Completion of budget execution operations in the current financial year is carried out in accordance with the procedure established by the financial body (management body of the state off-budget fund) in accordance with the requirements of this article.
2. The completion of operations by the federal treasury bodies for the distribution, in accordance with Article 40 of this Code, of the receipts of the reporting financial year between the budgets of the budgetary system of the Russian Federation and their transfer to the corresponding budgets is carried out on the first five business days of the current financial year. These operations are reflected in the reporting on the execution of budgets of the reporting financial year.
3. Budgetary appropriations, limits of budgetary obligations and limiting volumes of financing of the current financial year cease to be valid on December 31st.
Until the last working day of the current financial year, inclusive, the body providing cash services for the execution of the budget is obliged to pay budgetary obligations authorized for payment in the prescribed manner within the balance of funds on the single budget account.
4. Unused by the recipients of budgetary funds, the balances of budgetary funds that are not on the single account of the budget, no later than the last two working days of the current financial year, are subject to transfer by the recipients of budgetary funds to the single account of the budget.
5. Unused as of January 1 of the current financial year, interbudgetary transfers received in the form of subsidies, subventions and other interbudgetary transfers that have a special purpose, with the exception of interbudgetary transfers, the source of financial support for which is the budgetary appropriations of the reserve fund of the President of the Russian Federation, are subject to return to the budget revenue from which they were previously provided, during the first 15 working days of the current financial year.
(see text in previous edition)
(see text in previous edition)
Adoption by the chief administrator of the funds of the budget of the subject of the Russian Federation (local budget), the budget of the state off-budget fund of the decision on the presence (or absence) of the need for the interbudgetary transfers specified in the first paragraph of this clause that were not used in the reporting financial year, as well as their return to the budget, to which they were previously provided, when a decision is made on the need for them, they are carried out no later than 30 working days from the date of receipt of these funds in the budget from which they were previously provided, in accordance with the report on expenditures of the relevant budget, the source of financial support for which is the indicated interbudget transfers formed and submitted in the manner established by the chief administrator of the budget of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation (local budget), the budget of the state extra-budgetary fund.
(see text in previous edition)
In accordance with the decision of the chief administrator of the budget of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation (local budget), the budget of the state off-budget fund on the need for interbudgetary transfers received in the form of subsidies, subventions and other interbudgetary transfers with a special purpose, with the exception of interbudgetary transfers, a source of financial support which are the budgetary appropriations of the reserve fund of the President of the Russian Federation, not used in the reporting financial year, agreed with the relevant financial authority, the management body of the state extra-budgetary fund in the manner determined by them, funds in an amount not exceeding the balance of these interbudgetary transfers can be returned in the current financial year to the budget revenue to which they were previously provided, for financial support of budget expenditures corresponding to the purposes of providing these interbudgetary transfers.
(see text in previous edition)
The procedure for making decisions provided for in paragraph four of this clause is established by regulatory legal acts of the Government of the Russian Federation, the highest executive body of state power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, municipal legal acts of the local administration regulating the procedure for the return of interbudgetary transfers, respectively, from the budgets of state non-budgetary funds of the Russian Federation, the budgets of constituent entities of the Russian Federation Federation, budgets of territorial state non-budgetary funds, local budgets.
(see text in previous edition)
In the event that the unused balance of interbudgetary transfers received in the form of subsidies, subventions and other interbudgetary transfers with a special purpose, with the exception of interbudgetary transfers, the source of financial support for which is the budgetary appropriations of the reserve fund of the President of the Russian Federation, is not transferred to the income of the corresponding budget, the specified funds are subject to collection to the budget from which they were provided, in the manner determined by the relevant financial body, the management body of the state off-budget fund in compliance with the general requirements established by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.
(see text in previous edition)
Collection of unused interbudgetary transfers provided from the federal budget is carried out in accordance with the procedure established by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.
5.1. The budget allocations of the reserve fund of the Government of the Russian Federation for rendering financial assistance to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation by decision of the Government of the Russian Federation are subject to increase in excess of the volumes provided for by the federal law on the federal budget for the current financial year, within the limits of subsidies not used as of January 1 of the current financial year and other inter-budgetary transfers having a specific purpose, returned to the federal budget revenues and not taken into account when approving the total volume of federal budget revenues.
8. The balances of the federal budget (the budget of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation) in foreign currency formed as of January 1 of the current financial year on accounts opened for the relevant financial body in an authorized organization or other specialized organization performing the functions of a general agent (agent) of the Government of the Russian Federation, a higher of the executive body of state power of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation for servicing state external debt obligations, are not subject to transfer to a single account of the corresponding budget and are used in the first ten days of January of the current financial year to make cash payments.
9. Balances of funds from the federal budget and the budget of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, not used by recipients of budgetary funds, located on special accounts opened in accordance with the terms of agreements with international financial organizations, are not subject to transfer by recipients of budgetary funds to a single budget account and are subject to use by them in the current financial year for the same purposes.
A little explanation. Money is included in the budgets in advance - since the end of the previous year - for the implementation of certain tasks. Each of them is drawn up with a corresponding budget application, for example, for the construction of a school or a kindergarten or for a centralized sewage system, for the purchase of medical equipment for hospitals. All these tasks, in turn, are distributed according to various state programs, for example, health care development - "Densaulyk", infrastructure development - "Nurly Zhol", development of the agro-industrial complex and so on.
