WWW.DISSERS.RU


...
    !

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 29 | 30 || 32 | 33 |   ...   | 102 |

RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks Table Placement of subfederal papers in Volume of issu Volume of issu Issuers share in ance to domestic Federations subject ance, the total volume borrowings ra million rubles. of issuance,% tio,% Central federal district Bryansk Region 200.0 0,25 16,Voronezh Region 600.09 0,76 17,Kaluga Region 300.0 0,38 49,Kostroma Region 150.0 0,19 11,Moscow Region 9 884.59 12,44 29,Yaroslav Region 1 999.12 2,52 37,Moscow 32 365,1 40,74 66,North Western federal district Republic of Karelia 449. 28 0,57 26,Komi Republic 937. 5 1,18 65,Leningrad Region 1 000.0 1,26 36,St. Petersburg 13 702.75 17,25 99,South federal district Krasnodar Territory 1 000.0 1,26 57,Volgograd Region 769.05 0,97 28,Privolzhsky federal district Republic of Bashkortostan 927.14 1,17 41,Republic of Marij El 200.0 0,25 42,Chuvashi Republic 514.82 0,65 58,Nizhni Novgorod Region 1 000.0 1,26 12,Perm Region 200.0 0,25 22,Komi Permyak autonomous district 0.68 0,00 1,Ural federal district Sverdlovsk Region 105.0 0,13 12,Khanty Mansijsk autonomous district 539.1 0,68 24,Yamalo Nenets autonomous district 0.78 0,00 0,Siberian federal district Altai Territory 197.96 0,25 10,Krasnoyarsk Territory 2 230.0 2,81 25,Irkutsk Region 1 830.54 2,30 51,Novosibirsk Region 3 773. 0 4,75 8,Tomsk Region 1 464.42 1,84 31,Far East federal district Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) 2 195.76 2,76 32,Khabarovsk Territory 700.0 0,88 11,Sakhalin Region 200.0 0,25 14,Total 79 436.7 100,00 30,Source: IET calculations based on the data of the Ministry of Finance of the RF.

By now, the high level of securitization had been demonstrated by the largest issuers these are Moscow (66%), St. Petersburg (100%), Komi Republic (65%), Chuvash Republic (58%), Krasnodar Territory (57%), Irkutsk Region (52%). At the same time, because of considerable transaction costs, concerned with organization of bonds issuing, issuance of small loans proved to be too cost based, and the municipalities continued to borrow Section 2.

Monetary and budgetary spheres from commercial banks. Still, for the largest cities, issuance of papers became more and more attractive, which led, in 2004, to increasing the volume of placed municipal bonds more than 1,5 times in real terms (Table 21).

Table Volumes of net borrowings on the market of domestic subfederal and municipal papers (million rubles) Regional consoli Regional budgets Municipal budgets dated budget Net borrowings 47 880. 30 44 470. 13 3 410. Attraction of funds 79 436. 71 74 995. 96 4 440. Repayment of the principle debt body 31 556. 41 30 525. 84 1 030. Net borrowings 41 908. 20 40 043. 51 1 864. Attraction of funds 61 712. 63 59 012. 90 2 699. Repayment of the principle debt body 19 804. 44 18 969. 39 835. Net borrowings 17 696. 53 17 153. 76 542. Funds attraction 29 141. 78 28 169. 16 972. Repayment of the principle debt body 11 445. 25 11 015. 40 429. Net borrowings 6 601. 45 6 667. 59 66. Funds attraction 15 123. 78 14 226. 93 896. Repayment of the principle debt body 8 522. 34 7 559. 34 962. Net borrowings 1 877. 33 2 286. 17 408. Funds attraction 13 042. 22 10 090. 21 2 952. Repayment of the principle debt body 14 919. 55 12 376. 38 2 543. Source: the Ministry of Finance of the RF.

Stabilization of the financial market caused an increase in number of regions and cit ies, that entered the capital market on a regular basis. Since 1999, annual bond issuance had been made by Moscow, St. Petersburg, Chuvash Republic, Volgograd Region; since 2000, Tomsk Region and Komi Republic, Ekaterinburg; since 2001, by Leningrad and Irkutsk regions (Table 22).

Table Issuance of subfederal and municipal papers in 1999Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Federations Subjects 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Moscow * * * * * * St. Petersburg * * * * * * Chuvash Republic * * * * * * Volgograd Region * * * * * * Tomsk Region * * * * * Komi Republic * * * * * Leningrad Region * * * * Irkutsk Region * * * * Moscow Region * * * Khabarovsk Territory * * * Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) * * * Republic of Marij El * * * Novosibirsk Region * * * Yamalo Nenets AD * * Yaroslav Region * * Krasnoyarsk Territory * * RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Issuer Federations Subjects 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Republic of Bashkortostan * * * Republic of Karelia * Krasnodar Territory * Lipetsk Region * Nizhni Novgorod Region * Voronezh Region * Kaluga Region * Bryansk Region * Belgorod Region * * Tver Region * * Khanty Mansijsk AD * * Murmansk Region * * Kostroma Region * * Samara Region * Tambov Region * Republic of Mordovia * Sakhalin Region * Kursk Region * Stavropol Territory * Primorie Territory * Kabardino Balkarian Republic * Municipalities Ekaterinburg * * * * * Ufa * * * Yuzhno Sakhalinsk * * Krasnoyarsk * * Novosibirsk * * Tomsk * * Novocheboksarsk * * * Barnaul * Perm * Noginsk District of Moscow Region * Volgograd * * * * * Nizhni Novgorod * Kostroma * * Cheboksary * Arkhangelsk * Dzerzhinsky * Source: the Ministry of Finance of the RF.

