WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 22 | 23 || 25 | 26 |   ...   | 28 |

Section Monetary and Budgetary Spheres Fig. 4. The structure of the investment portfolio of the GAM, as of the end of Q III Investments by the GAM. The share of investments in RF external loan bonds in the GAMs investment portfolio during the year 2009 ied between 0.7 and 1.1 %. The share of the main instrument in which the GAM invests pension savings (RF domestic government loan bonds) dropped from 96.4 % at the years beginning to 78.7 % as of the end of Q III.

From the point of view of the pension saving investment pattern displayed by the GAM, Q IV was the most interesting period - as in Q III the normative base for investing pension savings had undergone a few changes. Some amendments were made to FZ-111 On the Investment of Funds to Finance the Funded part of the Labor Pension in the Russian Federation, whereby the set of instruments available for investing pension savings was expanded, including the investment of pension savings created in the name of those insured persons who had not made their choice of an asset manager.

The pension savings held in trust management by the GAM were divided into two portfolios: the default option; and the more conservative option for those related persons who wish to limit their investments by government securities. They had to submit the applications to this effect before the end of September. Due to absence of any large-scale campaign aimed at explaining the details of such an arrangement, the number of actually submitted applications was small, and so less than 1 bn Rb was transferred to the GAMs conservative investment portfolio. Thus, the bulk of pension savings was concentrated in the default investment portfolio (the so-called general portfolio), the choices of permitted types of instruments for which have been expanded from November 2009 onwards.

By the end of 2009 the expanded investment portfolio continued to be dominated by government securities: their share amounted to 80.5 %. The share of the new instruments was approximately 6 % (the bonds of Russian economic societies 1.6 %, mortgage bonds 2.1 %, Rb-denominated bank deposits 1.4 %). At the same time, the share of while the share of monies kept on credit institutions accounts declined only slightly by comparison with the end of Q III and amounted to approximately 12.8 %.

Investments by PAMs. The dynamics of the Russian stock market in 2009 was on the whole favorable for investing pension savings. As shown by the MICEX index, growth over the year amounted to 122 %. During Q I 2009, growth on the share market as demonstrated RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks by the MICEX 10 index1 was 23 %, which was to have a positive impact on the dynamics of the value of assets held by those PAMs that had a relatively high percentage of shares in their investment portfolios, and so decided not to register their losses. However, in the aggregate investment portfolio of PAMs the percentage of shares increased at a far lower rate than it would have been in the event of the asset managers preserving shares in their portfolios. If the data shown in Fig. 5 and 6 are compared, it can be seen that the percentage of shares in their aggregate investment portfolio during that period increased by only 1.2 p.p.

Among the fixed income instruments, the most substantial drop over Q I 2009 was demonstrated by the share of corporate bonds (from 43.2 to 40.8 %), the share of subfederal bonds also declined. At the same time, asset managers increased their investments in rubledenominated RF government securities, the share of which on the average grew from 4.8 to 5.2 %. However, the greatest growth was demonstrated by the share of other assets, the bulk of which is constituted by monies kept in broker accounts. The share of bank deposits dropped in Q I by 1.3 p.p.

securities Municipal bonds 4.8 % 2.9 % Other Deposits Monies in accounts at 7.0 % Subfederal bonds 9.5 % credit institutions 3.13.7 % % Bonds of Russian economic societies Shares 43.2 % 15.1 % Fig. 5. The structure of the investment portfolios of private asset managers, as of the end of The MICEX 10 index, while being a more narrow parameter of the stock markets dynamics (MICEX and RTS indices), is nevertheless due to its composition better suited to reflect the changes in prices of those shares in which pension savings can be invested. Besides, in contrast to the RTS index, it is estimated on the basis of ruble-denominated prices. However, not all of the companies encompassed by this index are included in the top quotations lists of Russian stock exchanges, and so some of them are not available for investing pension savings in.

Section Monetary and Budgetary Spheres Fig. 6. The structure of the investment portfolios of private asset managers, as of the end of Q I 2009.

RF government securities Other 5.2 % Monies in accounts at credit Municipal bonds 7.7 % Deposits institutions 26.5 % 2.2 % Subfederal bonds 5.6 % 10.8 % Bonds of Russian economic societies 29.1 % Shares 13.0 % Fig. 7. The structure of the investment portfolios of private asset managers, as of the end of Q II RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks RF government securities Monies in accounts at Other 5.2 % credit institutions 26.Deposits 7.7 % % 5.6 % Subfederal bonds 10.8 % Municipal bonds 2.2 % Shares Bonds of Russian 19.9 % economic societies 38.9 % Fig. 8. The structure of the investment portfolios of private asset managers, as of the end of Q III By the end of Q III the share of equities in the aggregate investment portfolio held by PAMs increased to 19.9 % (against 15.1 % at the years beginning). Simultaneously, PAMs continued to increase their investments in federal debt bonds (whose share over three quarters rose from 4.8 to 7.7 %). At the same time, the share of corporate bonds somewhat declined (from 43.2 to 38.9 %), as did that of bank deposits (from 9.5 to 6.2 %).

At the years end, the structure of the investment portfolios held by PAMs began to be influenced to a certain extent by the alterations introduced in legislation on investing pension savings in Q III IV 2009 (Table 3).

Table Permitted assets and the upper limits established for the investment portfolio of an asset manager selected by an insured person Restriction on percentage Assets of assets, upper limit Government securities of the Russian Federation No Government securities of subjects of the Russian Federation and municipal bonds Bonds of Russian economic societies Shares of Russian issuers Mortgage securities issued under legislation on mortgage securities Deposits and monies in bank accounts Stakes (equities, shares) in index investment funds that invest in securities of foreign issuers Bonds of international financial institutions Section Monetary and Budgetary Spheres Other quantitative limits Assets Restriction, upper limit Securities of one issuer or a group of related issuers, with the exception of government securities of the Russian 10 % of assets Federation, securities issued against government guarantees of the Russian Federation, and mortgage securities Deposits with credit institutions and securities issued by those credit institutions 25 % of assets Securities issued by entities affiliated with the asset manager and the specialized depositary 10 % of assets Deposits with credit institutions affiliated with the asset manager 20 % of assets Shares of one issuer 10 % of issuer capitalization Bonds of one issuer, with the exception of government securities of the Russian Federation, securities issued 20 % of aggregate volume against government guarantees of the Russian Federation, and mortgage securities of issuers bonds in circulation Securities of one issuer in the aggregate investment portfolio, with the exception of government securities of the 50 % of aggregate volume Russian Federation, securities issued against government guarantees of the Russian Federation, and mortgage secu- of one issuers securities in rities circulation Rate of return on investments By the results of Q I 2009, the rate of return on the pension savings invested by the GAM was found to be negative ( 7.2 %), which can be explained mainly by the unfavorable dynamics of prices for RF domestic loan bonds during that period. However, if a longer period is looked at, the overall rate of return on the pension savings invested by the GAM remained positive. The maximum period for which the PFRs published data are available is three years. Over that time, the mean annual rate of return on the GAMs investments was 2.9 %. A higher result over the same period could be demonstrated only by six of the PAMs investment portfolios.

By the results of Q II 2009, the rate of return, in nominal terms, on the pension savings by the GAM once again became positive (3,2 % per annum in the half-year), mainly due to the favorable dynamics of prices for RF domestic loan bonds over that period. Reevaluation of securities yielded in Q II a sum of 9.5 bn Rb, coupon income on OFZ amounted to 1.6 bn Rb.

The rate of return on the GAMs investments over the three first quarters of last year amounted to 4.1 % per annum, and over three years to 3.4 %. Thus, VEB was pushed to 21st place among the investment portfolios of the asset managers investing pension savings under trust management agreements with the PFR (by the results of the year 2008, VEB was the 8th by this index, having demonstrated a rate of return of 3.7 %).

By the results of Q III 2009, PAMs mainly demonstrated a higher rate of return on their investments than the GAM did. By the results of Q I, negative rates of return were shown by only three PAMs, one of which (FB AVGUST UK) had only just begun to operate as a trust manager of pension savings. The rates of return displayed by the others varied from 7 to 88.% per annum. The mean index was 32 % per annum1.

