|
"The country's leadership, the President and government
do not need any investments yet," said Deputy Head of the
Yabloko faction and Chairman of the Commission on Legal Issues
for Sub-soil Usage in Production Sharing, Sergei Ivanenko. This
abrupt statement came in response to the draft chapter of the
new Tax Code regulating the taxation of projects pertaining to
the development of [oil and gas] deposits based on production-sharing
agreements (PSA), submitted by the Finance Ministry to the Cabinet.
The previous Duma, said Ivanenko, formulated in general a special
tax regime for PSAs which stipulated payment of three taxes: payment
for the use of the sub-soil (royalty and rental), profit tax (fixed
rate) and social tax. The law also formally stipulated zero-rate
VAT. The new variant proposes the introduction of 20 taxes.
According to the Chairman of the Duma Committee on Budget and
Taxes Alexander Zhukov, the Finance Ministry's variant of this
chapter of the Tax Code regulating the taxation of PSAs essentially
changes the ideology of the special tax regime, as it will be
adjusted to the domestic regime. In particular, it proposes the
introduction of a universal procedure for VAT payments, profits
tax and others. According to Zhukov, this would imply the disappearance
of the fixed tax regime required for large-scale investors. Some
countries with steady tax legislation, said the Chairman of the
Committee, may not require PSAs, but we are in a different situation.
Zhukov warned that the adoption of this chapter of the Tax Code
in its present wording would eliminate the permanent regime of
the PSAs. There are no direct investments [into Russia], capital
outflow does not decrease and a [favourable] investment climate
"has not been created", therefore "it would be
wrong to bury the idea of PSA," added Zhukov. Ivanenko also
drew attention to the fact that two times during the past year
President announced that PSA projects would be a priority. However,
the contradictory statements of representatives of the Presidential
Administration and the government in charge of economic policy
gave cause for concern.
|
