WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 93 | 94 || 96 | 97 |   ...   | 115 |

To legal entities for using To farms and husbandpersonal subsidiary farmin industrial and other ries and to other agriculbuilding individual homes ing, gardening and anispecial purposes tural organization Federal mal breeding Districts outside in residen- outside in residen- outside in residen- outside in residential residential tial bor- residential tial bor- residential tial bor- residential boroughs boroughs oughs boroughs oughs boroughs oughs boroughs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Russian 58.10 6.39 34.15 4.62 162.57 13.48 3.92 1.Federation 2009/2008 0.49 0.72 2.86 0.82 3.50 1.94 0.13 1. Central Fed- 39.35 3.92 56.88 6.57 963.76 13.66 5.49 1.eral District 2009/2008 0.54 0.51 3.51 0.76 20.39 0.84 0.08 1.North-Western 125.09 8.21 47.78 4.08 15.11 29.62 0.99 0.Federal District 0.21 0.88 1.15 0.43 0.46 6.03 0.25 0.2009/ State (National) Report about the status and use of land in the Russian Federation in 2009 the RF Ministry of Economic Development, Federal Service of State Registration.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks (continued) table 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Southern 135.76 0.44 121.43 2.76 160.71 10.62 2.27 7.(combined) Federal District 2009/2008 1.04 0.00 5.70 1.42 1.89 2.27 0.36 16. Southern 26.49 0.44 16.66 2.59 16.23 8.78 0.93 7.Federal District 2009/ Northern- 109.27 0.00 104.77 0.17 144.48 1.84 1.34 0.Caucasus Federal District Privolzhsky 22.75 18.76 9.53 9.52 32.93 40.05 1.11 0.Federal District 2009/2008 0.96 2.19 1.87 0.98 0.81 12.48 0.21 0. Urals Federal 52.27 2.04 5.35 2.33 44.21 5.53 1.47 0.District 2009/2008 3.15 2.83 4.05 4.31 1.54 4.57 0.78 3. Siberia Fed- 38.13 17.72 6.11 5.25 38.81 6.02 0.60 0.eral District 2009/2008 0.88 43.22 1.20 0.75 0.91 0.93 1.22 0.Far-East 51.45 0.00 26.08 6.43 45.00 2.37 19.38 0.Federal District 2009/2008 4.52 0.00 7.81 64.30 1.85 1.74 193.80 5.Source: Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastral Records and Cartography In 2009 the area of land plots at pawn (mortgaged) increased 2.17 times versus 2008, and the number of transactions increased by 31.64% (Fig. 3). The average area of mortgaged land plot increased from 13.9 ha up to 20.56 ha.

1000 50 900 45 800 40 700 35 600 30 024 30 25 500 25 400 20 300 15 14 200 10 7 100 5 0 2005 2 006 2 007 2 008 2 Area, thousand ha Number of transactions Source: Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastral Records and Cartography.

Fig. 3. Dynamics of land mortgage thousand ha number of transactions Section 6.

Institutional Problems In 2009 the area of mortgaged land plots in Russia was on the average of 0.68% of the total area of privately owned land (by individuals and legal entities) compare vs. 0.31% in (Fig. 4). The majority of land plots mortgaged in 2009 (86.88%) are agricultural lands (85.55% in 2008).

140000 1,4% 120000 1,2% 100000 1,0% 80000 0,8% 60000 0,6% 40000 0,4% 20000 0,2% 0 0,0% Land owned by individuals and legal entities Area, thousand ha % Number of transactions % Source: Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastral Records and Cartography Fig. 4. Land mortgage by Federal Districts According to Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastral Records and Cartography, in 2010 the number of registry entries with regards to real property and transactions therewith increased by 4%. The Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastral Records and Cartography made 26 mln entries. The number of titles registered as per simplified procedure (dacha amnesty program) decreased a little bit versus 2009. 2.125 mln titles were registered under this program, which is about 17% less than in 2009, but 43% more than in 2008. In total 7.121 mln titles were registered under this program starting from 2006.

6.3.2. The Problems of Land Relations in Russia Speaking about the problems of land relations in Russia it is extremely important to set the systems benchmarks the key parameters of this sphere and in adjacent spheres having the key impact on absolutely all processes.