There are several dozens of such state programs in Kazakhstan. So, you may not believe it, but in our country, in the state, as a rule, non-utilization of budget funds is revealed in the fall. And these are billions of tenge. Can you imagine?!
That is, there is (were) money, but it was not spent, in the language of officials it is called “not mastered”. Surely you have heard the phrase in the news "budget underutilization amounted to ..."
“Yes, how can this be - they haven’t mastered it ?!” - any zealous housewife will rightly be indignant. Well, if she planned to make repairs in the apartment during the year, update the furniture, buy something from household appliances, set aside money for this, then she will repair, and update, and buy. There can be no doubt about this.
The work of our officials, not all of course, is sometimes less effective. Apparently, the larger the tasks, the more difficult it is to achieve what was planned.
Judge for yourself, at the meeting of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic, held on September 19, the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan Bakhyt Sultanov reported on the results of the execution of the republican budget for 8 months of 2017. A detailed message about this is published on ratel.kz.
According to the minister, as of September 1, 101.6 billion tenge has not been disbursed throughout the country. The "record holder" of non-disbursement of budgetary funds is the Ministry of Health - 20.3 billion tenge. The second place in the list of fines was shared by two ministries - the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Ministry of Culture and Sports. Their administrators have not mastered 9.3 billion tenge each. The top three in terms of non-disbursement of budgetary funds is closed by the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which did not have time to spend 7.9 billion tenge. Oddly enough, the failure to develop the budget for our army is a common thing.
Why is this happening? Bakhyt Sultanov named the reasons: sluggishness of administrators of budget programs, late tender procedures, postponement of their dates, litigation, untimely adoption of regulatory legal acts, delays in the work schedule, adjustment of construction documents and lack of applications for reimbursement for agricultural subsidies. Another reason is insufficient control over the work of contractors on the part of administrators of budget programs.
In our region, the situation with this is also difficult. At one of the recent meetings of the oblakimat, the head of the region, Zhanseit Tuymebaev, called the work of akims of districts and cities, as well as heads of departments for the development of budgetary funds, unsatisfactory. He recalled that one of the main tasks of the head of each institution is the effective and timely use of budget funds.
The amount of the adjusted budget of the South Kazakhstan region was 511.4 billion tenge. According to the results of 9 months of 2017, regional departments did not disburse 209.6 million tenge, and in districts and cities 559.4 million tenge. These data were reported by acting. head of the regional department of finance R. Mulkemanov.
According to him, most of the funds in large volumes have not been disbursed in Shymkent, Saryagash and Sairam regions, as well as regional departments of energy and housing and communal services, physical education and sports. By the way, last year 40 million tenge remained unused in the South Kazakhstan region, including the agricultural administration. Well, tell me, how much use is the money for the fight against locusts, if they have already gobbled up half the crop? Or - until the villagers wait for subsidies and benefits from the state for fuel, seeds, fertilizers, they will be forced to get into extortionate debts ...
For our region, which is subsidized by 80% from the budget, such sluggishness is a bad indicator. Has anyone been held responsible for this? Yes, but, as they say, these are people of the second echelon of power.
… This practice can be eradicated in our country only by strengthening responsibility. For example, Majilis deputy Omarkhan Oksikbaev proposed in March of this year to imprison officials who allowed non-appropriation of money under state programs, LSM.kz reported. To do this, it is necessary to introduce personal responsibility for each budget program.
“For example, if a school has been built somewhere, and it is filled by 30%, but somewhere we really need a school, because children study there in four or five shifts. Those who turned these funds the wrong way should be held accountable. Surely there was self-interest, some calculations. It is necessary to ask the guilty in full, and not just administratively fine 10,000 tenge, since this does not solve anything,” the mazhilisman believes.
Failure to develop the budget is always someone's unfulfilled hopes, first of all, for civilized living conditions. There are villages in our region where there is still no drinking water or natural gas. Let me remind you, outside the window is the second decade of the 21st century.
The 17th session of the regional maslikhat took place last week. On the eve of it, at the meetings of the permanent commissions, the deputies expressed their dissatisfaction with the work of the regional department of energy and housing and communal services. What they are not happy with is unforgivable red tape, inaction on gasification of settlements in Kazygurt, Maktaaral regions, as well as on water supply to the village of Sharapkhana, Kazygurt region, whose residents still carry water in buckets.
Another fact - in the village of Zhartytobe with a population of 30,000, the only polyclinic is in disrepair ... And at the same time, such a fact - at the session, the deputies once again experienced amazement, this time about the urgent allocation of 3 billion 300 million tenge to equip the substation Astana-1 and 2… And where were the program administrators before?! There was a month left until the end of the year.
And finally - the expenditure of the regional budget is controlled by the Audit Commission of the South Kazakhstan region. Her work should be open to us ordinary taxpayers. How, you ask? Known - all current information, minutes of meetings, answers to questions from citizens - all this should be posted on the agency's website.
What do we have? We go to the website of the South Kazakhstan Revolutionary Commission - almost zero useful information. At the same time, on the main page there is a welcoming speech ... by the ex-head of the department, Syrym Shalabai, if you remember, who was caught red-handed for a corruption offense on July 23rd.
