To view the photos posted on the site in an enlarged size, you need to click on their reduced copies.
You only confirm the saying:
"The beggar will drive the horse, sitting on horseback."
Henry VI, part 3, act 1
William Shakespeare
The brilliant Englishman remembered the saying in one of his historical chronicles. But she came to us from the Middle Ages from the good old England. More than half a millennium has passed, and the saying does not lose its relevance today. And it directly concerns all our SNTs. How? How? And remember. If you, dear gardener, have also visited other pages of the SNT Pishchevik website, then you probably paid attention to the fact that everywhere one thought runs like a refrain through the content of the pages:
SNT develops and flourishes where gardeners annually, carefully, sensibly, with feeling, with arrangement, invest money in their gardening partnership.
In other words, the meaning of English wisdom is that if a beggar mounts a horse who has never had a horse before, then he will simply drive him to death. That's what a lot of people do gardeners for years, decades, without investing anything in the development of their own SNT, like a beggar who has never had anything and has no idea how to deal with a horse that suddenly fell from the sky. Such SNT it simply falls apart and any creative activity, including in individual areas, gradually freezes and comes to naught.
Very often in this connection you can hear the common phrase of gardeners: " Governing body does nothing, there is no fence, no security, no water, roads are not being repaired. Why donate money if there is no return. "In this phrase - the question lies an elementary misunderstanding of the main goal and task of the SNT, as such. Namely:
1. Horticultural, horticultural, dacha non-profit partnership (cooperative, partnership) are established by citizens to solve the general problems of gardening, horticulture and dacha economy. One gardener cannot solve global resource-intensive tasks. For this, SNT is being created, as an organization of gardeners.
From opponents you can hear further: "But I don't need all your fuss with the organization. I can handle it myself." I doubt that one gardener will be able to provide himself with electricity, gas, water, other utilities, repair the access road to his site, be able to protect his property from thieves and solve many more problems with local authorities and the state.
2. The state, in order to preserve the fertility of the land and extract benefits from it, allocates land plots for gardening. Within these allotments, citizens are cut into individual garden plots. Driveways, streets, walkways and other elements of infrastructure are organized within each division. Ultimately, the state assigns all this to gardeners on the basis of the right of common (joint) property, as necessary condition development of horticulture.
The state goes further and legislates the share of each owner in the common land property. An example of such action on the part of the authorities state power and self-government are served by the resolution of the mayor's office of Kaliningrad No. 334 dated 03/07/1995 "On granting citizens - members of the horticultural partnership" Pishchevik "of the Moskovsky district to the common shared ownership of public lands and to the ownership (or lease) of the land plots occupied by them" and the resolution No. 2232 of 08/07/2002 "On Amendments to the Decrees of the Mayor of the City on the Granting of Land to Horticultural Associations and Citizens - Members of Associations". In accordance with the last named resolution, each member of the SNT is legally assigned a certain share in the lands common use.
From all this, one important conclusion follows, which is necessary for understanding the entire system of SNT:
3. If the gardener has property, then he freely owns it, uses it, disposes of it in accordance with Art. 209 "Content of the right of ownership" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which constitutes the right of ownership. From this right, the burden and risk of maintaining property are simultaneously placed on the owner (Article 210 "The burden of maintaining property" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).
Now try to answer the question yourself: "How can you maintain a land allotment transferred to two hundred, three hundred, a thousand ... gardeners, which does not include gardeners' plots?" With their individual garden plots, more or less everything is clear. If you have taken ownership of it, then you need something from this land, and you will use it in accordance with the permitted use. The same applies to other gardeners - owners of individual plots.
And who should organize scattered individual gardeners for maintenance of public land..? Think correctly, gentlemen, comrades, the general meeting, the board and other bodies of the SNT. They are also called upon to control gardeners within their competence and authority. This is also confirmed by Article 14 of the Federal Law-66 of April 15, 1998, where it is written in black and white that self-government bodies first choose land for gardening, then form a personal list of citizens of the future horticultural association. A general constituent assembly of gardeners is held. And only after state registration SNT people are provided with land plots.
Of course, there are many old SNTs that were formed before the publication of FZ-66. It is important to note here that even earlier land plots were provided to citizens as part of the SNT. Let them be called differently.
The arguments in favor of the organization of SNT, as a legal entity, given above, are not exhausted by this. This topic can be discussed further. However, let's put an end here, highlighting the main chain that determines the formation and functioning of the SNT as an organization, as a legal entity:
Allocation of land for gardening, horticulture, dacha farming involves the creation of an association of citizens, which is called upon (to paraphrase the law a little) not only to assist in solving common social and economic problems, but also to organize the maintenance of the land in accordance with the permitted use.
This is how we slowly but surely crept up to the basis of the existence of any SNT, i.e. to the argument that the maintenance of any property involves an investment of funds, and in most cases - money.
Further, it can be boldly stated that the investment of money by gardeners in the maintenance of the land allotment within the boundaries of the SNT is nothing more than the periodic surrender by all owners of individual garden plots of funds called membership fees in strict accordance with the norms of FZ-66 of 04/15/1998. And it is membership fees that are the basis for the existence of SNT, as an organization of gardeners, and gardeners, as owners of garden plots.
How true are all these statements? Let's figure it out.
Membership fees in SNT.
Purpose, principle of collection, size.
Membership fees are the basis for the existence of SNT
Solving common social and economic tasks, SNT, as an organization, creates an infrastructure that is quite specific for this particular association.
infrastructure- this is a set of objects, property, systems and services, controls necessary for the functioning and ensuring the conditions for the normal life of the SNT.
From the definition it follows that only all taken together: common property with management, control, employees and make up this very infrastructure, which gardeners, according to Art. 210 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are required to contain.
Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 210 "The burden of maintaining property"
The owner bears the burden of maintaining the property belonging to him, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.
If the board and similar SNT bodies do nothing for months, years, decades, then not only governing body, consisting of idlers, but also a general meeting of all members of the SNT, which from year to year elects idlers to governing bodies and does not require any work from them.
It is also important to note that the board, which receives a pittance for its work (this is the very minimum that must be maintained), and does not have the funds to develop and maintain the performance of other infrastructure elements, will not work. "Not up to fat, I would live," - it is very accurately said for such SNT.
It would seem that membership fee and all of the above has nothing to do with it. But it's not. The connection is direct, direct.
The membership fees of gardeners, just, are called upon, based on the definition given in the Federal Law-66 of April 15, 1998, to contain the entire infrastructure of the gardening partnership. And Article 19 of this federal law only confirms this:
FZ-66 dated April 15, 1998, article 19 "Rights and obligations of a member of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association"
- 2. Member horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association must:
- bear the burden of maintaining the land plot and the burden of responsibility for violation of the law;
... - timely pay membership and other fees provided for by this Federal Law and the charter of such an association, taxes and payments;
Let's add an important remark to subparagraph 1:
The purpose of collecting membership fees in SNT is: - Creation, acquisition, reconstruction, modernization of common property owned by SNT as a legal entity;- maintenance (maintenance) of the SNT infrastructure.
We understand further. Suppose we have a certain amount, which is carefully calculated by the board, and which will presumably be included in the estimate with a proposal to the general meeting to approve it as an expenditure part of the estimate. From the expenditure side, the revenue side of the estimate automatically follows and, accordingly, the size membership dues for each gardener (in more detail the estimate, its preparation and calculation of fees will be discussed below). It is here that the general meeting is marking time in one place for a long time, because. due to the large expenses, the treasury of the SNT should naturally receive large incomes, consisting of contributions from the members of the partnership. Nevertheless, after trampling and releasing steam by everyone, the meeting still approves the income and expenditure estimates. And an accountant can now easily calculate membership fees for any gardener. And on what basis, how? On these issues in the worldwide network there are ongoing battles without the rules of decency, without victories and defeats of the participants. Everyone has their own opinion. Let's try to work out the truth and put an end to the principles of collecting membership fees.
The principle of collection of membership fees
In the Federal Law-66 of 04/15/1998, there is no clear definition on what basis the gardener must pay contributions to the SNT. But this does not mean at all that in SNT you can do as the general meeting, the board, wants. This is exactly what many gardeners who do not read the law deeply think. But sometimes even the courts that decide on dues also think that the assembly can do anything. This opinion is erroneous. Let's figure it all out, comrades.
Example: On March 29, 2010, the Taldomsky District Court of the Moscow Region in civil case No. 2-284 / 10 to the SNT "Narcissus" on the recognition of the decision of the general meeting as partially illegal and the obligation to make settlements with individuals according to the list decided to deny the plaintiff's claim. Almost simultaneously with the first, a little earlier, on January 27, 2010, the Taldomsky District Court made a similar decision in civil case No. 2-99/10 against SNT "Narcissus" to recognize the actions as illegal and recover damages, dismissing the claim. The essence of the lawsuits is that the plaintiffs did not like the decisions of the general meetings of the SNT "Narcissus" in terms of establishing the amounts and principles for collecting membership and earmarked fees (the decisions of the Taldom Court with the necessary comments can be seen by clicking on this link).
When analyzing our near-member questions on contributions, we are only interested in the general important conclusion made by the judges from the whole variety of words, sentences, legal turns and conclusions, namely:
SNT and its members have the right to independently decide which principle of collecting membership and target fees is more suitable for your particular partnership. The main thing is to observe the following:
- the general meeting should be held in compliance with the norms of FZ-66 of 15.04.98 and the charter of the SNT;
- the general meeting must have a quorum, and following the results of the meeting, a properly executed protocol.
Firstly, decisions cannot be made without a comprehensive study of the norms of the law, and no one has done this, because. it should be understood that the court made certain conclusions in strict accordance with statement of claim plaintiff, his evidence and the arguments (evidence) of the defendant. In other words, considering these cases, the court did not prove anything to the plaintiff and the defendant. The judge only gave a legal assessment of the arguments of the parties and made a decision on this basis. It is not his duty to study the issue comprehensively, this duty rests with the plaintiff and the defendant.
Secondly, in the cases with the Taldomsky court, the plaintiffs lost because they could not prove their case. Moreover, they were initially wrong, without understanding the norms of the law.
Thirdly, the defendant, docking in his case, referring to just one article 21, paragraph 1, paragraphs. 10 "" FZ-66 of April 15, 1998 on the priority of making a decision by the general meeting of members of the SNT on contributions, he managed to win.
In continuation of the topic of court decisions of the Taldom District Court, we will only add that membership fee principle nevertheless, it is determined by law and does not depend on the will of the general meeting (we emphasize that the principle of collecting contributions, not the amount). Even if this fact does not lie on the surface of the law in its direct presentation. That is why gardeners, SNT boards, lawyers, "journalists" fight "to the death", and many cannot come to a final conclusion. And we, dear gardener, will find all the evidence ourselves and come to the same conclusion. This will happen not because we are the smartest, but because we have all the materials of all the battles in our hands and are able to draw the right conclusions from them.
Principle 1: One precinct - 1 SNT member - one vote at the meeting - one membership fee. All membership fees are equal.
“And why, let me ask you, in this case the tax is taken by the state in proportion to the size of the plot, and not a single gardener has a state of war with the tax authority over taxes different in size for his plot compared to the plots of his neighbors? And why, all of a sudden , from nothing direct content its huge area should be calculated somehow differently?"
Let's look at the issue from another angle. The owner of a larger plot unequivocally derives more benefits for himself. This includes higher yields more possibilities for recreation (pool, garage, chicken coop, sauna, gazebo, etc.). Someone will say that this has nothing to do with SNT and public land. Has, what else. SNT and created in order to combine material and financial resources gardeners and provide everyone equal conditions for gardening and recreation on their plots.
If the gardener, by virtue of owning a large plot (or even several plots), receives more from his plot (plots), then why should the provision of all these benefits be determined by equal contributions? The guard, making a tour of the territory of the partnership, spends more time on a larger area; the board, fulfilling its duties even with the same amount of work, ultimately allows the owner of a larger plot to extract more material benefits for himself. Let's go back to the letter of the law.
FZ-66 dated April 15, 1998 Article 19
2. A member of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association must:
1) bear the burden of maintaining the land plot and the burden of responsibility for violation of the law;
If the gardener owns one plot, then the burden of maintenance is determined by one plot. If the gardener bought a neighbor's plot, then the burden of maintaining the former neighboring plot falls on the buyer. That is, the owner of two sites must maintain 2 sites, respectively, pay 2 membership fees, more precisely one fee, but in double size. In any other case, the economic component of income in a gardening partnership will slowly but surely slide towards an increase in the amount of contributions for the maintenance of the entire infrastructure society. In other words, if initially there were 100 sites in the SNT and membership fees were paid from 100 sites, then this should always be the case. By the way, it will remain so for the tax authority. They absolutely do not care how many members of the SNT are left in the partnership, the tax is calculated from the area of \u200b\u200bthe plots. Therefore, the owners who have bought neighboring plots pay and must pay for those members who dropped out of the SNT in accordance with the requirements of Article 18 of the Federal Law-66 "Membership in a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association" and taxes and membership fees. This, if you don't mind, is seen as social justice.
From all that has been said, it follows important rule, confirmed by the given legislative norms:
Membership fees to SNT are calculated in proportion to the size of the individual garden plot of each owner (owner).
The membership fee is the same, but its size is different for gardeners. The gardener who owns a large plot pays a larger membership fee.
Membership fees
Quite recently, in our SNT, no one had a clue about the existing FZ-66 of 04/15/98 and all the norms and actions that follow from it. But times change, and not always for the worse. Get to the point! Our gardeners for 2010 paid membership fees at the rate of 200 rubles per hundred square meters. This is the end of this calculation. If you think about it, it becomes clear that these contributions had nothing to do with the actual costs of the SNT in this 2010 year. Indeed, why not pay 100 rubles or 500 rubles per hundred square meters. At the meeting, this is what people suggested. Nobody justified anything.
In 2011, thanks to familiarity with the Federal Law-66, the general meeting of members of our ancient SNT finally adopted an income and expenditure estimate, which almost corresponds to the norm of paragraph 1 of paragraphs. 12 article 21 "". We will not analyze the estimate by elements in this article. It is important for us to determine the principles for determining the size of the membership fee. And it clearly follows from the estimate.
So, before the general meeting, at which the income and expenditure estimate was to be approved, the board worked in advance (not 2 weeks) in all respects expenditure part estimates in strict accordance with, given in article 1 of the Federal Law-66.
