07 November 2014 20:01

A series of articles dedicated to the largest Russian companies has been completed. The main reason for writing this cycle was the desire to analyze and describe the largest representatives Russian economy and business, as well as try to assess the structure and development prospects of each large domestic company separately. I hope that the articles written by me will be able to help site visitors in analyzing and evaluating representatives Russian business. In this publication, to simplify the search for a company of interest, they will be sorted by industry structure.

Shares of oil companies have always been of interest to investors. is the main article of Russian export, accounting for about a third of all exports in monetary terms, and together with oil products, this share is almost 50%. In addition, prices for the third main component of exports significantly depend on the level of prices for oil and oil products. The largest representatives oil and gas industry in Russia are such companies as:

• leading Russian companies
• extraction and transportation of oil and gas
• credit and financial companies
• telecommunications companies
• companies in the engineering industry
• energy industry companies
• industry chemical industry
• company consumer

Best of the month needs 25 votes

Best of all time need 50+ votes

, Roskomnadzor , Ministry for the North Caucasus .

Among those who have previously published their plans are the Federal Treasury, the Federal Property Management Agency, the Federal Bailiff Service, Rospotrebnadzor, the Federal Penitentiary Service, the Federal Agency for State Reserves, Rostrud and others.

According to the form of the schedule and recommended indicators recommended by the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications, already in 2017 the share of domestic fixed assets in the central offices of state bodies should be at least 30% and at least 20% - in their territorial bodies, and in 2018 - at least 50% and 40 % respectively.

For a basic set of applications for working with text, tables, presentations, etc. similar indicators for 2017 are set for operating systems - at least 50% and 20%, for 2018 - at least 80% and 50%, respectively.

A source close to one of the departments calls the published plans-schedules, rather, "an answer for the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications" and believes that they often have little to do with real plans.

Russian software developers, however, are seeing a real rise in demand for their products. Aleksey Smirnov, CEO of Basalt SPO OS developer, in a conversation with TAdviser noted that the situation with the transition to domestic operating systems has noticeably changed since the second half of 2017: if earlier government customers often tried to find various reasons not to use domestic products, now they are meaningfully looking for where it is possible to replace imported operating systems without losses.

There are a lot of tests, demonstrations of the OS on the stand, he says. This trend was reflected in the real sales of "Basalt SPO", says Smirnov.

As examples of projects, the CEO of Basalt SPO cited the use of the FTS OS for the FGIS "Resstr ZAGS" - on servers in the data center and workplaces in registry offices, on servers of the new generation passport system, in the State Duma. The Moscow region acquires a large amount of fixed assets, there are projects in Tyumen and other regions.

Aleksey Smirnov noted that there had been deliveries before, but now they have become systematic. This, according to Smirnov, is facilitated by changes in the law on the ban on the admission of imported software, which since January began to apply not only to the purchase of licenses, but also to the rental of software, cloud subscriptions, the purchase of equipment with pre-installed software, etc. Favors a more active transition and the fact that whole complexes are already taking shape application programs for Linux-based OS, allowing to solve various tasks.

The CEO of "Basalt SPO" believes that the more active transition of government agencies to domestic operating systems based on Linux is hindered by the features of state information systems. Many of them were originally developed for users with Windows OS and Internet Explorer browser, and, it turns out, by replacing the OS and office software with domestic ones, officials cannot fully work with such state information resources. Such a problem, for example, existed with the public procurement system.

Medvedev approved the requirements for Russian office software

In March 2017, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev signed a law that establishes additional requirements for domestic office software included in the Russian software register. Office software, in particular, includes: operating system, communication software, office suite, mail applications, organizer, viewers, Internet browser, presentation editor, spreadsheet editor, text editor, file managers, legal reference system, electronic document management systems and anti-virus protection.

Requirements are established for the composition, functional characteristics and maintenance of software. The draft resolution sets out the requirements for office software in general and for its individual components, as well as for input/output data formats.

In list general requirements to office software:

• Russian-language interface;
• the ability to authenticate and identify users in the ESIA (if the program has an identification function);
• no requirement to install additional software (additional software modules, fonts) that has restrictions on its free distribution on the territory of the Russian Federation, with the exception of operating systems;
• for a user's web access to office software, it should be possible to use Internet browsers of at least 3 different copyright holders, while information about one of which is included in the register of Russian software.

On the user's workstation, office programs must be able to run under at least 2 different operating systems included in the register of Russian software, and Microsoft Windows OS (version 7 and higher). For server hardware - running at least 2 operating systems, information about which is included in the registry, and Microsoft Windows Server OS (version 2008 and higher).

Of the requirements for the office suite in terms of a text editor, spreadsheet editor and presentation editor - the ability to collaborate on an electronic document for a group of users, including recording changes in an electronic document in real time.

Electronic document viewers must support bmp, jpg, jpeg, png, gif, tif, tiff, OOXML, docx, doc, pptx, rtf, txt, pdf, xls, xlsx, odt, ods, odp, avi, mpeg, mp3 formats . To create new electronic text documents, presentations, tables, office software must support, among other things, the Open Document Format (GOST R ISO / IEC 26300-2010), Office Open XML (OOXML, PPTX) and PDF.

Within 3 months from the date of issuance of the resolution, the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications must approve the procedure and methodology for confirming the compliance of the software with the established requirements, and within 6 months - provide confirmation that the office software already included in the register complies with them.

In addition to the requirements for office software, the registry entry is supplemented with information about the compliance or non-compliance of the software included in the specified registry with the established additional requirements that determine the composition, architecture, and functions of domestic office software necessary to replace imported analogues.