Uznik greets website visitors with the words: “We are glad to welcome you… We are waiting for your feedback on the processes taking place in the region, constructive wishes and proposals for improving the efficiency of state audit, resolving urgent problems of South Kazakhstan region…”
And how in fact - effective, rich, interactive such a site should be, can be judged by a similar Internet resource, say, East Kazakhstan, Karaganda and West Kazakhstan regions. There - professionalism, openness, respect for the rights of citizens. We have the same ... Why is this being done? It is a well-known fact that it is always easier to fish in troubled waters.
Farida Sharafutdinova
At the end of last year, the Interdepartmental Coordinating Council for State Financial Control in the Republic of Tatarstan approved the "Conclusion on the results of the analysis and systematization of violations and shortcomings identified by state financial control bodies." About what kind of document this is, says the head of the Control and Auditing Department of the Accounts Chamber of Tatarstan Azat VALEEV.
Undoubtedly, the main task of state control bodies is to identify violations and shortcomings in the financial and budgetary sphere. However, this is only one side of the work of controllers. The second, no less significant, is the prevention of deviations from accepted standards and violations of the norms of laws. It is no secret that in some cases financial violations are committed due to ignorance of the new norms of budget legislation, so preventive and educational work is simply necessary.
In this regard, in control activities, special attention is paid to work aimed at preventing violations. For this purpose, a Conclusion was prepared in Tatarstan, which systematized the most common violations and shortcomings in the activities of budgetary institutions. The conclusion was prepared on the basis of an analysis of the results of audits conducted by the Accounts Chamber, the Department of the Treasury of the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Tajikistan, the territorial departments of the Federal Antimonopoly Service and Rosfinnadzor. This document is intended for managers and accountants of budgetary institutions. It contains over 400 specific examples of characteristic violations and deficiencies. Information about them is systematized in the relevant sections and subsections, in some cases links to regulatory documents are given. Today we will consider typical violations in the execution of the budget in terms of expenditures (Table 1), cases of inappropriate and inefficient use of budget funds (Tables 2, 3), violations in the field of state and municipal procurement (Tables 4, 5), as well as in the implementation construction and repair work (Table 6). For ease of perception of information, all data are summarized in tables.
Table 1 Budget execution by expenditure
|
Violation |
Comments |
|
|
Failure to communicate (untimely communication) to the recipients of budgetary funds of notifications of budgetary appropriations, limits of budgetary obligations |
According to Art. 221 of the Budget Code (as amended, which entered into force on January 1, 2008), the estimate of a budgetary institution is drawn up, approved and maintained in the manner determined by the main manager of budgetary funds in charge of the budgetary institution, in accordance with the general requirements established by the Ministry of Finance RF. General requirements for the procedure for compiling, approving and maintaining budget estimates of a budgetary institution were approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 20, 2007 No. 112n |
|
|
Violation of the established procedure for compiling and approving the budget estimates of a budgetary institution |
||
|
Acceptance of monetary obligations in excess of the adjusted limits of budgetary obligations |
Table 2 Examples of inefficient spending of budget funds
|
Violation (flaws) |
Comments |
|
|
Lack of demand for equipment, inventory and other material assets acquired at the expense of budgetary funds |
The principle of efficiency and effectiveness of the use of budgetary funds is spelled out in Art. 34 of the Budget Code. This principle means that when drawing up and executing budgets, the participants in the budget process, within the framework of the budgetary powers established by them, must proceed from the need to achieve the desired results using the smallest amount of funds or to achieve the best result using the amount of funds determined by the budget. The need for the recipient of budgetary funds to ensure the effectiveness of the use of the budgetary allocations provided for him is also enshrined in Art. 162 of the Budget Code
|
|
|
Payment for design and survey works that do not find practical application in the future |
||
|
Acquisition of goods, works, services for state and municipal needs at prices significantly higher than the average market |
||
|
Distribution of equipment, inventory and other material assets acquired at the expense of budgetary funds, without analyzing the actual need, as a result of which material assets are used inefficiently |
||
|
Formation of overdue receivables, failure to take measures to collect them |
||
|
Acquisition of inventory items that are not required to perform the functions assigned to the institution |
||
|
Non-use for a long time of budgetary funds received on the basis of the application |
||
|
Non-disbursement of budget funds when there is a need for them |
||
|
Purchase of materials, equipment of inadequate quality |
||
|
Payment of penalties (fines) as a result of failure to take measures to pay off accounts payable |
||
|
Failure to take into account the priority and expediency of construction, reconstruction of a particular facility when distributing funds for capital investments, as a result of which the final result of the use of budgetary funds is not achieved |
Table 3 Examples of misuse of budgetary funds
|
Violation |
A comment |
|
|
Use of budgetary funds for purposes that do not meet the conditions for their receipt |
The principle of targeting and targeted nature of budgetary funds is formulated in Art. 38 of the Budget Code. This principle means that budget appropriations and limits of budget obligations are communicated to specific recipients of budget funds, indicating the purpose of their use. Failure to comply with this principle entails misuse of budget funds. |
|
|
Payment for goods, works, services not according to the corresponding budget classification codes |
||
|
Illegal transfer by the recipient of budget funds of balances of funds from budget accounts to an off-budget account or to accounts of legal entities |
||
|
Use of budgetary funds to pay for expenses not provided for by the estimate of income and expenses |
||
|
Use of budgetary funds to pay for expenses that should be carried out at the expense of extrabudgetary sources |
||
|
Use of budgetary funds to pay for works and services not related to the activities of a budgetary institution, to provide financial assistance to commercial and non-profit organizations or to create them |
Table 4 Violations when placing orders
|
Violation |
Examples/Notes |
|
|
Failure to comply with the terms of publication in the official print media and placement on the official website of information on placing orders |
Notice of an open auction was published in the newspaper 11 days before the closing date for filing applications for participation in the auction. According to part 1 of Art. 33 of the Federal Law of July 21, 2005 No. 94-FZ "On placing orders for the supply of goods, performance of work, provision of services for state and municipal needs" (hereinafter - Law No. 94-FZ), a notice of an open auction is published in the official printed publication and posted on the official website at least 20 days before the deadline for filing applications for participation in the auction. There are also facts of untimely posting of trading protocols and requests for quotations on the official website, as well as publication of trading protocols in the official print edition. |
|
|
Discrepancy between the information contained in the tender (auction) documentation and the information specified in the notice of bidding |
There are discrepancies between the tender documentation and the notice posted on the official website regarding the terms for the provision of services: According to part 6 of Art. 22 of Law No. 94-FZ, the information contained in the tender documentation must correspond to the information specified in the notice of an open tender |
|
|
Violations by members of the commissions of the procedure for selecting bidders, request for quotations, unreasonable admission (or refusal to admit) a participant in placing an order to participate in bidding, request for quotations |
The commission allowed to participate in the tender a participant in the placement of an order, which, as part of the application, did not submit an extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. According to part 3 of Art. 25 of Law No. 94-FZ, an application for participation in the tender must contain an extract from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities or a notarized copy of such an extract received no earlier than six months before the date of placement on the official website of the notice of an open tender |
|
|
Establishment in the tender documentation of criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the tender that are not provided for by Law No. 94-FZ |
According to part 4 of Art. 28 of Law No. 94-FZ (as amended on March 1, 2009), in order to determine the best conditions for the execution of a contract offered in bids for participation in the tender, the tender commission must evaluate and compare such bids according to the contract price and other criteria specified in the tender documentation . At the same time, the criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the tender, in addition to the price of the contract, can be: - functional characteristics (consumer properties) or quality characteristics of the goods; – quality of works, services and (or) qualifications of the bidder when placing an order for the performance of works, provision of services; - the cost of operating the product; - the cost of maintenance of the goods; – terms (periods) of delivery of goods, performance of work, provision of services; - the term for providing a guarantee of the quality of goods, works, services; - the volume of providing guarantees for the quality of goods, works, services. According to part 6 of the above article, the use of other criteria for evaluating applications for participation in the competition is not allowed |
|
|
Publication in the official printed publication or posting on the official website on the Internet of information on placing orders, subject to such publication or placement in accordance with the legislation on placing orders, in violation of the requirements of Law No. 94-FZ |
The absence in the notice of an open tender of the quantity of goods supplied, the volume of work performed, services rendered. According to paragraph 4 of part 4 of Art. 21 of Law No. 94-FZ, the notice of an open tender must indicate the subject of the state or municipal contract, indicating the quantity of goods supplied, the volume of work performed, and services rendered. An exception is cases when, during a tender for the right to conclude a state or municipal contract for the maintenance and (or) repair of machinery, equipment, the provision of communication services, legal services, it is impossible to determine the required number of spare parts for machinery, equipment, the amount of work, services . The absence in the tender documentation of the procedure for evaluating and comparing applications for participation in the tender, which does not allow to make the assessment of applications of tender participants objective. According to part 4 of article 22 of Law No. 94-FZ, tender documentation must contain the procedure for evaluating and comparing applications for participation in the tender |
|
|
Establishment of requirements for participants in the placement of an order that are not provided for by Law No. 94-FZ |
The tender documentation for the subject of the tender "maintenance and supply of spare parts for motor vehicles" establishes requirements for participants in placing an order that are not provided for by Law No. 94-FZ. Namely: the organization must have a license for this type of work. However, according to the Federal Law of August 8, 2001 No. 128-FZ “On Licensing Certain Types of Activities”, activities on the subject of the competition are not subject to licensing. Art. 11 of Law No. 94-FZ establishes an exhaustive list of requirements for participants in placing an order during an auction and no one has the right to change or supplement it |
|
|
Conclusion of state and municipal contracts on terms that do not correspond to the bids of bidders and documentation on bidding or the announced terms of the request for quotations |
For example, the terms of the concluded contract regarding the end of the delivery time of the goods and the payment procedure do not correspond to the conditions specified in the auction documentation: |
|
|
The method of placing an order does not comply with the law. Conclusion of state and municipal contracts with a single supplier (executor, contractor) without bidding or requesting quotations |
The method of placing an order with a single supplier was unlawfully chosen when the amount of the order for the supply of goods (works, services) of the same name under one contract or several contracts (and other documents confirming the conclusion of the transaction) during the quarter exceeds the maximum amount of cash settlements. Cases of placing an order with a single supplier (executor, contractor) are established in Art. 55 of Law No. 94-FZ. The method of placing an order by requesting quotations was used, when the amount of contracts for the performance of goods (works, services) of the same name, payable within one quarter, is more than 500 thousand rubles. |
|
|
Non-inclusion of information about state and municipal contracts in the registers of contracts |
Customers do not always send (or send, but untimely) information about contracts, including information about the execution (termination) of the contract to the authorities authorized to maintain a register of state (municipal) contracts. The procedure for entering information into the registers of contracts, as well as the procedure for maintaining registers, is established by Art. 18 of Law No. 94-FZ, Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 27, 2006 No. 807 |
|
|
Absence of a local legal act that determines the procedure for the work of commissions for placing orders |
According to part 2 of Art. 7 of Law No. 94-FZ, the customer, the authorized body must decide on the creation of a commission for placing orders, determine its composition (including the chairman) and the procedure for working |
|
|
Absence (improper maintenance) of the register of purchases made without the conclusion of state and municipal contracts |
According to Art. 73 of the Budget Code, budgetary institutions are required to maintain registers of purchases made without the conclusion of state (municipal) contracts, which must contain the following information: - short name of the purchased goods, works and services; – name and location of suppliers, contractors and service providers; – price and date of purchase |
Table 5 Execution of state and municipal contracts
|
Violation |
Examples/Notes |
|
|
Unlawful change in the terms of state (municipal) contracts |
In contracts, the quantity (volume) of goods (works, services) and, accordingly, the price per unit, the timing of delivery of goods (performance of works, services) are illegally changed |
|
|
Exceeding the established advance payment limit |
According to the opinion of the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia (Letter of May 2, 2007 No. 6121-ASH / D04 "On measures to prevent adverse consequences from the actions of unscrupulous suppliers (contractors, performers) under state and municipal contracts"), the establishment of advance payments under state or municipal contracts is the right, but not the obligation of the customer, the authorized body (unless otherwise provided by the legislation of the Russian Federation). Taking into account the fact that obtaining an advance payment is in some cases the main purpose of concluding a contract by an unscrupulous supplier (contractor, performer), the need to transfer an advance payment should be carefully analyzed in each specific case. |
|
|
Violations of the terms of state (municipal) contracts, both on the part of suppliers (contractors, performers), and on the part of customers |
For example: - untimely payment by the customer for the delivered goods, work performed, services rendered; - delivery and acceptance of goods according to characteristics, quantity and prices that do not comply with the terms of the contract; – violation of the terms of delivery of goods, performance of work, provision of services established by the contract |
|
|
Lack of control on the part of the customer over the fulfillment of obligations under contracts. Non-claims to suppliers (contractors, performers) who violated the terms of the contract |
In case of improper fulfillment of the terms of the contract, customers do not always make claims to the contractor for damages and payment of penalties for each day of delay in case of non-compliance with the deadline for delivery of work established by the terms of the contract |
Table 6 Repair and construction and installation works
|
Violation |
|
|
Financing of capital investments in the absence of approved design and estimate documentation |
|
|
Overstatement of the physical volume of work (including payment for work and costs that were not actually carried out), repeated payment for the same work |
|
|
Payment by the customer of works and costs not provided for by the contract and design and estimate documentation |
|
|
Non-compliance by the contractor with design solutions (non-compliance with the technology of work, unreasonable replacement of one type of material with another, failure to perform certain hidden works) |
|
|
Overestimation of costs for unforeseen work, costs for the construction of temporary buildings and structures, additional costs when performing work in winter |
|
|
Payment by the customer of the cost of materials in acts of completed work without confirmation of the actual cost in the case when their cost exceeds the average regional prices, which does not correspond to paragraph 4.24 of the Methodology for determining the cost of construction products in the Russian Federation, approved by the Decree of the Gosstroy of Russia dated March 5, 2004 No. 15/1 |
|
|
Carrying out under the guise of current and major repairs of capital works (reconstruction) |
|
|
Non-compliance of contracts with the requirements of the law (violation of paragraph 2 of Article 743 of the Civil Code: the construction contract does not include a condition on the composition and content of technical documentation for construction and conditions on which of the parties and within what time period is obliged to submit the specified documentation; the procedure and terms for providing quality assurance and terms for detecting hidden flaws in constructed facilities) |
|
|
Conclusion of contracts (agreements) with contractors that do not have a license to carry out the relevant work |
|
|
Non-observance of the normative duration of construction, determined by the project documentation |
|
|
Operation of the building without an acceptance certificate of the completed facility by the acceptance committee, signed by representatives of the State Construction Supervision Authority and other interested bodies, permission to put the facility into operation, which may pose a danger to human life and health |
Review January 2014 - May 2015
1. Payment for the services of third-party organizations for the implementation of construction control if the state of the recipient of budgetary funds has a specialist who is entrusted with the responsibility for monitoring the quality and volume of construction, installation and repair work of contractors for compliance with design estimates, recognized by the court as inefficient use of budgetary funds. funds
In favor of the auditor
In the course of the audit, inefficient spending of federal budget funds was established, expressed in the fact that the effectiveness of the use of the envisaged budgetary appropriations in the amount of 112,954 rubles was not ensured, since in the presence of a chief expert specialist whose job responsibilities include monitoring the quality and volume of construction installation and repair work of contractors for compliance with design and estimate documentation, the recipient of budgetary funds in 2012 incurred expenses under contracts for the provision of construction control services to third parties.
The court came to the conclusion that these expenses are not a given result of the activity of a public institution and the expenses for these needs are inefficient.
(Source: decision 15 AAC dated 03/02/2015 in case N A32-22966 / 2014)
II. Inefficient use of property
1. The write-off of equipment before the expiration of the warranty period was carried out by the recipient of budgetary funds on the basis of the conclusion of an employee of an organization that is not an authorized service center of the manufacturer. In addition, when substantiating the inexpediency of further operation of the equipment, the estimated cost of restoring the equipment (its parts) was not determined. Under such circumstances, the decision to write off property may be considered unreasonable.
In favor of the auditor
The equipment was purchased by the recipient of budgetary funds with a guarantee of service by authorized service centers. According to the judges, within the framework of the service life, the warranty period of the manufacturer and the seller, if there are authorized service centers specializing with the support of the manufacturer in the repair of devices, only an authorized service center of the manufacturer can act as a proper expert in resolving the issue of equipment malfunction and the inappropriateness of its repair. . The absence of such a service center in the locality where the public sector organization is located is not an obstacle for this organization to exercise its rights and fulfill its obligations for the proper operation and write-off of property.
In addition, the judges point out that when experts substantiate the impossibility of operating the decommissioned equipment (its parts) and the inexpediency of repairing the equipment (its parts), the relevant documents should contain information:
1) on the qualifications and experience of the experts who conducted the study;
2) about the method of investigating faulty equipment;
3) about the causes of breakdowns;
4) about the estimated cost of restoration repairs (if there is a possibility of restoring the equipment to working capacity).
Failure to comply with the above conditions indicates that the write-off of equipment due to the inexpediency of its repair is unreasonable.
(Source: decision of the Arbitration Court of the Kemerovo Region of March 18, 2015 in case N A27-22731 / 2014, decision 7 of the AAC of May 29, 2015 N 07AP-4287 / 15)
Review for 2013
I. Inefficient use of budget funds
1. An overestimation of the estimated cost made by the developer and the general contractor was established due to the inconsistency of the applied unit prices with the work production technology, which was recognized by the court as inefficient spending of budgetary funds.
In favor of the auditor
In the course of the audit of the technical specifications of Rosfinnadzor, facts of illegal payment for work at the expense of the federal budget of the recipient of budget funds (hereinafter referred to as the institution) under the state contract dated 12/11/2009 were revealed. It is prescribed to take actions to ensure the return to the federal budget of illegally paid work under the contract.
According to the conclusion on the correctness of the application of building codes and prices in the preparation of estimate documentation for the estimates of the object, an overestimation of the estimated cost according to KS-3 was established. An analysis of overstatements made by the developer and the general contractor during construction shows that overstatements were made mainly due to the inconsistency of the applied unit prices with the work production technology. So, when laying road slabs for improvement, the rates of airfield construction were applied, and when making floors in warehouses, the rates of monolithic foundations were applied. About 25% of overstatements were made due to incorrectly applied prices for building materials. The prices for non-metallic materials sand and crushed stone, for waterproofing mastic, rails and other materials are too high. The uncompleted work included in the act of control measurement is 15%. In the acts of work performed, coefficients for tightness and dismantling of the roof are unreasonably included. Overestimation was allowed in case of non-compliance with the technology for performing finishing work in warehouses.
Thus, in violation of Art. 162 of the RF BC, articles 309, of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation under a state contract for the performance of work by an institution at the expense of the federal budget, work was unlawfully paid for, including: actually unfulfilled work, work at an inflated estimated cost, the application of multiplying factors for construction work, discrepancy between the applied prices to the technology of the work performed, soil transportation.
The court found justified the conclusions of the TU Rosfinnadzor on the inefficiency of spending budget funds, since in this case the tasks assigned to the participant in the budget process could be completed using a smaller amount of funds. The challenged order is lawful and justified both in law and in size.
(Source: Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated December 23, 2013 N F07-7389/13 and decision of the Arbitration Court of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region dated March 29, 2013 in case N A56-49514/2012)
2. Overestimation of the contract price as a result of the unlawful application of the coefficient when calculating additional costs for the increase in the cost of work in winter due to the incorrect application of the provisions of the regulatory act confirms that the tasks assigned to the recipient of funds could be completed using a smaller amount of funds.
In favor of the auditor
TU Rosfinnadzor audited certain issues of financial and economic activities of the UKS administration for the period from 01/01/2011 to 12/31/2011. The fact of inefficient (uneconomical) use of the funds of the interbudgetary transfer, which has a designated purpose, is revealed. On August 20, 2012, it was proposed to take measures to prevent further inefficient (uneconomical) use of funds.
The UKS administration awarded municipal construction contracts. It was established that payments under contracts were made at inflated prices, due to the unlawful application of a coefficient of 1.7 when calculating additional costs for increasing the cost of work in violation of the provisions of the "Collection of estimated norms for additional costs in the production of construction and installation works in winter GSN 81-05-02- 2007" because the scope of work does not provide for external engineering networks, landscaping and landscaping.
Loans came to the conclusion about the legitimacy of the conclusion of the Rosfinnadzor department about the inefficient (uneconomical) use of funds. The reference of the applicant of the cassation appeal to the execution of the municipal contract within the price established by the terms of the contract was rejected, since the courts established that the tasks assigned to the applicant could be performed using a smaller amount of funds.
(Source: Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District of July 24, 2013 N Ф03-3180/13)
3. Sources of information on prices for products can be not only the data of state statistical reporting. Advance payments by themselves cannot be regarded as an inefficient use of the regional budget. Paragraph 2 of Art. 53 of the Town Planning Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for the right of the customer to control the cost of building materials purchased by the developer and to demand documents confirming it.
in favor of the verifiable
In 2012, the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC) conducted an audit of the effectiveness of the activities and use of budgetary funds of the recipient of budgetary funds (municipal medical budgetary institution) for the period 2010-2011. Based on the results of the audit, inefficient use of funds was revealed, a proposal was made to eliminate violations, the institution was asked to recover from contractors the damage caused to the budget in 2011, and to refund funds to the appropriate budgets (according to the source of funding).
In 2011, the institution purchased food products. In the course of the audit, the KSP carried out a selective comparative analysis of prices, only according to the data of the state statistics department for the city of Samara, and concluded that the purchase of food at prices above the average market (retail) by an average of 18.6%. The courts noted that the sources of information on prices for products can be not only state statistical reporting data, but also official websites, registers of contracts; information on producer prices, publicly available results of market research, market research conducted at the initiative of the customer (authorized body), including under a contract or civil law contract, other sources of information, taking into account such conditions taken into account when calculating the contract price, such as: (periods) of delivery of goods (works, services); place of delivery of goods (works, services); terms and conditions of payment for the supply of goods (works, services), etc.
In December 2011, the institution received invoices for payment of advances for heat supply, water supply and sanitation for the specified period. Payment was made in strict accordance with the invoices received. As a result of accruals made by suppliers on the actual consumption of utilities (resources), an overpayment was established at the end of the month, which was reflected in invoices for December 2011, January-February 2012 and, accordingly, the expenses of the institution for 2012 decreased. The PCB noted that the Institution violated the requirements of the decision of the Duma of the city district, according to which recipients of budgetary funds have the right to provide advance payments in the amount of 100% of the cost of services for December 2011 under contracts for the provision of utility services. The courts pointed out that advance payments in themselves cannot be regarded as an inefficient use of budget funds.
In 2010-2011 budgetary funds for major and current repairs were transferred to the institution on the basis of municipal contracts and agreements concluded with contractors, where the price was determined in a fixed amount; acceptance certificates for the work performed were signed by the institution and its contractors without comments or claims and fully comply with the estimate agreed by the parties. The PCB noted that as a result of violations of paragraph 2 of Art. 53 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, requirements for maintaining as-built documentation, budget funds were inefficiently used. The following violations were identified: reflection of an excessive amount of materials, volumes of work that were not actually performed, overestimation of the cost of materials and work as a result of incorrect application of prices (overestimation of standards and prices for materials and work), replacement of materials with cheaper, low-quality supplied materials and work performed, inefficient use of budgetary funds, expressed in the absence of confirmation of the cost of materials by waybills indicated in the acts of work performed.
The court indicated that paragraph 2 of Art. 53 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not provide for the right of the customer to control the cost of building materials purchased by the developer and to demand documents confirming it.
The courts stated that the PCB did not provide evidence that the institution went beyond the limits of its powers when concluding contracts; inefficient use of budgetary funds; that the targets set for the execution of municipal contracts for the repair of premises could have been achieved using less funds or a better result could have been achieved.
(Source: Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District dated July 25, 2013 N Ф06-6033/13)
4. Responsibility for the initially incorrectly set maximum price, from which the competitive countdown began, and the excess expenditure of budgetary funds shall be borne by the person responsible for the development of estimate documentation and its approval.
A state contract (contract) dated March 16, 2009 was concluded between the Department for Capital Repairs of the Housing Stock (Department) and JSC (Company) for the performance of works on capital repairs of an apartment building. As a result of the verification of the facts of inefficient use of budgetary funds as a result of the execution of the state contract, carried out by the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC), an overestimation of the control volumes of work was revealed. This amount is claimed to be recovered from the company as unjust enrichment.
The court established that the company completed the work stipulated by the contract and handed it over to the state customer in the prescribed manner, which is not disputed. The results of the work were accepted without comments on the volume and quality, paid for, in connection with which, the court concluded that the argument that the defendant overestimated the cost of the work was unlawful.
The argument about the overestimation of the cost of work, identified in 2011 by the PSC based on the results of verification of the facts of inefficient use of budgetary funds as a result of the execution of the contract, was rejected. By virtue of the provisions of Federal Law N 94-FZ of July 21, 2005, the state contract concluded as a result of the tender must comply with the draft contract attached to the tender documentation and include the conditions proposed by the winner or the sole participant. Changing the tender documentation, including the draft contract, is possible only in the manner prescribed by the Federal Law. The initial (maximum) price of the contract (price of the lot) and the local estimate attached to the tender documentation are developed and approved by the authorized body (customer). Participants in placing orders do not participate in the formation of the initial (maximum) contract price (lot price) and the preparation of a local estimate. The price of the contract is fixed and cannot change during its execution. Federal Law N 94-FZ establishes an exhaustive list of conditions when the contract price can be changed.