SNT expenses include all SNT expenses that the society is ready to incur in next year. These expenditures will be accurately correlated with the maintenance of the SNT infrastructure and the infusion of part of the funds from contributions to a special fund. These expenses will include the salaries of the chairman, accountant, electrician, security guards, maintenance of buildings and structures, including everything common property, incl. the property that was created for earmarked contributions. This also includes expenses for stationery, trips to organizations and departments, telephone conversations, training and recertification of personnel, tax and other obligatory payments, expenses for organizing and holding general meetings, repairing equipment, public roads, etc., etc., etc. In a word, the expenditure part of the estimate that forms the membership fee will include all those expenses of the SNT that do not create or develop infrastructure, but only maintain it in strict accordance with the norms of Articles 209, 210 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
Common property (common property) created with the funds of a special fund, i.e. for part of the membership fees, as a rule, are designed to serve the infrastructure of the SNT. These are office equipment of the board, a common fence around the SNT, a board building, a guards' gatehouse, a barrier at the entrances to the SNT, fire fighting equipment, etc. That is, the property and objects that were not created for earmarked contributions, and which, by virtue of the method of creation, acquisition, become the property of SNT as a legal entity.
It is this common property, created with the funds of a special fund formed from membership fees, that is divided equally between all members of the SNT in the event of the liquidation of the SNT, because. this property is not shared. This property is not allocated and is not issued in parts, in monetary terms, in cases of withdrawal of a member of the SNT from the association, sale of a plot, donation, etc. This property is transferred to the maintenance of the new member of the SNT along with the garden land from the old member (who sold it, donated the plot, or somehow transferred the ownership).
Will membership fees be the same for all gardeners? The answer is obvious - no, they won't.
- The amount of the membership fee for each gardener is determined by:
- the total size of the cost (expenditure) part of the SNT estimate, which includes funds allocated to a special fund and funds used to maintain infrastructure;
- the size of the gardener's individual garden plot(s);
- participation (non-participation) of the gardener in the creation, acquisition, reconstruction, modernization of common property for targeted contributions.
It should be remembered: A property created with earmarked contributions is maintained, regardless of the way of creation, by membership fees, and not by earmarked ones).
If a gardener did not pay a target fee, for example, for the construction of a power line, and his plot is not connected to an electric line, then such a gardener should not and is not obliged to pay a membership fee for the maintenance of a power line.
The question may arise about the legality of charging a membership fee from gardeners who did not pass a target fee for power lines, but, for example, use street lighting, driveways in SNT at night. This case must be considered in the context of Article 249 "" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. That is, if the owners of power lines at their own expense also made a lighting system in SNT, then, for God's sake, charity is welcome. The maximum that can be done in this situation is to scatter the electricity consumed by the lighting system equally among all the owners of the power transmission line.
That all gardeners pay some part of the membership fee for the maintenance of the lighting system (do not confuse with the kW / h of electricity consumed by the lighting system - this is communal payment) it is necessary to first gather the members of the SNT for a general meeting and decide on the maintenance of the lighting system, of course, having agreed this issue with the owners of the power lines. At the same time, the lighting system created at the expense of a special fund will become the property of SNT, as a legal entity, and this property will be a share in relation to the entire power transmission line. That is, there will be share owners of power lines (gardeners), and there will also be a share owner of SNT. You can, of course, create a lighting system for targeted contributions from all gardeners. Then those who do not have electricity on the site will own a small piece of power lines, and those who have electricity - a large piece. But, these options are unlikely to give a ride to gardeners.
But, if this happens, then according to the share in the lighting system (similar to the share of SNT in power lines), gardeners will be required to pay a membership fee for the maintenance of the lighting system (replacement of lamps, preventive examination, salary of an electrician, etc.) Note that the owners of power lines will continue to pay a membership fee for the maintenance of power lines in a much larger amount.
As a result of all our research, we have:
The final amount of the membership fee is calculated by the accountant and the board of the SNT in relation to:
- for gardeners in the part that concerns everyone without exception;
- for gardeners in the part related to the maintenance of property (objects) of common use, created for earmarked contributions, and owning this property (objects) on the right of ownership.
This calculation will generally constitute the incoming part of the SNT estimate.
The income and expenditure estimate certainly includes and (Article 4, paragraph 2 of the Federal Law-66). But, targeted contributions are discussed on the page "Targeted contributions to SNT. Differences from membership fees, the principle of collection, size". It's detailed and laid out in detail.
There is another important point in the system of collection of membership fees. True, it also applies to all other fees in SNT:
Should be known and remembered that the SNT board cannot, does not have the right not to take into account all gardeners, including abandoned plots, in the income and expenditure estimates. Otherwise, the active members of the SNT at their own expense stupidly contain idlers who have not appeared in the SNT for years. And the number of those who do not appear is growing and will continue to grow if the active part, together with the board, does not take action against non-payers.
Losses resulting from underfunding of the incoming part of the estimate due to unpaid payments, the board has the right, is obliged to recover from non-payers through the court in accordance with the requirements of Article 7 "Powers of a horticultural, horticultural or summer cottage non-profit association", Article 46 "Protection of the rights of horticultural, gardening, dacha non-profit associations and their members "FZ-66 of 15.04.98 and articles: 210. "The burden of maintaining property", 244 "The concept and grounds for the emergence of common property", 249 "Expenses for the maintenance of property in shared ownership "Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
In other words, by not including the contributions and payments of the owners of abandoned plots in the estimate, SNT, thereby, allows a violation of the law, including the rights of all active members of the partnership (), whom the negligent board forces to pay for negligent gardeners.
In addition, with such a formulation of cases on the revenue side of the estimate, the board, the accountant, has unaccounted money that is not provided for in the estimate. And there are more of them, the better the board works with non-payers. Of course, we mean chronic non-payers, and not gardeners who delay payment of contributions for a month, two, a year. What will happen with such unrecorded money, think for yourself. There are several options: from theft, to putting money into business for the benefit of the entire partnership.
So, we quietly figured out the membership fees in the SNT: the purposes of their collection, the principles of collection, calculations of sizes. Now let's move on to the next page and arrange a debriefing for earmarked contributions. And this, believe me, is no less fascinating and even more incomprehensible sphere of payments in horticultural associations.
Since 2019, according to the new law on SNT, the partnership has the right to collect membership fees no more than once a month, and they can only be paid in a non-cash form to a special current account.
Federal law "On the conduct by citizens of gardening and horticulture for their own needs and on amendments to certain legislative acts Russian Federation"No. 217-FZ dated July 29, 2017 ( last edition) - effective January 1, 2019.
Changes in the payment of membership fees to SNT that await summer residents from 2019
The latest news in the field of conducting SNT activities in 2019 will also affect the payment of contributions. In Art. 14 it is indicated that contributions are allowed only in 2 options: targeted; membership.
In addition, the following changes are envisaged from the financial side
The new law on the activities of the SNT will oblige, from 2019, to pay contributions even to citizens who are not members of the SNT, but are engaged in any kind of gardening or horticulture on its territory. Payments will relate to anything related to the acquisition, use or repair of common property. In case of refusal to pay, it will be possible to collect payments through the court.
Changes that await summer residents who do not want to join SNT
Now the payment for the use of infrastructure facilities for them cannot be more than for a member of the partnership. But individuals believe that they should pay much less - only for the use of water, electricity, gas, security and garbage disposal. They do not want to chip in on the salary of the chairman and members of the board.Now I have to. Payments will be the same for everyone. But the rights of individuals are expanding. They will be able to participate in general meetings of members horticultural associations and vote on all matters related to the frequency and amount of contributions. But they still won't be able to choose the board.