Given the huge territory of the country (1,709.8 mln ha), the amount of land suitable for life-sustaining activities is not that big. According to expert evaluation, the major portion of land in the country is not suitable for inhabitation and life-sustaining activities, because such lands are located in the regions of the Extreme North and equivalent areas.

In addition the following needs to be taken into account:

thousand ha l l a n n n n a a r r g a r l e t ri Ur tern te e atio s s th Vo r e b u Cen Ea Si de W r So h t Fa Fe r n No sia s Ru RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks - the area of land covered with water and marshes made 225.0 mln ha (13.2% of the total land resources of the Russian Federation) as of January 1 20091.

- the area of land covered with woods made 802 mln ha (47% of the total land resources of the Russian Federation);

- the area of low-yielding tundra land made over 10%.

As per the most optimistic estimates, the good land share does not exceed 1/3 of the countrys territory. Only 13% of land area of Russia is used for agricultural purposes (plough lands, gardens, hay-fields, pastures). The share of the most valuable land (plough land) makes only 7.7% of the total area of the country. More than half of the plough land (52%) is located in the black soil areas (chernozem). About 80% of all farming products of Russia are produced here. And it is the sphere of use and turnover of agricultural land where the biggest problems are experienced.

The value of the most portion of Russian land is extremely small, only 1.9% of territory accounts for 82% of cadastral value of all the lands (the land of residential boroughs). All the other lands have extremely low level of infrastructure development.

With that, the level of land resources registration and management is extremely poor. In the vast majority of the country state and municipal lands are not delineated between the respective levels of government. By the beginning of 2010 only circa 302 mln ha (i.e. 19.1%) of all the lands being in state and municipal property were delineated. The average annual rate of growth of delineated land made only 1.6% over the last several years. Given such rate, more years will be required to complete delineation of state and municipal lands.

In Russia the procedure of acquisition of titles (buying out land from the state) has inherent contradictions for not delineated land. On one hand, it stipulates for the need to register the state title; on the other hand, it allows for the possibility to dispose the land owned by the state without such registration (paragraph 10 of Article 3 of the Federal Law No.137-FZ On Enactment of the RF Land Code of October 25, 2001).

Such regulation allows for voluntary decision-making in the sphere of land disposal and is highly corruption-prone.

The regions seeking for preservation of control over all the land have lawful right to deprive local self-government bodies of the right to dispose of the non-delineated land in the administrative centers of the RF constituent entities. And such lands are of the biggest value.

The State Real Property Cadastre system is not functioning in a robust manner, the plan is to complete it by the end of 2011. The Federal Law On State Real Property Cadastre2 came into force in March 2008. It stipulates for consolidation of two registration systems: Federal Agency for Real Property Cadastre (Rosnedvizhimost) and Bureau of Technical Inventory (BTI). The new cadastre should create the legal framework for state registration of the real property entirety and define the concept of the tax assessment basis as certain percentage of the cadastre value of a land plot. The provision of this Law about setting up a unified federal information system comprising the State Real Property Cadastre and the Unified State Register of Real Property Rights and Transactions Therewith in the electronic format is coming into effect starting from January 1, 2012.

72.1 mln ha covered with water (rivers, streams, lakes, water reservoirs, ponds, man-made water bodies, irrigation and drainage canals, etc.), 152.9 mln ha covered with marshes.

Federal Law No.221-FZ of July 24, Section 6.

Institutional Problems The following issues are currently relevant for the state cadastre system functioning1:

a) poor quality of government services provision;

b) lack of electronic document management practices.

The consequence of this long "lines" and long time required for registration, a big number of intermediaries and additional costs of title registration.

According to E.S. Nabiullina, the RF Minister for Economic Development, the immediate tasks that need to be resolved in this sphere are the following:

On one hand decreasing the title registration costs for individuals and organizations, as well as reducing the risk of unlawful forfeiture of real property titles;

On the other hand the possibility of fact and efficient resolution of number of major political issues (affordable housing construction, real estate tax introduction, national projects implementation, construction of facilities for Olympics and APEC, infrastructure projects).