The Company signed the contract and the estimates attached to it in the form in which they were included in the tender documentation, and followed the specified estimate when performing work and drawing up a work acceptance certificate.
The company is not a participant in the budget process, and if improper rates are applied by the department, it should not bear adverse consequences for itself. Responsibility for the initially incorrectly set maximum price, from which the competitive countdown began, and the excess expenditure of budgetary funds shall be borne by the person responsible for the development of the estimate documentation and its approval.
(Source: Decree of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated October 30, 2013 N F05-12874/13)
5. During the implementation of control and expert-analytical activities, the PCB is not entitled to assess compliance with the provisions of other branches of legislation regulating public and private legal relations. The fact of non-fulfillment of work for the period of the PSC control measure is not a basis for imposing the obligation to restore the subsidy funds to the budget and recover funds from the contractor.
in favor of the verifiable
In the period from 05/11/2012 to 06/28/2012, the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC) conducted an audit of the expenditure of budget funds for the overhaul of the dam, during which it was revealed that, in violation of Art. 34 of the RF BC, the Administration of the municipal district (Administration) does not ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of the use of budgetary funds. By submitting the PCB, it was proposed that the Administration carry out the implementation of municipal contracts related to the conduct of water management works, after the contractor receives a decision to provide a water body for use (clause 1); when placing municipal orders for construction and overhaul, include in the auction documentation the design and estimate documentation in full (clause 2); in municipal contracts for the performance of construction control services, provide for measures of financial responsibility of the contractor for accepting inflated volumes and (or) costs of work (clause 3); to exclude the facts of acceptance of overestimated volumes and costs of construction and repair work (clause 4); complete work on the recognition of the right of municipal ownership of a hydraulic structure (clause 5); to restore to the regional budget the subsidy funds used to pay for the overestimated volume of work on the overhaul of the dam (cleaning the river bed at a distance of 130 m with loading and hauling; received by the contractor (clause 6).
The courts, having analyzed the powers of the PCB, defined by Federal Law N 6-FZ, as well as the Law of the Vologda Region of July 12, 2011 N 2574-OZ, came to the conclusion that paragraphs 1-5 of the disputed submission were invalid, as being made outside the competence of the PCB, noting that in the course of carrying out control and expert-analytical activities, the PCB is not entitled to assess compliance with the provisions of other branches of legislation regulating public and private legal relations.
No violations in the spending of budgetary funds due to the conduct of water management works, the inclusion of design and estimate documentation in the auction documentation and municipal contracts for the performance of construction control services of measures of financial responsibility of the contractor, as well as the acceptance of the scope and cost of work during the control measure were not identified , and the right of municipal ownership of the real estate object "Glebovskaya dam" was recognized by the decision of the district court of 14.06.2012.
The loading of the dam rows with stone was completed in June 2012, and the fact that these works were not completed before 12/20/2011 and for the period of the PSC control measure is not a basis for imposing on the Administration the obligation to restore subsidy funds to the budget and recover funds from the contractor.
The ninth spring session of the Sakhalin Regional Duma began with a joint meeting of two committees - on social policy and budget and taxes. It considered the report of the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC) on the results of the audit of the use of budgetary funds aimed at the implementation of the subprogram to improve the quality and accessibility of preschool education within the framework of the relevant state program for 2014 and nine months of 2015.
The regional Ministry of Education, the relevant subdivisions of the local authorities of Kholmsky, Tymovsky, Nogliksky districts, Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk, as well as some preschool institutions, were subjected to an audit, for the purpose of efficient use of budgetary funds. In general, it was revealed that the main tasks of the subprogram correspond to the directions of the state policy in the field of education, determined by the strategy of social and economic development of the Sakhalin region for the period up to 2025.
At the end of 2014, the indicator "accessibility of pre-school education at the age of 3 to 7 years" reached 100 percent, i.e. all children of this age are provided with places in kindergartens. At the same time, it was noted that some municipalities, in the absence of a need for subventions, did not make timely proposals to reduce planned allocations, which did not allow the Ministry of Education to reallocate budget funds for other purposes. As a result, by the end of 2014, 83 million rubles. remained unclaimed. The amounts intended for the implementation of educational programs in short stay groups for children of preschool age were not used in full. Unclaimed funds were returned to the budget.
In addition, there was a violation of the deadlines for the commissioning of two kindergartens in the Nogliki and Kholmsky urban districts.
As a result, the report of the PCB was taken into account. However, the deputies noted several problems that have been waiting for a solution for a long time. In particular, the delivery of children to kindergartens from remote populated villages and towns. Bus service there is not regular, and therefore mothers are forced to stay at home with their children, at a time when there are places in city kindergartens, new preschool institutions are being built.
It was also noted that it was unacceptable not to use budgetary funds in the conditions of a budget deficit. To do this, it is necessary to identify priority areas and strengthen control over their effective use.
At the same time, committee members noted with satisfaction that the "Warm windows" subprogram was successfully implemented. Now it's time to take on the facades of preschool institutions.
In addition, according to the deputies, it is already now necessary to think about a problem that may arise very soon - the lack of school places, because today's kindergarteners will soon transfer to school desks, and their number remains at the level of the 90s, when the country had a period of demographic recession.