Associations vote on the principle: one owner - one vote. If the site belongs to three citizens, only two of whom are members of the partnership, then when voting on the activities of the SNT, only two will be able to vote from the site, they will have two votes. But on matters of competence of the meeting of owners - three. You can vote in full-time, full-time-correspondence and absentee forms.
But it is impossible to elect the chairman and the board in absentia, to resolve issues with contributions, with the allocation of land plots, change the charter, transfer property to common shared ownership. However, if the quorum at the general meeting on these issues has not met, then you can vote again in person and in absentia.
Legal advice on the new law on the activities of SNT
Now representatives can vote for a member of the SNT by proxy, which is certified by the chairman of the partnership. The new law deprives him of that right. Representatives will still be able to vote at general meetings, but only with a power of attorney certified by a notary. Lawyers advise before the entry into force of the new law for a maximum period to certify the power of attorney with the chairman.According to the law, summer residents in Russia are now gardeners and gardeners. Previously, associations of summer residents, gardeners and gardeners could exist as much as nine organizational forms(including as dacha partnerships and cooperatives). Now the legislator has provided only two: either a gardening partnership or a gardening partnership.
Dacha associations are automatically classified as horticultural associations. But, of course, no one will forbid a person to call himself summer residents. Especially in a situation where he does not have a garden or garden plot at all, but just a house in the village, where he comes to relax and does not do any gardening. The new law regulates life only in the territories of horticulture and horticulture, and not in settlements.
The sequence of actions of the SNT after the entry into force of the new law in 2019
Since the new law on SNT abolishes a number of forms of non-profit farms, they need to adjust their constituent documents to take into account new legislative requirements.
So, article 8 of law No. 217-FZ establishes the reflection in the charter of 2019 of the following data on the work of the SNT:
- names, founders and locations;
- organizational and legal form;
- the subject and goals of the activity; management method (powers of individual bodies);
- conditions for the admission of new members, exclusion or voluntary withdrawal from the ranks of the partnership;
- rights, obligations and types of responsibility of members;
- conditions for maintaining the register of members of a non-profit organization;
- the procedure for paying fees and liability in case of its violation;
- rules for the formation, list of powers and composition of the audit commission;
- the procedure for the formation or acquisition of property intended for joint use;
- options for familiarizing members with any type of information relating to the activities of a legal entity (accounting reports);
- ways of cooperation with citizens who are not members of the organization, but use the lands belonging to its territory for gardening (horticulture);
- the procedure for amending the Charter;
- conditions for the liquidation or reorganization of the partnership; decision-making rules at the general meeting by absentee voting.
REGULATIONS ON THE PROCEDURE FOR PAYING CONTRIBUTIONS AND OTHER MANDATORY PAYMENTS IN A GARDENING NON-COMMERCIAL PARTNERSHIP AND SPENDING SNT FUNDS
2. Contributions of members of the SNT
7. SNT funds
7.2 SNT Trust Fund
7.3 SNT Special Fund
1. General provisions on the procedure for paying contributions to the SNT
1.1. This Regulation uses the norms federal law No. 66-FZ of April 15, 1998 "On horticultural, horticultural and dacha non-profit associations of citizens", other branches of law, the Charter of the Horticultural non-profit partnership(SNT) and comprehensively regulates relations arising in connection with the conduct of gardening by citizens, determines the procedure for making mandatory payments to the Partnership to the extent that they are not regulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation and the Charter of the SNT.
1.2 This Regulation:
1.2.1 Determines the procedure for paying mandatory payments to the Partnership by citizens who have the legal right to own, own or use garden plots located within the boundaries of the territory of the SNT, who are members of the SNT or individual gardeners, gardening on an individual basis on the basis of an Agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities and other public property SNT.
1.2.2 Defines general order spending SNT funds.
2. Contributions of members of the SNT
2.1 Members of the SNT are required to pay membership and target fees provided for by Federal Law No. 66 of April 15, 1998 and the Charter of the Horticultural Non-Commercial Partnership.
2.2 Membership fees are intended to compensate for the costs of SNT for the remuneration of employees who have concluded labor contracts with SNT, payment for utilities for public facilities, the cost of maintaining and repairing public facilities of SNT, as well as other current expenses of SNT. The membership fee is equivalent to the payment for the use of infrastructure facilities for members of the CNT.
2.3 Payment for the use of infrastructure facilities does not include payments for communal resources for individual members of the CNT.
2.4 The amount of membership fees for SNT members (the size of the membership fee for one plot) is determined on the basis of the annual income and expenditure estimate approved at the General Meeting of the Partnership members and distributed to the number of plots according to the approved cadastral plan and in proportion to the area of the occupied land plot (occupied land plots) .
2.5 Target contributions are intended for the acquisition (creation), overhaul, as well as the reconstruction of public facilities of the SNT, which are jointly owned by its members.
2.6 The share contribution (entrance fee) forms the common property. The share fee for a new gardener (entry fee) is intended to compensate for the costs of acquiring (creating) common property, the size of the share fee is equal to five times the membership fee for one plot. The share entrance fee is paid by a candidate member of the Partnership in monetary form 14 days before the day when the General Meeting of members of the SNT considers the issue of admission to membership in the partnership. In case of refusal to accept the candidate as a member of the partnership, the specified fee shall be returned within 14 days from the date of the adoption of this decision. Failure to pay the entry fee is grounds for refusing to accept a candidate member of the SNT.
2.7 Non-use by a member of the Partnership of a land plot, or refusal to use common property are not grounds for exempting him, in whole or in part, from participation in the general expenses for the maintenance and repair of common property.
3. Contributions of individual gardeners
3.1 Citizens who are not members of the SNT, but who have the legal right to own, possess or use a garden plot located within the boundaries of the territory of the Partnership, engaged in gardening on an individual basis (Article 8 of the Federal Law-66) exercise their right to use common property for a fee, in in accordance with the Agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of SNT.
3.2 Individual gardeners, under the Agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of SNT, regularly pay the following payments to the Partnership:
3.2.1 Contributions for the use of infrastructure facilities and other public property SNT - regularly paid by Individual gardeners to pay employees who have concluded employment contracts with the Partnership, and other current expenses of SNT.
The amount of payment for the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of the Partnership for Individual Gardeners, provided that they make targeted contributions for the acquisition (creation) of the said property in the manner prescribed by these Regulations, cannot exceed the amount of membership fees for members of the SNT.
In the event that an individual gardener did not participate in the acquisition (creation) of common use property or has arrears in targeted contributions for the acquisition (creation) of infrastructure and common use property, the amount of the contribution for the use of infrastructure and other common use property is calculated by the SNT with a multiplying factor of 2 ,0 in relation to the amount of membership fees established by the General Meeting of the Partnership.
The fee for the use of infrastructure facilities does not include payments for communal resources for individual Individual Gardeners.
3.2.2 Contributions for the acquisition (creation) of infrastructure and public property of the Partnership - made by Individual gardeners for the acquisition (creation), overhaul and reconstruction of public facilities.
