The head of the Ministry of Finance transfers the country to non-cash payments. The country is gradually being transferred to cashless payments Transition to cashless payments
Not all consumers and sellers are ripe for the widespread use of non-cash money. Directly opposes administrative restrictions on purchases for cash and the leadership of the Central Bank. However, the Ministry of Finance seems to have decided not to pay attention to the objections of the Central Bank. “We are considering at the expert level the possibility of recommending, for certain calculations, let’s say that they exceed 600 thousand rubles, to use only a cashless system,” Anton Siluanov said yesterday in an interview with the Rossiya 24 TV channel ". According to him, when making large purchases, it makes no sense to come with a lot of cash. As an example, the head of the Ministry of Finance cited Italy, where citizens cannot pay in cash over a thousand euros.
However, this initiative of the Ministry of Finance is dictated not only by concern for Russian buyers. According to Siluanov, it is “expedient and more transparent” to conduct more non-cash payments, since gray business and the shadow economy are largely associated with the functioning of a large amount of cash in the country. The transition to the full payroll to card accounts promoted by the Ministry of Finance is called upon to bring entrepreneurs out of the shadows.
According to Siluanov, these measures will be proposed for consideration by the government in the very near future. At the same time, the minister admits that there are a number of restrictions to reduce the circulation of cash in the domestic economy. In particular, the expansion of the use of non-cash payments is hampered by an underdeveloped banking infrastructure outside of large cities. In addition, there are high commissions (from 0.8% to 4%) that banks charge from companies that carry out settlements with customers in a non-cash manner. This is significantly higher than the cost of collection (0.5%). “We hope that commercial banks will reduce their fees for such non-cash payments,” Siluanov suggested.
Meanwhile, the leadership of the Russian Central Bank is actively opposed to the administrative bans, which the Ministry of Finance is relying on. “There is no need to do anything with administrative measures, bans, etc. By this we will produce only various gray schemes ... In my opinion, this is not a fight against corruption. This is something completely different. In general, we love to look for the ruble not where we lost it, but under the lantern, because it is brighter there. This is wrong,” said the first deputy chairman of the Central Bank, Alexei Ulyukaev, last Saturday in an interview with the Ekho Moskvy radio station. According to him, "non-cash payments are better than cash," but they should be in demand due to convenience and comfort, and not administrative threats. At the same time, Ulyukaev emphasizes that in other countries, cashless transactions were introduced not by prohibitions, but by “creating powerful motivations for all participants in operations.” “And to impose bans, to impose restrictions, so many percent there, I think this is completely wrong,” Ulyukaev emphasizes.
Independent experts are much closer to the position of the Central Bank than the prohibitive initiatives of the Ministry of Finance. Some entrepreneurs, representatives of the banking sector, retail chains believe that the idea of switching to non-cash payments, introduced "from above", will not soon take over the masses. Oleg Shchapov, CEO of CTI, believes that the main problem is the massive unwillingness to use cashless payments. Much time will have to be spent on educational purposes, demonstrating the benefits of progressive forms of payment, before society is ripe for the rejection of cash. “The same banks and retail outlets need time to prepare for changes. There should be a clear state program. In a year and a half, it is possible to more or less normally switch to non-cash forms of payment," Shchapov emphasized.
“Fears about the readiness of our country to transfer payments by companies and individuals to a non-cash basis have a real basis. Moreover, this will be difficult not only due to the unavailability of the banking infrastructure and high commissions for making payments, but also due to the unwillingness of the population to use plastic cards, ”Tatyana Yurina, general director of the Finotdel company, shares doubts. In her opinion, the transition to cashless payments is absolutely the right approach. However, the mass installation of terminals for card payments in a short time will put an additional burden on the business. And if large network companies are ready for this, then individual entrepreneurs and small retailers are not.
The business is ready for cashless payments and the transfer of salaries to bank cards, says Alexander Oskin, Chairman of the Board of the Association of Distributors of Printed Products. But to hope that the transition to a cashless system will help the fight against the shadow economy is a deep delusion, he believes. In Russia, the volume of kickbacks and bribes has been steadily growing in recent years. Including non-cash. And the increased tax burden on business is pushing businesses into gray settlement schemes. “One gets the impression that the Minister of Finance knows little about real life,” Oskin notes.
The problem of the cost of a transaction is relevant - now the commission of banks is very high - up to 4%, says Denis Bartenev, CEO of ARAN Company. And if the Ministry of Finance does not agree with the banks, then the sellers will simply raise the prices of goods. Buyers will not be happy with this.
Tatyana Baskina, CEO of BigFish, called Siluanov's initiative "a normal evolutionary development of the settlement system." So far, the segment of the market most unprepared for such changes is real estate transactions, in which cash settlements through bank cells prevail. However, not all businesses are ready to give up cash. “Some entrepreneurs will be happy, especially if all the promised measures work. The other part will express skepticism and resist. Therefore, in parallel with technical measures, the government should ensure serious ideological work with business and citizens, developing a system of cashless payments,” Baskina is sure.
The Association of Regional Banks recently approached the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance with such an idea. In terms of stimulating non-cash payments between the buyer and the seller, a lot has already been done lately.
- It's time to think about the same, but in the relationship between the employee and the employer. This is the essence of our proposals, designed for the medium and long term, - said Oleg Ivanov, Vice President of the Association of Regional Banks.
The first key thing about this transition is that Russians will be provided not with any kind of “plastic”, but with one that works on the basis of the National Payment Card System (NSPK) being created by the Central Bank.
- Their mass production and issuance will most likely begin towards the end of 2015. Considering that Russians already have more than 200 million cards operating on the basis of international payment systems, the task facing the regulator is not trivial. In order for the new cards to be available to most of our citizens, it may take another two or three years, Oleg Ivanov believes.
Another fundamental thing is that no one is going to force employers to switch to non-cash. Moreover, to introduce large fines for them, as some media wrote, Ivanov notes. On the contrary, it is about stimulating businesses to use more cards than cash registers. Employers will be stimulated, of course, with money. In particular, Oleg Ivanov suggests, one can think about tax breaks for the active use of non-cash in monetary relations with employees.
In fact, there are quite a lot of advantages from the gradual withdrawal from cash in the calculation of salaries. The salary becomes “white”, and does not hide behind gray and black colors. Accordingly, the collection of taxes in the country also increases.
- An employee with a developed infrastructure for accepting bank cards wins, for the employer, the costs of servicing cash salaries are reduced. And not only for the employer, but also for the country's economy as a whole: it will grow by 1-2 percentage points due to the absence of extra costs, at least for printing and disposing of cash, - said Oleg Ivanov.
There will be no mandatory and urgent transition to plastic cards for business. Even in the medium term.
- We still imagine the level of infrastructure development and its serious difference in the regions, - the vice-president notes, - Trade micro-enterprises with an annual turnover of less than 60 million rubles are now exempted by law from the mandatory installation of terminals for accepting bank cards. A similar scheme is proposed for the calculation of salaries by employers on the card.
TRANSITION TO CASHLESS PAYMENTS: GOOD OR BAD?
Hello Felix!
... I read that cash will soon be canceled and we will all switch to non-cash payments using bank cards. What do you think, is it good or bad?
L.
Just recently we had a discussion on this topic in our courses.
I also read about the proposals of the Ministry of Finance to first limit the cash payments of citizens to the amount of 600 thousand rubles. Then they plan to reduce them to 300 thousand. And then, apparently, completely eliminate the "cash". This means that at first large payments, and then all monetary transactions will be carried out through credit organizations. With the payment of interest to these organizations.
Is it good or bad? Looking for someone. For banks, this is certainly good, because in this way they impose additional services on the population and, in addition, gain control over their savings. Bankers are tired of drooling in anticipation of ubiquitous non-cash payments, because. dream of earning on every transaction of every earthling. Officials, who are servants of bankers, also sing that thanks to the transition to cashless payments, it will be possible to reduce the state's spending on cash circulation, save Russians from robberies in the doorways on pay day, and so on.
And then the authorities claim that the abolition of cash payments will allow transactions to hit corruption and the shadow sector. Indeed, bank cards are introduced, first of all, in order to exclude the movement of uncontrolled cash flows. Electronic payments are perfectly traceable, since all transfers from account to account are recorded, in contrast to the transfer of "cash" to the paw.
In words, everything is so fabulous, as much as I want to applaud. If you are an honest citizen and not a crook, you might think that it will be wonderful when there is such a total electronic control over the income and expenses of every member of society. And that would really be great. But only if the governments were honest with the people. However, as practice shows, the state does not always play fair and periodically wool the pockets of its citizens.
The elite sits on the neck of the people. Consequently, not everything that is beneficial to the elite is beneficial to the people. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to suspect the noble intentions of the authorities when they talk about saving the Russians by limiting the circulation of cash. Moreover, behind the backs of the servants of the people looming banks, these rogue money pumps.
The criminal nature of banks
If money is the blood of the economy, then banks are its vascular system. Without banks, we would not have gone very far from the cave way of life, because banks allow the economy to develop intensively. Therefore, on the one hand, banks are needed by society.
But there is another side of the coin, which characterizes the roguish essence of the modern banking system: banks periodically "throw" their depositors. And otherwise they just can not work. (Though they weren't always like that.)
Just like matter is condensed energy, money is a concentrate of human labor efforts (long thoughts, nervous experiences, muscle tension and other purposeful movements). And bankers have direct access to these results of the labor of the population, appropriating part of them. Therefore, banking is the top of the food chain of all commerce, so to speak, its Everest. While everyone else is working (producing oil, producing cars, creating software, or working as security guards in a bank), earning money, bankers, meanwhile, are shearing this money: they take interest from monetary transactions, i.e. tax human nerves and calluses. This is not yet a reproach to banks, but a statement: if everyone earns money by digging in the ground or creating other useful values, then banks make money out of money.
And now the reproach. At its core, bank usury is a legal form of robbery. The fact is that it is the loan interest that creates inflation, which, in fact, is the cause of crises. For example, if you have a million, can you lend 10 million? I think no. But banks can. Because they create money out of thin air: any commercial bank has the right to distribute loans 10 times more than its authorized capital. Thus, banks inflate a bubble of unsecured money supply. When such financial bubbles burst, so-called crises occur, as a result of which banks get richer, and all other persons, both legal and natural, either go bankrupt or become poor. If earlier crises were the result of natural disasters, wars or adverse climatic conditions, now they have become financial. Many people think that the financial crisis is a spontaneous phenomenon, God's punishment or the result of mediocre government policy. However, there is another opinion: the current economic crisis is a controlled robbery of the population or, as the financial tycoons themselves put it, shearing sheep. The extra money steam generated by inflation has to be bled off periodically. At the expense of contributors, of course, and other hard workers up to infirm pensioners with disabilities. By confiscating their collateral, shaking out their wallets, or by crossing out a few non-cash numbers in their bank accounts. And since non-cash money is now produced by any banks, both the Central Bank and commercial ones, after the destruction of the excess money of the old crisis cycle, banks begin a new cycle of currency injection: they say, let's forget the past and start everything from scratch, as if nothing had happened. Then, at the end of the next inflationary cycle, they shear the sheep again and start inflating a new financial bubble. And so on, crisis after crisis.
In short, banks periodically rob their depositors - this is the law of their existence.
Advantages and disadvantages of plastic
Undoubtedly, it is more convenient to carry a thin bank card with you than a thick wallet. Most likely, this is where its advantages end. And then the disadvantages begin:
1. Keeping money on plastic is not as safe as it seems. Some believe that money on a bank card is more secure than cash in your pocket. Where did they get it from? Probably the officials convinced. However, storing non-cash in the form of numbers on bank servers is not as reliable as it might seem.
First (and this is the main disadvantage of plastic), the money in your account does not belong to you, but to the bank- never forget about it. This means that they can easily be confiscated (as was the case in Cyprus) or arrested for any reason and without, up to the point that they did not come out with a physiomordium. The more money will rotate in the non-cash sphere, the higher the likelihood that one wonderful day we will be able to see round zeros on the accounts. If all payments become non-cash, then the banks will know all the ins and outs of your financial movements. And also what is the size of your cash balance at each moment of time and, therefore, how much can be cut off from you, if anything.
Secondly, electronic money can be stolen either by hackers or with a fake credit card no worse than pickpockets steal cash.
Thirdly, the bank will speculate with your money, and if it goes bankrupt, then you will go for insurance for years and prove that you are not a sheep, but a conscientious depositor, but the banksters will have a different opinion.
2. Banking fee. Now you can still buy a pie without a bank commission, then not anymore. Then every citizen will be forced to unfasten the bank for any sneeze: for buying, for selling, for servicing a bank card, etc. First, 1% from large transactions (say, when buying an apartment, you give the bank 100 thousand rubles for transferring money from one computer line to another). Now banks charge an average of 2% for acquiring (cash card payments). And then, if they want, they can tear off all fifty. Or 99. Maybe I'm exaggerating, but the trend will be just that: an increase in payments for each banking operation, because. the banking system is a monopoly headed by a single center that is free from competition and feeds on money. And monetary appetites, as you know, are immeasurable. And you will not be able to do anything about this (growth in bank payments), since you will not have an alternative - cash will die out like those mastodons. At worst, only barter will remain.
The transfer of all payments to a cashless space is a direct coercion of all people to give part of their money to banksters. Why? - Ask yourself this question.
3. Loss of freedom. The establishment of total non-cash payments is a blow to the personal sovereignty of each person, and this is the strategy of the global banking system. And the entire modern banking system is already a global one, and it seems that there are no independent banks (even the famous Swiss banks no longer have the right to keep deposits secret). Its task is to manage all the money resources of the planet's population from a single center. Where this center will be is not important. Something else is important. There may soon be times when accounts are simply canceled at the push of a button on a computer somewhere in London or at the Fed. At any moment, it will be possible to block the accounts of all the dissatisfied and, thus, deprive them of the means to resist. Disagree with homosexual terrorism imposed by Europe? - get a gift. Dissatisfied with the rate increase? - get more. A foreign economy needs money - we will cut off half of your wool. And also, dear sheep, please go to the stall.
If all your money is in bank accounts, then this means that the bankers are holding you by the throat, and your freedom belongs to the bank (unless you are subsistence farming in Siberia or do not do without money, like ). And the banksters are not apostles, so they can cut off the oxygen at any moment.
The trend is seen as follows: first 600 thousand rubles, then 300, and then a barcode for each forehead. And then, apparently, that very notorious electronic concentration camp will come, in which not free people will live, but trembling creatures. I would like to be wrong, but, apparently, everything is moving towards that.
Is it good or bad?
Reprinting of article materials is possible only with obligatory links to the site (on the Internet - hyperlink) and to the author
Who doesn't love credit cards? Even being the most ardent Luddite who opposes any innovations, it is difficult to deny their convenience. Buy “those same jeans” on the Internet, pay utility bills, help out a friend with an instant money transfer, specifically “forget” the card at home so as not to spend too much, and so on. This piece of plastic contains many household amenities that were previously inaccessible to us. Moreover, without this piece of plastic, we are often without hands - and this trend will only strengthen in the future. Paying at the checkout, where instead of a live cashier there is a car, with your wristwatch is not a bold fantasy, but the near future. In any case, this is what we are preparing for.
In May 2016, the European Central Bank decided to stop issuing 500 euro banknotes. It is assumed that the banknote will be completely withdrawn from circulation by 2018. ECB President Mario Draghi believes that the abolition of the banknote will help in the fight against illegal activities, since it is the banknote of 500 euros that is most often used by criminals.
He is also supported by former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, which calls for withdrawing from circulation banknotes of 100 dollars and 500 euros for the same reasons - this will help in the fight against corruption and crime. 10 million euros is 22 kg of 500 euro banknotes, a few medium-sized suitcases. The same amount, divided into banknotes of 50 euros, will already weigh 184 kg, which will be more difficult to hide or discreetly transport.
The head of Deutsche Bank, John Cryen, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, said that in ten years there will be no more cash. Cash is expensive, inefficient, and contains disease-causing bacteria that are transmitted through banknotes.
Meanwhile, Europe is gradually limiting cash payments. And in the Scandinavian countries, less than 6% of all payments are already made with cash. In Denmark, for example, they are generally going to completely switch to non-cash transactions by 2020. And in Sweden you can even pay with a card for a street newspaper sold by the homeless.
However, behind all this neat transition to cashless not only concern for security, transparency of financial transactions and easing our fate. The cashless world of the future has many negative aspects. First of all, of course, this is an undisguised restriction of personal freedom. Banks get full control over (legitimate) transactions: they see where the money comes from, how much and where exactly it goes. You don't even need to read George Orwell here to imagine the level of possible government surveillance of its citizens.
It is at least naive to think that criminals will be stopped by the fact that some banknote will be withdrawn from circulation. Illegal fraud will move to the Internet, and non-cash accounts will be under total threat. The volume of cybercrime is growing on an unthinkable scale: CNN claims that in 2014 more than 317 million (!!!) malware units were created. That means almost 1 million malware every day. The story of the hacking of Sony Pictures Entertainment servers is still booming. A team of hackers from the OurMine group hacked the Twitter accounts of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Google CEO Sundar Pichai in early June this year. And even if these invulnerable people can be hacked, then what can we say about us, ordinary users with primitive passwords.
Another shadow story- This is the gradual introduction in the eurozone of the so-called "bail in" mechanism, which allows expropriating a client's deposits in order to save his bank. Roughly speaking, the client is forced (cannot be refused) to withdraw his money from the deposit and transform it into shares in order to save the bank from disaster. And the instability of banks, combined with a single non-cash account, is an explosive mixture that will explode sooner or later.
There is a very obvious, but no less likely precedent- with the transfer to cashless payments, we will become entirely dependent on technology. Computer networks very often tend to fail, and thus deprive us of access to our facilities.
Entire classes of society during a forced transition to non-cash will be marginalized: for example, the elderly and poor people who are used to paying with "live" money and do not trust electronic payment systems.
We ourselves will part with money easier and faster: a decreasing figure on the monitor does not hit the psyche as much as the physical absence of money. We are waiting for the aggravation of financial problems: getting into debt or getting burned out on gambling, again, will become even easier. In addition, digital currency allows banks to arrange much more complex shenanigans with interest rates, fees and other adventures that they like to pull off. While the world of cash, in fact, only one big catastrophe lies in wait - this is inflation, the depreciation of banknotes.
After all, how will the power of electronic banking systems around the world be able to support millions and millions of small daily transactions?
All these are just those questions and suspicions that lie on the surface of the world with cashless payments. And its whole essence can be briefly depicted on the example of one story that recently took place in the Filadelfia Stockholm church. At the end of the service, huge numbers appeared on the big screen - the bank account number of this church institution. Parishioners took out their smartphones and paid tithing through a special app called Swish. Another part of the assembled public lined up at a special terminal called Kollektomat, designed to collect donations. In the Scandinavian countries, they really do not like to stand out from the crowd. Last year, more than 85% of the 20 million crowns donated to this church were transferred from cards or through electronic payments.
Read us at
Telegram
- The bill on the transition to cashless payments, which is prepared by the Ministry of Finance, has caused a lot of controversy. Maybe that's why the document can't reach the State Duma. Does he have any prospects at all?
Anatoly Aksakov: Are you referring to the draft law on limiting cash payments for any transactions worth more than 600,000 rubles? This year it will go to the State Duma and, I hope, will be adopted. And, perhaps, it will work as early as January 1, 2014.
- Is there a need to force people to cards?
Anatoly Aksakov: The state as a whole is interested in increasing non-cash payments. And above all because the production of cash is expensive. For example, the production of a 10-kopeck coin costs the state treasury 50 kopecks. That is, many times more expensive than the face value. But in general, it turns into billions of dollars in costs both for printing banknotes and for minting coins. Secondly, if the money is in non-cash form in banks, and not on hands, in mattresses, tubs, then they will work. Banks can allocate them in the form of loans to the population and enterprises. That is, it will increase the resource potential of the banking system for lending to the economy, business, and the population. And what is very important, non-cash forms will allow you to get away from non-transparent payments, it will be easier to control them and, accordingly, increase the tax base.
- The latter does not sound very attractive to many businessmen.
Anatoly Aksakov: That is why many enterprises do not want to switch to using cards, since non-cash payment is able to really control the circulation of the money supply. Control that will force real taxes to be paid.
- Well, the state will win, business can lose, but what will people get? Do people need it?
Anatoly Aksakov: I think the advantage of cashless transactions in everyday life is becoming more and more obvious. It is more convenient for a person to have a card for cash payment, and not to carry bags of money with him. In addition, if he loses money or is stolen from him, then it is extremely difficult to return them. If you lose your card, you can always restore it in time. Taking into account many arguments, I support the concept of the Ministry of Finance on non-cash payments. Moreover, the transition to cashless payments is an objective requirement of the time. For non-cash payments, of course, the future. This is a more understandable and transparent settlement mechanism, and from the point of view of taxation, it is also an important structural measure.
But still, many people are wary of cards. Especially residents of rural areas, where bank cards and ATMs are a real curiosity.
Anatoly Aksakov: With the adoption of the bill, it is necessary to create a real basis for its implementation. Namely, by legislative and administrative means, to oblige all outlets, including those in the rural outback, to accept bank cards when paying. At the same time, a person should have a choice: pay in cash or with a credit card. Today, even in Moscow, there are many outlets where they do not accept bank cards for payment.
- Have they not yet realized the benefits of high technology?
Anatoly Aksakov: No, the main reason is not to show up in the tax office. I spoke about her. This, in my opinion, is an infringement of consumer rights. It is advisable to introduce an article into the Civil Code on the protection of consumer rights when choosing a form of payment for goods and services. A person has the right to pay everywhere both in cash and with payment cards. At the same time, as world practice shows, society chooses cashless payments. And we must be aware that the whole world is moving to stimulate cashless payments. It is high time for Russia to join the world practice of civilized payments, creating everywhere the technical conditions for card payment from expensive car dealerships to trade shops in the village.
But still, there were objections to the project not only from ordinary people and businessmen, but also from bankers. What didn't they like?
Anatoly Aksakov: Bankers, objecting to the project, said that now there are a lot of fraudulent transactions that can steal money from credit cards, and customers will lose their money without knowing about it. But later the bill was adjusted taking into account the positions of the Bank of Russia, as well as the Institute of Legislation and Comparative Law under the government.
Nevertheless, you must admit that the bankers' arguments were reasonable: more and more often we learn from police reports about hackers who steal money from citizens' accounts using fake cards.
Anatoly Aksakov: Unfortunately, crime is not far behind the times, and some citizens are trying to create fraudulent schemes that can steal money from credit cards. One must be realistic and understand that the adoption of a law in one form or another will not be a panacea for, for example, all sorts of dubious transactions. Also, non-cash payments can be cynically used in corrupt transactions, and it is difficult to prove that this is a form of payment or a bribe for mediation in winning a tender. Here we need new legislative acts and effective measures to curb illegal schemes. It is also necessary to improve financial literacy among citizens, especially the older generation, so that they are not afraid of cards and use them habitually. For example, care must be taken to keep the secret of the pin code. There are times when elderly people ask strangers to help them withdraw money from the terminal using a card, showing them all the codes and numbers. That is, it is necessary to make the cards more understandable and accessible to the consumer. The cardholder should make it a rule to regularly inquire the bank about the status of his account.
- Will this law on cashless payments be passed this year?
Anatoly Aksakov: I have no doubt that the stimulation of cashless payments will in any case be useful and will help the development of the economy as a whole. However, the current reality in our country makes us be wary of such measures, given the underdevelopment of payment systems in Russia. Although it is necessary to work actively in this direction, but not suddenly abandoning work with cash.
key question
- Now the State Duma is preparing for the second reading a bill on bankruptcy of individuals. How does the banking community feel about it?
Anatoly Aksakov: There is a fear that the adoption of this law in the version that the deputies now have may increase the risks of the banking system and stimulate mass bankruptcy. And create a problem for conscientious borrowers, since mass bankruptcy is a risk for the banking system, and, as you know, risk is always included in the interest rate. Since we have no more than 4 percent of people who do not repay loans, it turns out that 96 percent of conscientious borrowers will pay for the possible risks included in interest rates due to the adoption of this law. Should we create such a situation?
- So you're suggesting a firm "no" to the project?
Anatoly Aksakov: On the contrary, it is very important to adopt a balanced law on the bankruptcy of individuals, so that, on the one hand, it will allow those who find themselves in an objectively difficult situation to declare themselves bankrupt, restructure their debt and fulfill their obligations to the bank within a certain period of time . And on the other hand, he did not create a loophole for those who are not going to fulfill their obligations or fulfill them in bad faith.
These rules will be strict but fair. The debtor will have to prove his bankruptcy in court, and if it turns out that he is disingenuous, then severe sanctions will be applied to him, including criminal ones. In addition, the bill will contain restrictive measures for debtors, for example, this is an article on a ban on traveling abroad. The logic of this standard is simple: if you are bankrupt and you have no money to repay the debt, then where do you get the money for foreign trips and vacations in luxury resorts? These amendments will be adopted for the second reading, which is expected at the end of the spring session.