Creditability of territorial governments Credit rating In recent years the high economic growth rates in Russia led to raising of the sover eign credit rating and rating of territorial government agencies.

In so doing, the process of raising the credit rating of the territorial governments to the investment level observed. In November 2004, the first of the Russian regions the city of Moscow was awarded by the credit rating agency Fitch a credit rating of the invest ment level "BBB on borrowings in foreign currency. Then, the agency Moodys granted a credit rating of the investment level Baa3 to Moscow and St. Petersburg. At the begin ning of February 2005, the agency Standard&Poor's also raised the credit rating of Mos cow to the investment level – (Table 23).

Section 2.

Monetary and budgetary spheres Table International credt rating of Standard&Poors The rating award date In foreign cur In national cur Issuer name (latest update) rency/Forecast rency/Forecast Sovereign credit ratings Russian Federation 31.01.2005 BBB/Stable BBB/Stable Ratings of local and regional administrations Balashikha district 10.12.2004 B/Stable / Bashkortostan 12.03.2004 BB/Stable / Vologda Region 16.02.2004 B/Stable / Kaluga Region 16.02.2004 B+/Stable / Krasnodar Territory 14.09.2004 B+/Stable B+/Stable Irkutsk Region 22.11.2004 B/Stable / Klin district 28.09.2004 B/Stable / Leningrad Region 25.10.2004 B+/Stable / Moscow 01.02.2005 BBBStable / Moscow Region 29.09.2004 BB/Stable / Samara Region 12.03.2004 BB/Stable / St. Petersburg 01.10.2004 BB+/Stable BB+/Stable Sverdlovsk Region 29.12.2004 B+/Stable B+/Stable Stavropol Territory 23.06.2004 B/Stable B/Stable Surgut 09.12.2004 B/Positive B/Positive Khanty Mansijsk 13.08.2004 BB/Stable / autonomous district Tatarstan 08.09.2004 B/Stable / Ufa 14.04.2004 B/Stable / Yamalo Nenets 21.10.2004 B+/Stable / autonomous district Source: Standard&Poors.

Problems of outstanding debt restructuring Despite raising the credit ratings of a number of the Federations subjects, up until now the issues of outstanding debt restructuring have not been solved. According to the data of the Ministry of Finance of Russia, the volume of outstanding debt increased since November 2003 to October 2004 by more than Rb 8.7 bln., in nominal terms from Rb 20.3 to Rb 29.0 bln., which constituted 1,02% of the revenue side of regional consolidated budget or 0,17% of GDP.

The outstanding bonded debt is most considerable in the following regions: Chu kotka AD Rb 6.1 bn or 31,9% of the revenue side of the budget, Oryol Region Rb 2.8 bln.

or 28,1% of the revenue side of the budget, Orenburg Region Rb 2.5 bln. or 9,3% of the revenue side of the budget, in Republic of Tuva Rb 0.7 bln. or 8,1% of the revenue side of the budget (Table 24).

RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks Table Non restructured outstanding bonded debt of the Federations subjects Outstanding debt to The volume of outstanding budget revenues ratio, debt (thousand rubles)* %** Central Federal district Belgorod Region 106 063.5 0,Vladimir Region 58 711.8 0,Kostroma Region 326 928.0 3,Kursk Region 109 830.0 0,Moscow 500 000.0 0,Moscow Region 113 693.6 0,Oryol Region 2 805 785.6 28,Ryazan Region 1 233.1 0,Smolensk Region 209 370.3 1,Tver Region 412 252.2 2,Yaroslav Region 643 068.3 3,North Western federal district Republic of Karelia 12 680.0 0,Arkhangelsk Region 62 776.0 0,Kaliningrad Region 13 027.2 0,Leningrad Region 709.0 0,Novgorod Region 23 821.5 0,Pskov Region 389 164.7 4,South federal district Volgograd Region 33 736.7 0,Kabardino Balkarian Republic 160 250.0 2,Krasnodar Territory 455 898.2 0,Republic of Adygeya 43 244.0 0,Republic of Kalmykia 48 920.0 0,Republic of North Ossetia Alania 599 750.2 5,Stavropol Territory 984 105.7 3,Privolzhsky federal district Kirov Region 80 293.0 0,Nizhni Novgorod Region 617 203.3 1,Orenburg Region 2 502 191.3 9,Penza Region 509 120.7 3,Perm Region 659.6 0,Republic of Bashkortostan 106 791.5 0,Republic of Mordovia 468 091.0 2,Republic of Tatarstan 194 525.0 0,Samara Region 285 576.8 0,Udmurtian Republic 539 529.6 2,Ulyanovsk Region 118 727.9 0,Ural federal district Kurgan Region 103 343.0 0,Sverdlovsk Region 1 855.5 0,Tyumen Region 816 354.0 1,Chelyabinsk Region 23 902.7 0,Siberian federal district Section 2.

