors shows the presence of structural shifts in the period under study. The article also discusses possible consequences of structural shifts for development of regional economy and the budget system of Russia.

The article draws parallels between the state of the present-day global economy and the Soviet economy in the 1980s. It is assumed that in both cases the diagnosis can be similar and is defined as the socio-economic stagnation. Its main features are: excessive and increasingly growing accumulation of commitments in economic, social, institutional and political spheres as well as lagging and eventually reducing in the course of time possibilities of their implementation. Accordingly, transition to a new model of the global economy may be associated with the same stages, which are known from domestic economic history — crisis, transition period, slow recovery. It is assumed that consumption boom unfolding in Asian countries, which is based on consumer crediting of the population, is becoming a key driver of transition from stagnation to crisis. The author analyses possible consequences for the global economy of a consumer society creation in Asian countries, especially in China. The basic painful consequences of competition between two models of consumer society are defined. The author formulates new global challenges with regard to such consequences and experience of the transition period in our country. It is proposed to take into account these challenges in developing long-term strategies for the development of certain countries or groups of countries, including Russia.

The article draws parallels between the state of the present-day global economy and the Soviet economy in the 1980s. It is assumed that in both cases the diagnosis can be similar and is defined as the socio-economic stagnation. Its main features are: excessive and increasingly growing accumulation of commitments in economic, social, institutional and political spheres as well as lagging and eventually reducing in the course of time possibilities of their implementation. Accordingly, transition to a new model of the global economy may be associated with the same stages, which are known from domestic economic history — crisis, transition period, slow recovery. It is assumed that consumption boom unfolding in Asian countries, which is based on consumer crediting of the population, is becoming a key driver of transition from stagnation to crisis. The author analyses possible consequences for the global economy of a consumer society creation in Asian countries, especially in China. The basic painful consequences of competition between two models of consumer society are defined. The author formulates new global challenges with regard to such consequences and experience of the transition period in our country. It is proposed to take into account these challenges in developing long-term strategies for the development of certain countries or groups of countries, including Russia.