Tag Archives: tenure reformulation

GUZR calls for restructuring of permanent use

Panteleev, Aleksey.  “GUZR [Head administration of land resources] calls for restructuring of permanent use” (“GUZR prizyvaet pereoformit’ ‘bessrochku’”), Kommercheskie Vesti, 2 June 2010. 15 July 2010 http://kvnews.ru/archive/2010/jur21(947)/farm/14198/.

Update on restructuring of permanent (perpetual) use lands: 30% of Omsk enterprises [mostly small industrial enterprises] hold lands under permanent use.  Adds that in Omskaya Oblast until January 1, 2012, enterprises using land on which they own facilities, equipment, etc. can buy-out the land at a rate of 2.5% of its Cadastral value.  After that date, fines of 20 to 100 thousands rubles can be imposed, though at the federal level, considerations are being made to tighten these measures.

Also: “Perpetual use coming to an end.” Russian Real Estate, 9 August 2010. 16 July 2010 http://www.1rre.ru/news/doc/35747/.  On publication date, 80% of Omsk Oblast’s permanent (perpetual) users had been either been restructured as proprietors or renters, according to the GUZR of Omsk.

Amendments and additions to laws in December 2009

“Amendments and additions to laws in December 2009,” Metrkv.ru: Vsya Nedvizhimost’ Rossii. December 2009. 28 June 2010 http://metrkv.ru/articles/index.xml?&articles_id=10336016.

Cataloguing of amendments made by the Duma in December 2009. On December 27, 2009, the deadline for the restructuring of lands held under permanent (perpetual) use was extended to January 1, 2012, and for lands on which electric, telecommunications, pipe, etc. lines are located, the deadline is now January 1, 2015.  However, the changes also include another extension: the date after which fines may be imposed upon firms that have not restructured their land holdings is now Jaunary 1, 2013, meaning enterprises that do not meet the 2012 restructuring deadline may only be fined at least a year later.  De facto, the original Edinaya Rossiya proposal (see above) was upheld.

Moscow prepares to seize

Sichkar’, Olga and Khalil’ Aminov. “Moscow prepares to seize” (“Moskva gotovit izyatie”), Kommersant 197 (4252), 22 October 2009. 22 July 2010 http://www.kommersant.ru/doc-y.aspx?DocsID=1259907.

An evaluation of new legislature proposed by the Moscow Land Resources Department (Moskomzem).  If passed, the law would give Moskomzem the explicit right to seize land that had been left unused for two years (or used outside its allotted use).  Their arguments are that it would stimulate both the fulfillment of the city land plan, as well as the privatization of enterprise lands’ use-rights.  However, one lawyer argues that the law will only be able to be applied to lands under agricultural and construction uses, saying that city administration would be hard pressed to find a legitimate reason to be seizing industrial enterprise land based on non-use of the land.

In Volgograd, municipality will cooperate with industrial enterprises in buying out land plots

“In Volgograd, municipality will cooperate with industrial enterprises in buying out land plots” (“V Volgograde munitsipalitet okazhet sodeystvie promyshlennym predpriyatiyam v vykupe zemel’nykh uchastkov”), Zem.ru, 28 September 2009.  26 July 2010 http://www.zem.ru/all/825/.

The state of land reform in Volgograd.  The Volgograd municipality is offering a discount price on land buy-outs, if purchased by enterprises before the end of 2009; the relative stability of land tax rates, as opposed to more in-flux lease payments, is another incentive to buy out, the article adds.  The city administration is encouraging full privatization of land since land taxes on private land help fill the city budget.  The 400 hectares of federal land, on which 15 large industrial enterprises are currently situated, currently add some 123 million rubles to the city coffers annually; if reformulated as rents from the federal government, the city will lose these monies.  Committee on land resources chairperson Irina Anisimova is pleased that 80 new enterprise land privatizations in 2008 were added to the total 290 privatized industrial land plots, though she realizes this momentum must be sustained.  Although city administration affirms its readiness to cooperate with enterprises in quickly formulating buy-out documents, disparities between Cadastral appraisal prices and market prices are sure to fuel disagreements over buy-out prices.

Land taxes increase 50 times over

“Land taxes increase 50 times over” (“Zemel’niy nalog podorozhaet v 50 raz”), Agentstvo “Kadastrovie Novosti”, 11 September 2009. Federal Cadastre Agency for Real Estate, Media Materials: 14 July 2010 http://r41.kadastr.ru/news/media/1059085/.

Reporting on land tax raises as a result of new Cadastral evaluations.  Land values in Samarskaya Oblast are up 40-60%, in Rostovskaya Oblast they have increased 5 times over, and in Smolensk Oblast they are up 47.7 times.  Rosnedvizhimost’ officers say that tax rates have not yet been adjusted to new market conditions coming after a peak in the land market in late 2007/early 2008.  A managing partner of Miller Samuell Real-Group says these taxes “will simply kill any proprietor and will place a cross on the back of any business.”  In Smolenskaya Oblast, values of land plots under industrial enterprises have increased 47 times, which specialists say will harm production costs, productivity of local industry, profits, and competitiveness.

Problems for other enterprises and administrative bodies have arisen: in Moscow, City Hall is threatening terminating developers’ contracts for residential construction on some 5 million square meters of land that Rosreyester is refusing to register.  The Moscow Oblast Forestry Management has gone against federal recommendations in completing some of its recent land transactions; similar forestry land-use scandals have taken place in Petersburg and Leningradskaya Oblast, as well.

Note: Recent (in action since January 2010) changes to the land tax code are outlined at http://taxpravo.ru/analitika/statya-71574-popravki_po_regionalnyim_i_mestnyim_nalogam_v_2010_godu.

A single expanse

Vasilenko, Sergey. “V edinom prostranstve,” Ekspert 23, 15 June 2009, 80-81. 25 June 2010 http://dlib.eastview.com.ezproxy.middlebury.edu/browse/doc/20220270.

An interview with Vaagn Martirosyan, general director of telecommunications firm OAO Tsentr-Telekom; discusses the differences between doing business in Tverskaya Oblast and its neighbors in the Central Federal District.  Assistance from oblast administration has helped the company develop much development of telecommunications and its own business in the region.  When asked about the company’s current problems, Martirosyan mentions issues of land ownership almost exclusively: after a land plot’s transfer to a new proprietor, cable lines must be used, or otherwise, use of the land through which the cables pass must be bought.  Additionally, “Questions over land-use often hold up new construction.”

At the end of May, Duma to consider amendments to Land Code

“Dragonov: At the end of May, Duma will consider amendments to Land Code,” Edinaya Rossiya, 19 May 2009. 28 June 2010 http://www.edinros.ru/text.shtml?7/9830,.

Report on the Edinaya Rossiya party website on proposed amendments to the 2001 Land Code, regarding provisions that require firms to restructure their land holdings as leases or private property by January 1, 2010.  The party cites support for the changes from the industry, property, and land-issues committees.  The proposed extension on the deadline would be for 3 years until Jan. 1, 2013 (for lands under electric, telecommunication, pipe, motorway, and train lines, 6 years until Jan. 1, 2016).  Gosduma representatives calculate this will allow proprietors to “composedly (spokoyno)” make the required changes.

“In the opinion of [Valeriy] Dragonov,” vice-chair of the Duma Committee on Industry, “the deadline extension for the restructuring of these lands is one of the important steps to the comprehensive support of homeland industry.”  The party seems to view their postponement of short-term costs of land privatization (or restructuring as a lease) as a supporting Russian industry.

Perpetual land – for three years

Vasil’eva, Yuliya. “Perpetual land – for three years: Business asks to postpone the buy-out deadline for land plots to Jan. 1, 2013” (“Zemlya bessrochno – na tri goda”), Rossiiskaya Biznes-gazeta 692, 3 March 2009. 1 July 2010 http://www.rg.ru/2009/03/03/zemlya-vikup.html.

Summary of the history and current state of the Land Code amendments; stresses business’ desire to privatize/restructure their land use, but inability to do so due to bureaucratic barriers and high buy-out prices.  Power-mongering and super-control of the restructuring procedures on the part of local powers also complicate the conditions in which businesses were being required to buy-out their land.   The decrease in businesses’ liquid funds due to the crisis—funds that would be needed for land transactions—also increases the hardship.

In addition to these issues, RSPP department head Irina Kotelevskaya notes the lack of a “good register of land territories” as another complicating problem.  In the federal Duma’s Committee on Property, “it has been noted that in crisis-time conditions, with the increase in the price of credit and the insufficiencies of working capital at many industrial enterprises, the direction of significant monetary resources towards the organization of the buy-out of land plots might just lead to a worsening of their financial situation all the way to near-bankruptcy.

Land is looking for an owner

“Land is looking for an owner” (“Zemlya ishchet sobstvennika”), Agentstvo “Kadastrovie Novosti”, 18 February 2009. Federal Cadastre Agency for Real Estate, Media Materials: 14 July 2010 http://r41.kadastr.ru/news/media/805304/.

A step-by-step description of what must be done by Vladivostok enterprises wishing to restructure its land use from permanent (perpetual) use into private ownership or a rent.  “The procedure for restructuring land plots is both technically and judicially complicated and multiphase.  Realistically, it can take no shorter than six months. . .”  Enterprises, paying for all these services themselves, must order an official topographic map of the property from an authorized organization (though these sometimes turn out to be poor quality); they must have documents drawn up stating how they desire to restructure their land; they must arrange for a cadastral evaluation of their land; and finally submit these items to the territorial division of Rosnedvizhemost’ and the Department of Land Resources.

The Surveyor

Belykh, Anton.  “The Surveyor” (“Zemlemer”), Biznes-Zhurnal 7, 10 April 2007. 15 July 2010 http://www.business-magazine.ru/trends/government/pub282369.

Survey of Moscow land reform.  Article discusses the unwillingness of the Moscow bureaucracy to let go of land ownership, despite the April 2006 passage of No 431-PP “On the transfer of land plots in the city of Moscow to private ownership,” which was aimed at bringing Moscow land legislation and procedures in line with the federal Land Code.  More precisely, it was to change what had been, for all intents and purposes, a non-existent procedure for land privatization into its first existence.  For the law firm Vegas Lex, despite the significant number of land buy-out applications filed with the firm in the first nine months of the new law being in effect, no more than 10 privatization transactions have been successful.  Oleg Ryzhkov and his officers promise that the number of unsuccessful privatizations will soon start to come down.  In addition the bureaucracy’s grasping onto its land rights as a power control, the article also points out that lease payments from land tenants (mostly developers) generate more revenue than would land taxes (i.e., than they did in 2007 at publication).