4. Obligations of gardeners when leaving the SNT, when alienating and acquiring rights to plots
4.1 Mutual settlements when a member of the SNT leaves the Partnership to acquire the status of an individual gardener
4.1.1 In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 19 of Federal Law No. 66 “On horticultural, gardening and country non-profit associations of citizens”, a member of the SNT has the right to voluntarily withdraw from the Partnership with the simultaneous conclusion of an agreement with such an association on the procedure for the use and operation of engineering networks, roads and other common property;
4.1.2 When a member of the Partnership withdraws from the SNT, he is obliged to reconcile payments with the accountant of the Partnership and pay off (if any) the debt for the payment of contributions and payments for the entire period of his ownership / use of the site, preceding the withdrawal from the SNT, taking into account the penalties established by the General Meeting for late fees and payments. At the same time, an Agreement on the procedure for repaying debts can be concluded between the SNT (represented by the Chairman of the Board) and the citizen.
4.1.3 After mutual settlements, in the absence of debt to the SNT, a member of the Partnership who wants to leave it, applies to the Board with an irrevocable application and concludes an Agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of the SNT in the form approved by the Board of the Partnership.
4.1.4 The exclusion of a citizen from the members of the CNT, in accordance with the law, occurs on the basis of a decision of the General Meeting, which assigns him the status of an individual gardener, which gives him the rights and imposes duties regulated by the Agreement, the Charter and internal regulations of the CNT.
4.1.5 Payment of the cost of a part of the common property created at the expense of targeted contributions paid by the Individual gardener for the period of his membership in the SNT is not made.
4.2 Mutual settlements with the Partnership in the event of alienation of a land plot
4.2.1 Upon alienation of the site, a member of the SNT or an individual gardener is obliged to reconcile payments with the accountant of the Partnership and pay off (if any) the debt for the payment of fees and payments for the entire period of his possession / use of the site, preceding the date of transfer of ownership of the site, taking into account fines established by the General Meeting for late contributions and payments.
4.2.2 According to the law, a member of the SNT has the right to alienate garden plot simultaneously alienate to the acquirer a share of the common-use property in the Partnership in the amount of earmarked contributions. In the event that a member of the SNT has decided to exercise this right, he is obliged to report this in his application to the Board of the Partnership. Otherwise, the application contains a request for the payment of the value of his share in the common property in the amount of paid earmarked contributions. Refund of 100% of paid targeted contributions is made within 3 months from the date of the last of the following events:
– full repayment of the debt to the Partnership;
– transfer of the right to the site;
- date of application.
4.2.3 After mutual settlements, in the absence of debt to the Partnership, the Gardener, who wants to alienate the site, applies to the Board with an application in response to which the Chairman of the Board issues to the gardener a Certificate of no debt to the Partnership.
4.3 Participation of new growers in the creation of infrastructure for CNT
4.3.1 The new owner of the site is automatically recognized as participating in the creation of SNT infrastructure facilities and is exempt from paying the entry fee of the new gardener if two conditions are met simultaneously:
- if during the alienation of the site by the former member of the SNT, his share in the general property of the Partnership was alienated in favor of the new right holder and former member SNT has no debt to the Partnership,
- if the right of the new gardener to the plot arose by inheritance and the deceased member of the SNT has no debt to the Partnership,
4.3.2 In all other cases, in order to recognize a new gardener as participating in the creation of the common property of SNT, he must pay an entrance fee for a new gardener, the amount of which is determined by the amount of the debt of the former owner of the plot, taking into account penalties, but cannot be less Minimum size the entrance fee of the new gardener, determined by the General Assembly.
4.3.3 Except in the case of transfer of ownership of the plot by inheritance, the payment of an entrance fee by a new gardener does not relieve the former right holder from obligations to the SNT.
4.4.4 The new grower shall pay the entry fee within a reasonable period of time after the acquisition of the right to the plot, but no later than within 10 days from the date of receipt of the relevant Payment Request from the Board. Failure to pay the entry fee entails a refusal to accept a new gardener as a member of the SNT and retain the status of an individual gardener who did not participate in the creation of the Partnership's infrastructure facilities. This entails the obligation to pay fees for the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of the SNT with a multiplier of 2.0 in relation to the amount of membership fees established by the General Meeting of the Partnership.
4.4.5 In the event that a new copyright holder has applied to the Board with an application for admission to the membership of the SNT, he, in addition to the status of an individual gardener, acquires additional status member of the Association.
4.4.6 Obligations to make regular payments to the Partnership arise for a new grower from the date of his acquisition of the right to the site or the start of actual use of it, depending on which event occurs earlier. These obligations are governed by the Agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of the SNT, concluded from this date.
4.4.7 The admission of a new gardener as a member of the SNT, in accordance with the law, takes place on the basis of a decision of the General Meeting of Members of the Horticultural Partnership (Meeting of Representatives), which assigns him the status of a member of the SNT, which gives him the rights and imposes duties regulated by the Charter, these Regulations and other internal regulations of the SNT.
5. Utility payments in SNT
5.1 SNT distributes the costs of communal resources consumed by the Partnership among SNT members and individual gardeners in proportion to their actual consumption, which is determined in accordance with meter readings. The tariff for communal resources is determined and approved by one of two different methods:
Method_1 The tariff is calculated by the result of arithmetic division of the cost of the resource consumed by the Partnership as a whole (according to the readings of the general meter) by the sum of the readings of individual growers' meters. The tariff is approved by a joint decision of the Board and the Control and Audit Commission of the SNT. Payment for consumed energy at the end of the accounting period, in fact.
Method_2. The tariff is calculated as the product of the tariff, defined by the agreement with a resource supplying organization by a multiplying factor that takes into account losses for the transfer of a communal resource in the networks of the Partnership and resource costs for general needs. Tariff coefficient calculated by the accounting department of SNT and approved by the General Meeting. According to the results of the reporting period, the positive difference between the actual payment of the Partnership to the resource supplier and the amount of payments received is payable by the members of the SNT in the form of a corrective payment for the resource. The negative difference goes to Operating fund and is spent on the needs of the Partnership in accordance with the approved Receipt and Expenditure Estimate. When calculating the tariff according to method_2, payment for a communal resource is made quarterly.
5.2 The rates for utility bills are the same for Individual gardeners and members of the SNT.
6. The procedure for paying payments to SNT
6.1 Members of the SNT are required to timely pay membership and other fees provided for by the Federal Law and the charter of the Partnership, taxes and payments;
6.2 Gardeners make the payments provided for by these Regulations within the time limits established by the decisions of the General Meeting of SNT members or the Board of the Partnership, as well as other payments established by individual agreements or legal requirements by transferring funds to the SNT settlement account. Payment of membership fees is due by June 01 of the current year. The payment date is the date the funds are credited. By agreement with the Board, payment is possible by depositing funds at the SNT cash desk - in this case, the document confirming payment is the form strict accountability issued to the payer by the cashier of the Partnership.
6.3 In case of delay in payment of any of the payments provided for by this Regulation, gardeners pay penalties in the amount of 0.1% of the amount of the outstanding payment for each day of delay, but not more than the amount of the overdue payment. A member of the Partnership (individual gardener) is exempt from paying penalties (fines) if he proves that the delay in fulfilling the specified obligation occurred due to force majeure or through the fault of SNT.
6.4 The amount of the fine can be changed by the decision of the General Meeting of the members of the SNT. The payment of a penalty does not exempt a member of the Partnership from paying the fee.