In the situation when the majority of Russian lands lack cadastre documents, the definition of the plot boundaries remains very difficult, and that is reflected in the sphere of land taxation2.

Cadastral valuation remains the tool actively applied by the regions to increase budget revenues. In a number of regions the cadastral value of lands occupied by certain facilities especially in cities and towns with population exceeding 10,000 persons, is evidently a scarecrow, meaning it is set to prevent privatization of such land plots. Mainly it pertains to lands occupied by garages and parking lots, multi-storey apartment buildings, educational institutions and organizations. The motivation behind such decisions deserves special attention and analysis.

For example, in Primorsky Region the cadastral value of land occupied by multi-storey apartment buildings in residential boroughs with population exceeding 10,000 persons is more than 9 times higher the cadastral value of land occupied by individual homes (RUR 603.41 per sq. m versus RUR 65.13 per sq. m)3. The cadastral value of land occupied by educational institutions and organizations, garages and parking lots is slightly lower, but still one of the highest in the Region (RUR 597.18 and 566.89 per sq. m respectively). Similar situation may be observed in Khabarovsk and Kamchatka Regions, in Sakha Republic (Yakutia).

In Moscow Region the cadastral value of land occupied by multi-storey apartment buildings exceeds the value of land occupied by individual homes more than 10 times (RUR 7,465.versus RUR 734.77 per sq. m).

Shares in land remain one of the most important problems. This legal regime of agricultural land use does not provide for ownership/disposal/usage transparency. And 83.2% of all privately owned land falls under shares in land status (circa 110.6 mln ha, i.e. about 6.5% of all the land).

The weak points in using shares in land from the agricultural land use regulation standpoint are as follows:

See here and further on: Key point of presentation by E.S. Nabiullina, the RF Minister for Economic Development, on February 12, 2010, in the Russian Government Service Academy with the President of the Russian Federation at the all-Russian conference on the outcomes of activities of the Federal Service of State Registration, Cadastre Records and Cartography - http://www.economy.gov.ru/minec/press/news/doc20100212_03.

See details in: E. Apevalova. The Issues of Land Relations and Their Legal Regulation.//Transition Economy.

Outline of Economic Policy in Post-Communist Russia. Economic Growth in 20002007, M. Delo Publishers, 2008, pp.612613.

Section 228 of the State (National) Report about the status and use of land in the Russian Federation in 2008.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY IN trends and outlooks - The right to dispose of shares in land is limited due to the difficulty (in some cases impossibility) to allocate a separate land plot in lieu of the share in land, without which divestment of land to somebody not being a participant in the share is impossible.

- The fact of a land plot having multiple owners impedes the decision-making on the title and land use.

In reality many owners of shares in land lease them or transfer them in trust, etc. In the current conditions multiple schemes are applied for actual transfer of property rights for shares in land without appropriate registration leading to uncontrolled concentration in the agricultural lands market, violation of rights of owners of shares in land and actual owners of such lands, data about the actual situation with agricultural land use becoming non available for the government, etc.

In May 20081 the legislator amended the procedure of land plots allotment in lieu of shares in land within the common title providing for the mechanism of possible agreeing of a location of a portion of land plot subject to allotment in case there is no resolution of the general meeting of the owners of shares in land. According to this new procedure, in case there is no resolution of the general meeting about location of a portion of land plot subject to allotment, the owner of the share willing to separate the land plot shall be entitled for either publishing in the media or for notifying other owners of shares about his/her intention for such separation listing the specific location. In case no objections are received within 30 days, the location of such land plot shall be deemed agreed (paragraphs 3, 4 of Article 13 of the Federal Law On Turnover of the Agricultural Land)2.

Formally this simplifies the process of separating a land plot in lieu of shares in land for regional authorities and for those capable of implementing this mechanism in accordance with the legislative language. However, poor level of legal culture, lack of organizational and financial capabilities for getting any assistance in exercising their rights will become the critical factors impeding the residents of rural areas in using this right. So in reality this mechanism of agricultural land redistribution in favor of the state means that either major agricultural holding companies and legal entities or intermediaries will become the ones who dispose the unclaimed shares in land.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 93 | 94 || 96 | 97 |   ...   | 115 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .