Tax levied on the bourgeoisie. Who canceled the poll tax in Russia? In the Russian Empire

The poll tax is a tax that was introduced by Peter 1, replacing the tax on tax yards. The tax significantly expanded the number of people who had to pay it, as a result of which the main goal of the king was achieved - to increase the flow of money to the treasury. The poll tax was paid by about 5.8 million people, and its value was 74 and 120 kopecks (depending on the class to which the person belonged).

Preconditions for the reform

Peter 1 is known for creating taxes on literally everything. You can often hear a joke that in Peter's era they did not pay, except perhaps for air. This is indeed the case. The king's favorite brainchild (army and navy) was consumed by gigantic money, which at the beginning of the reign had nothing to repay. For example, in 1710, taxes were collected for 3.1 million rubles, but the total expenditure of the treasury was 3.8 million, of which 2.7-2.8 million (in different sources the figures are slightly different) went to the army and navy.

There was not enough money and Peter even introduced a special position - the Profit Man. Profits are people who performed only 1 function - they were looking for means of enriching the treasury. In simpler terms, they came up with new taxes as the simplest way to get money.

The essence of the tax

Until 1724 in Russia taxing yards... They are based on the availability of land and peasants, as a result of which the amount of the tax was calculated. Peter 1, who was looking for all sorts of ways to replenish the treasury, replaced this tax poll tax... That is, now the tax was paid from each person. For these purposes, a population census was carried out in 1718, which recorded about 5.8 million inhabitants in the country. In reality, this figure was higher, since many were hidden from scribes in order to pay less money later. During the census, for the first time, they recorded not only the inhabitants on whom there was tax, but also the classes that used to be free (free people, walking people, slaves).

Starting from 1724, the following sizes of the poll tax were established:

• 70 kopecks from each person, regardless of their age.
• 1.2 rubles from those who were not in peasant dependence.

In fact, the price of freedom was set (unofficially, of course) - 40 kopecks.

The poll file has significantly increased budget revenues. In 1725, only about 9 million rubles were collected in taxes, while in the middle of the reign of Peter, about 3 million rubles were mainly collected.

CANCEL AIR SUPPLY.

