Enterprises by type of ownership. Forms of ownership of the organization: decoding and characteristics
The basis in the system of socio-economic relations is the form of ownership, which influences ideology, economics, social policy, and so on.
The simplest concept of property is a form of appropriation by a person (or a group of persons) of certain material goods with the ability to use and dispose of them, sell them, give them, exchange them, etc.
In order for property not to lose its practical meaning, at least two subjects are required so that there is someone to enter into relations with regarding the subject of ownership.
What forms of ownership exist
There are different forms, it all depends on who the owner is. The main established forms:
- state, which is divided into municipal and federal;
- private, can be individual or collective;
- the property of religious and public organizations that have the right to use their property only for certain purposes, within the framework prescribed by the constituent documents of a particular religious or public organization.
Federal property includes:
- Natural resources;
- unique natural objects;
- funds from the state treasury;
- cultural and historical sites;
- individual agricultural industrial enterprises;
- individual educational facilities, scientific institutions.
Municipal property includes buildings, land plots, residential and non-residential funds, utility networks, structures located on the territory of the municipality and owned by local governments.
Main types of property
In modern market-economic relations, after the procedure of denationalization of property and privatization of most enterprises, private property becomes the defining type - the type of ownership of the results of production, its means, in which the interests of the owner come first, followed by the interests of the collective.
Private property may include: individual ownership, group ownership (joint stock company, partnership).
Other types of accessories:
- collective– when property is purchased by a collective of employees or transferred to it free of charge;
- cooperative– a voluntary association of citizens using funds jointly owned by them, leasing the property of state-owned enterprises;
- civil– created from the labor income of citizens participating in social production,
- joint stock company– ownership of property acquired with proceeds from the sale of shares;
- individual labor– when a worker and an owner are united in one person, it differs from a personal farm in meeting the needs of the public by attracting the market.
There are mixed forms, when within one form or another there are features of several types of ownership.
What is property rights
This concept means the legal right of a person, at his own discretion, in accordance with personal interests, without overstepping the bounds of the law, to dispose of a thing and influence it.
The owner has the right to demand the elimination of illegal actions in relation to the property of those persons who are not its owners. A thing can be the result of labor, a means of production.
The owner in relation to his property is guided by three powers:
- he has the right to own property;
- the right to enjoy one's property;
- the right to dispose of (determine the legal side) ownership.
The right to own a thing or property gives the opportunity to dispose of it at one’s personal discretion, but at the same time, the law imposes an obligation on the owner:
- maintain your property (ensuring proper condition, timely repairs, paying taxes);
- liability for damage, wear and loss of property, compensation for damage caused by property.
If all three powers are concentrated in the subject of ownership, the owner’s responsibility for it occurs automatically.
What is property
Traditionally, this means that the means of production (things) belong to a specific owner. Such relations are not only economic, but also legal relations that can arise in matters of ownership, disposal, and use of property.
Private (individual) property
This includes the property of an individual (person) or legal entity (firm, enterprise). Private property is not limited in quantity; legally, an individual or legal entity can be the owner, for example, of an entire metallurgical plant, dozens of houses or buildings.
Only property that has been withdrawn from state circulation (historical or cultural monuments, nuclear weapons, etc.) cannot be acquired for private ownership.
A citizen may own:
- items purchased to satisfy his personal needs– plots of land, residential buildings, apartments, cars, garages, different kinds household appliances, much more;
- transport, buildings or premises, serving for the organization of entrepreneurship and production;
- bonds, shares, securities , cash;
- intellectual property items(literary works, musical works, images, etc.).
The source of financing for personal ownership is individual income received from participation in public or private production.
Intellectual property
This definition means results (products) creative activity person(s) in the field of science, literature, production, art, which are of an intangible nature.
The World Intellectual Property Organization has established its types:
- trademarks, logos, service marks;
- utility models;
- breeding animal breeds and plant varieties;
- inventions in the most different areas human activity;
- scientific discoveries;
- results of the performing activities of artists, television programs, sound recordings, radio broadcasts;
- literary works, scientific discoveries and works, works of art.
Intellectual property can be personified into material objects, becoming a type of product. But it can bring profit to its owners only if it is provided with special legal protection of the state (patents for inventions, trademarks, brand names, etc.).
Land ownership
Types of land ownership existing in Russia:
- State Federal;
- State subjects of the federation (territory, autonomous republic, region);
- Municipal (or city);
- Private.
Owners of land plots can be individuals or legal entities; they have the right to use different forms of land ownership:
- right to own land when its owners have the legal right to sell, mortgage the plot or part of it, exchange, donate, inherit;
- lifelong inheritance when the rights of the owner are exercised, but the plot cannot be sold, rented, or mortgaged, it can only be passed on by inheritance;
- unlimited use when the rights of the owner of a plot are realized, having it in lifelong use, but cannot be inherited;
- rent, which is sold only to the owners of the land.
Owners of land plots are required to pay land tax, which is calculated at a legally fixed base rate.
State property
State property is property that belongs to the Russian Federation and its constituent entities. It is heterogeneous, as it includes:
- state budget funds, state banks, diamond fund, gold reserves, currency fund;
- historical, cultural values of national significance, artistic values;
- territory, natural land and water resources;
- Federal roads, organizations for their maintenance;
- defense facilities;
- municipal treasury.
State property is assigned to municipal institutions, enterprises on the rights of ownership, use, disposal.
Entrepreneurship
This is a type of activity that can be carried out in areas that are close and understandable to the owner. Areas of business activity:
- consumer;
- industrial;
- service;
- informational;
- scientific, others.
Entrepreneurship– a business that provides services to the population, produces in-demand goods, and allows the development of a market economy, being its small and medium-sized forms.
For entrepreneurship to exist successfully, the state must recognize private property, support and encourage small and medium-sized businesses so that funds from these structures regularly replenish the treasury.
For an entrepreneur, it is important not only to be able to organize the production of goods or the provision of services, he is required to understand whether there is a demand for these goods or services, therefore entrepreneurial activity is always associated with a certain amount of risk.
Every citizen has the right to own, dispose of, and use his personal property.
The Constitution of Russia and the Civil Code recognize any form of property and guarantee the protection of rights to it.
Russian legislation provides for the protection of the owner’s rights in the event of an infringement on them.
Own (from the Old Russian “sobnost’” - ownership of a thing or someone as personal property) - ownership of things, material and spiritual values by certain persons, legal right to such ownership and economic relations between people regarding ownership, division, redistribution of property objects.
Property as the appropriation of material goods by people in the process of their production, exchange, distribution and consumption is unity of legal and economic content. In real life they are inseparable: the economic content is protected by law, the legal content of property receives an economic form of implementation.
Subjects and objects of property:
Legal content of property is implemented through the totality of powers of its subjects: possession, use, disposal.
Possession -
Use -
Order -
Also within the powers of use, two more contents are distinguished:
Rent - the right to use property without having the right to dispose of it.
Trust (from English trust- confidence) - the right of the owner to transfer the right to manage his property to another person without the right to interfere with his actions.
These rights are closely interrelated and only together constitute the legal content of property.
ownership, management and control.
Methods for terminating and acquiring ownership rights
Forms of ownership
Existing forms of ownership are very diverse.
and many mixed forms, such as collective-private or state-collective
According to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the Russian Federation recognizes and protects equally private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership.
Own (from Old Russian “sobnost” (belongings, property) - possession of a thing or someone as personal property) - This:
1. In an economic sense, a person’s attitude towards a thing belonging to him as his own. Economic content of property is revealed through its functional characteristics: ownership, management And control. Moreover, the main thing is control over the production and financial activities of the subject of ownership.
2. In a legal (legal) sense - the unity of rights to own, use and dispose of a thing within the limits established by law.
Possession - actual possession of this property, legally secured.
Use - extraction process beneficial properties from this property and receiving fruits and income.
Order - the ability to change the condition, purpose, ownership of property (sell it, donate it, change it, inherit it, rent it out, pledge it, etc.).
In real life, the economic and legal content of property are inextricably linked: the economic content is protected by law, the legal content of property receives an economic form of implementation.
A modern market economy presupposes the existence of various forms of ownership, including state, collective, group, individual and many mixed forms, such as, for example, collective-private or state-collective etc. A modern market economy is an economy with mixed ownership, both in the sense of the existence of different forms of ownership, and in the sense of the formation of mixed forms.
In accordance with the Constitution, the following forms of ownership are recognized in the Russian Federation.
Forms of ownership in the Russian Federation:
Name of ownership form |
Property objects (property) |
|
Property of citizens and legal entities (enterprises, organizations, institutions) Property of citizens and legal entities (enterprises, organizations, institutions). |
Items that satisfy personal needs: residential buildings, apartments, land, dachas, garages, cars, televisions, etc. Cash; stock(from lat. ctio- disposition) - securities issued by a joint-stock company and giving their owner the right to receive a portion of the profit; bonds(from lat. obligatio- obligation) - bearer securities issued by the state or a public institution, for which their owner receives an annual income or participates in the drawing of sums of money during their validity period; other securities. - documents certifying property rights. Something that can serve to organize production, business activities: buildings, transport, etc. You cannot have in private ownership property that is withdrawn from circulation, that is, from the list of what can be freely bought or sold: the wealth of the continental shelf (that is, part of the underwater margin of the continents adjacent to the shores of the land) and the marine ecological zone, natural parks, some types of weapons, historical and cultural monuments, state treasury, gold reserves, etc. |
|
State |
Federal property, property of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, state entities that make up the Russian Federation (republics, territories, regions, etc.). |
Property withdrawn from circulation. Premises where government bodies are located (for example, the buildings of the State Duma, the Government of the Russian Federation, ministries, courts, etc.). Many defense enterprises, transport, communications enterprises, industry, oil, coal, gas, etc. |
Municipal (from lat. muhicipium- self-governing community) |
Property of urban and rural settlements, as well as other municipalities. |
Property of local authorities - residential buildings, shops, consumer services, catering, etc. |
Other forms property |
Cooperative, joint-stock property, property of labor collectives, public organizations, etc. |
Land, housing stock, buildings, equipment, inventory, cash, securities, other property necessary to support the activities provided for by the organization’s charter. |
Private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership are equal.
Methods for terminating and acquiring property rights.
During the transition from one type of economic system to another, such methods of terminating and acquiring property rights as nationalization And privatization.
QUESTIONS:
1. The following list shows the similarities between shareholder and state forms ownership and the differences between the joint-stock and state forms of ownership. Select and write down first the serial numbers of the similarities (2), and then the serial numbers of the differences (2).
2. Below is a list of terms. All of them, with the exception of two, relate to the concept of “subject of property”:
labor collective;
land plot.
3. (1−6). Read the text and complete tasks 1−6.
“Private property is not just property (clothes, house, car), but it is an economic relationship between people. Private property means that a person treats property (means of production, consumer goods, money) as “his own,” that is, he acts as a master, possessor or sovereign manager. A person and his family become interested in increasing their property. Separating themselves from others, private owners strive to obtain more and more vital goods (property) for their possession, use and disposal. But in order to get them, they are forced to produce goods for others, getting in exchange, everything you need for yourself. For example, a private owner of a bakery, wanting to buy a car, must bake and sell so much bread so that the proceeds are enough to buy this car.<…>
Private property psychology is the psychology of economic activity and entrepreneurship. In an effort to achieve personal enrichment, private owners produce more and more goods. Moreover, private property shapes a person as a person free and independent of others. Possessing something of your own, even if it’s very small, is the foundation for the formation of an independent personality.<…>
Private ownership of land, objects and tools, and goods thus contribute to the development of a market economy. It stimulates initiative and independence, revitalizes the economy, and increases interest in more efficient, economical management of the economy.
At the same time, we must understand that private property is not good at everything. What falls into the hands of some becomes inaccessible to others. As a result, it may turn out that, as a result of private property, individuals may lose what others have in abundance.
To avoid this, even in a market economy, the state strives to ensure that some of the benefits remain publicly available to everyone and are in public, state, municipal (local) ownership.”
(Kazakov A.L. Shkolnik about the market economy.
M.: Society “Knowledge”, 1993. pp. 33−34; 35−36.).
1) Make a plan for the text. To do this, highlight the main semantic fragments of the text and title each of them.
The following semantic fragments can be distinguished:
1) the essence of private property;
2) features of private property psychology;
3) the influence of private property on society;
4) the role of the state in limiting private property.
It is possible to formulate other points of the plan without distorting the essence of the main idea of the fragment, and to highlight additional semantic blocks.
2) What is private property? Using the text, explain why private property is a condition of a free market.
According to the text, private property is “not just property, but economic relations between people”; this “means that a person treats property as his own, that is, he acts as the owner, possessor or sovereign manager.”
Private property is a condition of the free market, because “by separating themselves from others, private owners strive to obtain more and more of life’s goods for their possession, use and disposal. But in order to get them, they are forced to produce goods for others, receiving in exchange everything they need for themselves.”
The definition and explanation can be given in other formulations that are similar in meaning.
3) How is private property psychology characterized in the text? What, according to the author, is the foundation for the formation of an independent personality?
Other types of private property may be mentioned.
5) Talking about private property in class, the student noted that this property is the basis of the market, stimulates the development of production and the progress of society, therefore there is no point in restraining the strengthening of private property in a modern market economy. Not all students in the class agreed with this opinion. Which of these two points of view is reflected in the text? Provide a piece of text that helps answer the question.
The text reflects the second point of view (the point of view of class students) - in a modern market economy, the manifestation of negative qualities in people due to private property (excessive selfishness, acquisitiveness, purely personal gain, etc.) is restrained by the state due to a number of restrictions that do not allow the possibility of private property harm consumers and public interests.
A fragment of text is given, for example: “...in the conditions market economy the state strives to ensure that some of the benefits remain publicly available to everyone and are in public, state, municipal (local) ownership.”
6) Do you agree that private property “stimulates initiative and independence, revitalizes the economy, increases interest in more efficient, economical management of the economy,” i.e., the advantages of private property outweigh its disadvantages? Based on the text and social science knowledge, give two arguments (explanations) in defense of your position.
1) The position of the examinee is expressed: agreement or disagreement with the expressed opinion.
2) Two arguments (explanations) are given, for example:
in case of agreement, it may be stated that:
Private property acts as the material basis for a person’s independence from the state. Individualism presupposes an orientation toward self-realization and cooperation, which means that private property cements society;
Private property can make society rich because it encourages work and stimulates economic entrepreneurship;
in case of disagreement, it may be stated that
Private property creates inequality between people, therefore a society dominated by private property is anti-democratic;
Private property leads to the fact that a person turns from a goal of development into a means of development, since everything is subordinated to making a profit.
Other arguments (explanations) may be given.
Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation
NOVOSIBIRSK HUMANITIES INSTITUTE
Fraternal branch
Faculty of Economics
Macroeconomics
Topic: Forms of ownership and types of enterprises in the Russian Federation.
Course work of a 2nd year student of distance learning
Volkova Lyubov Anatolyevna
Scientific supervisor Murashova L.N.
Coursework due date_____________________
Grade_____________
Introduction
1.1. The concept of property, its economic content
2. Forms of ownership
2.1.Historical forms of ownership
2.2. Signs of classification of forms of ownership
2.3. Forms of ownership
3. Property in Russia
3.2. Criteria for the effectiveness of property transformations
3.3. Features of property transformation in Russia
4.1. The enterprise, its tasks and functions
5. Types of enterprises
5.2. Self employed
5.3. Partnership (partnership)
5.4. Corporation (limited liability companies)
5.4.1. Small business.
5.4.2. Joint stock company (closed and open).
5.4.3. Joint venture.
5.5. Cooperatives
6. Enterprises and entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation
Conclusion
Bibliography
Introduction
To understand the laws of functioning of the economic mechanism, as well as the entire economic system in general, property relations are of fundamental importance.
For a long time, economic thought was dominated by the idea that property is a person’s relationship to a thing, a person’s power over a thing, his ability to own, manage, and use the material conditions of his existence. At the same time, a person’s desire to own things acted as a natural, inalienable instinct.
However, as knowledge about the laws of social development accumulated and deepened, ideas about property began to change towards an increasing recognition of its social rather than natural basis.
The most important step in the study of property was made by the economic thought of the last century. To the ideologist of petty-bourgeois socialism P.-J. Proudhon (1809-1865) famously said: “Property is theft.” This definition was not universally accepted and was subject to justifiable criticism, but there was a very valuable detail in Proudhon's position. If one person owns a thing, then another person is deprived of the opportunity to have it. This means that it is not nature, but social relations that underlie property.
The Napoleonic Code stated that “property is the right to use and dispose of things in the most absolute manner.” Here, property relations are presented in the form of legal relations, where subjects are endowed with the right to use material values.
A person lives, produces and uses the results of labor in close interaction with other people. Because of this, it can be argued that property is a relationship between people that expresses a certain form of appropriation of goods, c. features the form of appropriation of the means of production.
For a correct and more complete understanding of property, in my work I will determine the place that belongs to it in the system of social relations.
An enterprise (firm) is an organization doing business under a specific name. The firm controls the use of land, labor and capital. She makes her own decisions regarding the design, production method and sale of products. A firm should be distinguished from a production unit such as a factory, farm or mine because it is a unit of management. One firm may own or control several production units.
Firms come in different sizes - one private entrepreneur or a corporation with many thousands of employees.
Creating value is a fundamental function of an enterprise. The process of creating value is the satisfaction of group or individual needs, as a result of which the enterprise achieves public recognition of its activities. A thriving enterprise is an enterprise that receives sustainable profits from its activities. The owners (or shareholders) of the enterprise are interested in a constant and ever-increasing flow of income and in such a use of their own and borrowed funds that increases the value of their property (dividends, shares). Personnel and suppliers are interested in the stability of the enterprise, long-term relationships with it, as well as a favorable working atmosphere. For consumers, the highest value is provided by goods and services that satisfy them in quality and price.
Public recognition, in turn, gives the company the opportunity to expand production, increase sales and services, and ultimately increase its profits.
The main working tool in the implementation of the target functions of the enterprise is the market strategy, within the framework of which the competitive advantages of the enterprise are realized. In international business theory and practice, three main types of enterprise market strategy are distinguished.
The management of the enterprise must seriously analyze the existing competitive advantages and choose one of the strategies for behavior in the market.
After the market strategy has been carried out, the next tool for implementing the target function of the enterprise, ensuring sustainable profit generation, is planning aimed at achieving the goals of the enterprise.
In my course work I will describe the criteria by which enterprises are classified and what types of enterprises there are.
1.1. The concept of property, its economic content.
Property is one of the most important and complex problems of economics and economic theory. The history of the economic life of a society during periods of increased social activity leads, as a rule, to a redistribution of objects and property rights. Russia's transition economy confirms this historical tradition.
Social thought has always paid more attention to the problem of property. Special appeals to it are contained in historical, philosophical and fiction. A rich tradition and material have been accumulated in the legal literature, within which a number of directions in the study of property rights have emerged. Economic science has also always paid special attention to this problem. Nevertheless, this problem remains underdeveloped. activities and their results.
Own– 1) a system of objective relations between people regarding the appropriation of the means and results of production; 2) the set of rights of a subject to manage economic conditions; the idea of property has been formed in science and in life for many hundreds, even thousands of years, but is still the object of analysis, research, and debate.
The category “property” historically entered scientific circulation long before economics and economic theory emerged as a special branch of science. First of all, property became an official object of legal, juridical nature and philosophy. The formation of property took place back in primitive society. Roman law already defined the concept of property and the basic relations associated with it, such as: possession, use, disposal.
The emergence of property relations at the forefront of scientific and social thought is not accidental. Transformations in property relations directly leave an imprint on the life and well-being of people, affect their vital interests, and are visible on the surface of life and social phenomena.
For a long time, property as a special social relationship was a direct subject of jurisprudence, primarily civil law. However, with the further development of social production and the emergence of new forms of entrepreneurial activity, property acquires greater significance in its economic aspect and becomes, along with the legal one, a defining economic category.
Let's turn to the original concepts and definitions.
Property – the relationship between a person, group or community of people (subject), on the one hand, and any substance of the material world (object), on the other hand, consisting of permanent or temporary, partial or complete alienation, disconnection, appropriation of the object by the subject. So property characterizes the belonging of an object to a certain subject.
Subject of ownership(owner) – an active party to property relations, having the opportunity and right to own an object of property. Subjects of property are ultimately animate persons. Attempts to replace them with certain categories such as “state” without indicating which bodies and persons represent the “state” essentially lead to “subjectless” property, which is an abstraction. Only people can personify and practically realize the right of ownership.
Property – the passive side of property relations in the form of objects of nature, matter, energy, information, property, spiritual, intellectual values, wholly or to some extent belonging to the subject. Objects of property are often called simply property, meaning in this concept both the object itself and the relations related to it regarding ownership.
In the concept “ property relations”includes, on the one hand, the owner’s relationship “to his thing,” that is, property, subject-object relationships between subject and object. These primary relations serve as a material prerequisite for the relationship between subjects of property, that is, subjective-object relations. The latter represent economic relations arising in connection with property and reflect the property relationships of the subject with other subjects. This group of relations is of a socio-economic nature and determines, first of all, the forms of distribution of property, products, goods, income, and other valuables between owners.
The specificity of the economic content of property consists of the following main characteristics.
1. Property is not a thing and not just a relationship between people and things, but a relationship between people who can be associated with things (the means and results of production). But these relations have not material, but socio-economic content and forms (connection of workers with production conditions, forms of income, etc.).
2. Monopolization of production conditions by some subjects and their alienation from others or equal rights workers' access to production conditions characterizes the socio-economic content of property relations and determines the nature of the combination of the main factors of production of workers and productive resources, and the appropriation of the result.
3. Forms of income form the economic realization of property and are determined by the position of subjects in property relations.