6.5 In case of systematic non-payment of contributions and other obligatory payments to the Partnership, the Board is obliged to take all possible legal actions to pay off the debt: from imposing disciplinary measures impact before going to court. Signs of systematic non-payment are approved by the decisions of the SNT Board.
7. SNT funds
7.1 SNT Operational Fund
7.1.1 The operating fund of the SNT is formed from membership fees of members of the Partnership, fees for the use of infrastructure facilities, compensation payments, penalties for non-payment of utility bills.
7.1.2 The funds of the operating fund are directed to the maintenance of the public property of the SNT (hereinafter referred to as the Infrastructure).
7.1.3 The property of the general use of the Partnership is property (including land plots of common use) intended to provide within the territory of the SNT the needs of the members of the Partnership for passage, travel, water supply and sanitation, electricity, security, recreation and other needs (roads, common gates and fences, children's and sports grounds, garbage collection sites, fire protection facilities, etc.). Infrastructure SNT in particular include:
- public lands of SNT within the established boundaries;
- streets and driveways (from the borders of the SNT to the border of the garden plot) as linear real estate objects;
- power lines (from the secondary winding of the transformer to the consumer's individual metering device);
- fence along the borders of SNT;
- buildings and structures created for the protection and maintenance of the common property of the Partnership, the provision of public services and security;
- equipment located outside or inside individual garden plots and serving more than one garden plot;
- other facilities within the boundaries of the SNT intended to serve the members of the Partnership and individual gardeners, the alienation or transfer to the use of which may lead to infringement of the rights and legitimate interests of the members of the Partnership and / or individual gardeners.
7.1.4 The funds of the operating fund are spent in accordance with the approved by the General Meeting of the Income and Expenditure Estimate for the following needs (including, but not limited to);
– measures to ensure collective security, including fire safety;
– inspection of the state of objects of common property and property of the Partnership as a legal entity;
- garbage removal;
– ensuring the safety of property located on the territory of the SNT;
– expenses for the maintenance of other facilities related to the infrastructure of the Partnership;
– tax on common lands, other tax payments of the Partnership as a legal entity, incl. taxes paid by the Partnership as a tax agent;
- encouragement of members of the Board and members of other elected bodies of the SNT;
- remuneration of labor of persons involved in labor and civil law contracts for the current needs of the Partnership;
– ensuring the activities of the Board, Audit Commission: postage and communication services, hospitality, stationery and expendable materials for office equipment;
- consulting services;
– protection of the legal rights of the Partnership.
7.1.5 The Management Board has the right to approve the excess of costs for individual expenditure items of the Income and Expenditure Estimate up to 30% of the planned amount, but in such a way as not to exceed the total costs at the expense of the Operational Fund provided for the planning period by more than 15%.
7.2 SNT Trust Fund
7.2.1 The Trust Fund is formed from:
- Targeted contributions from members of the SNT;
– Contributions for the acquisition (creation) of infrastructure facilities and public property of the Partnership, paid by Individual gardeners.
7.2.2 The funds of the trust fund are spent in accordance with the approved by the General Meeting of the Receipt and Expenditure Estimate for the following needs (including, but not limited to);
– construction, overhaul and reconstruction of roads on the territory of the Partnership;
– construction, overhaul, reconstruction of buildings that are the common property of SNT (Storozhka, office of the board, etc.);
– construction, overhaul, reconstruction of facilities and engineering systems, which are the common property of SNT (common fence, gates, etc.);
– design and execution of customer functions for construction/repair/reconstruction projects;
– registration of property rights to the created objects related to the common property and property of the Partnership as a legal entity.
7.2.3 The Management Board has the right to approve the excess of costs for individual expenditure items of the Income and Expenditure Estimate up to 30% of the planned amount, but in such a way as not to exceed the total costs at the expense of the Trust Fund provided for the planning period by more than 15%.
7.2.4 In the event that payment to one contractor exceeds 30,000 rubles or 2.5% of the total planned costs from the Trust Fund, the competitive selection of a contractor is mandatory.
7.2.5. It is forbidden to spend budgetary funds of SNT without a formalized in due course minutes of the meeting of the members of the Board of SNT.
7.3 SNT Special Fund
7.3.1 The Special Fund is formed from:
– entrance fees of new gardeners;
– income from economic, investment, financial activities SNT;
- penalties for late payment of contributions and mandatory payments;
- funds of the trust fund directed to the Special Fund only by special decision of the Board of the SNT;
- membership fees sent to a special fund by a special decision of the Board of SNT.
- funds provided by SNT in accordance with Articles 35, 36 and 38 of the Federal Law-66 "On horticultural, gardening and country non-profit associations of citizens";
- charitable donations.
7.3.2 The funds of the Special Fund are spent in accordance with the approved by the General Meeting of the Receipt and Expenditure Estimate for the following needs (including, but not limited to);
– creation and purchase of fixed assets owned by SNT as a legal entity;
- the purchase of modern means of production used in the improvement, cleaning and processing of garden plots;
- payments to SNT members who alienate a land plot, the cost of their share in common property (according to clause 4.2 of this Regulation).
7.3.3 The resources of the Special Fund may be redistributed to the Trust Fund and the Operational Fund on an operational basis, by decision of the Board.
7.3.4 The funds of the Special Fund, upon approval of the SNT Income and Expenditure Estimate, may be redistributed by the decision of the Board to the Operational Fund and the Trust Fund.
7.3.5 Common property acquired or created at the expense of a special fund formed by decision of the CNT is the property of such CNT as a legal entity.
8. Temporary partnerships for the implementation of initiative projects
8.1 In the event that for the creation / reconstruction of a large object of common property required by the CNT, the funds of the CNT Trust Fund are not enough, individual gardeners may form temporary partnerships for the implementation of a part (stage) of such a project in order to accelerate its implementation and the possibility of faster obtaining its results for participants such temporary partnership.
8.2 Project boundaries – the scope (area) of work agreed by the Management Board, which satisfies the following criteria:
– This scope (section) of work is the minimum necessary for the project participants to achieve the project objectives;
- The implementation of this scope of work is economically feasible for other gardeners;
8.3 Prior to the opening of the project, the Project Proponents are obliged to notify all growers affected by this project about their initiative: invite them to enter into a temporary partnership and make the appropriate payments.
8.4 Participants of the initiative project should not pursue investment goals from participating in it.
8.5 The project participants, prior to its commencement, elect a treasurer - a person responsible for collecting and spending funds and a project manager - a person responsible for its implementation. The nominations of the treasurer and the project manager must be approved by the decision of the Board, after which the treasurer can start collecting payments.
8.6 The condition for starting the implementation of the project is the sufficiency of funds collected by the Initiative Group, i.e. no need to involve additional funds for full settlement with contractors.
8.7 All decisions of the project participants are made by a majority vote of the number of project participants who have made their contributions at the time of the decision. The decisions of the project participants are documented in a protocol signed by the project manager and the treasurer.
8.8 The payments of all participants in the temporary partnership must be proportional to the number of plots they own. Participants of temporary partnership have the right to provide in the estimate (calculation) of the initiative project remuneration to the Treasurer and the project manager.
- keeping track of the funds collected;
- coordinate with the participants of the temporary partnership changes in the Estimate (calculation);
– agree with the participants of the temporary partnership the form of reporting on payments made at the expense of funds entrusted to him;
– keep records of the funds spent within the framework of the project and, upon request, report to the members of the partnership on the expenditure of funds;
8.10 The project manager must:
– coordinate design decisions with the SNT Board;
– to develop an estimate (calculation) of the project and agree it with the members of the temporary partnership;
– be responsible for the choice and actions of the contracting organizations (Contractor) chosen by him;
8.11 It is allowed to combine the functions of the project manager and treasurer. The treasurer and the project leader can be removed from these posts by a majority vote of the project participants. New leader the project and/or the treasurer must be approved by the decision of the SNT Board.
8.12 Gardeners who did not join the project at the time of its inception, but whose plots are within the boundaries of the project and who express a desire to benefit from the results of the project to the same extent as its participants, are obliged to compensate for the costs incurred by participants in the temporary partnership and make payments in the same amount (adjusted for inflation) as the rest of its participants.
8.13 After the completion of the project, the partnership participants have the right to restrict access to the result of the project for other gardeners whose plots are located within the boundaries of the SNT, but who have not paid the monetary contribution provided for all participants in the temporary partnership, until the moment the entrance fee is paid, established by the decision of the general meeting of partnership participants.
8.14 The project is considered completed, and the temporary partnership is liquidated when the following conditions are met:
– all partners in the partnership have made the agreed payments.
– obligations to contractors are fulfilled;
– the financial report on the implementation of the project is signed by all participants of the temporary partnership;
- the Act on the commissioning of the entire SNT common property facility was signed, the facility was transferred to the balance of the SNT or the operating organization.
8.15 After the completion of the project, the balance of the collected funds can be distributed among the project participants in proportion to the payments made or, by the decision of the shareholders, directed to the general needs of all project participants.
8.16 The Project Manager is responsible for the results of the project to the CNT. The project manager and the treasurer are responsible to the project participants.
8.17 Funds collected under the initiative project are not SNT funds.
9. Other provisions on the procedure for paying contributions and payments to SNT
9.1 Non-use of the garden plot by the gardener or refusal to use common property and / or utilities is not a basis for the release of the gardener in whole or in part from the fulfillment of obligations to pay contributions and other obligatory payments provided for by this Regulation.
9.2 Non-payments for the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association are recovered in court.
9.3 The gardener has the right to combine several adjacent land plots owned by him on the right of ownership into a single land plot. When contiguous land plots are merged, one land plot is formed, and the existence of such adjacent land plots ceases (FZ-136 of October 25, 2001). The date of state registration of rights is the day of making the relevant records of rights in the Unified State Register rights (EGRP), about which a corresponding entry is made in the registration certificate.
9.4 The gardener is obliged to ensure the possibility of communication with him (by phone, by e-mail, etc.) and the transfer of official information. When changing personal data (last name, first name, patronymic), registration address, telephone number, e-mail, inform the person responsible for maintaining the Register of Gardeners in writing within 10 days from the moment these changes were made;
You can do without the surveying procedure if:
- The land was registered in the property.
- No problems with neighbors are foreshadowed - they will not figure out where the border between your plots should be.
- It is not planned to make transactions with such real estate.
In other cases, surveying is simply necessary. It will be possible to take ownership of real estate - or make any deal with it - in 2018, but you will only have to go through a mandatory procedure to determine the boundaries of the site. And the new SNT law has nothing to do with it, it will not make changes. Now you know that the new bill is not so terrible for gardeners and gardeners.
Membership fees to snt law 2018
Settlements with the operator for the treatment of solid municipal waste, the regional operator for the treatment of solid municipal waste on the basis of agreements concluded by the partnership with these organizations. 4. Improvement of land plots general purpose. 5. Organization of the protection of the territory and provision of fire safety within its boundaries.
6. Holding audits partnerships. 7. Payment of wages to persons with whom the partnership has concluded employment contracts. 8. Organization and holding of general meetings of the members of the partnership, as well as the implementation of the decisions of these meetings. 9. Payment of taxes and fees related to the activities of the partnership, in accordance with the legislation on taxes and fees.
Let's consider another type of contributions - targeted Targeted contributions can be directed to: 1.
Membership and earmarked contributions to a horticultural partnership under the new law
Table of contents:
- Payment of membership dues
- How to deal with non-payment of membership dues in SNT
- Membership and earmarked contributions to a horticultural partnership under the new law
- How are the membership fees of SNT members calculated legally - from a site or from a hundred?
- SNT: membership fees without documents
- How much to pay membership fees to the SNT for the owner of two sites?
Payment of membership dues in snt in new edition FZ-337 dated July 3, 2016. On July 29, 2018, the President of the Russian Federation signed a new federal law “On the conduct by citizens of gardening and horticulture for their own needs and on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” . Free download link to the new law (format docx file): FZ-217 dated July 29, 2018
The date of entry into force of the law is 01.01.2019.
Payment of membership dues in snt under the new law
It's fast and free! New law about SNT in 2019 - issues of organization and structure garden associations, SNT bodies Federal law No. 217 “On the conduct by citizens of gardening and horticulture for their own needs and on amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” was adopted in the summer of 2017. When answering important questions on the organization and structure of the SNT will rely on it. Firstly, in order for citizens to be able to conduct horticultural or horticultural activities, they need to:
- Be the owners of the respective plots or have a desire to acquire such land.
- Register as a non-profit organization.
The organizational and legal form, in accordance with Article 4 of this law, may be as follows: horticultural non-profit partnerships (SNT) and gardening non-profit partnerships (ONT).
How to teach gardeners to pay contributions to snt to a current account.
Important
How to deal with non-payment of membership fees to the SNT If the chairman of the SNT does not want to apply to judiciary with a statement on the debtor and wants to settle the matter amicably, then he can send him a letter. It contains a requirement, which states that the debtor must pay off all his debts. Thus, the liquidation of debts will take place without the intervention of the court and will save each of the parties from wasting money and time.
Membership and earmarked fees in a horticultural partnership under the new law on the day the new Federal Law on Horticulture and Horticulture comes into force, entrance fees are not returned to citizens.
How not to pay snt contributions
Attention
BUILDING WITHOUT PERMISSION If you want to build up your s / plot intended for individual housing construction (hereinafter - IZHS), gardening or summer cottages, you need to know in which cases it is required to obtain a building permit, and in which it is not required. How to increase your land? From March 1, 2015, there was a legal opportunity to increase your land plot at the expense of state or municipal lands (land plots) (Article 39.27 - 39.29 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation). How will the Criminal Code protect equity holders? On May 12, 2016, amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation came into force, establishing criminal liability for raising funds from citizens for construction in violation of the requirements of the legislation on participation in…
New rules for the life of summer residents: everyone is transferred to utility bills
Why do we need country or garden associations: SNT, DNT, garden or dacha cooperatives? First of all, to create comfortable conditions for using their personal land plots, dachas, garden houses. To meet their needs for passage, travel, water supply and sanitation, electricity, gas supply, heat supply, security, recreation and other needs, gardeners and summer residents create public property at their own expense. Common property includes roads, water towers, common gates and fences, boiler rooms, children's and sports grounds, garbage collection sites, fire fighting and similar facilities.
In SNT1, such common property is created (acquired) at the expense of earmarked contributions. The law, establishing the obligation of members of the SNT to participate in the creation of common property, regulates the procedure for establishing earmarked contributions and their payment.