2016

The Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications tried to develop requirements for Russian office software. It turned out weak

The requirements for the composition of the software say that it should include an editor for text documents, spreadsheets, presentations, software Email, mail applications, communication software, file manager, organizers, viewers and operating systems.

Among the general requirements for office software - it must provide joint work over an electronic document by a group of users with the ability to record changes in real time, the document says.

If a user accesses office software using Internet browser tools, it must provide the ability to use Internet browsers of at least three different copyright holders.

Office software must support work with DBMS included in the register of Russian software.

The requirements for operating systems indicate that for an automated workplace, office software must support work on at least two different operating systems of the Linux family and Microsoft Windows operating systems (version 7 and higher). Server hardware requires support for at least two Linux family operating systems, and for subscriber devices, support for Android, Apple iOS and Tizen OS.

Communication software should ensure the creation, viewing, editing, copying, printing of information and transmission using communication channels and local area networks of electronic documents, electronic messages, including text messages, images, sound and video files. It has requirements to support message delivery, the ability to turn off message notifications, search by messages, etc.

A large list of requirements is contained in mail applications. It spells out the features of the interaction between the server and client software and functionality. Among the requirements are also the implementation of anti-virus scanning of electronic messages and electronic documents and mechanisms for encrypting information and electronic signatures.

The requirements for viewers indicate that they must provide the ability to view electronic documents, including those saved in bmp, jpg, jpeg, png, gif, tif, tiff, OOXML, docx, doc, rtf, txt, pdf, xls, xlsx, odf, avi, mpeg. The presentation editor should support the Open Document Format electronic document formats and the Microsoft electronic presentation format (pptx), and the creation of new spreadsheet electronic documents should be possible, including in the Open Document Format (GOST R ISO / IEC 26300-2010), Office Open XML (OOXML, XLSX).

It is worth noting that in the document the authors confuse formats as such and file format extensions: they oppose OOXML and xlsx, although the former includes the latter. The document mentions the ISO 29500 standard as a draft even though it was approved back in 2008.

The Association "Domestic Software" reported to TAdviser that the organization does not yet have a position on this document. It was sent to the members of the ARPP and they are collecting responses, on the basis of which the association will later form its position.

Advisor CEO Alexey Smirnov, the free software developer of Basalt SPO, told TAdviser that he sent his comments to the preliminary version of the document. Some of them were taken into account in whole or in part. For example, the wording of the requirements for the formats of supported documents has been corrected, but this list still needs to be worked on, it is clearly raw and duplicated many times in the document, the expert believes.

Among those not taken into account is a comment on the requirement for the possibility of co-editing electronic document in real time. Alexey Smirnov is not sure that this requirement will comply with security requirements and is sure that it is definitely not applicable to all software at once, as it is set out in current version document.

Also, the expert is perplexed by the requirement for newly purchased office software to be sure to work under Windows: “Now the justification for buying Windows is only compatibility with application software, but the requirements already include application software compatibility with Linux,” Smirnov argues. In addition, the "two versions of Linux" that the project installs support for are, for example, RedHat and SuSE, so there must be compatibility with the OS from the registry, he is sure. Smirnov proposes in this paragraph to confine ourselves to the requirement of compatibility with any OS from the register of domestic software.

From the OS requirements for workstations, it follows that Windows 7 is required to allow it to run all programs built to run under Windows 10, points to another flaw in Smirnov's document. He believes that this is unlikely to be feasible.

Among other remarks of Alexey Smirnov - why many software classes important for office work, for example, videoconferencing and ERP, "dropped out". The objection that they are server-based, he considers irrelevant, since mail and instant messenger are also not limited to client software.

Alexey Smirnov also raised the question of how these requirements are to be applied: by whom and when will their implementation be verified for specific programs? In addition, some paragraphs of the document, in his opinion, can be understood as additional requirements for all programs of the corresponding classes when they are entered into the register. However, the register is used not only by the feds, and the question arises, what should the regions, municipalities and state corporations do then.

The legal status of the document is also unclear, the adviser to the general director of Basalt SPO points out in his comments. It actually contains an additional restriction on public procurement. This means that it must be tied to 44-FZ, otherwise the state customer will have problems with the law, he believes.

Earlier, in July 2016, the government issued a decree requiring federal government agencies to switch to Russian office software by the end of 2018. The development of requirements for its composition and functional characteristics was entrusted to the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications, and the deadline was set for October 2016.

At the end of September 2016, a meeting of the working group of the Council for Regional Informatization, the working body of the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications, was held, at which the participants discussed the functional requirements for domestic office software for government agencies. By this time, the department sent a request to the federal executive authorities about the software used and the requirements for it. Industry representatives also sent their proposals to the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications on functional requirements for office software. The Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications noted that the draft government decree on additional requirements to office software was developed taking into account the analysis of the information received from government agencies and industry representatives.

Preparations have begun for cleaning up imported office software and operating systems in government agencies

On August 29, 2016 the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications sent the letter (the copy is at the disposal of TAdviser) to federal state bodies and off-budget funds with the request to provide data on use of office software in their activity.

An analysis of this information should be carried out as part of the implementation of the plan for the transition of federal government agencies and non-budgetary funds to the use of domestic office software in 2016-2018.

This letter was sent by the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications to government agencies instead of a similar document, which was sent out earlier, at the end of July, by Deputy Minister of Communications Alexei Sokolov. The new letter expanded the list of classes of foreign office software, about which government agencies are required to provide information: now it also includes operating systems, anti-virus software and information security software, reference and legal systems.