The rate of return on the investments made by PAMs in the first half-year 2009 was on the average 34.4 % per annum. As seen by the results of the three-year period, 33 PAMs once again displayed a positive rate of return in nominal terms. In Q III 2009, the results of invest Relative to the average value of net assets as estimated in accordance with the requirements stipulated in Article 16 of the Federal Law On the Investment of Funds to Finance the Funded Part of the Labor Pension in the Russian Federation.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks ing by PAMs changed only slightly. In the period from the years beginning, for 36 companies their negative results of the previous three years were replaced by positive results. It should be noted that the investment portfolios of the leaders by the rate of return levels belonged to the category of medium-sized and small (while the average sum of managed assets as of the end of Q III was 231 mln Rb, the size of assets in the investment portfolios displaying the highest rates of return over the three previous years varied from 124 mln Rb (UK Portfelnye investitsii [Portfolio investments] to 3 mln Rb (the conservative investment portfolio of Trinfiko) (Fig. 4).

Table The asset managers with the highest rates of return on pension savings investments Rate of return on pension savings investments, % per annum Place held by results of first three quarters Asset manager of 2009 over 3 years (Q IV over 12 months (Q IV over Q III 2006 Q III 2009) 2008 Q III 2009) 1 Otkrytie 11.44 30.38 20.2 Portfelnye investitsii 9.82 94.08 41.3 8.99 135.16 57.Trinfiko, long-term growth IP* 4 8.85 71.22 38.TrinfikoK, balanced IP 5 7.4 21.73 13.TRINFIKO, conservative IP 21 Vneshekonombank 3.41 4.08 1.* IP investment portfolio.

2.4.11. The Market for Municipal and Subfederal Borrowing The Dynamic of the Advancement of the Market Russias 2009 consolidated regional budget and budgets of the territorial government extrabudgetary funds combined posted a Rb. 329.3bn deficit equaling 0.84% of GDP. When compared with the 2008 figures, the amount of the regional consolidate budget deficit surged relative to GDP seven-fold (the 2008 deficit of the territorial budgets accounted for Rb. 48.bn, or 0.12% of GDP).

The RF Subjects 2009 budgets combined reported a Rb.276.9 bn deficit, urban entities a 39.7bn- worth deficit, the intracity urban entities of the city of Moscow and St. Petersburg 0.07bn, budgets of municipal districts 18.9 bn., while budgets of urban and rural settlements posted a surplus of Rb 6.2bn. The respective figures of the year of 2008 were: for the RF Subjects deficit of Rb. 38.2bn, for urban entities deficit of 13.2 bn, the city of Moscow and St.

Petersburg surplus of 0.1bn, municipal districts deficit of 2.7 bn, urban and rural settlements surplus of 5.2bn.

Section Monetary and Budgetary Spheres Table Surplus (Deficit) of Territorial Budgets to Budget Expenditure Ratio (as %) Consolidated regional budget Regional budgets* 2009 5.3 5.2008 0.7 0.2007 0.8 0.2006 3.7 4.2005 1.6 2.2004 1.1 1.2003 2.6 2.2002 2.7 3.* With account of the government extrabudgetary funds.

Source: calculations by IET on the basis of the Russian Ministry of Finance data.

Table Surplus (Deficit) of Territorial Budgets to Budget Expenditures Ratio in 20072009 (as %) Budgets of the intracity urban Budgets of urban Budgets of urban enti- Budgets of municipal Year entities of the city of Moscow and and rural settleties districts St. Petersburg ments 2009 0.63 3.32 1.88 2.2008 1.47 1.09 0.26 2.2007 5.34 1.23 0.04 2.Source: calculations by IET on the basis of the RF MinFin data.

As of January 2010, as many as 61 Subjects of RF reported deficit of their consolidated budgets (in 2008 45 regions) worth a total of Rb. 377.9 bn, or 7.8% of the revenues part of the respective budgets (in 2008 132.7 bn., or 3.1%).

The median level of the budget deficit accounted 6.4% to revenues to a respective budget.

The greatest budget deficit to the revenue part of the budget ratio was noted in Astrakhan oblast 16.7%, Vologda oblast 16.1%, Nizhny Novgorod oblast 15.2%, Republic of North Ossetia (Alania) 14.9%, the city of Moscow 14.4%. Over a half (53.4%) of the aggregate deficit fell on 5 Subjects of the Federation: the city of Moscow 38.6%, or Rb 145.bn, Krasnoyarsk Krai 4.4%, or 16.5bn., Nizhny Novgorod oblast 3.9%, or 14.8bn, Moscow oblast 3.7%, or 12.4bn, and Republic of Tatarstan - 3.2%, or Rb12,1 bn. (Table. 5).

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 22 | 23 || 25 | 26 |   ...   | 28 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .