The battle for the $ 500 billion: to be continued
This week, the law on trading in the new edition, the discussion and the adoption of which was accompanied by the spring and summer of heated debate in the public space, again at the sight of senior government leaders.
First, President Vladimir Putin at a meeting with supporters of the party "United Russia", stressing that he knew about the attempts of retailers to circumvent the law, using as compensation "fines or something else" for suppliers, called "Do not let that happen." To this end, President Dmitry Medvedev ordered the prime minister to give a corresponding order of the Federal Antimonopoly Service. Dmitry Medvedev was not slow to respond: the next day, he said that if the Trade Act have any loopholes to circumvent it, then you need to change the law.
The law is harsh, trade is creative
Recall that the new amendments to the trade law designed to reduce retrobonusov - payments to suppliers in favor of large retailers - from 10 to 5 percent. Nationally, this means a redistribution in favor of the suppliers and manufacturers of products for about 500 billion rubles. The amount is quite palpable, even for the largest domestic federal networks with trillions turnovers. Of course, to block such a development were included considerable lobbying power, which, for example, the Alfa Group - the owner of one of the largest retailers with 8 thousand stores - can have an impact on virtually all levels of legislative and executive branches of government. measures have been developed in parallel to compensate for the financial losses from the introduction of the new law. And if lobbying little success has not brought, the options for how to prevent the loss of income in the framework of the law, found fairly quickly: introduced a new system of penalties in the relationship with suppliers, as well as offered to go to the three options prices during the contract of counterparts trading networks depending on delivery of goods - to the store, to the regional distribution center or to the warehouse. In the previous version of the law cost of logistics services included in retrobonus regardless of the shipping address. Moreover, a number of major suppliers of goods and food - and it is in their best interest as a new version of the law on trade sponsors of the amendments, and was claimed adopted - is not pleased to changing the rules of the game: they were deprived of the opportunity to promote their products the most effective way directly to the shopping hall. And, too, began to "be creative", organizing the work with retail chains through distributors. In this case, large companies disappear direct supplier status and an opportunity to legally promote trade marketing benefit for the promotion of the product, as it was within a ten retrobonusa.
Obviously, these developments, which include retailers in the contracts for the supply of products in the coming year, and resulted in many complaints of domestic producers, becoming the basis for the planned check Antimonopoly Service to find out whether the new law gave the declared benefits specifically for agricultural enterprises and farmers. In the meantime, apparently, and considering, again, the possibility of federal lobbying retailers, trade successfully preparing for the possibility of losses, with the Federal Antimonopoly Service was ready to legalize until recently almost any
price discounts from suppliers in favor of federal networks. Implementation of these and other mentioned actions initiated by the federal retail chains, has not changed in essence "dozakonnogo 'financial status-quo manufacturers - by hook or by crook retailers pay the cash flows in their favor.
Does the seller will help the farmer?
But is it all determined with the arrangement of roles - bad traders, unnecessarily fleeced farmers and agricultural enterprises, and positive domestic producer, trying, in spite of the intrigues of the retailers, to fill the market with cheap and quality products? The problem, in my opinion, more difficult, and it would be wrong to reduce it exclusively to oppose trade and production. We can talk about the direction in which will develop the domestic food market: whether he will remain at the stage of small-scale production and retail sales mainly or will become stronger, developing a powerful and highly efficient processing industry large wholesale deliveries?
The new law states that 500 billion rubles - the cost of reduced retrobonusnyh five percent - will be reallocated from several major retailers to the hundreds and thousands of small and medium-sized farmers. Is this rational? After all, these resources are retailers, according to their statements, planned to send to the consumer market development, including the creation of new agricultural production that are guaranteed to be delivered is relatively inexpensive to import products under the brand name of the network. Or the money could be invested together with the agro-industrial complex on the development of logistics chains and warehouse infrastructure in advance of the deployment of a network of shops in some distant region. However, such real prospects only at a concentration of financial resources in a management center, a single powerful management organizational structure. It is an axiom of strategic investment decisions. Simply put, we must determine what is more effective: tens of billions of rubles at the disposal of a major investor, who will go to the construction of, say, a major canning factory for processing of fruits and vegetables? Or the same means, spread over hundreds of small and medium-sized owners, suppliers and manufacturers, which at best will be able to buy them a new not the most expensive car of the General Director?
The answer, in my opinion, is obvious. But only on one condition: if the hundreds of billions of rubles, for the right to control who comes today struggle will be obliged to submit strictly to the investment law large retailers. Not really rely on networks reteylerskih Declaration owners and managers that they sleep and see how to redirect funds retrobonusov downsizing of their incomes on the development of processing industries and the agricultural industry as a whole, and the law on trade deprives trade investment prospects. It is known that changes in mood often oligarches, especially after the objectives are achieved.
But in general, I would venture to suggest such an opportunity - to restore in law ten percent the size retrobonusov with the condition of their target of spending on investments in agriculture, food industry, the formation of logistics infrastructure and the development of commercial networks and the like - could well be a compromise between the federal trade networks and domestic manufacturers, freeing the way, from the federal budget for these expenditures. Then the reasons for conflicts involving referees in the highest state leaders would be exhausted.
Related posts
Path novice trader What is it
Path novice trader. What is it? Path novice trader. What a novice trader faces, and what steps it needs to go. Almost every person who trades the forex...
Volatility indication of what
Volatility - an indication of what went wrong in the QE something Marcello Minenna, professor at Milan's Bocconi University, argues that the QE program...
Framework agreement reached on
The framework agreement reached on Iran. Oil falls in price On Thursday, Iran and 6 major world powers concluded a framework agreement on curbing nuclear...
Next posts
