Last year, oil and gas revenues accounted for 43% of total budget revenues, and for 2016 the government planned 44%. But there are several years of low oil prices ahead - in the region of $50 per barrel maximum, Suslina believes, so the share of oil and gas revenues in 2016 will be clearly lower than in 2015. “Previously, 70% of the budget was revenues from the export of hydrocarbons, and now 45%, which means we can feed ourselves without it. We need to change and take advantage of this situation,” Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev called on February 5. In fact, data from the Ministry of Finance show that oil and gas revenues peaked in 2014 at 51.3% and have steadily grown since 2009.
How to plug holes
The reverse side of the decline in oil and gas revenues is the increasing role of non-oil and gas revenues. Of course, in the current situation, the government will consider all possibilities to increase the revenue side of the budget, says Cherniavsky, although an increase in the tax burden may further slow down the economy. A decision has already been made on the second in a year , while the Ministry of Finance proposes to take part of the revenues from fuel excises (23%) to the federal budget (now regional budgets receive all revenues from excises on gasoline). According to the calculations of the department, such a redistribution from May 1 could give the federal budget in 2016 an additional 68.5 billion rubles. In addition, the government is discussing the possibility of introducing especially for palm oil. The Ministry of Finance has not yet given an answer on the advisability of introducing such excises, an official from the financial and economic bloc told RBC earlier this week.
Now the federal budget receives from 50 to 100% of revenues from excises on alcohol, alcohol-containing and alcoholic products, tobacco, cars and all excisable goods imported into Russia, follows from the Budget Code. Revenues from excise taxes make up the second largest share of non-oil and gas revenues of the federal budget, 13% (149.4 billion rubles) in January-February 2016, follows from the data of the Treasury.
Oil and gas revenues in the Russian budget
Before51,3% reached the share of oil and gas revenues of the budget during the presidency of Vladimir Putin (2014 budget)
RUB 5.9 trillion amounted to oil and gas budget revenues for 2015
IN10 times nominal oil and gas budget revenues increased in 2015 compared to 2002
8% occupied oil and gas revenues of the budget in GDP in 2015 (in 2014 - 10.4%)
53% to 47% was in 2015 the ratio of revenues from MET to revenues from export duties as part of oil and gas revenues. This is a consequence of the "tax maneuver" designed to redistribute oil and gas revenues in favor of tax revenues. In 2014, the ratio was in favor of export duties (62% to 38%).
$29,69 per barrel was the average price of Russian oil Urals in January-February 2016
57% non-oil and gas revenues in January-February 2016 amounted to VAT
13% of non-oil and gas revenues was the receipt of excises
As you can see, there are losses. But not lethal. We take a calculator, summarize and get the export of all hydrocarbons (crude oil, gas and oil products) for 2015 - $ 203.323 billion.
According to statistics, all exports from Russia in dollar terms decreased by 31.1% (compared to 2014) and amounted to $345.9 billion.
The reason is simple - falling oil prices. If in January 2014 a barrel of Brent oil cost about $107, in January 2015 - $50, and in January 2016 already $34. And then Russia smoothed out the unpleasant moment by increasing the extraction and production of petroleum products. Otherwise, the losses would have been greater.
Russia began to increase the production of petroleum products; export not only raw materials, but also finished products.
Based on these figures, it turns out that the share of oil and gas is almost 70% of Russia's total exports.
Surprisingly, the majority stops and fixates on this figure, blaming Russia exclusively for the raw-material model of the economy. For some reason, the opposition does not like to listen further. After all, further figures destroy their "message" - everything is bad in Russia.
Wait a minute, but do we, as a whole country, work exclusively for export?
According to the liberals, Russia's GDP in 2015 for some reason is half as much - $650 billion. It is not known where they got this figure from.
Russia's GDP in 2015 is $1,325 billion. $89.5 billion received from crude oil exports is about 6.8%.
Even if we take the entire hydrocarbon export ($203.323 billion), it is still just over 15% of Russia's GDP.
Perhaps, in this case, it was necessary to use the dollar estimate of GDP obtained using purchasing power parity (PPP) conversion, but I could not find this figure for 2015.
In 2014, Russia's GDP at PPP was $3,745 billion. But then all my calculations can be safely divided by three.