Monetary and budgetary spheres Outstanding debt to The volume of outstanding budget revenues ratio, debt (thousand rubles)* %** Altai Territory 249 415.7 0,Irkutsk Region 20 137.0 0,Krasnoyarsk Territory 935 563.4 1,Novosibirsk Region 325 298.9 0,Omsk Region 941 195.1 2,Republic of Tuva 662 284.3 8,Republic of Khakassia 2 444.7 0,Taimyr (Dolgano Nenetsk) autonomous 26 229.0 0,district Tomsk Region 500 414.0 2,Ust Ordyn Buryat Autonomous District 65 702.0 2,Far East federal district Kamchatka Region 937 795.9 7,Magadan Region 20 450.0 0,Primorie Territory 424 594.0 1,Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) 2 121 595.9 3,Khabarovsk Territory 6 250.5 0,Chukotka Autonomous District 6 147 020.7 31,Total 28 964 081.8 1,*According to the data of October 1, 2004.

**The outstanding debt, as of October 1, 2004, to the regional (non consolidated) budget revenues ratio.

Source: IET calculations based on the data of the Ministry of Finance of the RF.

2.4.3. Stock Market In 2004, Russian stock market demonstrated more moderate growth rates than in the prior years (Fig. 20), with stock indices sometimes falling down quite drastically. The rea son for such downfalls were growing political risks associated with the attack against YUKOS. Backtax claims for 20012003, arrests of the companys bank accounts and as sets, accusation and detainment of a number of its senior managers and ultimately the sale of its main oil producing assets, Yuganskneftegas, all that triggered sales along the whole range of Russian blue chips and resulted in the fall of the stock indices. The crisis of confidence burst out in the banking sector in June through July 2004 also battered the dynamics of the national financial markets and particularly the stock market.

Given the above, however, a favorable macroeconomic situation against the back ground of extremely high world prices for oil and oil products saved the stock market from a drastic fall and sometimes contributed to a notable rise in quotations. In addition, the dy namics of the market were encouraged by the September 2004 auction on the sale of a part of the government stake in LUKOIL, as well as the granting to Russia of investment rat ing by Fitch.

RUSSIAN ECONOMY in trends and outlooks 90 800.Volume of trading (USD) 80 750.RTS index 70 700.60 650.50 600.40 550.30 500.20 450.10 400.350.Source: the RTS Exchange Fig. 20. The Dynamics of the RTS Stock Index and Volume of Trading in In 2004, the Russian RTS stock index grew by 46.7 points, from 567.4 up to 614.points, or by 8.23%. These results appears fairly moderate vs. those of 2003, when the RTS index grew by 206.46 points (+57.22%) in absolute terms. As to investors activity, it proved to be lower in 2004 vs. 2003. More specifically, the 2004 turnover on the classical stock market in RTS roughly accounted for USD 5.7 bln., which is a. 7% down vs. 2003 (6.bln.). Plus, 2004 saw 48.84 Thos. deals stricken vis vis 56.269 Thos. reported in 2003, which also evidences a lower activity than in 2003. The average daily turnover of trading sessions on the stock included in the computation of the RTS index in the trading system in 2004 made up USD 21.15 mln., thus a. 11.9% down vs. 2003 (USD 24.0 mln.).

The dynamics of the market were different over the year. Between January through April the market was dominated by the upward trend and the RTS index climbed up by 195.47 points from 586.08 up to 781.55 (+33.35%). Hence, the new historic maximum registered on April 12, 2004. The rise in the RTS index was accompanied by a notable growth in the volume of trades. Given that between January to February the monthly vol ume of trades with the stock used to compute the RTS index roughly accounted for USD 430 mln., in March and April it grew up to USD 617 and 830 mln., respectively. At this junc ture it should be noted that it was in April 2004 when the record breaking volume of daily trades was registered: namely, on 22 April, the respective amount was USD 71.67 mln. The main reason for the positive dynamics of the stock market was an extremely high level of liquidity in the banking sector, which was growing steadily over the 1st quarter. That helped investors accumulate free capital and, at least, in part fueled their demand for stock. The market was further encouraged by presidential elections outcome, when having perceived Mr. Putins victory as an evidence of a future political and economic stability, non residents began to show a greater interest in the national stock market.

points mln US dollars 05.01.22.01.09.02.26.02.16.03.01.04.19.04.07.05.26.05.11.06.30.06.16.07.03.08.19.08.06.09.22.09.08.10.26.10.12.11.30.11.17.12.Section 2.

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 29 | 30 || 32 | 33 |   ...   | 102 |



2011 www.dissers.ru -

, .
, , , , 1-2 .