From January 1, 1887 in European Russia, the collection of taxes on the basis of tax per capita should cease. The poll is one of the sad legacies of the 18th century, the era of temporary workers and favorites, one of the distortions of the ideas of Peter I by his closest successors. Concerned about the transformation of the army, a long, difficult war, Peter I mercilessly persecuted people "walking" and "nѣtchik" - anyone who avoided the duties of a citizen; but at the same time, he sought to distribute social burdens as evenly as possible, imposing service on whom, on whom payments, prescribing "between the great and the lower, the poor and the rich in terms of real equality in inspection and to have, no one would have been burdened with the proper more others. because if it happens, then exaggerated - poor yards and arable land, and government revenues will decrease over time and the wretched crying will attract the yoke of God for the whole state". With such an understanding of the basis of the state economy, he obviously could not introduce the poll tax in its modern meaning. The first census (1718-1723) was carried out" for the house "," for the knowledge "of cash payment forces, and tax was supposed to involve only persons who are free from the sovereign service, "arranged by arable land, producing trades and trade"; were put "... The most" location "again was supposed to do" badly, according to the state of nature and the circumstances of the provinces, according to the price of field blankets and other necessary reasons. " and garrison regiments, "temporarily", "roughly" counted to heart i 32 1/2 tax souls, and on the content of the connago - 51 1/4 taxable soul.), got a character, little corresponding to the destiny of the sovereign. While the revision was being checked (until 1726), he died ... and distortions of his plans began; quickly began to establish “that completely anti-Petrovsky order, which the deceased Vasilchikov described with the words:“ the liberty of the nobility and the bondage of the peasants. ”Only recently history cleared Peter's memory of slander, which attributed to him the introduction of the poll tax, and the“ voice of the people ”so This submission, growing and losing its special purpose, gradually took the first place among our direct taxes, both in terms of the significance of the income delivered, and in its reflection on the life of the Russian peasantry. The government, apparently, was always aware of the inconvenience of this tax; 1727, 1810, 1832, 1859) tried to eliminate them, but until 1882 his attempts remained fruitless: he barely managed to temporarily reduce the poll payments, but then it increased them again, yielding to the needs of money, poor financial calculations ... and in particular the conditions of the social order and the lack of civic feeling in lassakh, who created a privileged position for themselves. Even after 1861, from which modern Russian life has been leading its age, the per capita salary increased slightly: from 1839 to 1862 it in European Russia was 95 kopecks, in 1862 it increased to the ruble, from 1863 it increased in average size by 25 kopecks, from 1867 - by another 50 kopecks. With this increase, the per capita tax in different localities, "depending on the degree of welfare of the population," was from 1 p. 15 K. up to 2 rubles 61 k. (The government, having undertaken in 1859 the study of ways to abolish the poll tax, tried, by increasing it in 1863 and 1867, to weaken, at least, some of the inconveniences of its application, and therefore, instead of the previous monotonous taxation salaries differing in place, in order to achieve at least some compliance with the poll tax property conditions of the payer.). Съ тхъ porъ, to which the fees collected according to the same capitation system are added: state, zemstvo (from 1875 (In average size 50 k. Per soul; from 4 to 91 k.)) And public congress of state peasants (from 1876 . (In the average size 34 1/4 k. Eat the soul; from 14 to 40 k.)). Between them at the same time, completely parallel to this increase in the poll tax, continuous work was going on to replace it with something more fair and reasonable. Namely, on June 10, 1859, the highest commission was established "for the withdrawal of funds in the strengthening of state revenues through the improvement of the system of taxes and fees through the introduction of new taxes, and the main task the commission admitted: " the abolition of the tax class and the abolition of the poll tax with a decrease in all kinds of fees and duties, lying on the peasants, to size, corresponding to their payment forces". This commission has acquired a loud notoriety under the name" tax. " The estate tax, which serves as the main obstacle to the destruction of unworthy taxation of the estates for "taxable" and "taxable", not secured by any property, unequal, calculated without relation to payment forces, from the "soul", besides introduced in the last, 10th census (1859), that is, the soul is completely fictitious at the present time, this, in addition, hinders the free movement of the payer, almost attaching him to the place; in a word: it unites the majority conditions recognized by experience and science as inconsistent with a reasonable tax.The tax commission existed for twenty-two years; their questions (her "works" are, it seems, 27 volumes, in 60 books), but to fulfill the "main task", although partly - to cancel the poll tax - it was not for her ... Въ tsѣlom " the main task" waiting for completion and still so far. However, the activity of this commission is instructive in many ways, and it is timely and useful to recall some features of its history. She began her activity completely out of time, on the eve of the all-pervading coup of 1861, rightly realizing that "until the life of the main mass of payers - the peasants - is settled, there cannot be a complete transformation of the tax system"; realizing that the forthcoming reorganization of peasant life will take over all spheres of Russian life to the very depths, and will entail a number of other reforms; that any work aimed at arranging future relationships must first of all clarify for itself the picture of a newly emerging life. And no one could have imagined this picture in 1859. The government, imbued with the need for liberation, proceeded, however, to the task without a comprehensively thought-out program, without stopping at any coherent system of reforms, apparently without even giving itself a preliminary clear report: in which areas will inevitably transformations be required beyond the vast amount of law? The very foundations of the liberation were still contested, modified, "the struggle was hard," and the banner of victory was not even tilted towards the opponents of the oppression of the peasants with the land. When the principle triumphed, the opponents of the peasant landowners, hiding behind the most liberal arguments, waged a struggle against the obligatory redemption and completeness of overheads, and sought to preserve the forests and pastures for the helpers. about the right to ransom overhead by individual members of society, about the size of redemption payments, etc. Still less definitely realized what the further transformation would follow: what would become state, specific peasants; What administrative and economic bodies will replace the abolished pro-government authority? ... Until the middle of the 60s, the commission only had to take a wait-and-see position ... But for this period it became clear enough. It turned out to be especially favorable for the fulfillment of the "main task", but ... the Ministry of Finance of that time did not at all sympathize with the reviving Russia and looked the other way ... , admiring the "emancipation" of the Russian peasants, exclaimed: "ous n" avez plus qu "à ajouter un beau réseau de chemins de fer, un crédit bien organisé pour lancer la grande industrie, et, avec vos richesses inou ricses (then in these" "they were still drinking). .. quel avenir! "If someone offered him the place of the Minister of Finance in Russia, he would have accepted him, without hesitation, with sincere conviction that it would only be worthwhile to attach to this completely unique Russia the establishment of Napoleon's centralized France, and she would not be able to say it! .. Having stumbled upon the communal, zemstvo order, during their experiments of acclimatization, on the peculiarities of the national agricultural, predominantly, the nation, in spite of all the aspirations of state centralization, which retained the tradition of nothing else, the Cossack circle, the loan of free lands in these orders I did not understand and waved my hand at them, as to the phenomena that did not deserve serious attention, as to the roughness, which should move, or even disappear, be rubbed into the imported millstones. 70s by the helpful advice of this stranger? and the bank fever, guided partly by bourgeois ideals, partly by sympathy for the noble-laborer system of the Baltic region, it did not realize that the prevailing interest in Russia at that time was and will remain for a long time - the arrangement of the peasants, that all ... It also remained alien to the ongoing revival of Russian society in the face of zemstvo institutions, even directly became hostile to them: thanks to his insistence, on November 21, 1866, trade and industry were withdrawn from the zemstvo taxation. This was supposed to serve as a guide for the taxation commission in her relations kъ overlapping At the same time, the commission, not being afraid of contradicting their actions with their task, showed in one of the reports the following view of the issue of taxation of lands of private owners: "Regarding the attraction to participation in fees for the state needs of the landlords, it is impossible not to notice that, after the assumption of this collection, in thirty provinces zemstvo institutions have been introduced, which ... most of the zemstvo expenses are covered by the collection of land from all withdrawals. Thus, the general land tax has already been introduced into the form of the provincial and uzdnago land tax ... Therefore, taking into account the present transitional state of the utility farms, all the while the need to conduct them with free-hired labor, that they must not wait for these Regarding the prospective transformation into the poll taxation system, it would be inconvenient for a new tax for state needs. " For the peasants, the "burdens of the transitional state" were not recognized, despite the fact that in the same report - peasant payments (capitation, zemstvo and redemption) numbered from 10 to 18 rubles. with a soul, from 1 p. 50 k. Up to 3 rubles 50 kopecks from tithes, from 30 to 60 rubles. out of the yard! Protecting in this way the "grande industrie" and the land plots, obviously, it was necessary to abandon both the destruction of the tax-paying estate and the lowering of taxes on the peasants to a size corresponding to their payment forces. I had to confine myself to another poll tax, с тѣхъ same peasant... In 1869, in fact, a draft tax of land and podvornago: the state per capita land tax was supposed to be transferred to the peasant land (22 mil.), the very same capitation tax (about 40 mil.) to the peasant households, or, perhaps, already to earn money. Even the ministries of internal affairs and state property met this project unsympathetically, rightly finding it inappropriate to "everyday conditions and incompatible with the means of the people." Neither the one nor the other ministry, however, did not explicitly indicate impossibility to solve the problem, leaving the burden of taxes exclusively on the peasants... It was worked out, then, the project was replaced by per capita taxes with household and discharge taxes (in size 55 mil., Of which 40 fell on the peasants), but the minister of finance himself, reporting about it to the sovereign in 1876, expressed his conviction that this project was not it can be recognized neither useful nor timely, since it will reduce peasant payments by only 1/9 part, and in the meantime, complicate the administration; what while there is enough more equal redistribution of the total amount of per capita taxes(except ransom "of course) between the provinces ... This report, at least, was distinguished by a frank formulation of a real task, which the ministry considered possible for itself. The report was ordered to be examined in a special commission under the leadership of the Grand Duke Konstantin Nikolaevich, but attention was diverted from the internal ones by the external ones - by the war against Turkey ... the possibility of bypassing the possessing classes, for a while the end came ... The tax commission, however, existed for another five years, as if by an oversight, dying in inactivity, but state control, finally, paid attention to its useless vegetation, and it is closed. At the end of the war, on March 23, 1879, the new Minister of Finance, Adjutant General Greig, as if forgetting about the existence of the 1859 commission, asked even the Highest command to form a new commission, which was instructed to immediately "start discussing the proposed volume of levies, levied in favor of the state treasury according to the capitation system, and the volume of withdrawals, for their replacement, other sources of state revenues. " The tasks of the new commission were not destined to be realized either in the management of the Ministry of Finance of S.S. Greig, or in the management of his successor, A.A. Abaza. The first step to abolish the poll tax was made only under H. X. Bunge; it was on May 18, 1882 that the highest decree was issued: 1) to begin replacing the poll tax from 1883 and to carry out this transformation gradually, over the course of several years of the entire capitation tax during a period not exceeding 7 years old.), on the basis of the withdrawal of new sources of state income, and 2) to stop levying from January 1, 1883: b) the poll tax on landless peasants and household people assigned to the volosts, and c) the poll tax on the peasants who received a fourth part of the higher or specified size of overpayment from the helpers, "that is, for the most disadvantaged people. This decree was added only by this decree. 000 rubles; in 1884, the poll tax was canceled by another 15.688,000 rubles from landless peasants assigned to the volosts without concessionary sentences, from peasants from factory and factory ones, and also the salaries of the poll tax were lowered: a) by half - for former helpers peasants and, in certain, more needy areas, for all categories of payers, and b) by 1/10 part for the rest of the peasants. : on state peasants 22,179,000 rubles (including paying quitrent tax to state peasants of European Russia 18,412,000 rubles), for former helpers - 10.441,000 rubles, for specific ones, 2.002,000 rubles. and on other payers 4.510,000 rubles. Replaced, in 1882 and 1884, the aforementioned 19,259,000 rubles, by the way, by increasing the tax on immovable property in cities, posadakh and mostechkakh, land tax, duties on the cost, as well as for the right to trade and trades; introduction of duties on property, which are transferred by free means; tax on incomes with monetary capital - in short, fees that expose a deliberate system, a strict principle; all of them are without class, secured by property, imbued with the idea of ​​income, subject to natural growth in accordance with the development of the national economy, and, finally, have an undoubted educational value, step by step preparing society for income tax in its simplest and most perfect expression. "On the previous payers of the poll tax, naturally, only a part of this tax should have remained in a modified form, according to proportionality with their property taxed on the same basis and in the same size with the property of the rest of the estates. "The only, relatively unimportant, drawback of most new taxes is some difficulty in collecting, the need for this collection of living, active local ministries. But this drawback and fixable: we will be able to eliminate it by establishing the posts of tax inspectors; in addition, every year it will be less noticeable if our society develops in civil relations. land falls 2.300,000 rubles. The rest of the articles, as the reader sees, have little to do with the farmer and, in general, the poor man. into Russian life such foundations that inevitably had to be reflected in all spheres and put a lasting based on your well-being, as it depends on a reasonable and fair tax system. Last year, however, the Ministry of Finance for some reason suddenly completely changed the calm and, it seemed, so conscious movement. Did it get scared of the persistently growing budget, did it lose the composure and noble consciousness of what it was doing because of the screams of every moral petty, frightened by the pitiful flaws of its tight pockets, did its cravers get tired, seduce their eyes, who preferred a serious soul, the greatness of which would be recognized only at the end of the path and would have found itself an estimate in history, and not in street screams - it is difficult to say. One thing is certain: the measures adopted by the law on May 28, 1885 to complete the reform, are in sharp opposition to all the previous regulations of the Ministry of Finance on the fulfillment of the 1882 prescriptions; therefore, looking closely at the chronology and parallelism of events, you come to the conviction that the ministry in this case did not act independently, succumbed to outside influences; that it, not discerning the partisan lining of the plans proposed to it, was tempted to hastily destroy the proud knot, throwing off the shoulders the hard, cumbersome work of unraveling it. The councils went, presumably, from the same eternally aching landowners, from the coupon owners, from the owners of large industrial enterprises, factory owners ... with the imposition of papers - all these, of course, are acts of "political wisdom"; but that the first step should, however, be followed by both the second and the third. ..that at the end of the end the idea of ​​profitability will come true with a fullness undesirable for them, and they - the richest - will have to pay more than others ... There were exclamations about the untimely innovations, about the difficult situation of land tenure and industry. Khor makalshchikov about the fact that now the land is "only at a loss" was combined with a mansion, ready to prove that the factories are working, and coupons are not burned "only out of honor." Such exclamations did not help. A storm arose against the Ministry of Finance, mainly against institutions in charge of salary fees - a storm that for a long time was only annoying and harmful because of the lack of confidence in the government, which settled in timid minds, causing undoubted damage to the kind of industry, in the interests of which ... But after that, her persistence, apparently, shaken the clarity of views and the calm implementation of the program by the Ministry of Finance itself. the possibility of support in the state council. The insidiousness of this plan was not conspicuous: it seemed that there was a common between the "friends of industry" and the rent of the state peasants: that they were Hekub, and that they were Hekub! In the meantime, with the termination of the question of replacing the poll tax, for interest-bearing securities, factories, lands, urban real estate, inheritance, in general for income, the persistent denunciation, the indication of the need to take on immediately 37 million tax. There is no doubt that when the ministry's draft law, which was brought in from outside, won approval, the same "friends of industry" - enemies of the ministry's previous program - rushed to congratulate him on the accomplishment of "the greatest reform of the present reign!" But it is even sadder that some short-sighted publicists, such as, for example, a young scientist who dedicated the law on May 28, 1885, an unsuccessful report, published in Trudy I.V.E. Society (No. 6 and 7 of the current year). Be that as it may, a perfectly conceived, thoroughly begun reform ended with an effective decoupling of the unit, return to taxation commissions, which, if we do not take serious mѣr, threatens us with completely undesirable consequences. To abolish the 37 million rubles per capita tax remaining by 1885 in European Russia, it was decided how known: 1) to increase from 1887 the quitrent tax of former state peasants for each selenium by the amount of the per capita tax due to selenium according to the previously existing legal regulations however, so that the tithe levy increased according to this calculation should not exceed the redemption payments of the neighboring peasants' landlords and that, in total, the annual payments of the state peasants should not rise more than by 45% of the current lease tax; 2) to increase the excise tax by one (already ninth) kopeck per degree of alcohol (the law of May 18, 1885), and the most capitation tax was canceled for landlords and individual peasants on January 1, 1886, for state ones - on the 1st January 1887. "Friends of Industry" have achieved their goals: all 37 million remained on the peasants. Of the 18 million per capita tax that lay on the state peasants (about 8 million souls) - sixteen will remain on them under another name (In a hundred approximately uzdakh (that is, approximately in 1/4 uzdov of European Russia), the amount of quitrent and capitation tax would exceed the amount of local redemption payments, therefore it cannot be collected in full.); another 21-22 million people will not only pay extra, but - without drinking a single extra glass - overpay for vodka... and, in addition, only partly to the treasury, mainly to the pocket of the jubilant tavern! They say that, on the other hand, payments are distributed among the peasants, more equalizing. How to lower it? Until now, the state peasants breathed easier than the former helpers; they had a lot more in general, and payments were easier; and now both tѣm and others will be equal - hard ... "Moscow Vedomosti" - for this reason, without exaggeration of facts peculiar to them - they calculated that the 9th kopeck imposed on the degree of alcohol should increase the profit of marrows and unresolved shinks, at least as much as the state income. The newspaper is counting; that about two-thirds of the total amount of wine in the inner provinces goes to retail sales. Assuming a wine strength of 40 °, the increase should be 40 K. per bucket; but since there are 100 cups in a bucket, then the elevation per cup will be 2/5 kopecks, and such a coin does not exist, therefore, the elevation will, of necessity, be significant. "In order not to complicate buyers," the store owners and tellers of our chernozem provinces, instead of forty kopecks, added by the treasury, in retail sales, have already added a round ruble to the bucket. Shkalik instead of 6 kopecks. it costs 7 kopecks, a kosushka instead of 12 - 14 kopecks, a half-bottle instead of 30 - 35 kopecks. The people pay, therefore, for wine at retail, the markup is not 1 kopeck, but 2-2 1/2, that is, 80-90 kopecks. on a bucket of 40 degrees. The landlord peasants paid the poll tax in 1885 around 90 kopecks - 1 ruble. from the soul. Considering the increase in drinking costs, in accordance with the law of May 18, 1885, only 44 million, leaving about 1/6 of 4 million city "souls" (until 1883 subject to a capitation tax) and adding at least 35 million to rural inhabitants ( about 22 million revision souls), we will see that for each soul there will be an overpayment of about 1 ruble. 50 kopecks This calculation, of course, is very inaccurate, but, comparing it with the calculations made on the same subject in other press organs, we can say that he is afraid of excessive indulgence in the reform of the excise administration, - the administration, 3 years, to say in passing, do not deserve any condescension and only amaze with their frivolous boldness ... But now he is not up to him; it was important for us only to show how the last act of abolishing the poll tax corresponded to the present one and what a heavy burden it had on the population, instead of making it easier ... taxes in general and excise taxes on threads in particular. The way out of financial difficulties by way of an ingenious allowance for one or another excise tax is seductive, of course, with its simplicity, as the allowances "for the soul" were once tempting, but the easier it is to get carried away with them, the more cautious one should be seduced by the temptation. It would have to, in view of the inevitability of the further decline of the Russian peasantry, soon raise the issue of a new decrease in payments, and not only for the peasants who were former owners, but also for the state ... To return to it is unexpected and strange the abandoned question of the rise of peasant welfare and, by the way, on the coordination of taxes with income - in any case have to; otherwise it will become extremely difficult, although all the same it is inevitable. One magazine, also providing in the future the possibility, even the need to reduce the still increasing rent, even suspected whether the last act of the Ministry of Finance was caused in order to abolish the poll tax - only by desire eliminate the name of this tax and, at the same time, remove from oneself the obligation to carry out the facilitation of the peasantry prescribed by the law of 1882 for a certain date (1891)? ... The guess, of course, is not very plausible, but not devoid of wit. So, for 28 years, it is not possible to break the intrigues of the group of "optimists", despite the repeatedly expressed will of the higher authorities, despite the fact that in this period of time there were moments that were especially favorable for countering the dark intrigues of egoism. The best impulses of society, the best intentions of individual government officials, one way or another, were allowed for implementation, only insofar as they did not concern the interests of this group, by a small number, but by a strong position and solidarity. Under such circumstances, the most important part of the law on May 28, 1885, it is necessary to recognize not the abolition of the poll tax itself, but the points: transformation of quitrent tax into redemption payments, due to be paid in 44 years, and the fourth, - granting "the Minister of Finance to proceed without delay to preparatory actions and the preparation of assumptions: a) on the distribution of the mentioned payments between the seleniums if possible, commensurate with the value and profitability of overheads, and b) the amount of changes that must be made in legalizations based on the population count by revision souls: about the procedure for liability for payment to the treasury of fees and passport systemѣ ". These assumptions, upon due consideration, should be introduced into action on January 1, 1887. It is easy to be convinced that the admirers of privileged positions and farm laborers' Russia, with this reform, not only decided to dump 37 million taxes from their shoulders, but also made a significant step forward towards the destruction of the hated principles of February 19, towards undermining the opposing communal life of the peasants also the principle of state land ownership, not allowing * the plundering of state lands. When the editorial commissions, preparing the conditions for the liberation of the peasants from heavy dependence, stopped for the thought, by way of ransom, to provide the land to the peasants as property, their decision was met with delight by the best part of the then society. But, at that time, there was an opportunity to foresee the movement towards the collection of lands into the hands of the more wealthy villagers and the deprivation of the poor, which has so clearly manifested itself over the past years; if we understood then the role that redemption payments begin to play in the history of our peasant landownership, in short, if we weren't just “hindsight”, perhaps already in 1861 we would have to prefer the redemption of landowners state property and taxation of them - according to the profitability of overhead - equally distributed quitrent tax. In any case, it is strange that an unsuccessful approach, completely forgivable in 1861, but requiring prudence at the present time, was repeated with some incomprehensible haste: the ministry not only did not recognize it useful to listen first to public opinion about what was conceived, but, did not subject her project to any peer discussion. Be that as it may, the landownership of the state peasants is entering the whirlpool of a destructive struggle for peasant societies against the kulaks. Converting in this way the quiteline payments into redemption payments, extending the scope of the redemption clause, urgently needed, at least, previously or simultaneously to cleanse it from the sides, vigorously condemned by life, the press, zemstvos, government bodies, from the elements directed against the main principle of our peasant reform - against the principle nago, free labor of the farmer on the land provided for his use(Exactly " secured in his use"- at least not your own but de jure constituting the property of the state and subordinate to relations in the genus of the currently destroyed relations of state peasants to their nadulam.), a principle capable of with sufficient, to protect Russia from the shocks that threaten the West, and representing a reliable stronghold of the internal well-being and external greatness of Russia. Particularly harmful, as is known, turned out to be articles promoting the mobilization of peasant peasant property, both communal and personal, - articles allowing its free circulation. The question of revising, and partly canceling these articles (115, 161, 162, 165, 169, 173), known under the name of the question of "the inalienability of peasant nadulov", is now becoming especially urgent among other issues of peasant land tenure (resettlement, the question of land and small-scale economic credit, the volume of public smells, community-artels, etc.); he is destined to receive a decisive meaning when solving other questions of this kind. The circulation of redemption payments into redemption payments can be found which justification only under the conditions of such a revision, and it is necessary to pay attention not only to the fencing of the transition of peasant lands to the outside hands, but also to the fencing of them from collecting in a few hands into the environment of society itself. By the way, note that the issue of limiting the "laissez faire" principle in the sphere of peasant landownership, at the present time, is not even a special Russian question, although it, obviously, nowhere in Europe has such a vast overwhelming significance as. In Germany, for example, every year it becomes clear more and more that the main reason for the decline of the peasant economy should be recognized not a number of crop failures, not low prices for grain, not even taxes, somewhat exceeding the norm, which is determined by the unavoidable needs of the land plot and family - namely, the freedom to mobilize peasant plots and burden them with debts. The text of the Law of June 12, 1886 on the transformation of quitrent tax into redemption payments (Art. I, p. 15), applying to the current legislation, allows, unfortunately, early installments for the repayment of capital debt and in the middle of state peasants, as for , there and for the owners of yard plots. From this, we can conclude that they are threatened with the same danger as the former peasants; it remains to be filled with persistent rumors about the alleged agreement of the Ministries of Internal Affairs and Finance regarding the introduction into the state council of a bill on inalienability and on the recognition of allotted land as public property, both in communal and household use of it. We can only predict that such a bill will be met with deep sympathy by all sincere friends of Russia. It should not be overlooked in view of the fact that the conversion of a quitrent tax into redemption payments is, strictly speaking, alienation of state property into private property in the amount determined by the law itself almost in billion rubles (redemption payments are supposed to be collected from the state peasants 49 we. per year, which the law proposes for capitalization to be multiplied by 20.). Such a side has, firstly, a principled meaning. Alienation in the present case does not bear, of course, the nature of the squandering of state wealth to the favorites, which is a spot on the Russian history of the 18th century, nor the character of the plundering of the lands of the Orenburg, Caucasian and other, which is undoubtedly a sad page of the past - the reign of the law: the inalienability of nadlnyh lands (We would gladly say in general: "lands redeemable with the assistance of the government", but for this you still need to cite data that are not included in this article, so as not to deviate from the subject matter.), public peasant landownership can, of course, to be protected, - but the transformation of the quitrent tax into redemption payments, along with "several other phenomena, for example, with the fact that . Recoil of overheads in The private property of the state peasants - one way or another - was carried out as a time when the question arose urgently: could the lands of the former landlords of the peasants be given de facto the character of state lands? These measures, by the way, explain the vitality of thoughts about theft. They do not stop to this day; recently in "Moskovskih Vѣdomosti" was published, for example, without any reservations from the editorial board, correspondence from Ufa, proposing to resume the distribution of land in the European East to "honored officials", etc .; the swindlers of Eastern Siberia, as can be seen from the Siberian press, also dream of seizures in the Pro-Amur and Ussurian territories ... Is it possible that the thought of such a distribution, such seizures, can still be allowed after the lessons taught by the past, after all the significant explanations of state property in general and the importance of its protection for Russia in particular, if only as a colonization fund? Even twenty years ago, America considered itself infinitely rich in free lands, and now the eyes of the earth are not overwhelming us; and look how, taught by experience, the government of the States is concerned about the seizure of the spaces still remaining in its disposal from the hands of speculation and about preserving them for all sorts of agricultural farmers. .. Or are we neither our own nor someone else's experience of good use? The attitude to the transformation of the quitrent tax into redemption payments, as to the alienation of state property, also affects the law of July 12: allowing one-time contributions to the treasury, corresponding to the redemption capital or part of it, this incoming law (1, 16) turns payment, "for the repayment of state debts." The Minister of Finance was given, in addition, "to introduce in the established order his thoughts on the procedure for repayment of the capital amount corresponding to the redemption payments established for 44 years by former state peasants." Consequently, on the one hand, the capital amount equal to the value of the land, urgent payments for which (49 million) should stop after 44 years, should be resented to the state treasury (apparently, by deducting a well-known% of annual contributions for repayment); On the other hand, the government recognizes the payment of state debts as the most correct use of this capital. It would be strange to allocate only early contributions for such a payment, both because these contributions, most likely, will be too insignificant (it would not even be worth talking about their use to pay off our huge debts), and also because there are no grounds, recognizing the well-known purpose capital is correct, to remove, according to this appointment, only an insignificant part of it. Indeed, the money raised through the sale of a significant share of state property must go to capital improvement of finances (which one cannot but recognize the repayment of at least part of the capital amount of state debts); spending them on current expenses would be extremely indiscriminate; This will be understood even by the Russian society, which is little penetrating into financial operations, to which the type of assistant who has passed the ransom evidence has learned a lot in this relationship. It remains to be expected how the Ministry of Finance will furnish this operation to the possible benefit of Russia? It could be noted that the share of annual contributions, for the deduction of% of repayment, must necessarily go towards the payment of interest on state debts, but Russia pays them annually in five more ways than it can receive in the form of redemption payments that have replaced the quitrent state and capitation taxes peasant; therefore, will the interest be spent on these redemptions - the bottom of an accounting record that has no meaning. It is only important to realize the significance of the land fund, crossed out during the present reform, from the financial resources of the future, and to give proper use to the capital received for it. Attention is drawn to the practical implementation of the reform. The main basis for the allocation of redemption payments are as follows: established in the legislative order for each province in an unchanged size for the entire redemption period (until 1931), payments are distributed among the departures by agreement of the ministers: finance, internal affairs and state property; the allocation of the amount assigned to each district between individual settlements is made by the provincial peasant dalam presences on the basis of the allocation projects drawn up by special outgoing commissions from the local taxable inspector and two members of the local government but the peasant members, which are assigned to the presence the chairman. The allocation for selenium proposed by the commission is carried out by a survey of the elected representatives from the society, including two from each selenium, convened simultaneously from the selenium closest to each other. The statements of the authorized persons are entered into the protocol, which is submitted to the provincial presence together with the draft allocation of the uzdnaya commission. Here the provincial and regional presences appear, there is still little environment, little familiar with the locality, the institution of tax inspectors ... ? .. As far as we were able to hear, the Ministry of Finance does not dare to entrust to the zemstvo, in view of the negligence that it often showed when distributing an additional decrease in redemption payments; but - what is still strange - the society, apparently, looks completely indifferently at the dissatisfaction shown to it ... One can even hear voices that one cannot rely on the "current zemstvo", that the government's dissatisfaction is completely thorough ... to their own dulam, they assert that only persons who are looking for a place in them, earnings, even not infallible incomes, are engaged in zemstvos ... Is this so? - we will not examine. The question of the power of the zemstvos or their lack of strength and the reasons for this lack of strength, of the zemstvos as instruments of trashy parties is too important to talk about it casually, especially in view of the desire expressed from different sides to replace it with an official or noble element. Here, it is only important to note the obvious fact of the government's lack of confidence in the zemstvo in the task, the fulfillment of which seems to be the direct responsibility of the zemstvo, and to point out the importance of this fact. If, indeed, such a string as the Zemstvo broke in the structure of our post-reform life, Russia cannot remain indifferent to this phenomenon; without her, let's say more - without its correct functioning, social life is unthinkable. It is necessary to strictly investigate how true the fact of the unfitness or low suitability of modern zemstvos is, and if it is wrong, it is necessary to find out why this happened, what lowered the level of zemstvos ... and to attend to their rise. The absence of a well-organized, civilly developed zemstvo power cannot but be felt even by the government itself, which cannot but realize that this power must be composed of local public elements, and moreover elements non-estate, representing the interests of all strata of the population, even predominantly tѣkh, who, according to these circumstances, are less likely than others to defend their needs in the state. Carrying this force, the government, in spite of the best aspirations, is not secured from serious mistakes; his mropriyatiya are doomed to distortion and failure. Ashamed as it may be, but we have to admit that we do not know enough about Russia, and that we cannot rely, in assessing modern validity, neither on officials, in the majority of completely alien places in which they serve, nor on "experts" who have experienced the fruits of their own bad luck. the lordly economy, nor the "knowledgeable people" who do not even know about their own ignorance; nor, in general, to representatives of their own interests, who casually assert that they serve as representatives of the interests of the region. How bad we are our zemstvos, all the same they have given and are giving comparatively better material for acquaintance with modern life in the works of their co-workers or in the works undertaken at their expense, on their initiative. To the same material, to the facts of living reality, it is necessary to address the question of the changes assumed in the "legalization of the procedure for liability for the payment of salary dues to the treasury", especially if the government insists that these "changes" are inevitably sent January 1st, future 1887... We are a little afraid of haste in this particular case. Indeed, the law is concerned only with the establishment of the "order of responsibility for the payment of salary dues, corresponding to the abolition of the poll tax, and already it has already been put in the administration as if the question is actually about circular pore, even incessantly canceled out. But what if the best order is due to the preservation of the mutual guarantee? Is it possible to speak so lightly about canceling one of the fundamental foundations of people's life, a historically established form of life, adapted by popular practice to the requirements of our state life - a form with the help of which the people so long support possible justice in the spheres of economic relations of the peasantry? ... Mutual responsibility - one of the names of the studied, the name of the familiar to the government and society of the phenomena of Russian life; about it, all the investigations undertaken over the past time unanimously testify that prejudices against him are completely false that they are built on arbitrary approval of "experts" who spoke about mutual responsibility, without having an understanding about it and recognizing even personal antipathies as sufficient basis for their demonstrations. A special dovoriem is used, for example, by the opinion attributing to mutual responsibility "the ruin of hardworking, prosperous peasants for arrears of luntyaev-bednyakov". Between the two detailed studies, wherever they are produced, they prove that never a rich man has to pay for a man. Both the zemstvo study and the testimonies of persons who have familiarized themselves with the matter more closely, on the contrary, with remarkable unanimity testify that the arrears are mainly not due to the poor, but precisely to the rich kulaks and to various relatives and godfathers of the volost chiefs, the so-called. Later, I had a case to hear a whole series of such responses from tax inspectors of the most diverse localities. Without dwelling on this question in detail, let us note only that the exact exemplars not only nowhere gave not the slightest indication of the harm of mutual guarantee, but all, on the contrary, confirm that this institution, inseparably from the communal structure, is one of the most solid foundations of the people's ... The importance of mutual guarantee is especially evident in the leveling distribution of taxes. Mir, having become aware of the amount of taxation falling on him, as is known, distributes it among his joints. From time immemorial, practicing this layout, he developed a polysyllabic system, striking in its fairness, being able to take into consideration all the availability of data: both the need, and the number of workers in the family, and their consistency. He distributes the tax either in cash, then according to the revision souls, then according to taxes, then on the ground, then in whole units, then in fractions. The basis of this painstaking, but fruitful work, completely unattainable for the administration, is mutual responsibility. Thanks to her, the world takes care of the support of its members, the protection of each of them from complete insolvency: arranges to "help" with work, there frees the person who contributes money for the indigent from duty in kind, and so on. Due to the mutual responsibility, taxes are sometimes paid in full or in part by renting out public income items; 12,000 dessiatines of land remaining from dead or gone householders. separate from personal responsibility... In places where income from overheads pays off payments, this responsibility is easily determined: its most common form is, obviously, the temporary surrender of the overhead by the borrower; in the same place, where the answers are the land, where the incomes are not enough to cover even the taxes, when the world's feasible help is exhausted - an outrageous epic of "knocking out" taxes begins, which the world is not involved in, although the clerk and consortes make up a sentence on his behalf, as the same, constitute and decisions of the volostnago court. Return on earnings, hard punishment, sale of the last property (but it is the debtor himself, and not the well-to-do peasants), any publishing over a human is a phenomenon with which the mutual responsibility, obviously, has nothing in common. These phenomena are caused not by mutual responsibility, but by the low level of representatives of the administration and, mainly, by these facts perfect inconsistency of payments with land overhead, with property, which were constantly pointed out to the government by all honest people and the elimination of whom the government itself set as the main task of the tax commission in 1859. We saw whose worries the main task remains unfulfilled ... Any tax must be secured by property - this is an elementary rule of financial science. If something is still protecting us from the more difficult aftermath of oblivion of this rule, then it is precisely these communal, circular foundations, over the destruction of which the worshipers are trying. We saw that these foundations protect the peasants until ruin, they also only they they can lift a fallen peasant, and sooner, more deeply, the feeling of mutual responsibility was preserved in society, than it is worn out, weakened by elements that, without noticing that they are chopping off the branches with their own feet, yearn for the devastation of the village. Here is their own consciousness: "If, in the wake of the destruction of mutual guarantee, and a class of landless workers is formed ", we read on page 22 of the report of the "Valuevskaya" commission, "then no society will release the plots of land that have moved away from them. For large landownerѣltsev, as well as for peasant societies ("As well as for peasant societies" - an insert, obviously arbitrary, made without a survey of society. Later studies state the opposite.), highly desirable so that agriculture was in the hands of wealthy people "(Not devoid of interest, drawn up in the same sense, striking by the unabashedness of arguments, the report of Mr. Shatilov, who recently appeared in the Trudy of the Moscow Society of Agriculture." and to their protection and strengthening the law should strive, every day gaining greater and greater significance in the definition of peasant life. , by force - is perfectly illustrated by examples of the postponement of the indigenous front of one danger, are they not prohibited by the tone? optional, they, of course, will not allow you to lease a plot of public land, but fuck his allocation; they will not hesitate and bother to sell the land of the debtor in order to buy it for a penny (The law allows selection I paid for arrears, but so far, with mutual responsibility, this mire is not in the morals of the peasants. They are accustomed to treating the rights of their members to the land so strictly that, even in the absence of a single socialist, when he fought off the land, the priority right to the well-known tax upon return and payment of arrears, at least from the income of the same donation, remains with him.) ; to finish, even to survive from the village of the bednyak, the devastation of which can no longer affect the world, - in general, they will not to protect individuals of the same social nature from ruin, but, on the contrary, contribute to their death by way of an inexhaustible arsenal of means, which are in their disposal. Recently, I managed to hear about a new combination, allegedly arising in the administrative spheres regarding the mutual guarantee: "the distribution of taxes between the members of society should be given to the world, and from the mutual guarantee upon collection of arrears, it should be released by paying the collection directly and solely to the person who did not pay the share, determined by them according to the world layout "... It seems that there is nothing to prove the entire inconsistency of such a decision: enter it into force, the rich, so as not to pay anything, will only have to bring down all the tax burden on the people, from whom there is nothing to take! ... In any case, such a decision would open up a great temptation for uneven layouts and unpunished arbitrariness of the worlds; the creation of the proletariat would have gone ahead with rapid steps. Briefly speaking: in whatever form the abolition of the mutual guarantee took place, it would only be a triumph of admirers of Russia’s engagement, -"radicals of capitalism". Back in 1881, having indicated how a handful of these radicals stubbornly, with energy worthy of more pure goals, follow the manifestations of domestic life, looking out for where and how to find means to curtail the people, not losing sight of the least good reason to destroy it - - to lead him to the proletariat, to the position of a slave in the vast fields of an insignificant and powerful minority, - "Order" posed a number of questions: "Where are you going? Suppose for a minute that you have reached your criminal goal, and think: is it really unprecedented in history, 60-thymillion proletariat, constituting 86 percent. the entire population of the country, the proletariat, who never left the vague dream of a "black front" and was torn off by you from the last piece of land, will obediently go to work in your fields? How to deal with this proletarian? Until now, the entire peasant mass, ignoring the administration, even carefully guarding itself from it, originally led the structure of its life with the internal forces of the community. What army of bureaucrats in state replace these forces of order in bezpredlnykh Russian wastelands for the homeless, embittered people, having lost their everyday foundations and scrapbooks? Even if, driven by poverty and hunger, the proletarians come to work for you, what kind of economy is possible with such workers? Is it possible with them not only an intensive, progressive, but also some kind of economy? Will not Russia be deserted, will it not run wild, how deserted, run wild is luxurious Italy, flooded with slaves in the last days of the Roman Republic? What will become of the industry? Two or three lean years cut production by half ... and what will happen to him when homeless workers make up 86% of the population? There can be no foreign markets for our factories, but who will consume home production? The robbed people? Or will you support them with insane luxury? The luxury of a minority is the shameful stigma of a devastated country. This is an axiom. What will be in the state treasury with this abomination of neglect? Who, what can contribute to it? What can she do? What will be the internal, external significance of the impoverished Russia? Into what shamelessly powerless, flabby junk should the nation decay, turned into the impoverished mass and the depraved minority? " ... Come to your senses, it's time: Denn solchen grossen Leiden Gebührt ein grosses Grab!

The taxation system in Russia has existed for a long time. Today we are obliged to pay income tax to the treasury, calculated as a percentage of total income, and once in our country a poll tax was used, which did not depend on the amount of earnings.
Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky "On the harvest"

What kind of tax was it? Why was it canceled and who made the decision to stop tax payments?

What is a capitation tax?

Although we usually associate the poll tax with Peter's Russia, in fact, it was first introduced back in ancient Rome. Then it was called tributum capitis and originally extended to citizens living in the provinces.

Later, the tax appeared in all European countries and operated for many centuries, and in the 19th century it was canceled due to the adoption of a new reform and the introduction of an income tax.

The poll tax was a tax that was paid by all persons subject to tax. It was counted according to the results of the population census and was charged approximately in the same amount from each person. This is where the name "capitation" came from, which means "from every soul."

Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky "Peasants at the mow"
In Russia, all men, from babies to the elderly, were taxed, with the exception of the clergy and persons of the nobility. The tax rate could vary depending on the categories of citizens. As a rule, they took less from the state peasants than from the serfs.

Who introduced the poll tax in Russia?

The initiator of the introduction of the poll tax was Peter I. He made this decision in 1718 in connection with the need to increase the size of the regular army, for the maintenance of which additional sources of funds were required. The king considered that the best option would be to raise money from his own subjects, and ordered a census of the population, and then divide the required amount by all counted.

Initially, only peasants, single men and backyard people were considered, but by 1720 it was decided to take into account the clergy and courtyard people. As a result, there were more than 5 million people who were ordered to pay 74 kopecks each.

Sergei Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky "At the haymaking near the halt"
By 1722, urban residents were also taken into account, and they were appointed to submit 1 ruble 20 kopecks. The collection of the poll tax began in 1724.

The poll served in Russia until the end of the 19th century. Over time, its size increased and in some regions reached 2 rubles 61 kopecks. With the introduction of indirect taxation, they began to abolish it. In 1866, taxes were no longer levied on guilds and bourgeoisie, and in 1882, Emperor Alexander III signed a decree on the gradual abolition of taxes from all people for 8 years.

As new sources of replacement were found, the tax was first abolished in the central part of Russia, and by 1897 in Siberia.

Why was the poll tax canceled?

One of the reasons for the abolition of the poll tax was the violation of equality between citizens before tax legislation. The fact is that over time, some estates were successively exempted from paying the tax.

As a result, by the end of the 18th century, tax was levied only from peasants, and when calculating it, many circumstances were taken into account - the number of souls in the family, the size of land allotments, etc. The existence of taxes, which were paid only by a part of the population of the state, was considered discriminatory.

Sergey Mikhailovich Prokudin-Gorsky "Mining at the Bakalsky mine in the Urals"
Another reason for canceling taxes is the difficulty in collecting it and large arrears. By the middle of the 19th century, the population owed the state huge sums. After the signing of the decree abolishing the tax, Alexander III issued a manifesto, according to which he forgave citizens all debts as of 1883.

Subsequently, the poll tax was replaced by duties on the transfer of property, an increase in customs tariffs and excise duties, as well as an increase in quitrent tax from state peasants.

This small document completed a whole era of the poll tax in Russia, introduced by Peter I. According to the Imperially approved opinion of the State Council, from January 1, 1887, the poll tax was canceled for all payers of the Russian Empire, except Siberia. For the main territory of Siberia (Tomsk, Tobolsk, Yenisei and Irkutsk provinces) the capitation tax was canceled by S.Yu. Witte from January 1, 1899 by the law of January 19, 1898. However, the law did not apply to the Altai District of the Tomsk Province, the Amur General Governorate, the Yakutsk Region, the Kirensk District of the Irkutsk Province, the Turukhansk Territory of the Yenisei Province, the Narym Territory of the Tomsk Province, the Berezovsky and Surgutsk districts of the Tobolsk province.

The introduction of the poll tax in Russia by Peter I was caused by an increase in the size of the regular army and the need for sources for its maintenance. In 1718, a popular census was carried out in order to decompose into the number of male souls the amount required to support the army. Initially, it was ordered to write to the poll tax of peasants, brothels, business and backyard people, and courtyards. In 1720, courtyards and churchmen were registered in the poll tax. According to the results of the census, there were just over 5 million souls, which determined the amount of tax per person at 74 kopecks. In 1722, the capitation tax was extended to the townspeople in the amount of 1 ruble. 20 kopecks from the soul. But the collection of the poll tax began only in 1724.
The poll tax was an estate tax, not a general tax. Already under Peter I, noblemen and representatives of the higher clergy were not included in the revision tales. In 1775, the merchants were exempted from the poll tax, for which guild duties were established. In 1863, the bourgeoisie stopped paying the poll tax: instead, a tax was introduced on real estate in cities, townships and townships. But this measure was extended to the petty bourgeoisie of Siberia only in 1873 After all estates, except for the peasants, were exempted from paying the poll tax, this tax turned exclusively into a peasant tax.
The increase in the poll tax since the end of the eighteenth century. was associated with the costs of the device and maintenance of land and water routes. The next round of increase in the per capita tax began in 1861. Moreover, the increase took place taking into account regional characteristics. After 1867, until the abolition, there was no increase in the poll tax.
Under Peter I, the poll tax was collected by the colonels and commissars of the regiments living in the localities, Catherine I entrusted this matter to the governors and governors, and Anna Ioannovna transferred the tax collection again to the military. Finally, under Catherine II, the collection of the poll tax was entrusted to the landowners, their clerks and elders. With the establishment in 1775 of the Treasury Chambers, it was the latter who were entrusted with managing the distribution and collection of the poll tax. The poll tax was collected on the basis of revision souls, the number of which from revision to revision remained unchanged: those who died in the interval between revisions were not excluded from the salaries, and those born were not included in them. The entire peasant society was responsible for the receipt of the poll tax. In turn, the distribution of the poll tax among individual payers was carried out by the peasant societies themselves, taking into account the size of the allotments, the number of souls in the family, etc.
The more the gap between the farms increased as they developed under capitalist conditions, the less acceptable for the state was the poll taxation, which did not take into account this gap. Due to the existence of the poll tax, there was a mutual guarantee, because otherwise it was impossible to ensure the tax imposed on individuals. In turn, the mutual guarantee entailed both the restriction of the freedom of movement of the peasantry, and the actual restriction of the peasants in the right to choose their occupation. Therefore, from the beginning of the 1860s. the question of the abolition of the poll tax was raised several times along with the preparations for the abolition of serfdom. This issue has received great importance since 1870, when it was first raised before the zemstvos, discussed by them and resolved in one way or another, but did not receive any further movement in government spheres.
Finally, in 1879, a commission was formed to discuss the proposed abolition of the poll tax and to collect other sources of income to replace it. The commission, which consisted of officials from various departments and invited experts, drew up a project on three types of replacement of the poll tax: an income tax of 35 million rubles. from income from commercial and industrial capital, crafts and personal labor; personal tax of 16 million rubles. from persons of working age; estate tax for 18 million rubles. from the estates of all without distinction of class.
First of all, the authorities tried to ease social tension in the countryside. In 1881, the redemption payments were lowered, since more was collected from the peasants freed from serfdom than was paid under the obligations of the redemption operation. With the help of the Peasant Land Bank, founded in 1882, which assisted peasants in acquiring former landowners' lands, the authorities tried to solve the problem of peasant land shortages. Thanks to the support of this bank, the peasants acquired in 1883-1900. 5 million acres of land.
When Bunge became the head of the Ministry of Finance, in 1882 he decided to finally tackle this issue. In May 1882, the Imperial decree of Alexander III followed, which was ordered to abolish: the poll tax in favor of the treasury from the bourgeoisie; per capita tax from landless peasants and courtyard people assigned to the volosts; per capita tax from peasants who have received allotments from the landowner on the basis of article 123 of the General Regulations and article 116 of the Little Russian local state. Also, Minister of Finance N.Kh. Bunge was ordered to develop considerations for the gradual (over 8 years, starting from January 1, 1883) the abolition of the poll tax from the remaining categories of the population.
By the coronation manifesto of May 15, 1883, all arrears of the poll tax were forgiven. In the same month, landless, factory and factory peasants were exempted from the poll tax. For former landlord peasants (in some localities and for other payers) the poll tax was reduced by half. Finally, on May 28, 1885, the Emperor approved the opinion of the State Council on the termination of the collection of the poll tax from January 1, 1886: from all peasants who were subject to the provisions of February 19, 1861 and June 21, 1863; from the Baltic peasants, with the exception of those settled on state land; from Little Russian Cossacks and other categories of the population, consisting of both special and general salaries, with the exception of those who pay quitrent. And from January 1, l887, it was ordered to abolish the collection of the poll tax from all categories of the population of the empire, except for Siberia.
Bunge tried to meet the needs of the people, even when it was associated with some sacrifices for the treasury. With the abolition of the poll tax, he had to meet with great difficulties precisely on the issue of the balance of the budget, to which the poll tax annually gave about 40 million rubles. It was supposed to partially compensate for this by increasing the tax on alcohol and quitrent taxes from state peasants, which the government refused to raise in 1886 for 20 years. A compromise was found in the transfer of state peasants from the quitrent to a compulsory ransom, in which their land taxes were increased by an average of 45%. That is, the transfer of state peasants to ransom turned out to be nothing more than an increase in the quitrent. However, this reform was carried out with a certain installment plan: from January 1, 1883 and January 1, 1884, the per capita tax was added from the most overburdened peasants, and from the peasants of the rest of the localities - from January 1, 1886.
In addition to the tax on alcohol, taxes on sugar and tobacco were increased, stamp duty and customs rates on many imported items were increased, and a tax on the gold mining was introduced. The tax on real estate in cities and the land tax also increased, a tax on income from monetary capital and a tax on gifts and inheritance were introduced, taxes on foreign passports, etc.
Among the activities of the Minister of Finance was the creation of the institution of tax inspectors, who were entrusted with both collecting taxes and collecting information about the prosperity and solvency of the population in order to further regulate the tax system. Prior to this, the collection of taxes was carried out by the police using harsh forms of collection, up to the sale of property necessary in peasant life and even bread on the vine.
As a result of the transformations, the state quitrent tax became the main peasant tax in the state budget, in which the income principle became more clearly manifested. The link to the allotment was preserved: only users of state lands were subject to the payment of quitrent dues. In this case, the main criterion for determining the salary of the tax was the cost or profitability of the land. But auxiliary indicators were also taken into account, which made it possible to assess the economic viability of a given village: the amount of arrears, the number of inhabitants, etc. Although the reformed peasant taxation remained far from the full implementation of the income principle, the most obvious anachronism in the tax system was eliminated.