I agree that low oil prices are at least unpleasant for our country. We rely on this money. But it is not necessary to say that we are completely dependent on oil exports and its prices. Even foreign analysts confirm that Russia, even without receiving any income from the sale of hydrocarbons, will be able to live quietly for 3-4 years, during which the Russian economy can further widen the gap and lose dependence on hydrocarbon exports as much as possible. At least Bloomberg experts see huge potential in the Russian economy. And it's hard to disagree with them.
The Russian Federation is currently in the top ten oil-producing countries, and holds 8% market share. As in many large oil-producing countries, the budget largely depends on revenues from the sale of oil and refined products. Currently, Russia's budget dependence on oil fluctuates from 40 to 55 depending on the calculation method.
In recent years, the share of budget revenues from oil sales has been steadily increasing. Over the past 10 years, oil production has more than quadrupled. The price rose from nine dollars per barrel in the default year 1998, to a maximum of $115 per barrel in early 2014. Increased energy prices have invariably affected the filling of the income of the Russian Federation, whose budget has increased several times in recent years. The merit of such an increase in the budget is largely due to oil revenues. The Russian government is developing programs to develop the economy, the declared goal of which is to reduce dependence on the sale of petroleum products. So, for example, the adopted development program implies that in 2020 the share of income from will be about 35% of the country's budget.
Dangers of the oil needle.
The danger of the country's excessive dependence on oil and income from its sale is expressed in the mediocre development of the industrial sector and the service sector, which are not directly related to the processing and sale of energy resources. The actual excess profits from the sale of oil make it possible to offset the decline in the service sector and industry. That is why many major oil-producing countries are actively investing money from oil revenues in securities and investing in developing countries. The danger of the situation in the economy, when the budget is directly dependent on revenues from the sale of oil, was clearly demonstrated by Venezuela, in which the revenue part of public spending for 80% consists of the sale of petroleum products. Currently, in this country, against the backdrop of a two-fold fall in prices, there is a financial crisis () and a pre-default state. Russian economy, which is heavily dependent on revenues from the sale of oil and gas, has faced significant difficulties in the past six months due to falling hydrocarbon prices. Over the past six months, the price of oil has dropped from $110 per barrel to $55-60 per barrel. This led to a loss of GDP in the amount of about one hundred billion US dollars. Currently, the price of oil has stabilized at around $60 per barrel. At the same time, it must be said that the Russian budget was calculated based on the cost of oil at eighty dollars per barrel. That is why in the near future the budget will be adjusted downward.
Russian oil brand Urals contains an increased amount of sulfur, which somewhat complicates its subsequent processing. That is why Urals has a slightly lower cost than Brent oil or Norwegian North Sea oil.
Many experts and economic analysts argue about the dependence of the Russian economy on energy resources (maybe like America?). Opponents of the thesis of Russia's dependence on the sale of oil cite data on the share of income from the sale of oil in GDP. In the total volume of the gross domestic product, income from the sale of oil is only 9%. This is what allows experts to say that the Russian economy does not depend on the sale of hydrocarbons. However, in this case, it should be noted that the GDP indicator and the size of the country's budget are somewhat different concepts. And in the budget, which reflects the funds available to the country, the share of oil profits is about half.
It should be noted that today, against the backdrop of falling world prices, anti-crisis programs are being adopted in the Russian Federation, which imply a reduction in the dependence of the economy on the sale of oil. To solve such problems, it is necessary not only to carry out a significant reduction in costs, but also to radically increase
"sitting on an oil needle." Supporters of this myth argue that the Russian economy is supposedly based almost exclusively on the export of hydrocarbons, and if the volume of this export decreases or the price of oil drops significantly, then this will allegedly lead to the complete economic collapse of Russia.
This myth is widespread both among Russian all-weatherers and in the West - for example, some representatives of the US political elite call Russia the "Big Gas Station".
In reality, the extraction of fuel and energy minerals in the structure of our industry is only 21%, while the contribution of oil and gas revenues to Russia's GDP does not exceed 16%.
It is important to distinguish between the share of hydrocarbons in GDP (16%) and the share of hydrocarbons in exports (40 to 50%). The imperceptible substitution of the first indicator for the second is often used to create the impression that "everything is lost."
Core myth: Russia's dependence on oil
The share of oil exports in Russia's GDP.
Sub-myth: The critical dependence of the ruble on the price of oil
The exchange rate of the ruble really depends, among other things, on the price of oil, but this dependence should not be exaggerated or considered the only factor.
Let's look at Libya destroyed by the Americans, which is very dependent on oil exports. Libya exports eight times more oil per capita than Russia - it would seem that the Libyan dinar would have to fall significantly below the Russian ruble and depreciate several times due to lower oil prices ... however, in practice, the exchange rate of the Libyan dinar over the past six months not only fell, but even slightly strengthened.
This once again proves that the decline in oil prices, although unpleasant for Russia, is by no means the main reason for the depreciation of the ruble.
In conditions when there are no fundamental domestic economic reasons for the depreciation of the national currency, the main reason for the depreciation is coordinated speculative attacks. International speculators are able, if necessary, to play against foreign currencies. So, for example, the story is well-known when the speculator Soros managed to push the rate of the British pound sterling by 25% (see Black Wednesday 1992).
When Americans organize riots in some country of interest to them - for example, in Argentina, Brazil or Turkey - simultaneously with the Maidan, the exchange rate of the local currency often mysteriously falls. In the conditions of the dollar world, it is not difficult for Americans to shake the exchange rate of the “enemy currency”.
So, in parallel with the attack on the ruble in November-December 2014, a financial attack was carried out on the Turkish lira (which reached another historical low) - this attack intensified after the Turkish government took a number of important steps towards cooperation with Russia, and also arrested a number of Turkish color revolutionaries.
However, as a rule, such attacks do not have a long-term effect. After the end of the machinations of speculators, the artificially boosted rate usually rolls back to more adequate levels. And if you look at the long-term annual dynamics of the ruble exchange rate and the dynamics of oil prices, it turns out that there is practically no dependence, and the observed correlation of these indicators over the past 22 years shows a completely opposite result compared to what liberal economists say: oil prices significantly increased, and the ruble weakened significantly, and not vice versa.
Another reason for the depreciation of the ruble was the anti-Russian sanctions imposed by Western countries under US pressure. The Americans themselves actually admitted their responsibility for this: statements in the vein “our sanctions worked successfully, the ruble fell” were made in December 2014 by White House representative Josh Ernest and head of the National Economic Council Jason Furman.
US oil imports 1950-2011
US oil production and consumption, with an optimistic outlook
Dependence of Western countries on oil
We can say that it is not Russia that is sitting on the oil needle, but the countries of the West. If Western countries stop buying oil from Russia, then Russia will still be able to supply hydrocarbons to other markets, as well as use them for domestic needs. If Russia stops supplying hydrocarbons to the West, then the population of these countries will freeze, and production will stop.
Solar and wind energy technologies are currently not efficient enough and cannot compete with oil and gas. And returning to a primarily coal-based energy, as it was in the 19th century, presents a significant technological challenge, since infrastructure and vehicles are designed primarily for oil and gas. In addition, coal is an extremely environmentally unfriendly fuel.
Also not a solution to the problem of shale gas and oil deposits, as well as oil and gas from tar sands,. Despite the huge reserves, the cost of production of these energy carriers is significantly higher than that of traditional oil and gas, so these fields will not allow you to quickly get rid of external dependence. Tellingly, the Americans themselves are well aware of this problem, which is reflected in the reports of their relevant departments and scientific organizations.
What will the fall in oil prices lead to?
At the end of 2014, there was a significant drop in oil prices, from around $100-$110/bbl for most of the year to around $65/bbl in early December.
Many considered this a catastrophic price drop, but it must be remembered that in 2008 prices fell even deeper, from $145 in the summer to $36-40 in December. At that time, the fall in oil was associated with the first wave of the global economic crisis (it was also associated with the US economic attack on Russia after the war in South Ossetia on 08.08.08, when Russia first used force against the American satellite - Georgia).
However, low oil prices did not last long - from the first months of 2009, prices began to rise slowly, by mid-2009 the price reached $70 per barrel, and by early 2011 the price again exceeded $100 per barrel.
The fact is that the low price of oil is not beneficial to either the key oil-producing countries or the largest consumer - the United States, because the Americans are trying to develop the production of shale oil and shale gas, the production of which is profitable only at a price level of at least 80-90 dollars. per barrel.
Cheap oil is also unprofitable for Canada, where a significant part of it is extracted from tar sands, which requires increased investments. A decrease in oil prices leads to a decrease in gas prices, which is extremely unprofitable for producers of liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is profitable only at sufficiently high prices (there are several LNG projects in Russia, but mostly Russian gas exports go through pipelines, and in terms of Russia has almost no competitors in terms of pipeline gas supplies).
It is unlikely that the low level of oil prices will last long, as too many players in the market do not benefit from it. A long-term drop in oil prices is possible only in the event of a deep multi-year economic crisis, or a transfer of the world economy from hydrocarbons to other energy sources (however, such a transition would take many decades).
What will happen if the low oil prices reached in December 2014 persist throughout 2015? According to American analysts from Wall Street, Russia will lose 4.7% of annual GDP from this (which is generally a correct estimate, given the share of oil exports in Russia's GDP of about 8-9%).
This is an unpleasant, but by no means catastrophic drop - for comparison, according to the same data, Venezuela will lose 10.2% of GDP, Saudi Arabia - 15.8%, and Kuwait - 18.1%. The United States, according to the same American analysts, will acquire 0.5% of GDP, but this does not take into account the effect of the crisis in the shale industry (already in November 2014, the number of permits for new drilling rigs fell by more than 40%, which will affect primarily in the extraction of shale gas and oil, since the shale industry requires constant new drilling).
Subscribe to the "Stockinfocus" channel in to be the first to know about the main news and the most important events of the day.
Describing the oil war that Saudi Arabia is waging with the West, to compare the dependence of the economies of various countries on oil exports, I wrote: "When they say that the Russian economy is completely dependent on the sale of hydrocarbons, this is not true." Then I did not provide any evidence, although in my opinion, they lie on the surface. Compared to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and other countries, Russia is nowhere near as dependent on the sale of crude oil. Just look at the numbers.What does Russia get from oil and gas exports?
Export of crude oil
2014 - 223.415 million tons - $153.878 billion
2015 - 244.485 million tons - $89.577 billion
Export of petroleum products
2014 - 164.837 million tons - $115.649 billion
2015 - 171.535 million tons - $67.4 billion
Gasoline (as part of petroleum product exports)
2014 - 4.177 million tons - $3.162 billion
2015 - 4.746 million tons - $2.481 billion
Diesel fuel (as part of petroleum product exports)
2014 - 47.399 million tons - $40.803 billion
2015 - 51 million tons - $25.853 billion
Gas export
2014 - 172.6 billion cubic meters - $54.730 billion
2015 - 185.5 billion cubic meters - $41.8 billion
Export of liquefied gas
2014 - 20.5 million cubic meters - $5.244 billion
2015 - 21.4 million cubic meters - $4.546 billion
As you can see, there are losses. But not lethal. We take a calculator, summarize and get the export of all hydrocarbons (crude oil, gas and oil products) for 2015 - $ 203.323 billion.
According to statistics, all exports from Russia in dollar terms decreased by 31.1% (compared to 2014) and amounted to $345.9 billion.
The reason is simple - falling oil prices. If in January 2014 a barrel of Brent oil cost about $107, in January 2015 - $50, and in January 2016 already $34. And then Russia smoothed out the unpleasant moment by increasing the extraction and production of petroleum products. Otherwise, the losses would have been greater.
Russia began to increase the production of petroleum products; export not only raw materials, but also finished products.
Based on these figures, it turns out that the share of oil and gas is almost 70% of Russia's total exports.
Surprisingly, the majority stops and fixates on this figure, blaming Russia exclusively for the raw-material model of the economy. For some reason, the opposition does not like to listen further. After all, further figures destroy their "message" - everything is bad in Russia.
Wait a minute, but do we, as a whole country, work exclusively for export?
According to Rosstat, the volume of GDP in 2014 was 77 trillion 893.1 billion rubles, and in 2015 - 80 trillion 412.5 billion rubles ($1325 at an average dollar exchange rate of 60.66).
According to the liberals, Russia's GDP in 2015 for some reason is half as much - $650 billion. It is not known where they got this figure from.
Russia's GDP in 2015 is $1,325 billion. $89.5 billion received from crude oil exports is about 6.8%.
Even if we take the entire hydrocarbon export ($203.323 billion), it is still just over 15% of Russia's GDP.
I agree that low oil prices are at least unpleasant for our country. We rely on this money. But it is not necessary to say that we are completely dependent on oil exports and its prices. Even foreign analysts confirm that Russia, even without receiving any income from the sale of hydrocarbons, will be able to live quietly for 3-4 years, during which the Russian economy can further widen the gap and lose dependence on hydrocarbon exports as much as possible. At least Bloomberg experts see huge potential in the Russian economy. And it's hard to disagree with them.