When determining the place of the category of property in the system of social relations:
· first, the economic content of the category of property depends on the nature of established forms of ownership, which include relations of production, distribution, exchange, and consumption. For example, a market economy is characterized by the predominance of private property;
· second, the position of certain groups, classes in society, their ability to use all factors of production depends on property;
· third, forms of ownership change in accordance with changes in methods of production caused by the development of productive forces;
· fourth, although within each economic system there is some basic form of ownership specific to it, this does not exclude the existence of its other forms, both old ones transferred from the previous economic system, and new, peculiar sprouts of the transition to the new system. The interweaving and interaction of all forms of ownership has a positive impact on the entire course of development of society.
· fifth, the transition itself from one form of ownership to another can go in two ways: evolutionary - based on the competitive struggle for survival, the gradual displacement of everything that is dying out and strengthening the dominance of elements that are viable in the appropriate conditions, as well as revolutionary - the violent assertion of the dominance of new forms of property (in theories of Marxism: the main point socialist revolution - the elimination of private property).
2. Forms of ownership.
2.1. Historical forms of ownership.
Forms of ownership can be considered in vertical-historical and horizontal-structural sections.
In the vertical-historical classification, forms of ownership form the key points of redistribution and concentration of property rights. This classification is close to the traditional formational classification, although it does not completely coincide with it.
For primitive forms of ownership are characterized by the fact that property rights have not yet been formed and, accordingly, there were no institutions and mechanisms for their distribution and redistribution. Consequently, there were no conditions for the formation of economic power and economic dependence. Equal rights to living conditions, labor and results were the hallmark of primitive appropriation.
Antique the form of ownership is characterized by an extremely high concentration of property rights among private individuals, when full property rights extended to people. The absolute concentration of property rights among some individuals corresponded to an equally absolute absence of rights among others, who were deprived of personal characteristics.
The subsequent development of human society was accompanied by a consistent movement towards equality of personal rights and freedom. In this historical movement, following the ancient one, arose feudal own. It was characterized by absolute property rights over the conditions of production and limited property rights over people.
Ancient and feudal property have in common that economic power was supplemented by power over the personality of people.
Liberation from personal dependence led, on the one hand, to the legal equality of all citizens, and on the other hand, to a new type of relationship: the economic power of some and the economic dependence of others. If we proceed from the accepted classification according to the formation criterion, then these properties have capitalist system. With an equal distribution of civil rights, there is an unequal distribution and concentration of property rights.
Construction experience socialism was an attempt to equalize people not only in rights and freedoms, but also in property rights to the conditions and results of production.
There are intermediate forms of ownership that involve the redistribution of property rights in order to limit the economic power of some and liberate others from the economic dependence. An example is the participation of employees in management, income distribution, control, etc.
Current trends in the world economy indicate that post-industrial development of society will be accompanied by an increasing distribution of absolute private property rights and an increasing variety of combinations of rights between economic agents.
2.2. Signs of classification of forms of ownership.
The question of forms of ownership is one of the most complex in economic theory. As noted, the classification of forms of ownership can be carried out in historical plan by describing successive forms of ownership. Each of the historical forms, in turn, is specified by objects and subjects of property, by the nature of the appropriation of production results and other characteristics.
Functional, a horizontal approach to describing the structure of modern forms of ownership requires supplementing the historical approach with special characteristics, based on the above content of property as a combination of economic powers that determine the position and socio-economic status of subjects of the economic process.
The theoretical basis for the functional definition of forms of ownership and their structure are economic powers. The modern theory of property rights numbers from a dozen (in a larger classification) to one and a half thousand (in a fractional classification) powers. But not all powers can be considered essential, determining the socio-economic position of the subjects of the economic process. Which ones can be considered as such? This is first of all work. This is the main factor in all economic processes, including the process of appropriation, since it is in the process of labor that objects of property and all social wealth are created. At the heart of the pyramid of relations between property and forms of ownership is the subject of labor (worker, peasant, engineer, programmer, etc.). But workers and creators of objects of property can become the subject of the formation of a form of ownership only when their creative right supplemented other significant property rights: to resources, to the production process and its result, to income. It is essential to note: whoever owns monopoly resources or has absolute ownership rights to them has a priority right to the process and result of production, to income and management. At the top of the pyramid of the appropriation process are income. They are the initial motive and the final result of the economic functioning of property. The owner can cede the management function by hiring managers; he can assign the rights to use the production conditions by renting them out. But he will not concede to anyone the right to appropriate income and dispose of it. From the point of view of economic rights of ownership, the position of workers who create wealth depends on the state of other rights. Workers certainly act as creators of objects or material basis property. But this does not at all mean that the basic property rights belong to those who stand at the origins of real creative appropriation. history and modernity indicate that final appropriation is being torn away from its origins. Several options are possible here: 1) supreme property rights go to those who create property and real social wealth; 2) he works alone, and other subjects and institutions become the owners of what is created; 3) various combinations between these two polar situations are possible.
The second essential feature of distinguishing forms of ownership is the authority to dispose of created property objects. Their special value form is income. This level of authority implies economic power. In the practical implementation of these powers, options are also possible: 1) income is appropriated by the one who creates it; 2) creates one and assigns another. Intermediate options are also possible. Closer to the second power is disposal of property. In essence, property in value form is accumulated (capitalized) income.
And finally control. When highlighting this authority, two circumstances are taken into account. The process of creating property on any large scale requires the agreement and coordination of all participants. But there is also a more significant side to this power in connection with property. With the formation of joint stock companies, the functions and subjects of ownership are separated from the functions and subjects of management. subjects of management (managers), controlling the movement, economic turnover of property and assets, become the real holders of certain powers to dispose of the means and results of production. In economic theory, this process is called the “revolution of managers.” The reality of Russia's transition economy is full of examples of contradictions and conflicts between external investors and managers. This contradiction is an unresolved reality even in countries with already established and developed market economies.
2.3. Forms of ownership.
When studying forms of ownership, one has to deal with the lack of a unified terminological base due to confusion in basic concepts. Such forms of ownership as national, state, public, collective are perceived by some authors as synonyms, by others - as different concepts. The same applies to the concepts of individual, private, personal property. In order to achieve an understanding in the further presentation, we will first try to determine what a form of ownership is, by what criterion it is determined and what forms of ownership must be distinguished from each other.
Form of ownership We will call it the type characterized by the subject of ownership. In other words, the form of ownership determines the belonging of various objects of property to a subject of a single nature. Based on this definition, we highlight the following forms of ownership.
Individual (individualized) property, within which the subject of property is personified as an individual, an individual who has full right (within the framework of the law) to dispose of an object of property or a part or share of an object belonging to him. With this form of ownership, the owner knows what belongs to him.
Within individual property, depending on the nature of the property and the nature of its use by the owner, one can distinguish personal And private own. Personal property is distinguished from private property in two ways.
Firstly, believing that personal property covers objects of individual property used, consumed only by the owner himself or provided by him to others for free use. Accordingly, private property is objects of individual property provided for use and consumption for a certain fee to other persons. This definition applies to objects in the form of property and consumer goods. On the other hand, we can generally assume that personal property is ownership of household items, personal property, and consumer goods.
Another approach to private property is that these are objects of individual property, used with the use of someone else's, hired labor, while personal property covers only objects used with the use of the personal labor of the owner. This definition applies, naturally, mainly to the means of production.
Let us note that, according to both the first and second definitions and both taken together, knowledge of the subject and object of property does not in itself make it possible to distinguish personal property from private property. The same object can be both personal and private property, depending on the nature of its use, application, and consumption. At the same time, using one of the definitions or both together, it is impossible to clearly define the line separating personal property from private property, and to establish the very fact of using personal property as private property, if this is worth doing at all.
In this light, it is difficult to accept the current of fear and even hostility towards private property that many Russians inherited from Soviet times and has intensified with the transition to a market economy. Most often, the rejection of private property is not due to a deep understanding of its nature and necessity or inadmissibility, but to an ideological background, a psychological attitude. After all, for many years the word “private owner” was interpreted and perceived as reprehensible and antisocial. The main objection to private property is that with private ownership of the means of production, as stated in the works of K. Marx and V. Lenin, exploitation arises, the appropriation of the results of other people's labor. On this basis, it was concluded that private ownership of the means of production is inadmissible in conditions economic system, called socialism in the Soviet Union.
However, it is the category of private property that is truly economic, since its use and functioning in business activities has an effective impact on the efficiency of the economy as a whole, while personal property is a characteristic of a person’s personal consumption and is rather an object of sociological research and social planning.
As for the identification of personal ownership of the means of production, based on the use of the labor of the owner himself, as the most “decent”, then, having legal rights to exist in a market economy, it represents the most primitive form. Marx himself argued that such forms of initial unity between the worker and the conditions of his labor are childish forms, equally unsuitable for developing labor as social labor and increasing the productive power of social labor.”
Regarding the exploitation of other people's labor, understood as the exclusion from the worker of part of the surplus product (profit) created by his labor, we note that such withdrawal occurs in any form of ownership. Moreover, the share of surplus value withdrawn by the real owner of the means of production, under conditions of public ownership of the means of production, can be no less than under conditions of private ownership. Where these funds are directed is, again, little determined by the dominant form of ownership, but depends more on the regulatory function of the state and the objective needs of production and society, individual social groups.
I would also like to note the fallacy of popular ideas that private property occupies a leading place in the economy, even if this was the case a very long time ago. The current market economy is characterized mainly by collective, corporate, and mixed forms of ownership. In a fairly typical capitalist market-type economy, 10-15% of the means of production are individually privately owned, 60-70% are collectively-corporate, joint-stock, and 15-25% are state-owned. Another thing is that corporate, joint-stock property is also classified as private, for which there are certain reasons.
The second form of ownership is collective in the broad sense of the word or multiple ownership. Within the multi-personal form, the subject of ownership is not personified as an individual, but represents an aggregate, a community, a collective of owners. The property owner can act as an authorized person or a group of persons expressing the proprietary interests of the entire partnership, but much more often it acts and is officially registered in a legal manner as a single legal entity (business entity, enterprises, company) or a government body, public organization. It would be more convenient to call multi-person property simply common, but the term “common property” is interpreted in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation as property owned by two or more persons, that is, as group property.
Speaking about multi-personal property, we proceed from the broadest understanding of it as a variety of forms of property that are social in nature, covering the range from family to national. This is any integrative, in a certain sense social, form.
Originating in narrowly collective, group ownership, within the framework of which there is direct direct participation and control on the part of the owner over the use of the property, multipersonal property is washed down to state, nationwide, where the influence on the direction of use of the property on the part of the owner (the people) is significantly mediated .
The division of forms of ownership into individual and multi-personal reflects a very enlarged structuring of various forms, covering a significant number of them in all their diversity. Let us note that such a division of property into two forms: individual and multi-personal is not generally accepted either in economic science or in practice. Thus, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation distinguishes private, state and municipal forms of ownership, while recognizing at the same time the possibility of the existence of other forms. At the same time, the division of ownership into the property of legal entities and individuals is widely known. The latter form is clearly associated with individual property.
We will try to specify the forms of ownership more clearly and in detail by highlighting the most characteristic forms (classes, types), based on the desire to reflect the actually developing forms and identify conditional ones, the name of which does not correspond to their true content.
It is quite clear that those used in Soviet times Russian history ideas about “state” property, behind which stood the property of state bodies, “cooperative-collective farm” property, which was poorly distinguishable from state and personal ownership only of consumer goods, were dogmatic and conditional.
It is necessary to clarify the category of “public property”, to separate it from the category of “state property”, because the confusion of these concepts creates confusion and the possibility of manipulating the forms and relations of property, and, as a result, real objects of property.
The global idea of public property, covering everything that is called joint property above, is very abstract in the sense that it is difficult to specify the owner. It is absolutely clear how the people as a whole are able to realize the functions and rights of the subject of property in relation to seven types of joint property, how the mechanism of responsibility for the so-called public property is generated.
It seems that we should single out such a form as national (public) ownership of natural resources, not involved in social production and having universal accessibility, including land, water, airspace, flora, fauna. These riches should be called public property. They are the exclusive property of the entire people. In relation to this object of property, the formula should be applied: “this is what belongs to everyone together and to everyone individually on the basis of equal access.” The janitor has equal rights to the use of such property with the president; everyone becomes the general manager of public property on behalf of its owner - the people, the population can only be carried out by the authorities of the people.
As for state property, it is involved in social production and therefore cannot belong to everyone on an equal basis.
As a result, in an enlarged view, the set of forms of ownership covers:
· nationwide - in the form of natural resources for public use, with general and equal accessibility to all members of society (unfortunately, this form of ownership is not highlighted in the adopted Russian legislative acts on property);
· state - natural resources, fixed production assets, working capital, information, representing part of the national property - transferred by the will of the people and the decision of the authorities of the people to the jurisdiction and disposal of state bodies under certain conditions of use with the simultaneous delegation of responsibility;
· regional state, placed under the jurisdiction and disposal of regional government bodies (the property of the constituent entities of the federation);
· communal, municipal, transferred to the disposal of local authorities;
· collective, representing an indivisible part of the national, state, regional property, devoted for a certain or unlimited period to a group of persons, as well as rented and used in accordance with the system of rules and regulations established by law, agreement, charter. It is essentially a derivative form of ownership resulting from the transfer of ownership rights;
· general – in the form of property, valuables, cash, securities created, acquired, originally owned by two or more persons, members of an associated group, used by them at their own discretion, subject to the general rules and restrictions established by law (such forms, to a certain extent, include joint stock, collective-shared, cooperative property). Common property is divided into joint, within the framework of which the property belongs to all participants, persons on an equal basis, without the allocation of shares, and shared ownership, in which the share of each of the individual owners, participants, persons in the common right of ownership is determined;
· individual, representing property, items, information that belongs personally to an individual and is used by him at his own discretion, subject to legal norms that apply to citizen-owners.
It is also advisable to highlight property of public organizations and group, family property.
In the structure of forms and relations of ownership, one should distinguish natural And cost Aspects. If the natural and material composition of the property is indivisible, only the monetary value can be divided. Therefore, situations are quite possible and often observed when the owner has the right to claim the monetary value of an object, but not the object itself.
We emphasize that there is no and cannot be an absolute separation of forms of ownership; mixed forms of ownership, including transitional ones from one form to another. For example, if ownership of labor is individual, ownership of the means of production is common, land is state-owned, and all these factors of production are combined in one enterprise, then the ownership of the enterprise obviously becomes mixed. It follows that we are forced to admit interpenetration and common existence of different forms of ownership within one object. The same means of production can be simultaneously, from a certain perspective, objects of different forms of ownership. And the owner, manager, and user of the object can obviously differ. However, this circumstance should not serve as a reason for the illegal and unauthorized use of property by entities without justification.
Until now, we have been talking about subjects of property represented by citizens, collectives, organizations, and the people of the country that owns this property. But on the territory of the country, as part of its national wealth, there may be property of foreign citizens, organizations, states in the form of objects wholly or partially owned by foreign entities. Such proprietary penetration, to which in our country there is an extremely wary attitude both from certain groups of the population and in government circles, is an inevitable consequence of the development of foreign economic relations and the inclusion of the country in the world economic system. So it is legitimate to include in the number of forms of ownership foreign ownership in isolated form or as part of mixed ownership (joint ventures). The object of such property can primarily be means of production, buildings, property, investment capital, borrowed funds, and collateral.
Concluding the description of the structure of forms and relations of ownership, we point out the clear desire that has appeared in recent years to bring under its legislative basis. Legislative acts on leasing and rental relations, on property, on land and land use, and on foreign investments are adopted at the federal and republican levels. Such acts have already included the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, and over time the law on intellectual property will also be included. Although the adopted Russian laws are imperfect in many ways, they undoubtedly form the primary legal foundation of property structures and relations. Closely adjacent to the mentioned package of laws are legislative acts on the denationalization and privatization of property, which are designed to direct the processes of changing existing forms and relations of property in the right direction.
3. Property in Russia
3.1. Formation of property in Russia
During the revolutionary transformations in Russia, which began in October 1917, private property was eliminated in industry, transport, construction, and trade. Collectivization in the countryside replaced the individual ownership of peasants with cooperative-collective farm (actually semi-state) property. As a result, the complete dominance of socialist, or public (i.e., state and semi-state) property was established.
Subsequently, the process of increasing social means of production through savings continued in the USSR. As a result social structure ownership of the means of production by the early 90s. took the following form: state 88.6; collective farm 8.7; cooperatives for the production of goods and services (including housing and construction) 1.5; property of citizens 1.2%. These figures essentially express a high state monopoly on the means of production.
The establishment of the dominance of state property, identified with the public property, had its merits. It ensured unified centralized management of the economy, a huge concentration of resources and their use to solve major economic problems.
The process of expanded reproduction was based on the development of state property. Centralization of property was the basis for relative equality in the distribution of material and spiritual benefits among members of society.
At the same time, the experience of the USSR and other socialist countries has shown that the globalization of state property also has major disadvantages, which become intolerable over time.
State enterprises were not economically interested in using new achievements of science and technology. These achievements were rejected, since the existing monopoly of state ownership made it more profitable to produce traditional products using established technology. The lack of competition deprived enterprises of economic incentives to improve product quality and reduce production costs. Internal sources of development were replaced by external incentives based on the power of administrative power.
As a result, the efficiency of the national economy based on state ownership turned out to be low; in many respects it is inferior to the efficiency of a market economy. The growth rate of labor productivity slowed down, capital productivity decreased from year to year, and the material intensity of products increased.
Similar shortcomings appeared in collective farm property. Administrative bodies had undivided command of collective farms, determined the direction of their production, and formed their governing bodies. Collective farm democracy was formal in nature. The collective farm was deprived of the right to dispose of its products, since the bulk of it went to the state at prices set by it.
The lack of a truly master's attitude towards production, one way or another, impedes its normal functioning. Of course, the director and the management service of the enterprise strive to ensure that it operates efficiently. But, as is often argued, and not without reason, the owner is always interested in the prosperity of the company, and the manager is always interested in maintaining his position.
In Russia, during radical economic reforms in the 90s. a system has developed that includes a number of forms of ownership (Fig. 1).
Various forms of ownership operating in the general system of economic relations cannot be isolated from each other. Overcoming their specificity, they inevitably intertwine. Based on this interweaving, mixed forms of ownership can arise. The objective basis of this interweaving is the mutual complementation and use of those specific opportunities that are inherent in each of the specific forms of management. Thus, in privatized Russian joint-stock companies the property of individual citizens, collectives and the state is now merging.
3.2. Criterion for the effectiveness of property transformations.
The difference between economic and legal approaches to property transformation is clearly visible in the following main areas. Law dispassionately records the transfer of property rights from one entity to another. The question of how effectively the property was used before and what caused the need to change owners is not the subject of special attention in the legal approach. For the economic approach, the question of the effective use of property passing from one owner to another is the main one. Therefore, it is the economic criteria for the transformation of forms of ownership that are most important for determining the compliance of specific ways and forms of transformation of property with historical and economic progress. Ignoring this circumstance can lead to such transformations that will lead to great losses, economic and social regression.
Another difference between the economic approach to property transformations and the legal one is that within the same legal form of ownership, significant transformations can occur in the process of appropriation. For example, an individual has ownership rights to a land plot. Regardless of whether it cultivates this plot or not, its property rights will not change, although in terms of economic content these are two completely different situations. His right of ownership does not change even if the land plot is cultivated by hired workers. However, this is already the third and fundamentally different situation from the point of view of the real economic process of appropriation under the same right of private property. Therefore, only economic analysis allows us to obtain deeper, more specific and internally dissected knowledge about the real content of property.
This approach is typical for all main directions of economic theory. The theory of effective and rational distribution of resources, justifying the criteria for moving resources from the non-state (private) sector to the state (public), puts forward the following requirement: the transformation of property by moving funds and resources from one (private) sector to another (public) is possible and economically justified if the losses from the withdrawal of resources from the private sector are less than the additional benefits in the state (public) sector. In other words, the transformation of private property into public property is justified only if it leads to an increase in the productivity (return) of resources. This economic criterion, with some refinements, can be applied universally to all other forms of property and redistributed property rights.
However, decisions made on property transformations in a transition economy can often, as experience shows, be dictated by other circumstances: political, interests of shadow and criminal capital, the chosen option for transformation (radical or reformist). All this can significantly affect the development of rational economic decisions, which can lead to economic losses in this moment time.
However, the short-term and long-term consequences of property changes should be taken into account. In this regard, there is a problem of weighing short-term losses and long-term benefits for society from property transformations. Its solution requires a number of special economic calculations. In any case, careful scientific economic analysis must precede property transformations on a national scale.
3.3. Features of property transformation in Russia.
The choice of directions and forms of transformation in the transition economy of Russia is carried out in the course of heated discussions, which were conducted in the following main areas. The following were justified as priorities: denationalization with preservation of state ownership in large enterprises and privatization in the field of small business; creation of collective enterprises with both indivisible and collectively shared ownership; free distribution of state property among the population (through special privatization accounts, government securities, etc.); corporatization of enterprises and auctioning of shares of the enterprises themselves.
Privatization in Russia was carried out in a radical manner in nature, scale, pace, timing and methods.
The RSFSR Law “On the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the RSFSR” was adopted on July 3, 1991 and served as the basis for the development and implementation of practical privatization programs. The Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of January 29, 1992 “On the accelerated privatization of state and municipal enterprises” was the basis for intensifying the privatization process. A large-scale privatization process, with the prescription of quantitative privatization plans by industry and region, unfolded on the basis of the first privatization program (June 1992). And the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 1, 1992 No. 721 and the approved package of annexes to it led the privatization process into a state of “technological flow”.
In our country, privatization was carried out at a frantic pace. It was not preceded by any preliminary preparation. No inventory of enterprises was carried out. In conditions of very rapid depreciation of money, the value of enterprises was not correctly assessed (they were often sold at residual value - at the cost of fully worn-out equipment). Therefore, many factories fell prey to clever buyers at a price comparable to the cost of a new prestigious apartment.
The “cavalry” pace of privatization in 1993, when 43 thousand enterprises left the public sector, is indicated by the following figures:
Privatized enterprises, thousand: 42.9
by sale 29.4
corporatization 13.5
Receipt of funds from privatization of enterprises:
privatization checks, million 46.8
cash, billion rubles 450.3
including:
personal funds of citizens 50.1
funds for economic stimulation of enterprises 19.1
funds of purchasing enterprises 208.0
funds from foreign investors 1.0
It was noted above that privatization is a special, but not the only form of property transformation. It is possible to redistribute property rights without redistributing economic power. Privatization itself can be carried out radically, subordinating it to political goals, or evolutionarily, subordinating it to the goals of economic efficiency. In the transitional economy of Russia, there have been trends toward reverse transformations of property from private to state, cooperative, and municipal. Examples include numerous cases of the return of privatized housing to municipal ownership; association of shares of corporatized agricultural enterprises; acquisition by municipal authorities of a controlling stake in privatized enterprises in order to increase production, etc.
At the end of the 90s, as a result of the implementation of a wide range of measures for denationalization and privatization in Russia, significant changes occurred in property relations and organizational and legal forms of commercial activity. This situation is characterized by:
· variety of forms of ownership;
· transformation of private property into one of the main forms of ownership in the Russian economy;
· overcoming the monopoly of state ownership in almost all spheres of the national economy;
· the formation of new forms of management that are adequate to changes in property relations;
· approval of new forms of organization economic activity(joint stock companies, partnerships, farms, charitable and other public foundations, etc.);
· formation of market infrastructure and mechanisms serving new forms of ownership.
Despite the fact that major stages of privatization have been completed, the redistribution of property rights has not yet been completed. The optimal concentration of powers among individuals and legal entities, which provides the most effective forms of functional movement of property, has not yet been found. The criterion of economic efficiency should come to the fore in the process of redistribution of property rights at new stages of property transformation.
By 1997, a situation had developed that could provoke a new large-scale redistribution of property rights, i.e., a new stage of privatization and re-privatization. The system of non-payments, into which almost all sectors of the real sector of the economy “crept”, after a sharp increase in the scale of prices since 1992, led to the fact that most enterprises, including entire sectors of the state’s life support, turned out to be chronic debtors. Buyers in the new conditions may be banks and other financial institutions with monetary capital.
Having already quite obvious experience of massive and radical transformation of property, it is necessary to avoid radical, ill-conceived and uncalculated decisions based on economic results.
4. Manufacturing plant
7.1. The enterprise, its tasks and functions
A production enterprise is a separate specialized unit, the basis of which is a professionally organized labor collective, capable, with the help of the means of production at its disposal, to produce the products needed by consumers (perform work, provide services) for the appropriate purpose, profile and assortment. Manufacturing enterprises include plants, factories, combines, mines, quarries, ports, roads, bases and other economic organizations for production purposes.
From a purely legal side, according to the legislation of the Russian Federation, an enterprise is an independent economic entity created in the manner prescribed by law to produce products and provide services in order to satisfy public needs and make a profit.
The most important tasks of an operating enterprise are:
receipt of income by the owner of the enterprise;
providing consumers with the company's products;
provision of enterprise personnel wages, normal working conditions and opportunities for professional growth;
creating jobs for the population living in the vicinity of the enterprise;
security environment: land, air and water basins;
preventing disruptions in the operation of the enterprise (delivery failure, production of defective products, sharp reduction in volumes and reduction in production profitability).
The objectives of the enterprise are determined by:
interests of the owner;
amount of capital;
the situation within the enterprise;
external environment (Fig. 4).
The right to set tasks for the personnel of the enterprise remains with the owner, regardless of his status - a private individual, government agencies or shareholders. The owner, based on his own interests, goals, priorities, not only has the right, but is forced to formulate and set tasks for the enterprise team - otherwise someone else will do it instead of him in his own interests.
![]() |
The most important task of an enterprise in all cases is to generate income through the sale of manufactured products (work performed, services provided) to consumers. Based on the income received, the social and economic needs of the workforce and owners of the means of production are satisfied.
The body that formulates and specifies any economic task is obliged to take into account the real conditions of its implementation, taking into account the functions that the enterprise performs.
Regardless of the form of ownership, the enterprise operates, as a rule, on the terms of full economic accounting, self-sufficiency and self-financing. It independently enters into contracts with consumers of products, including receiving government orders, and also enters into contracts and makes payments with suppliers of the necessary production resources.
The main functions of a manufacturing enterprise include:
production of products for industrial and personal consumption;
sale and delivery of products to consumers;
after-sales service of products;
logistics of production at the enterprise;
management and organization of personnel labor at the enterprise;
comprehensive development and growth of production volumes at the enterprise;
entrepreneurship;
paying taxes, making mandatory and voluntary contributions and payments to the budget and other financial bodies;
compliance with current standards, regulations, and state laws.
The functions of the enterprise are specified and specified depending on:
enterprise size;
industry affiliation;
degrees of specialization and cooperation;
availability of social infrastructure;
forms of ownership;
relationship with local authorities authorities.
The enterprise bears full responsibility to the financial authorities for the timely transfer of taxes and other payments, and covers all damages and losses from its own income. Using proceeds from the sale of products (services), it pays expenses for the organization and development of production, as well as for the purchase of raw materials, supplies, and labor.
The administration and personnel of the enterprise are obliged to constantly ensure that the products they produce are of sufficiently high quality and not too expensive. Both are necessary to conquer and retain the sales market. Products of low quality, as well as those that are too expensive, force the consumer to look for a supplier from whom they can purchase the same products with better quality indicators or at a lower price. In order not to lose consumers, the company’s specialists study product markets, take measures to accelerate scientific and technological progress, improve product quality, and reduce its cost. In fact, in work collectives manufacturing enterprises The fate of the state and development of the country's economy and politics is being decided.
5. Types of enterprises
5.1. Signs of classification of enterprises
The business sector of the national economy usually includes a huge number of enterprises, which, for the purposes of economic analysis, are grouped according to a number of significant characteristics. The most common classifications are based on forms of ownership, size, nature of activity, industry, dominant factor of production, and legal status.
By type of ownership enterprises are divided into:
private, which can exist either as completely independent, independent firms, or in the form of associations and their component parts. Private companies can also include those firms in which the state has a share of capital (but not a predominant one);
state, which are understood as both purely state (including municipal), where capital and management are completely owned by the state, and mixed, where the state owns the majority of capital or plays a decisive role in management. On the recommendation of the Organization economic cooperation and Development (OECD) state-owned enterprises should be considered those in which government agencies own the majority of the capital (over 50%) and/or those that are controlled by them (through government officials working at the enterprise).
Of these two categories of enterprises, they are often distinguished mixed, those. enterprises with a significant or predominant state share in the capital. This category of enterprises sometimes occupies a significant place in the economic life of the country, for example in Russia in the late 90s, when, as a result of privatization, the state retained a stake in many privatized enterprises (a quarter of all employed workers work at these enterprises).
By size enterprises are divided into small, medium and large, based on two main parameters - the number of employees and the volume of production (sales).
In terms of number, small enterprises usually predominate (in Russia they account for about half of the total number of enterprises).
IN different countries Small businesses are defined differently. According to the law “On state support of small businesses in the Russian Federation” dated June 14, 1995 in our country, these include those where the average number of employees does not exceed 30 people in retail trade and consumer services, 50 people in wholesale trade, scientific and technical sphere, agriculture - 60 people, transport, construction and industry - 100 people
Classification of companies by nature of activity (productive and non-productive) involves their division into producing material goods(consumer or investment goods) and services. This classification is close to the classification of enterprises by industry , which divides them into industrial, agricultural, trade, transport, banking, insurance, etc.
Classification of enterprises based on the dominant factor of production provides for labour-intensive, capital-intensive, material-intensive, knowledge-intensive enterprises.
By legal status (organizational and legal forms) in Russia distinguish, first of all, business partnerships and societies; production cooperatives; state and municipal unitary enterprises; individual entrepreneurs.
5.2.Private entrepreneur
This type of firm is also called a one-man business, or sole proprietorship. The owner has or acquires the material resources and capital equipment necessary for production activities, and also personally controls the activities of the enterprise.
ADVANTAGES:
1. A sole proprietorship is easy to establish, since the legal registration procedure is very simple and registration of a company of this kind usually does not require large expenses.
2. The owner is his own boss and has considerable freedom of action. To make decisions about what and how to produce. There is no need to wait for decisions of any meetings, partners or directors.
3. The owner can provide personal services to the client.
4. The incentives for effective work are the most energetic. The owner receives everything in case of success and loses everything in case of failure.
However, there are also disadvantages to this organizational form, and they are quite significant.
FLAWS:
1. With rare exceptions, the financial resources of a sole proprietor are insufficient for the company to grow into a large enterprise. Since the bankruptcy rate of sole proprietors is relatively high, commercial banks are not very willing to provide them with large loans.
2. Full control over the activities of the enterprise is exercised, the owner must carry out all major decisions, for example, regarding the purchase, sale, attraction and maintenance of personnel; do not lose sight of technical aspects that may arise in production, advertising and distribution of products.
3. The most important disadvantage is that the sole owner is the subject unlimited liability. This means that self-employed entrepreneurs risk not only the company's assets, but also their personal assets.
If the company goes bankrupt, he is personally and solely liable for the debts of the company. In this case, the owner's personal property may be sold to pay debts.
5.3. Partnership (partnership)
Partnership - This is a form of business organization that is a natural development of sole proprietorship.
Partnership Act 1890 defined a partnership as a voluntary association of 2 to 20 people united for a joint business with the aim of making a profit. However, some areas of activity (lawyers, accountants, brokers) now allow more than 20 members to form partnerships.
Partnerships vary in the degree of participation in the activities of the enterprise. In some cases, all partners play an active role in the functioning of the enterprise, in other cases, one or more participants may play a passive role. This means that they invest their financial resources in the company, but do not actively participate in its management.
ADVANTAGES:
1. Like a sole proprietorship, a partnership is easy to form. In almost all cases, a written agreement is concluded, and the bureaucratic procedures are not burdensome.
2. Since many people are united in a partnership (partnership), the initial capital can be greater than in a sole private enterprise.
3. Firm management can be specialized. Each partner can take responsibility for a specific area of work. For example, for management, production, etc.
FLAWS:
1. When several people participate in management. This division of power can lead to incompatible interests, inconsistent policies, or inaction when decisive action is required. It's even worse when partners disagree on major issues. For all of these reasons, managing a partnership can be cumbersome and difficult.
2. The company's finances are still limited, although they significantly exceed the possibilities of private ownership. The financial resources of three or four partners may not be sufficient, or they may be such that they still severely limit the potential growth of a profitable enterprise.
3. The duration of the partnership is unpredictable. Withdrawal from a partnership or death of a partner, as a rule, entails the disintegration and complete reorganization of the company, potentially disrupting its activities.
4. Partnerships (partnerships) suffer from unlimited liability for the activities of the enterprise. A general partnership means that each partner is fully responsible for the debts of the business.
5. You can create a limited liability partnership. In this case, the partner is liable for the debts of the enterprise in the amount of the funds that he invested in it. However, partners in this type of partnership cannot take part in the conduct of the business - at least one of them must still assume full responsibility.
5.3.Corporation (limited liability companies)
Corporation - This legal form businesses that are distinct and separate from the specific individuals who own them. These government-recognized “legal entities” can acquire resources, own assets, produce and sell products, borrow, make loans, sue and be sued. And also perform all the functions that are performed by any other type of enterprise.
ADVANTAGES:
1. The most effective form of business organization in matters of raising money capital. Corporations have a unique method of financing - through the sale of stocks and bonds - that allows them to attract the savings of numerous households. Through the securities market, corporations can pool the financial resources of a huge number of individuals. Financing through the sale of securities also has certain advantages. From the buyers' point of view. Corporations have easier access to bank credit compared to other forms of business organization. The reason is not only the greater reliability of the corporation, but also its ability to provide banks with profitable accounts.
2. Another significant advantage of corporations is limited liability. Owners of corporations (that is, stockholders) risk only the amount they paid to purchase the shares. Their personal assets are not at risk even if the corporation goes bankrupt. Creditors can sue a corporation as a legal entity, but not the owners of the corporation as individuals. The right of limited liability significantly simplifies the task of a corporation in attracting monetary capital.
3. Because a corporation is a legal entity, it exists independently of its owners and, for that matter, of its own officers. Partnerships can die suddenly and unpredictably, but corporations, at least according to the laws, are eternal. Transferring ownership of a corporation through the sale of shares does not undermine its integrity. In short, corporations have a certain permanence that other forms of business lack, which opens up the possibility of long-term planning and growth.
The advantages of a corporation are enormous and usually outweigh the disadvantages. And yet they exist.
FLAWS:
1. Registering a corporation's charter involves some bureaucratic procedures and legal fees.
2. The next possible disadvantage of a corporation concerns issues related to the taxation of corporate profits. It's about the problem double taxation: That portion of a corporation's income that is paid out as dividends to stockholders is taxed twice—once as part of the corporation's profits and again as part of the stockholder's personal income.
3. In case of sole proprietorship and partnership, the owners of real estate and financial assets themselves directly manage and control these assets. But in large corporations, whose shares are widely distributed among hundreds of thousands of owners, there is a significant divergence between the functions of ownership and control.
The reasons for this lie in the inactivity of the typical shareholder. Most shareholders do not exercise voting rights, or if they do exercise this right, they do so only by signing up to grant powers to current officers of the corporation.
All limited companies must be registered with Companies House. Before the start of actual activities, the company must submit a number of documents to Companies House for approval:
Company Memorandum;
Charter of a joint stock company.
The law requires all registered companies to publish annual accounts and provide copies of these accounts to Companies House.
5.4.1. Small business
A small enterprise can be created by a private individual, an enterprise, an organization, both state and public. Firstly, it can be “single-cell” and more complex, have branches, sections, and representative offices. Secondly, the variety of purposes for which an enterprise can be created: artistic and auxiliary crafts, provision of all kinds of services to the population, launching almost any activity not prohibited by law. Thirdly, the relatively simple procedure of establishment and registration is attractive.
In industrialized countries, small businesses contribute a significant share of the total gross product.
The viability of small enterprises is determined by the freedom and simplicity of their creation, the absence of administrative coercion, a preferential taxation system, and a market pricing mechanism.
Small enterprises include newly created existing enterprises employing up to 200 people in industry or construction, up to 100 people in science and scientific services, up to 50 people in other branches of the production sector, up to 25 people in non-production sectors, up to 15 people in retail trade.
Small enterprises can be created as a result of separation from an existing enterprise, association, or organization. In these cases, the organization (enterprise) from which the small enterprise was spun off acts as its founder.
For state registration of a small enterprise by the local Council of People's Deputies, the latter should provide the following documents:
Order of the founders;
Memorandum of association;
Receipt of payment of the state fee for registration.
The constituent agreement defines the relationship between the enterprise and its founder, the business owner, financial ties, authorized capital, and deductions from profits in favor of the founder.
The charter of a small enterprise establishes the goals of its activities, the procedure for forming the property of the enterprise, the procedure for management, the possibility of redemption, the distribution of profits, the conditions for reorganization and termination of activities and other important issues.
The enterprise independently carries out its activities, disposes of the products produced, the profit received, which remains at its disposal after paying taxes and other obligatory payments.
Small enterprises report on the results of their economic activities to the founders in the manner prescribed by the constituent agreement.
The enterprise is managed in accordance with the Charter. The manager (director) is appointed by the owner upon establishment of the enterprise. The management structure and staffing are determined by the workforce independently. Contracts can be concluded with managers, specialists and other employees as a special form of employment contract.
Procedural issues of liquidation of an enterprise are resolved by the owner of the property through the liquidation commission appointed by him. Justified claims of creditors against a small enterprise being liquidated are satisfied from its property.
When an enterprise is reorganized, its rights and obligations are transferred to its legal successors.
5.4.2. Joint stock company (closed and open)
Joint-Stock Company - a voluntary organization of legal entities and citizens (including foreign ones) for joint activities by combining their contributions and issuing shares for the entire value of the authorized capital.
Joint stock companies provide three important purposes:
The issue of shares by an enterprise for the purpose of mobilizing funds does not change its status, that is, the organizational and legal procedures are not transformed: a meeting of future participants, determination of the authorized capital, development of a charter and its state registration.
Depending on who owns the shares, joint stock companies can be state-owned, cooperative, public, or mixed.
A joint stock company may be created for the purposes of economic and other activities not prohibited by law. A joint stock company, being a legal entity, has the right to enter into any transactions provided for by law, independently resolve issues of organizing management, setting prices for manufactured products, remuneration, and distribution of net profit. The company may have representative offices, branches, and establish subsidiaries as independent commercial organizations.
To register a joint stock company, the following documents are submitted:
Application for registration (letter of founders);
Minutes of the founding meeting;
A receipt for payment of the registration fee, the amount of which depends on the authorized capital.
Limited Liability Company (LLC):
This is recognized as a company founded by one or several persons, the authorized capital of which is divided into shares determined by the constituent documents; LLC participants are not liable for its obligations and bear the risk of losses associated with the activities of the company within the limits of the size (value) of the contributions made by them. The authorized capital of a limited liability company is made up of the value of the contributions of its participants. An LLC has no public liability. This legal form is most common among small and medium-sized enterprises.
Joint stock companies are created of two types - closed and open.
A joint stock company, the participants of which can alienate shares belonging to them without the consent of other shareholders, is recognized as open. Such a joint stock company has the right to subscribe for the shares it issues and to sell them freely under the conditions established by law. An open joint-stock company is obliged to annually publish an annual report for public information, balance sheet, profit and loss account.
A joint stock company, the shares of which are distributed only among its founders or other predetermined circle of persons, is recognized closed .
Joint-stock companies and limited liability companies have no fundamental differences. The only difference is that joint stock companies form their authorized capital by issuing shares, the owners of which may be unknown in advance. Limited liability companies create such a fund only at the expense of shareholders. If existing companies begin to issue shares, they will turn into joint stock companies. The concept of “limited liability” means that the shareholder is liable only to the extent of his share. Liability does not extend to the rest of his property, unlike a cooperative, whose members are responsible for obligations with all their property.
Contributions (shares) of participants in a joint stock company (partnership) with limited liability can be transferred from one owner to another only with the consent of the other owners (shareholders) in the manner prescribed by the charter.
Deposits (shares) of an open company can be transferred from one owner to another without the consent of the shareholders. The shares of this company can be freely traded.
The highest governing body of a joint stock company is the general meeting of shareholders. It makes it possible to exercise the right to manage LLC members. The number of votes of participants at the meeting is determined in proportion to the size of their shares in the authorized capital.
ADVANTAGES:
Possibility of mobilizing large financial resources;
The ability to quickly transfer funds from one industry to another;
The right to freely transfer and sell shares, ensuring the existence of the company, regardless of changes in the composition of shareholders;
Limited liability of shareholders;
Separation of ownership and management functions.
5.4.3. Joint venture
Foreign investment refers to all types of property and intellectual assets invested in an enterprise for the purpose of making a profit. Foreign investors have the right to take business participation in enterprises created jointly with legal entities and citizens on the territory of the Russian Federation, as well as create enterprises wholly owned by foreign investors.
Enterprises with foreign investment are created and operate in the form of joint-stock and other business companies and partnerships provided for by law on the territory of the Russian Federation.
A joint venture can be created either through its establishment, or as a result of the acquisition by a foreign investor of a participation interest (share, shares) in a previously established enterprise without foreign investment or the acquisition of such enterprise completely.
The constituent documents of enterprises with foreign investment must determine the subject and goals of the enterprise's activities, the composition of participants, the size and procedure for forming the authorized capital, the size of participants' shares, the structure, composition and procedure for decision-making, a list of issues requiring unanimity, and the procedure for liquidating the enterprise.
Contributions to the authorized capital are assessed by participants based on world market prices. In the absence of such prices, the cost of deposits is determined by agreement of the participants.
To register a joint venture, the following documents are provided:
Written application from the founders for registration;
Conclusion of relevant examinations;
Notarized two copies of constituent documents (founding agreement);
A notarized copy of the property owner’s decision to create an enterprise or a copy of the decision of the body authorized by him, as well as notarized copies of constituent documents for each participant on the Russian side;
A document on the solvency of a foreign investor, issued by its servicing bank or other financial institution;
An extract from the trade register of the country of origin or other equivalent evidence of the legal status of the foreign investor in accordance with the laws of the country of its location;
Enterprises with foreign investors have the right to carry out any types of activities not prohibited by law. Some activities require a license, such as insurance and banking.
Joint ventures have the right to create subsidiaries, branches and representative offices both in the Russian Federation and abroad.
Foreign investors and enterprises are allocated land, have the right to rent property, acquire participation shares, shares and other securities for stock exchanges, participate in exchange transactions in the manner and under the conditions established by law. Foreign investors can participate in the privatization of state and municipal enterprises in the Russian Federation.
Foreign citizens can be members of the management body of an enterprise on the terms determined by individual contracts.
Liquidation of an enterprise with foreign investment is carried out in the manner prescribed by law and in strict accordance with the charter. If the enterprise, after a year after registration, does not confirm the payment of at least 50 percent of the contribution amounts specified in the statutory documents, the body that registered the enterprise recognizes it as failed and makes a decision on liquidation. The enterprise is considered liquidated from the moment the act of the liquidation commission is approved, which must be reported in the press.
5.5. Cooperatives
There are two types of cooperative societies: workers' cooperatives (or producer cooperatives) and consumer cooperatives (retailer cooperatives).
WORKER COOPERATIVES:
This is a voluntary association of citizens on the basis of membership for joint production activities based on their personal labor and other participation and association by its members (participants in property shares). Worker cooperatives are a for-profit organization.
The founding document of workers' cooperatives is its charter, approved by the general meeting of its members. The number of members of cooperatives should not be less than five. Property owned by worker cooperatives is divided into shares of its members in accordance with the charter of the cooperative. The cooperative does not have the right to issue shares. A member of a cooperative has one vote when making decisions in a common way. Profits are divided among employees in accordance with the established agreement.
At the beginning of the 20th century there were about 200 worker cooperatives in Great Britain. They were strongly supported by cooperative retailers, who purchased most of the products of these cooperatives. By the beginning of the 60s, the number had decreased to thirty. Most production cooperatives remained in the printing business, sewing clothes and shoes.
CONSUMER CO-OPERATIVES:
The owners of cooperatives of this type are the consumers themselves - those people who buy goods, rather than produce them.
The first society of retail traders was created in Rochdel in 1844. a group of poor weavers who founded a small shop. The basic principles of cooperative societies are as follows:
1.Open Membership: |
There is no limit to the number of members in a cooperative society; everyone can enter and leave the cooperative at any time. |
2.Profit distribution: |
For many years, cooperative members received regular cash dividends. The amount of dividends is determined by the amount of funds brought into the cooperative. |
3. Payment of interest on share capital: |
Members of cooperatives receive a fixed interest on their share capital. The management of the cooperative is carried out by a committee - usually employees. Combining this work with another. They are elected by the members of the cooperative. The current work of the cooperative is carried out by managers. Full-time employees appointed as members of the select committee. |
Traditionally, cooperative societies have considered themselves to be more than just a special form of business organization.
5.6. State-owned enterprises (public corporations)
The word “government” includes both local authorities and the central government.
The government is the largest employer, so its income and expenses far exceed those of the largest limited companies.
Many publicly owned enterprises, like private firms, sell what they produce. The most well-known examples of this kind are nationalized industries, such as coal mining, electricity generation and railway transport. These businesses are run by publicly traded corporations.
Own:
A publicly traded corporation is a form of business organization. This form is used to manage nationalized industries.
Like limited companies, they are legal entities, but unlike them they do not hold shares. Public corporations are owned by the government. In reality, they belong to all citizens of the country.
Control:
There is a governing board. On the surface, the managers of these corporations have the same responsibilities as the directors of a company. The most important difference is that How they get into leadership positions.
In public corporations they are appointed Minister of the Interior, while in limited liability companies choose shareholders.
Managers of public corporations manage the day-to-day operations of the enterprises, but are responsible to the government, not to a meeting of shareholders. The Minister of State is responsible for their work. For example, the Minister of Energy is responsible for the state of coal mining in the country, the Minister of Transport is responsible for railway lines.
Finance :
Since public corporations have no shareholders, such an organization cannot raise capital by issuing shares. In some countries, they obtain long-term loans directly from the government and short-term loans from banks. Some public corporations receive loans from abroad. The state compensates for all expenses, including losses of public corporations.
Public corporations are required to submit annual reports of operations and a balance sheet of income and expenses. These documents are reviewed by the government.
Goals :
If the main goal of limited liability companies is to make a profit, then the goals of public corporations are completely different. It is assumed that working in nationalized industries, they will at least be self-sustaining enterprises, that is, they will not incur constant losses. Their main task is to work for the common good. This means that managers must conduct business in such a way that it is as efficient as possible in the interests of the entire society, the entire country.
Public corporations must be much more concerned with the social impact of their activities than limited liability companies. For example, a railroad corporation should not allow railroad closures in remote rural areas that could completely deprive local residents of a vital transportation service.
Today's government policy is to compensate for losses in those types of services that are of great social importance.
Municipal enterprises:
Local authorities are also involved in the management of enterprises. The best known example in this area is urban bus services, which are the responsibility of local authorities in relatively large cities.
City services such as swimming pools, playgrounds and other types of services are offered and sold for money by local authorities.
Some of these types of services are financed from the budget, since their prices do not compensate for real costs.
6. Enterprises and entrepreneurship in the Russian Federation
In the past, Soviet science generally avoided issues of enterprise and entrepreneurship. You won't find these words even in Explanatory dictionary Russian language S. Ozhegova. Soviet social scientists viewed these concepts as purely class phenomena, although in everyday life and economic practice most people (and leaders certainly) came into contact with the practice of entrepreneurship to one degree or another.
American experts Robert Hisrich and Michael Peters defined an entrepreneur as a person who spends all his energy on it, takes on all... the risk, receiving money and satisfaction with what he has achieved as a reward."
Such a definition, with its obvious romanticism, hardly gives a sufficiently accurate picture of entrepreneurship, especially in Russia in the 90s. The main task of every entrepreneur, which is to generate income for the invested labor and capital, is everyday prose, and not at all romantic.
The Law of the Russian Federation “On Enterprise and Entrepreneurial Activities” notes that “entrepreneurial activity (entrepreneurship) is the proactive independent activity of citizens and their associations aimed at making a profit.” Entrepreneurial activity in this Law is interconnected with the activities of the enterprise, as a result of which “the status of an entrepreneur is acquired through the registration of an enterprise.”
Many problems arise when creating them. In Russia, this is primarily due to imperfect legislation: methods for coordinating the work of complexes with central and local administrative and economic departments have not been fully developed; the boundaries of economic independence of these complexes have not been established; relationships between associations and concerns with state and local authorities in many cases do not have clear legal regulation; The legal basis for information services for complexes, as well as for the development of cooperation and the preservation of existing production ties, have not been developed.
In addition, with the formation of large production complexes, as a rule, the problem of monopolism becomes aggravated. The creation of extremely large production complexes, concentrating at their enterprises the production of the bulk of the country's similar products, poses a real threat of market monopolization, increased inflation, and inhibition of scientific and technological progress.
The solution to the problem is to organize parallel production of similar products and develop foreign economic relations. However, the creation of parallel structures and competitive placement of orders will take considerable time. Therefore, government agencies consider the primary and most accessible method of limiting monopolism to be the development of a system of economic and legal measures of state regulation of the processes of integration of production within concerns and associations.
7. Joint-stock companies in Belgorod
Characteristics of the corporatization process in the agro-industrial complex.
There is a widespread opinion that joint stock companies are not adequate to the specifics of agricultural production - the procedure for their functioning in agriculture differs slightly from the organization of work of production cooperatives and limited liability companies. In addition, a characteristic feature of joint-stock companies in agriculture is the distribution of income not in proportion to the number of shares, but depending on the labor participation of each employee. Only a few joint stock companies present income in the form of dividends per share.
Currently, there are 321 joint-stock companies operating in the agro-industrial complex of the Belgorod region, of which 175 are open joint-stock companies, and 146 are closed joint-stock companies. Over the previous three years, there has been a tendency towards a decrease in the number of closed joint-stock companies and an increase in the number of open joint-stock companies. This trend can be seen especially clearly in the example of agricultural enterprises. The trend towards an increase in the number of open joint stock companies is not due to the goals of raising capital by placing shares, but is explained by the creation of new commercial structures, mainly agricultural enterprises and enterprises processing agricultural products.
In 1999-2001 In the agro-industrial complex of the Belgorod region, new commercial structures were created mainly with the organizational and legal form of JSC. The founders of the new organizations were large industrial enterprises and individuals who are owners of land shares in specific agricultural enterprises. Newly formed enterprises were created, as a rule, by large industrial and commercial enterprises, which include Efirnoe OJSC, Alekseevsky Meat Processing Plant OJSC, BelAgroGAZ LLC, APP Rif CJSC, Prodimex OJSC, Belgorod Experimental Fish Plant OJSC feed", OJSC "Stoilensky GOK", etc. The largest investors in terms of the volume of investments and the availability of land in the property are OJSC "Efirnoe", CJSC APP "Rif", OJSC "Stoilensky GOK".
The authorized capital of joint stock companies as of January 1, 2001 amounted to 856.3 million rubles. Additional capital - 148.8 million rubles. The number of shares is 104,243.1 thousand with an average par value of 23.80 rubles. There are no preferred shares in the total mass of shares.
Analyzing the placement of shares of joint stock companies of the agro-industrial complex, we can say that the largest share is 96,5% occupied by shares of agricultural enterprises, a small share of shares is placed by repair and technical enterprises (0,1%) and transport service enterprises (0.1%). The number of shares placed among shareholders was reduced due to the conversion of shares, as well as the liquidation of some companies; There was also an issue of shares, including additional issues.
Assessing the profitability of joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex .
An analysis of the performance indicators of joint-stock companies that affect the profitability and profitability of production indicates an increase in sales volumes of products, goods, works, and services. So, if as of January 1, 1999, the volume of revenue from the sale of products, goods, works, services (excluding VAT) amounted to 4912.40 million rubles, then the same figure as of January 1, 2001 amounted to 13275.26 million rubles. This fact speaks of a positive shift in the activities of joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex, which was achieved mainly due to an increase in the volume of production and processing of agricultural products. As of January 1, 1999, the financial result of joint stock companies of the agro-industrial complex amounted to 131.86 million rubles, as of January 1, 2001, the financial result was 392.14 million rubles, while the profit for core activities amounted to 1830 .41 million rub. Consequently, a significant part of the enterprise’s losses does not come from its core activities, but from servicing accounts payable on non-operating operations and from extraordinary expenses.
Assessment of production potential .
The production potential of joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex can be characterized by the following indicators:
the value of property from January 1, 1999 to January 1, 2001 increased 1.23 times and amounted to 13,009 million rubles;
the share of production assets in the total value of property amounted to 68.12% of their total value as of January 1, 2001.
Production assets as of January 1, 2001 amounted to 10,268.8 million rubles. During the period from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2001, their value increased 1.05 times. Currently, there has been a tendency to reduce the share of fixed assets in the total value of property.
Indicators of financial and economic activity of joint-stock companies of the agro-industrial complex .
Joint-stock companies are characterized by high levels of efficiency in the use of fixed assets and labor resources. In 2000 (compared to 1999), the amount of sales revenue increased by 1.37 times, labor productivity increased by 1.33 times, and the number of employees increased by 3.4%. However, over the same period, capital intensity decreased: from 2.94 in 1998 to 0.97 in 2000; The capital-labor ratio decreased by 25.79%, which is a negative fact in the activities of joint-stock companies.
Characteristic feature The agro-industrial complex is the presence of a small share of shares in the workforce (with the exception of agriculture) and agricultural producers. There is a trend towards a decrease in the number of shares among these groups of owners and a concentration of shareholdings among legal entities, including third parties. This trend is negative, as it is explained by the concentration of blocks of shares among large owners who, for the most part, do not take into account the interests of both labor collective, and agricultural producers.
In the future, this may lead to a significant redistribution of income in favor of processing enterprises to the detriment of the interests of agricultural enterprises. At the same time, prices for products of the processing industry will increase and prices for agricultural products will be limited.
As of January 1, 2001 (according to the constituent documents), 52 issues of shares were registered, including 28 additional issues. The unsatisfactory economic condition of joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex requires the development and implementation of specific projects that can change the situation. One of the key problems in joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex is the lack of investment in production, so it is important to determine ways and methods, as well as the possibilities of forming a securities market, with the help of which it is possible to solve the problems of financing joint-stock companies in the agro-industrial complex.
There is a speculative tendency when repurchasing and selling products; income is redistributed in favor of processing enterprises. Currently, there is a need to carry out a set of measures to eliminate price disparity between agricultural enterprises and processing enterprises using the stock market of joint stock companies of the agro-industrial complex.
Conclusion
To summarize, I can say that official statistics in Russia distinguishes the following forms of ownership: state (including federal and constituent entities of the Federation), municipal, public associations (organizations), private and others (including mixed ownership).
And the question arises: what form of ownership, under certain conditions, should be given preference and priority in economic policy? In many countries with developed market economies, private property (individual, collective, corporate) predominates. At the same time, a significant part of the property belongs to the state (central and local authorities, municipalities). In countries Western Europe approximately one tenth of the industrial workforce is employed in state-owned enterprises. The experience of many countries suggests that it is necessary to discard the assumption that only one form of ownership ensures the efficient functioning of the economy everywhere. In addition, both state and private forms of ownership are multivariate. Experience convinces us that different areas, industries, and sectors of the economy have their own specific forms, better adapted than others to the specific conditions of production and exchange. Let's say that individual ownership has proven itself well in retail trade and in many types of services (hair salons, shoe repair shops, household appliances, etc.). Many types of production that do not require excessive complexity and bulky equipment operate effectively on the basis of collective ownership in the form of partnerships and limited liability companies. Large and even super-large companies based on joint stock principles can be private, for example, giants in the automotive industry, oil producing, chemical, aircraft manufacturing concerns, etc. At the same time, railways, communications, power plants, coal mining, metallurgical, defense enterprises can successfully work in the public sector.
In other words, for each form of ownership and its variants there is its own “niche”, where some specific form of ownership turns out to be the most productive.
In many countries, small private forms, large modern agricultural enterprises, cooperatives, and state organizations for the technical maintenance of agriculture and livestock breeding coexist in agriculture.
Pluralism of forms of ownership turned out to be objectively necessary in the conditions of transition to a market in post-socialist countries.
The concept of the expediency of the formation and development of different forms of ownership is enshrined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In Art. 8 states: “In the Russian Federation, private, state, municipal and other forms of property are recognized and protected equally.”
I also found out that:
1. In microeconomic analysis, the main object is the firm (enterprise). Firms form the enterprise sector in the economy. In a market economy, it takes the form of a sector of commercial organizations, or the entrepreneurial sector.
2. Enterprises (firms) are independent economic units of different forms of ownership that have pooled economic resources to carry out commercial activities. Commercial refers to the activity of producing goods and providing services for third parties, individuals and legal entities, which should bring commercial benefits to the enterprise, namely profit.
3. Making maximum profit is the ultimate goal of any business activity. Its achievement is carried out through the definition and implementation of a set of targets of a tactical and strategic nature.
4. The main working tool of an enterprise is its competitive strategy. It is understood as a mechanism for realizing the competitive advantage of an enterprise. Competitive advantage is the price or quality characteristics of an enterprise's products, which distinguish it favorably from competitors and ensure a stable position in the market.
5. The business sector of the national economy usually includes a huge number of enterprises, which for the purposes of economic analysis are grouped according to a number of significant characteristics, primarily by forms of ownership, size, nature of activity and industry, dominant factor of production, as well as legal status.
6. According to the legal status (organizational and legal forms) in Russia, the following enterprises are distinguished: business partnerships and societies, production cooperatives, state and municipal unitary enterprises, as well as individual entrepreneurs.
Bibliography
1. "Course of economic theory" under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. Moscow, 1997.
2. "Economics course" under. ed. B. A. Raizberg. Moscow, 2000.
3. "Theoretical Economics" under. ed. G. P. Zhuravleva, N. N. Milchakova. Moscow, 1997.
4. “Economic theory” E. F. Borisov. Moscow, 2000.
5. “Economics” by K. McConnell, S. L. Brew. Moscow, 1992.
6. "Enterprise Economics" under. ed. O.I. Volkova. Moscow, 1998.
7. "Economy" under. ed. A.S. Bulatova. Moscow, 1997.
8. "Course of microeconomics" R.M. Nureyev. Moscow, 2001.
9. "Fundamentals of Entrepreneurship", ed. Yu. M. Osipova. Moscow, 1992.
10. “Economic theory” V. Ya. Iokhin. Moscow, 2000.
11. "Entrepreneurship". Khizrich R., St. Petersburg M. - M.: Progress-Univers, 1992.
“Economics course” under. ed. B. A. Raizberg. P. 98.
“Course of Economic Theory” under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. P. 465.
“Theoretical Economics” under. ed. G. P. Zhuravleva. P. 134.
“Course of Economic Theory” under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. P. 472.
“Course of Economic Theory” under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. P. 474.
“Economics course” under. ed. B. A. Raizberg. pp. 105-109.
“Course of Economic Theory” under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. P. 480.
“Economic theory” E. F. Borisov. P. 96.
“Economic theory” E. F. Borisov. P. 97.
“Theoretical Economics” under. ed. G. P. Zhuravleva. P. 145.
“Course of Economic Theory” under. ed. A. V. Sidorovich. P. 483.
Hizrich R., Peters M. Entrepreneurship. - M.: Progress-Univers, 1992. -S. 20.
By organizational and legal forms:
- · business partnerships and societies
- Ш business partnerships
- o general partnership: a general partnership is an association of individuals or legal entities whose members are liable for the obligations of the partnership with all movable and immovable property. This means that if you, as a private person, have entered into a general partnership as one of the founders, then in the event of liability (bankruptcy), all personal property that goes beyond the scope of vital necessities will be described to you: a car, a summer house, furniture, paintings, jewelry etc. Persons who have joined an already existing company are responsible, along with the old members of the company, for all debts, including those that arose previously, before their entry into the company.
- o limited partnership: limited partnership, otherwise limited partnership - a partnership in which, along with the participants who carry out business activities on behalf of the partnership and are liable for the obligations of the partnership with their property (general partners), there are one or more participants - investors (limited partners), who bear the risk of losses associated with the activities of the partnership, within the limits of the amounts of contributions made by them and do not participate in the implementation of business activities by the partnership.
- Ш business societies
- o joint-stock company: a joint-stock company is a commercial organization whose authorized capital is divided into a certain number of shares certifying the obligatory rights of the company's participants (shareholders) in relation to the company.
b open joint-stock company: shareholders of an open joint-stock company can alienate their shares without the consent of other shareholders.
b closed joint-stock company: shares of a closed joint-stock company are distributed only among the participants of this company and are not distributed among outside circles of persons.
- o limited liability company: a limited liability company is a company established by one or several persons, the authorized capital of which is divided into shares of sizes determined by the constituent documents. Participants in a limited liability company are not liable for its obligations and bear the risk of losses associated with the activities of the company, within the limits of the value of their contributions. Currently, the Russian Federation has a special law regulating the legal status of limited liability companies.
- o company with additional liability: a company with additional liability is a company established by one or more persons, the authorized capital of which is divided into shares of sizes determined by the constituent documents; The participants of such a company jointly bear additional liability for its obligations with their property in the same multiple of the value of their contributions, determined by the constituent documents of the company.
- · Production cooperative (artel): a production cooperative is a voluntary association of citizens on the basis of membership for joint production or other economic activities (production, processing, marketing of industrial, agricultural and other products, performance of work, trade, consumer services, provision of other services), based on their personal labor and other participation and the association of its members (participants) of property share contributions.
- · State and municipal enterprises. A state enterprise is a commercial organization that is not vested with the right of ownership to the property assigned to it by the owner. The property of a unitary enterprise is indivisible and cannot be distributed among contributions (shares, shares), including among employees of the enterprise.
- Ш On the right of economic management
- Ш On the right of operational management (federal government enterprise)
Property is the core of any society. It arose at the dawn of human development, expressed in the appropriation of property personally and collectively.
There can be no talk of society if there is no form of ownership in it. During the transition to a market economy, Russia faced a number of objective difficulties. One of the main reasons is the problem of ownership. To do this, it is necessary to differentiate and understand the forms, types and types of property that will be discussed in the article.
The concept of ownership
Property concept is a relationship of distribution and appropriation. They consist in the fact that a person or group of persons (property owner) has the right to dispose of property (property object) for certain purposes.
Subjects there must be at least two. Forms and types of property, from the point of view of law, depend on the subject of ownership.
Property owned by an individual or household is called personal or private property. When it comes to a group of persons, such ownership can be collective, cooperative, joint-stock, public or state. Legislatively, 16 types of property are approved in the Russian Federation.
Properties- this is movable and immovable property, securities, products of labor, money, etc. Conditionally can be classified as follows:
- Material:
- inanimate - objects, resources, fossils;
- living - animals, rarely - people (in a slave system).
- Intangibles include intellectual property, as well as water, air and outer space.
Classification of forms of ownership
There are 2 types of property: private and collective. Based on these two types, different forms of ownership arise.
The following forms of ownership exist in the Russian Federation:
- private;
- public;
- mixed forms of ownership.
Each of the forms is also classified into small forms, depending on a number of objective reasons.
In a market system, the main type of property is private, which is divided into the following forms.
Single- characterized by the fact that an individual or legal entity realizes the ownership, use and disposal of property. Often they are farms or family businesses, that is, producers of goods.
A single one can be represented in the form of ownership of a specific person who uses hired labor.
Affiliate- this form involves the association in a specific form of property, or the association of capital of a number of individuals or legal entities. The main goal is to conduct general business activities. In this case, we mean enterprises founded with the help of share contributions from the founders. Share contributions include: land, money, material assets, innovative ideas, etc.
Corporate- is based on the work of capital, which is formed through the sale of shares. Each owner of shares is the owner of the capital of the joint-stock company.
Forms of public ownership
Within the framework of public property, there are: collective, state and national property.
Collective- is formed by distributing it among the employees of the team, workers at a separate enterprise. In other words, it is a closed joint stock company.
State- the property of all members of society. The peculiarity is that the state is engaged in the implementation of relations of appropriation through relations of ownership. In this case, the state is called upon to personify the socio-economic interests of all citizens and segments of the population, including social and professional groups of society.
Nationwide- this type of property presupposes the ownership of the entire public domain simultaneously by everyone and everyone separately. According to Art. 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in the Russian Federation both private, state, and municipal and other forms of property are recognized and protected equally.
Mixed form concept
This type of property is characterized by the penetration of some forms and relations of ownership into others and, as a result, the internal content becomes more complicated.
A striking example of this: structures of private entrepreneurial activity and cooperative nature are created within state enterprises.
Today, the economy, for the effective operation of various projects, comes to the unification of different forms of ownership, each of which retains its own special content. In this way, combined forms are created. These include joint ventures, holdings, concerns, financial and industrial groups, etc. Everyone has equal rights to manage, distribute profits and dispose of property.
So, according to Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, every citizen has the right to have property and dispose of it at his own discretion, both individually and jointly with other persons.
It is worth noting that forms of ownership can change from one to another. This is implemented in the following ways:
- Nationalization. For example, land, transport or industry (private property) becomes the property of the state;
- Privatization. There is a transfer of state property into private property. For example, legal entities or individuals acquire various objects, shares of joint stock companies, etc. from the state. Objects of national heritage and cultural values are not subject to privatization;
- Denationalization. In this case, the state returns the property to the previous owners;
- Reprivatization. State property is returned to private ownership. It is carried out by purchasing enterprises, land, shares.
The modern economy and its formation have necessitated the transformation of property relations.