The highest approved opinion of the State Council (Collection of Uzak. 1885 June 14, Art. 551a) - On the abolition of the poll tax and the transformation of the quitrent tax
The Council of State, in the United Departments of State Economy and Laws and in the General Assembly, having considered the presentation of the Minister of Finance on the abolition of the poll tax and the transformation of quitrent taxes, stated in its opinion:
1. To end the collection of the poll tax from January 1, 1886:
a) from all peasants, former landowners, appanage and others, who are subject to the Regulations on February 19, 1861 and June 26, 1863 (36657, 39792);
b) from the peasants of the Baltic provinces who are in a special position, with the exception of those settled on state lands and
c) from Little Russian Cossacks and other settlers, who are both on special and general salaries, with the exception of those who pay quitrent.
2. From January 1, 1887 to abolish the poll tax for all taxpayers in the Empire, with the exception of Siberia.
3. From the same January 1, 1887, in view of the end by that time of the period for which a constant amount of quitrent tax was assigned from state peasants [Vys. uk. November 24, 1866 (43888)], to transform this tax on the grounds necessary for its final redemption within a 44-year period.
4. Provide the Minister of Finance to proceed without delay to preparatory actions and making assumptions: a) on the transformation of the quitrent tax from state peasants, so that the total amount of redemption payments available to replace it does not exceed by more than 45 percent the current total amount of this tax, and that the distribution of the said payments between the villages was, as far as possible, commensurate with the value and profitability of the allotments at their disposal, and b) about the changes that should be made in the legalizations based on the account of the population by auditing souls, about the procedure for liability for payment in the salary treasury and the passport system. Assumptions on the aforementioned subjects, in relation to the relevant departments, should be submitted for consideration in accordance with the established procedure, with such a time calculation that their activation could follow from January 1, 1887.
Resolution. His Imperial Majesty, following the opinion in the General Assembly of the State Council, on the abolition of the poll tax and the transformation of quitrent taxes, He deigned to approve and ordered to fulfill it.

Barabanov O.N. Reforms and counterreforms in Russia in the XIX-XX centuries: International "round table" of the alumni association ist. fac. Moscow State University // Vestnik Mosk. un-that. Series 8. History. 1995. No. 5. S. 64-65.

Bokhanov A.N. Emperor Alexander III. M., 1998.

Korelin A.P. S.Yu. Witte and fiscal reforms in Russia in the late XIX - early XX century // Domestic history. 1999. No. 3. S. 42-64

Russian reformers, XIX - early XX centuries / Ed. A.P. Korelina. M., 1995.

V.L. Stepanov N.Kh. Bunge: The fate of a reformer. M., 1998.

What region of the Russian Empire was not subject to the abolition of the poll tax from January 1, 1887?

When was the poll tax introduced and how was it calculated?

Who is the abolition of the poll tax related to?

What are the consequences of abolishing the poll tax?

The introduction of the poll tax in Russia is associated with the name of Peter the Great. However, this form of tax existed long before its appearance in our country, on the territory of Ancient Rome, and later in many European states, and was abolished at the end of the 19th century after the introduction of a new form of income tax.

In 1724, a general population census was completed in Russia, which did not include clergy and nobles. Based on the results of this event, the tax was determined, which from now on was to be paid by all men in the country, including newborn children and the elderly. A poll tax is a special form of tax levied on certain residents of a country in favor of the state treasury. It should be recalled that such a tax (tax or tax) has existed in Russia since the 15th century, and ministers of churches and the upper privileged estates were also exempted from paying it.

In the fall of 1718, the emperor demanded to collect revision "tales", that is, to conduct a census of the entire male population of the country. At that time, special documents were called "fairy tales" that reflected the results of the census. This document indicated the owner of a certain yard and members of his family, patronymic, age). Representatives of the city council were involved in the compilation of revision "fairy tales" in urban areas, and in rural areas - by elders, landowners or their managers. Revision "fairy tales" were subject to mandatory clarification, in the periods between their collection, the absence or presence of a person at his place of residence was recorded. If the person was absent, the reason was indicated (death, escape, military service). All clarifications related to the year following the collection of "fairy tales". In simple terms, a person could die, and his family was obliged to pay for him to file the next year after death. Such a census system allowed the state to increase tax collection and make good money on the so-called “dead souls”.

The census, begun in 1718, was completed only by 1724, as a result of which about five million people (souls) were counted. Some historians believe that the poll tax, introduced by Peter the Great, had only one purpose - to collect money from the population for the maintenance of the current Russian army. The first rate of this tax was equal to 80 kopecks per year from one family member (men), in subsequent years it decreased to 74 kopecks. The Old Believers paid a double rate of the poll tax until 1782, due to which the common population christened them “doubledans”. Until 1775, the merchant class was obliged to pay tax on an equal basis with the rest, then interest charges were introduced specifically for them from the capital they owned.

The gradual increase in government spending could not but affect the amount of tax levied on the ordinary population of the country. By 1794, the capitation tax had grown to one ruble. Since the middle of the 19th century, the amount of the tax has become completely dependent on the place of residence of its payer. Residents of cities were obliged to pay the state annually in the amount of 2 rubles 61 kopecks. By this time, the villagers' capita tax was 1 ruble 15 kopecks.

For several decades, this type of tax has been the main source of government revenue. With the introduction (a premium to the price of a product or service), its significance for maintaining the state treasury has significantly decreased. In 1863, the collection of the capitation tax from the petty bourgeois (the lower urban class) and guild (artisans, craftsmen, their students and assistants) was stopped practically throughout the entire territory of the Russian Empire (with the exception of Siberia and Bessarabia).

Large debts of the population to the state, the difficulty of collecting taxes led to the fact that in 1887 the poll tax in Russia ceased to exist. The exception was Siberia, where this tax was levied on the population until the beginning of the twentieth century.