The full list of used office software, about which you need to provide information, now looks like this:

• Presentation Editors
• Table editors
• Text editors
• Diagram editors, flowcharts
• Reference legal systems
• Communicators / messengers (including mobile)
• Email server and client software
• Organizers/Planners
• Document viewers
• Media editors
• Antivirus and security software information security

In an earlier version of the letter, the list included:

• File managers
• Communication software
• Office packages
• Mail Applications
• Organizers
• Document viewers
• Browsers
• Media editors
• Presentation Editors
• Table editors
• Text editors

As before, the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications is also interested in the 20 most frequently launched foreign products for the period from the beginning of 2011 to the end of 2015.

Separately, the department asks to list the requirements for office software from departmental automated information systems. Apparently, this has replaced the question of “whether there is a “hard” binding to the use of certain office applications” by departmental information systems, which was contained in the July letter to government agencies.

Officials are asked to provide information on the use of software not only in their central offices, but also in territorial divisions, subordinate agencies, federal state unitary enterprises, etc. It is also required to provide information about the actual and forecast costs for these products in federal government agencies and their subordinate institutions.

Additionally, the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications asks federal government agencies and extra-budgetary funds to inform about their readiness to participate in the implementation of a pilot project for the transition to the use of domestic office software, which is planned to be carried out in 2016-2017.

Information must be sent to the Ministry of Communications before October 1, 2016. Based on the analysis, the need for office software for the period 2016-2018 should be determined.

Approval of the plan for the transition of government agencies to Russian office software

On July 26, 2016 the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Dmitry Medvedev approved the plan of transition of federal state bodies and the state off-budget funds to use of the domestic office software in 2017-2018. The Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications together with interested government agencies will ensure its implementation.

According to the relevant government decree, until October 1, 2016, government agencies must provide the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications with information on the use of office software, and by March 1, 2017 - approve the schedules for the transition to the use of domestic office software in 2017-2018.

The transition must be carried out using software included in the unified register of domestic software.

From January to May 2017, in accordance with the plan, a pilot project should be implemented to transfer to domestic office software, including those provided under the cloud model, at least two federal executive authorities, at least three territorial bodies The Federal Tax Service and one state institution subordinate to it, as well as at least one state non-budgetary fund.

After that, from May 2017 to December 2018, government agencies and non-budgetary funds must switch to domestic office software.

The plan also includes the development of proposals by the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications for the implementation of mechanisms providing for the transfer of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation by 2020, bodies local government, state-owned companies and joint-stock companies with state participation, state state and budgetary institutions, for the use of domestic office software.

Full text of the order

1. Approve the attached plan for the transition in 2016-2018 of federal executive bodies and state off-budget funds to the use of domestic office software.

2. The Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, together with the interested federal executive authorities and state extra-budgetary funds, ensure the implementation of the plan specified in paragraph 1 of this order.

3. Federal executive authorities, state off-budget funds:

• before October 1, 2016, submit to the Ministry of Communications of Russia information on the use of office software in the manner and to the extent determined by the Ministry of Communications of Russia;
• before March 1, 2017, to approve the plans-schedules for the transition in 2017-2018 to the use of domestic office software;
• ensure the transition to the use of domestic office software in accordance with the approved schedules.

4. Federal executive authorities and state non-budgetary funds to carry out the transition to the use of domestic office software:

• using the software included in single register Russian programs for electronic computers and databases;
• in the case of providing domestic office software using "cloud" technology - using an infrastructure that provides information and technological interaction of information systems used to provide state and municipal services and perform state and municipal functions in electronic form.

5. Recommend to the executive authorities of the subjects Russian Federation, state corporations and companies, joint-stock companies with state participation to provide for the implementation of measures for the transition to the use of domestic office software.

Full text of the plan

№	Event	Type of document confirming the execution of the event	Responsible executor	Implementation period	Expected results
1	Conducting an analysis of domestic software included in the unified register of Russian programs for electronic computers and databases, as well as the use of office software in the activities of federal executive authorities and state non-budgetary funds, including their territorial divisions, as well as in the activities of federal executive authorities federal government authorities unitary enterprises, state treasury and budgetary institutions, including taking into account the requirements for office software from departmental automated information systems		Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, federal executive bodies, state off-budget funds	October 2016	analysis of domestic software included in the unified register of Russian programs for electronic computers and databases, as well as the use of office software, including taking into account the requirements of departmental automated information systems. The need for office software for the period 2016-2018 has been determined
2	Development of requirements for the composition and functional characteristics of office software, including those provided by "cloud" technology, for use by federal executive authorities and state non-budgetary funds		Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, interested federal executive authorities, state off-budget funds	October 2016	approved the requirements for the composition and functional characteristics of office software
3	Preparation of a financial and economic justification for the transition of federal executive bodies and state off-budget funds to the use of domestic office software for 2016-2018	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Communications of Russia	November 2016	prepared a financial and economic justification for the transition to domestic office software
4	Development of rules for the provision of office software, including the "cloud" technology	act of the Government of the Russian Federation		December 2016	the rules for the provision of office software, including those provided by "cloud" technology, are defined
5	Preparation of proposals for the organization and implementation procedure in 2016-2017 of a pilot project for the transition of federal executive authorities and state non-budgetary funds to the use of domestic office software	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, interested federal executive authorities, interested state non-budgetary funds	October 2016	the procedure and terms for the implementation of the pilot project were determined; federal executive bodies and state non-budgetary funds participating in the implementation of the pilot project have been identified
6	Determination of the procedure and methodology for confirming the compliance of domestic office software with the established requirements for the functional characteristics of office software		Ministry of Communications of Russia	November 2016	approved the procedure and methodology for confirming the compliance of domestic office software with the established requirements for the functional characteristics of office software
7	Creation of a software and hardware stand in order to confirm the compliance of domestic office software with the established requirements for the functional characteristics of office software	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Communications of Russia	December 2016	a stand was created to confirm the compliance of domestic office software with the established requirements for the functional characteristics of office software
8	Development of guidelines for the transition of federal executive bodies and state extra-budgetary funds to the use of domestic office software, including previously purchased office software	departmental normative legal act	Ministry of Communications of Russia	December 2016	approved guidelines
9	Preparation of an infrastructure that provides information and technological interaction of information systems used to provide state and municipal services and perform state and municipal functions in electronic form, and systems of federal and regional centers data processing, to provide federal executive authorities and state extra-budgetary funds with domestic office software, including using cloud technology	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Communications of Russia	December 2016	the necessary infrastructure has been prepared; the technology of providing domestic office software using "cloud" technology has been worked out
10	Implementation of a pilot project for the transfer of at least 2 federal executive bodies, at least 3 territorial bodies of the Federal tax service and one state institution subordinate to it, and at least one state extra-budgetary fund for the use of domestic office software, including those provided using "cloud" technology, taking into account the requirements for office software from departmental automated information systems	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	The Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, the Federal Tax Service of Russia, interested federal executive authorities and the state non-budgetary fund	January - May 2017	implemented a pilot project on the use of domestic office software, including those provided by the "cloud" technology
11	Development of proposals for the implementation of mechanisms providing for the transition by the end of 2020 of the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local governments, public corporations and companies, state treasury and budgetary institutions, joint-stock companies with state participation for the use of domestic office software	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Communications of Russia	May 2017	proposals were developed for the implementation of mechanisms providing for the transition by the end of 2020 of these authorities and organizations to the use of domestic office software; the stages of the transition and the list of regulatory legal acts, the adoption of which is necessary for the transition of these authorities and organizations to the use of domestic office software, are determined
12	Transition of federal executive authorities and state off-budget funds to the use of domestic office software	report to the Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia	federal executive authorities, state off-budget funds	May 2017 - December 2018	implemented a mechanism for the transition of federal executive bodies and state non-budgetary funds to the use of domestic office software
13	Development of regulatory legal acts and guidelines that form the legal and methodological basis for the transition by the end of 2020 of the executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local governments, state corporations and companies, state public and budgetary institutions, joint-stock companies with state participation to the use of domestic office software ensure	normative legal acts, guidelines	Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, concerned federal executive authorities	August 2017	adopted regulatory legal acts and approved methodological recommendations
14	Preparation of an annual report on the progress of the transition of federal executive bodies and state non-budgetary funds to the use of domestic office software	report to the Government of the Russian Federation	Ministry of Telecom and Mass Communications of Russia, federal executive authorities, state off-budget funds	annually, until December 30 of the current year	monitoring and control of the transition to the use of domestic office software is provided
15	Conducting methodological seminars on the transition to the use of domestic software

The true attitude of Russians towards domestic manufacturer

The domestic manufacturer is alive. The domestic producer will live.

The results of the IOM Anketologist survey show that 45% of Russians prefer domestic goods over foreign ones when buying, and 17%, on the contrary, are more loyal to foreign manufacturers. We note a rather interesting feature: a specific country producing a particular product is significant when buying it for 56% of respondents, and only 15% do not pay attention to this fact. Imported producers are not only being gradually squeezed out of commodity markets but also from the minds of Russians.

In general, Russian manufacturers received positive assessments from 86% of respondents (22% are absolutely positive, another 64% are rather positive). Another significant and very positive indicator: 29% of respondents are completely sure that the domestic manufacturer will be able to provide the country with everything necessary in the near future, another 44% are confident enough in this.

Trust but check!

But the level of trust in products, depending on its manufacturer, varies quite significantly. 77% of respondents showed their trust in Russian goods (12% trust completely, another 65% have a partial level of trust). Foreign-made goods received 66% of Russians' confidence reviews, which already indicates a change in the main consumer preferences of the country's population.

The largest percentage of respondents (79%) showed their confidence in goods produced by Russian companies together with foreign partners as a quality standard. Least of all, Russians trust goods manufactured by domestic companies, but under a certain foreign brand, a kind of mimic brand.

Preferences and wishes

According to the results of the survey, Russians most often try to buy domestic goods in such categories as food (84%), medicines (51%), soft drinks (50%), jewelry (42%) and hygiene items (39%) . However, the volume of demand for Russian goods continues to grow. Therefore, respondents would like to see more domestic products in categories such as clothing (57%), medicines (56%), footwear (54%), food (52%) and Appliances (48%).

And the conclusion suggests itself: Russian consumers prefer to purchase exactly the goods of domestic manufacturers and have a positive attitude towards them.

Honey gingerbread and fly in the ointment...

The reasons for such a positive attitude, as shown by the survey, are as follows: the appropriate price of goods for the wallet of an average Russian (75%), the use of natural raw materials and materials (71%), as well as a fairly acceptable workmanship (50%).

However, it is worth recognizing the fact that domestic producers are still far from the ideal.

14% of respondents noted that they have a negative attitude towards Russian companies. As a justification for their position, the respondents noted the following disadvantages: rather poor workmanship (90%), low product reliability (82%), its fragility (70%), overpriced (67%) and poor design (55%). Domestic producers can correct the situation by improving the quality of products (85%), using high-quality raw materials and materials (63%), expanding the range (60%) and reducing prices for finished products (57%).

The main associations that respondents have when they mention the phrase “domestic producer” are “our own, native”, “natural, environmentally friendly”, “inexpensive”. However, such positive associations are also accompanied by negative ones: “low-quality”, “backward”, “ugly”. One significant trend was singled out: in the minds of Russians, a “domestic manufacturer” is strongly associated with agriculture and the production of food products, but the negative image associated with poor quality products of our automotive industry.

Made in Russia

Exactly half of the respondents (50%) expressed their readiness to buy products of domestic producers at a higher price, but on the condition that it will not be inferior in quality and other important parameters to foreign analogues. Russians are willing to pay a slightly higher price for a product if they are sure that it is produced in Russia in the following categories: food (55%), medicines (44%), clothing (33%), shoes (32%) and household technology (27%).

At the same time, almost a third of all respondents (30%) are not at all ready to pay a higher price for a product, no matter which country produces it.

It should be noted that respondents consider Russian goods to be very common in terms of availability at various points of sale. This indicator allows you to assess: exactly where consumers will move for the necessary product. So 53% of respondents are sure that most of the domestic products are sold through the markets. Another 40% of respondents see ordinary Retail Stores. And 39% believe that the products of Russian manufacturers can be purchased at any point of sale regardless of her status.

In general, Russian products deserve positive reviews. 39% of respondents note that the quality of Russian goods is very good, but it still falls short of foreign analogues. 34% of respondents believe that the quality has remained at the same, rather average level, but in the absence of a foreign substitute product, this fact can be ignored. The most positively minded group (14%) is sure that domestic manufacturers have learned to produce goods more High Quality than foreign analogues entering our market. But the negatively inclined group of respondents (12%) believes that the quality of products Russian companies remained either at a fairly low level, or, as the most depressing scenario, became even worse.

Packaging is the face of the product

It is possible to stimulate consumer demand for Russian goods different ways. One option is to use the information on the packaging that this product was manufactured by a domestic manufacturer at a modern factory and using the latest technologies. According to the survey results, such information would significantly increase the likelihood of a purchase for 58% of respondents, and for another 27% - to an average degree. We also note the fact that consumers have developed identification of domestic goods, and the overall level of confidence in them has increased. Thus, 71% of respondents answered that they would most likely believe that the product was made in Russia if such a large inscription is present on its packaging. Another 20% said they would absolutely believe in such information provided. As a clarification, we note that 22% of respondents would purchase goods marked "Made in Russia" with a probability of 50%, 16% of respondents would do so with a probability of 90%, another 16% - with a value of 100%.

The image on the packaging, of course, increases the desire of the consumer to purchase the product. According to respondents, the most appropriate images for domestic goods are the GOST sign (57%), the flag of the country or other state symbols (47%), as well as the image of the Russian troika (14%). The remaining examples of images that are unofficial symbols of Russia gained a relatively small percentage of the votes: the Moscow Kremlin scored 13%, the bear as a symbol of the country and its wildlife - 13%, the birch as a symbol of the Russian soul and nature gained 11% of the votes, the matryoshka doll - 10%. The samovar as at home and comfort received 6%, the image of a girl in folk costume- 5%, a church or a temple, ballet as a symbol of culture and a hockey player, personifying sports achievements, scored 4% of the votes each, and the folk musical instrument balalaika - only 3%.

Also, the placement on the product label of a certain additional information according to the results of the study, it will increase confidence in domestic products to a large extent among 41% of respondents, to an average degree - by 35% of respondents, and slightly - by 18%. In order to increase the level of confidence on the packaging, according to the respondents, it is necessary to indicate the expiration date of the product (74%) as an integral attribute, a mark of quality or product certification (74%), the country that supplies raw materials and materials (68%), and also - the conclusion about the safety of the raw materials necessary for the manufacture of goods (63%).

In its current state, the label of domestic goods deserves the following assessments: according to the criterion of clarity of image and information, 47% of respondents gave a score of 3, and 31% give a mark of "good"; completeness about the product is rated mostly as satisfactory (49% of choices) or good (30%). But the readability of information on the package gets 3 points (41%) and 4 points (31%), respectively.

Domestic patriotic consumer

An increase in consumer demand for domestic goods can also be facilitated by a general rise in patriotism among the population. Thus, 41% of respondents indicated that they would buy more Russian products on the wave of increased patriotism, and almost a fifth of the respondents (22%) would absolutely do so.

The approximate level of citizens who are patriotic to varying degrees, according to the survey, is 89% (64% absolutely agree with the statement that “it is necessary to love your country, despite the difficulties and difficult conditions in which it is located”; another 25% partially agree with this statement). The survey highlighted a very interesting feature: the level of patriotism among Russians is very significantly dependent on the income that citizens have. Thus, the largest number of respondents (56%), who absolutely agree with the above statement, assess their income at a moderate level, sufficient to buy food and some expensive purchases. However, the group of anti-patriotic citizens also consists mainly of people with a moderate (43%), as well as an average (37%) income sufficient to purchase durable goods. It should be noted that neither age nor field of activity, namely, income is an indicator not only of the attitude towards the domestic manufacturer and its goods, but also of the level of patriotism in general.

An online survey was conducted from September 24 to October 8 among 514 participants from 9 Federal Districts of the Russian Federation.

In order for the manufacturer to be able to prove that the products are manufactured in, he should indicate the level of localization of production as a percentage, says a government official who takes part in considering issues related to the implementation of the import substitution program.

In order to help resolve this problem, the Ministry of Industry and Trade has prepared a draft document that is designed to specify the criteria by which it will be possible to determine with certainty whether a particular product should be classified as a domestic product. In addition, he describes what should be considered as goods, the analogues of which the Russian industry does not produce. This week the examination of this project will be completed, and the commissioning can be expected closer to the middle of summer. This resolution has not yet come to the Ministry of Economic Development, officials of this department said.

There are several main distinguishing features inherent in Russian goods. The project outlines a list of conditions and processes in Russia, the percentage of the cost of raw materials and imported components in the selling price finished product. The calculation must be made according to the value declared at customs or according to the documented price of their primary sale in Russia, the cost finished products formed taking into account transport costs.

In addition, a special clause deduced an indispensable condition that the manufacturer is obliged to carry out research and development activities, give preference to Russian citizens, etc.

The head of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, Denis Manturov, said during his speech this month that as various criteria are prepared, this document will be supplemented with other items.

There are two signs by which the fact of the absence of Russian-made analogues will be determined. This kind of product should not have identical characteristics, physical, chemical and other properties that are not related to its appearance, and at the same time affect the work by more than 20%. Another sign is the selling price and the level of operating costs.

With regard to products that are produced for the needs of the defense department, already now only components made in Russia are needed, says an employee of a company operating in the military-industrial complex. According to him, there are imported components in some civilian devices, which will need to be abandoned in order not to contradict the new rules. However, since the dollar has become more expensive, it is much more profitable to use Russian components.

For companies operating in the automotive industry, the criteria have been formulated and are already in effect, according to Sollers. It also clearly spells out the responsibilities of such companies related to the degree of localization, specific obligations regarding the creation of various research centers on Russian soil and the mandatory organization of a full engine manufacturing cycle.

Companies engaged in import substitution will be stimulated by subsidies.

Various representatives of the business community note that now, due to the increased attention of the authorities to the issue of import substitution, companies whose products fully meet the requirements for Russian manufacturer may, in theory, hope for certain bonuses. However, here a significant question arises, in what format the preference will be. Would prefer a carrot or a stick, asks the representative of the RSPP.

The government says that incentives in the form of targeted investment agreements are provided for enterprises that meet the criteria. He, in addition, indicates that it will still be possible to provide an order to only one supplier if it is a participant in a special investment contract.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade has already started accepting applications from companies wishing to take part in such projects, according to information on it. The conditions say that the state will provide subsidies that can be used to reimburse costs for servicing loans taken from Russian financial institutions in the period from 2014 to 2016. Russian enterprises with projects whose cost will not exceed 5 billion rubles can participate in this casting.

Parallel considered possible admission Russian enterprises to government purchases. For this purpose, a number of documents will be developed, in accordance with which the main criterion for the admission of products to public procurement will be their production in the countries participating in the Eurasian economic union. AT Russian government note that in order for a product to be considered Russian, all components must be produced on the territory of the EAEU.

The idea of ​​forcing foreign enterprises wishing to take part in public procurement to build a full production cycle in Russia over the course of several years has been studied in the government for more than one year. However, the requirements under which companies or their products are considered to be manufactured in the Russian Federation are not sufficiently specified, this state of affairs can lead to various abuses, some foreign entrepreneurs feared.

Russian business increasingly prefers to make transactions under domestic law and sue at home. According to a study by Legal Insight and the Internet Initiatives Development Fund, more than 65% of Russian lawyers are ready to use domestic jurisdiction when concluding investment transactions. Experts unanimously confirmed this trend. The fall of the ruble exchange rate and the “collapse” of demand are cited as reasons; undesirability for many state-owned companies in the current international situation to use foreign law; the deoffshorization of the Russian economy announced by Putin; and finally, changes to the Civil Code with clearer rules regarding guarantees, assurances of circumstance, etc.

Russia's legal and judicial systems may be celebrating victory - Russian businesses are increasingly choosing to transact under domestic law and sue in their native courts rather than in the UK. Although the proportion of transactions made with the so-called clause under English law is still high, there has been a clear trend towards a return to Russian justice, experts interviewed by Profile note. But just a few years ago, the problem of mass exodus of businesses to foreign jurisdictions in the Russian legal community was considered one of the key ones. The reform of legislation, the judiciary, deoffshorization, the economic crisis, political isolation - all this led to the victory of the national Themis.

And yet, while it looks like one battle won, the end of the war is far away. And strategically, it is the United Kingdom that probably wins in it - and not Russia, but the whole world, since it is simply more convenient for business to use English law than any other.

Gentlemen's Preferences

Seemingly purely legal, the problem of moving to a foreign jurisdiction has a fairly clear explanation. Actually, jurisdiction is the law of the country that the two parties agree to apply to their transactions, in the courts of which they will resolve disputes if they arise. That is why we became witnesses of high-profile "showdowns" Russian oligarchs In Great Britain. So, in the High Court of London in 2012, Oleg Deripaska and Mikhail Cherny divided the shares of Rusal. The late Boris Berezovsky, who claimed compensation for the shares of Rusal and Sibneft, then and there lost to Roman Abramovich. Among the well-known "cases" are also "VTB v. Nutritek, YUKOS v. Rosneft", "Slutsker v. Haron Investments. Those were the times when the oligarchs divided their millions, and the media relished how British lawyers replenished the lexicon with new terms - kidalovo, krysha, dolya, obschak, vor-v‑zakone.

But British justice was preferred not only by Russian business celebrities. As a result, in 2012 the problem of “flight” of Russian business to foreign jurisdictions was named one of the key ones. It was discussed in the State Duma and at round tables of the professional legal community. According to a study conducted at that time by the law firm Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners (EPAM), 57% of the respondents either did not subject their transactions to Russian law at all, or assigned no more than 10% of them to it. Only 33% of the surveyed businessmen working in Russia executed up to half of the transactions according to Russian laws, and no more than 10% of companies agreed to submit most of their contracts to them.

The legal publications Legal Insight and The Lawer conducted a survey in the same year among representatives of the legal departments of leading Russian companies. "This study once again confirmed the existence of a long-discussed problem in Russia - the inconvenience of domestic law for the needs of business," the authors of the study noted. The consequence of this was "the widespread use in certain sectors of the domestic economy (primarily in the investment business, banking, development) of English law." According to the results of the survey, 77% of respondents worked in companies, the majority of whose activities were carried out in Russia. Of these, 37% were involved in litigation in foreign countries, mainly in the UK (12%) and Cyprus (8%). In addition, 56.5% of respondents called Russian law “uncomfortable” for doing business.

Comfort in English

The company is registered, operates and deals in Russia and often with Russian partners, but with a reservation under English law. This means that the lawyers write the contract in accordance with British contract law and entrust the resolution of emerging disputes to the English courts. Why does business do this? Because it is more convenient for him, and comfort is the key word here.

The Russians have become adept at this for a long time, says Evgeny Zhilin, a partner at the law firm YUST, and they are already not much inferior to the average English lawyers. “Russian lawyers have long since learned to draw up transactions in English law, and the participation of English lawyers in these transactions is not always significant,” he says. – It often happens that Russian lawyers on both sides take a deal in English law, negotiate, draw up draft documents, and then simply give them for verification to an Englishman who, for £5,000-15,000, says that everything is OK, or something corrects if, for example, a new precedent has appeared.

The advantage of the British system is simple, says Zhilin: “In English law, what works is what is agreed upon. If you don't do it, you will be forced." “In Russia, the parties do not yet always understand how much what is written, agreed upon will be executed through the judicial system,” he compares with the domestic system. “This moment of uncertainty about the consequences is a key deterrent.” English contract law is flexible, based on the principle of freedom of contract, adds Alexander Garmaev, head of the VEGAS LEX Corporate Projects Group. “English law allows the parties to settle the relationship at their discretion and does not establish unreasonable prohibitions,” he explains. “It is also considered that the law enforcement practice in relation to the provisions of English law is relatively predictable - it is possible to predict in advance how the court will interpret the disputed provisions.”

However, high level Other European judicial institutions also enjoy confidence in Russian business, says Garmaev, such as the courts in Stockholm and Paris. “Various offshore jurisdictions are still popular, among which the largest is still in Cyprus,” continues Goltsblat BLP partner Matvey Kaploukhy, specializing in corporate practice, mergers and acquisitions. – Among non-offshore jurisdictions, Holland is often chosen. The key considerations when choosing a jurisdiction are taxes, including having a convenient double taxation treaty, as well as the cost of administering a company.” For commercial transactions, Zhilin notes, Swiss law is often used, it is considered quite neutral. Dmitry Stepanov, a partner at Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners, explains that Switzerland (like England and Austria) is chosen for business inheritance proceedings, and in trust disputes (trust management of property) Switzerland and England also prevail. Yet English law leads the way in most commercial transactions. “Although the place may not necessarily be London, but Cyprus, Jersey, Maine, the British Virgin Islands and others,” Stepanov explains.

How things have changed

Only four years have passed, and the picture has changed. According to a study conducted at the end of last year by Legal Insight and the Internet Initiatives Development Fund (IIDF), more than 65% of Russian lawyers are ready to use domestic jurisdiction when concluding investment transactions. In total, more than 500 lawyers from large companies and law firms. Of these, 23% consider it acceptable to use Russian law for a transaction amount of up to 120 million rubles, 13% - up to 60 million rubles. And 80% of companies ready to use domestic jurisdiction for transactions from 2 billion rubles. and above, according to the survey, already have experience with Russian law. Approximately the same assessment is given by Zhilin from YUST. If earlier, according to him, the number of transactions in the English jurisdiction and in the Russian one was in the ratio of 90% and 10%, now it is "about 80% to 20% or 75% to 25%."

Experts unanimously confirmed the trend towards the return of business to domestic jurisdiction. “The number of transactions concluded within the Russian jurisdiction is growing. Clients are increasingly turning to just such installations: we will make a deal under Russian law, - says Zhilin. – I think that in the future the number of Russian transactions will gradually increase. Including foreign partners, if the main vector (areas of activity) is Russian, if the company is located in Russia, they often already recognize that the shareholders' agreement should be subject to Russian law. This year we have already supported several such major transactions of leading Russian companies. But, as a rule, we are talking about the creation of joint ventures, and not about buying and selling a business in its classic form.”

Legal Insight and IIDF researchers say that “today, more and more companies are “looking” towards Russian law in the face of the depreciation of the ruble and the “collapse” of demand.” Garmaev also noted this factor: “A sharp change in exchange rates has led to the fact that the services of foreign lawyers for supporting transactions and litigation have become significantly more expensive.” However, Zhilin considers the impact of the fall of the ruble unprincipled. “If we are talking about large transactions, estimated at least tens of millions of dollars, then the costs of lawyers against this background are insignificant,” he says. – This can be a defining moment only for micro-transactions – up to $10 million, where we are talking about start-ups or small companies. It can really be expensive to pay lawyers £100,000-200,000 there. Of course, the cost of the services of Russian lawyers is somewhat, and sometimes noticeably lower.” At the same time, he recalls that Russian lawyers with English law have long been on “you”.

The second reason is political. “For many public sector companies, the use of foreign law has become undesirable given the current international situation,” Garmaev stated. “The degree of state intervention is seriously increasing, there are more and more companies with state participation, including those in highly sensitive sectors of the economy,” agrees Zhilin. “Therefore, in a number of cases, the choice of Russian law is dictated by, as they say, installation aspirations - to apply Russian law in a revealing way, to hang an order on your chest.”

The third reason is of a legislative nature: the deoffshorization of the Russian economy initiated by President Putin. “More and more deals are being made under Russian law, and this is largely due to policies that make using offshore companies extremely onerous,” says Golsblatt BLP's Kaploukhiy. And Garmaev explains that as a result of the tax changes in the course of deoffshorization, “transactions with the use of foreign structures became inappropriate in terms of tax issues.”

But the changes made to the Civil Code became decisive for the return of companies to Russian jurisdiction. AT last years it was replenished with new norms regulating legal relations important for business. “Now in Russian law, transactions are easily concluded on joint ventures (joint ventures), the sale of business and individual assets, shareholder agreements, options to purchase or sell shares, shares, irrevocable powers of attorney to vote,” Stepanov lists from EPAM. Russian law has tightened up - some tools have appeared that were not there before, Zhilin confirms: “These are more detailed and understandable rules regarding the agreement of shareholders, conditional transactions, the so-called escrow (deposits that ensure the execution of transactions). There are clearer rules regarding guarantees, assurances of circumstances and so on,” he also gives an example.

British fashion

But the most big deals, says Zhilin, are still not in Russian law, and disputes over these transactions are not resolved in Russian arbitration. “Probably, it is too early to say that Russian law is on the same level as English law in terms of convenience and flexibility in regulating contractual relations,” the lawyer believes.

And there are reasons for that too. The first is the dubious quality of Russian justice, which all experts are talking about. Two years ago, the Russian Themis was seriously reformed. The Supreme Arbitration Court (SAC) was liquidated, and its functions were taken over by the Economic Collegium of the Supreme Court. “Now they are summing up the first results: how efficiently and successfully the Economic Collegium is working,” says Zhilin. - The general message is that it was done in vain. Rather, the judicial system has lost rather than gained from this.” “The liquidation of the EAC can rather be called a step in another direction,” agrees Kaploukhy. - And the reform of the legislation on arbitration courts is controversial, as it is designed to bring order to arbitration courts, but at the same time it actually closed corporate disputes in Russian arbitration courts and the International Commercial arbitration court at the Chamber of Commerce of the Russian Federation. Gamaev, in turn, notes that business has "certain doubts about the transparency of the Russian judicial system." Without the institution of law enforcement, only "on paper", even the most progressive norms will not work, Stepanov sums up. "It is necessary to create an authoritative arbitration - a non-state arbitration court for commercial disputes, where Russian commercial law would be applied and, more importantly, developed," he is sure.

Legislatively, too, much would still need to be improved, lawyers say. “It is necessary to create mechanisms for transferring business to heirs, but without splitting the business, as happens in conventional inheritance, but with keeping the “business on the go,” Stepanov believes. – Because the captains of Russian business are getting old and are thinking about who and how to transfer their assets. It is necessary to introduce into our law some analogue of a trust (in continental law, and not only in English, it exists and works great), otherwise many complex corporate structures and will further structure holding companies outside the Russian Federation.

But actually the differences between the two systems of law - the Anglo-Saxon case law (England and the USA) and the continental (Europe, Russia) - are the main reason for the departure of business to British jurisdiction. We, Russians, Europeans, unlike the British, just have a different basic model of legal consciousness, says Zhilin. “We are not used to writing 200-page contracts, because we have the Civil Code, which itself is quite detailed and large, clearly regulating many relations,” he explains. - Therefore, contracts are often written on two or three pages, see the rest in the Civil Code. Not so in England. There, everything that you agreed on should be in the contract, they don’t have any Civil Code, and no one will help you. Therefore, the contracts are so large, long, detailed. To the uninitiated reader, they may even seem ridiculous in their casuistry and detail, but nevertheless, that is how they work.

And the codification of legislation - the desire to reduce disparate norms into codes - characteristic of the countries of the continental system of law, has become a problem not only for Russian business - everyone prefers Britain. “You won't find a single normal loan deal where foreign banks would lend money and which would not be concluded under English law,” says Zhilin. “That just doesn't happen. It is clear that here one clings to the other. Many banks originate from England and have historically been pulled forward by their own lawyers. But even German banks now very often make credit transactions under English law. That is, this is not a typical Russian problem, it is a problem of very many jurisdictions, and everyone, in fact, learns from more advanced legal orders.”

The Russian legal system has one advantage. After the collapse of the USSR, although our country adopted in many respects the legal traditions of continental Europe, it also learned from the Anglo-Saxon system. There is potential for further improvement, Zhilin believes. “I am more than sure that Russian law has a fairly high adaptive capacity, because it absorbs not only the institutions of continental law, but also Anglo-Saxon law,” he says. “They don’t get along well, but it works.” The only thing left to do is realize this potential.