Payment of membership dues
Should a new member of the SNT, by purchasing a plot from a former member of the SNT, pay off his debts on contributions? There are cases when, upon joining the SNT, the Chairman requires the new member of the SNT to pay off the debt on special-purpose or membership fees. Debt may be transferred from the debtor to another person on the grounds prescribed by law, or by agreement between the former member of the SNT and the new member with the obligatory consent of the SNT to such a transfer of debt (clause 1 of article 392.2, clauses 1 and 2 of article 391 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). The law does not contain provisions that a new member of the SNT, when acquiring a land plot, transfers the debts of the previous member of the SNT.
Therefore, if there is no debt transfer agreement between the old and new CNT member, it is illegal to demand that the new CNT member repay the debt! 5.
It makes sense to collect debts on earmarked contributions only from the current member of the SNT, but not from the former. We examined the main problems, but not all, that gardeners and summer residents face in the courts when establishing, paying and collecting targeted contributions from them. © Kovalev Nikolai Nikolaevich Article No. 7 - “Participation of individual gardeners in the management of SNT”. Our dacha lawyers explain that, under the new law, individual gardeners are the same owners of common property as members of a partnership ...
It has become easier to conclude a direct energy supply contract in SNT The current legislation provides for the possibility for gardeners whose power receiving devices are already connected to SNT networks to switch to ...
How to pay membership dues to snt under the new law
The document should include the initials of the applicant, the address of the place of residence, the postal address to which the letter can be sent, as well as email and consent to comply with the charter of the organization. Do not forget that the bodies of the SNT or ONT must issue a membership book or other documentation to the applicant within 3 months that confirms membership in the partnership. If denied, the applicant must be informed that membership has been denied. A house on the SNT site in 2019 - what buildings can be erected on the plots of a horticultural non-profit partnership? Owners of plots belonging to the partnership must pay attention to the type of permitted use of the land. It is from it that you can determine what can be built on the site. Since, according to the new law, there are two types - garden and garden plots - then the buildings are subdivided based on this.
How to pay contributions to snt under the new law
Preparation of documents necessary for the formation of a land plot located in the state or municipal property, in order to further provide the partnership with such a land plot. 2. Preparation of documentation for the planning of the territory in relation to the territory of horticulture or horticulture. 3. Carrying out cadastral work for the purpose of entering into the Unified State Register of Real Estate information about garden or garden land plots, general-purpose land plots, and other real estate objects related to public property.
4. Creation or acquisition of common property necessary for the activities of the partnership. 5. Implementation of measures provided for by the decision of the general meeting of members of the partnership. Contributions cannot be spent on other expenses - this is stated in the new law.
What associations need to be transformed? NEW LAW ON SNT AND GARDENERS CEO) Often, during a divorce, an unscrupulous spouse tries to withdraw the business from the division of joint property, for example, by selling shares in a joint company to third parties at low prices. Has the project for the organization and development of the SNT territory been cancelled? In connection with the numerous questions of gardeners, our SNT lawyers explain the question of whether it is possible to organize the territory of SNT (other horticultural and country non-profit associations of citizens), as well as to divide the land plot of such an association, to use such a document as the “Organization and Development Project” or is it finally cancelled? A word to our dacha lawyers.
On the eve of the next meeting in snt "Zvezda" I would like to touch on the topic of targeted funding in horticultural associations, and in particular, the issue of targeted contributions. Let us explain why this particular question attracted our attention.
At first glance, Federal Law No. 66 quite clearly defines the concept we are considering, and there should not be any difficulties with classifying certain items of expenditure as targeted contributions. However, difficulties do arise.
The law says that “target contributions are funds contributed by members of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit partnership or a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit partnership for the acquisition (creation) of public facilities.”
However, the funds received by horticultural associations as earmarked contributions are not spent on anything. In the estimates of various SNTs, you can find gasoline and mobile communications, taxes and fines, stationery and household goods included in this column. In the estimate of snt "Zvezda", approved at the meeting in July 2013, you can see such articles as payment for audit services, bank commission, Internet for accounting.
Some, in their zeal to classify anything as common use, go even further. Here, for example, is a comical quote from the appeal ruling of the Vyborgsky District Court: “The justice of the peace unlawfully attributed the chairman of the board of the SNT and his salary, accountant, cashier, watchmen, janitor, paperwork, state duty, photocopying, court costs, forms, paper, stationery, bank service, purchase of firewood for the board, fines, toilet repairs and front door board, etc.” ()
“What is the problem?” our readers may ask. The main thing is that the collected funds should be spent according to the declared articles, and everyone will be happy. But we fundamentally disagree with such a fairly common point of view among gardeners. Why? Let's try to explain.
In accordance with paragraph 2. Art. 4 of the Federal Law N66 "SNT property is created for targeted, membership and entry fees." From the same Federal Law No. 66, it follows that targeted contributions should be used for the acquisition (creation) of public facilities, which are included in joint property of members non-commercial partnership: “public property (PPE), acquired or created by such a partnership at the expense of earmarked contributions, is the joint property of its members” (Article 4, Clause 2). And if the operator's services are paid from targeted contributions mobile communications or an auditor, a member of the SNT simply does not become the owner of any objects / property, because no property or objects not purchased or created!
In general, the complexity of the issue under consideration about earmarked contributions gives rise to the concept of ownership in relation to public property (PPE). As we managed to find out, the "unfortunate" IOP in gardening partnerships is different. The difference is determined by the subject of law, that is, the one to whom this property belongs by right of ownership. In addition to snt members creating IOP from earmarked contributions, there is also an IEP created from membership and entry fees.
Thus, due to contributions to SNT, two fundamentally different types ownership of the IEP:
- the property of the association (snt) as a LEGAL ENTITY - from the funds of a special fund (membership, entrance fees, etc.);
- property of an INDIVIDUAL (member of the snt) - from earmarked contributions.
The owner, as specified in clause 1 of article 209 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, has the rights to:
- ownership,
- use,
- property disposal.
In addition to rights, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation gives the owner and obligations: according to Art. 210 he bears the burden of maintaining his property, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.
So, IOP, owned on the right common joint property the members of the snt who made targeted contributions, the owners jointly own and use, and they can exercise the right to dispose of such property only by mutual agreement (Article 253 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation):
item 1. “Participants in joint ownership, unless otherwise provided by an agreement between them, jointly own and use common property”;
item 2. "The disposal of property in joint ownership is carried out by the consent of all participants, which is assumed regardless of which of the participants makes a transaction on the disposal of property."
The same owners must jointly bear the burden of maintaining their property. According to Federal Law No. 66, as well as clause 3.4. Charter snt "Star" "gardeners have the right to conduct economic activity individually." From the fact that they have the right to use infrastructure facilities and other common property snt “for a fee, under the terms of agreements concluded with the Board” and the amount of such fee “cannot exceed the amount of payment for the use of the specified property for members of the snt”, we see that for members of the SNT, there is also a fee for using the IEP.
What do they have to pay for? To this, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation notes that the article is valid, "unless otherwise provided by an agreement between them." Thus, having concluded an agreement on the collection of fees for the use of IEP and the inclusion of such fees in earmarked contributions, i.e. by making an appropriate decision at the General Meeting, the members of the snt - participants in joint ownership will save themselves from unnecessary strife with "individuals", as well as from a smooth outflow of property mass into the hands of a legal entity (more on this later). And the collected funds will be spent on the repair and maintenance of the IEP, while the obligation to maintain their property will be fulfilled by the owners.
The owner of another IOP, a legal entity, exercises its rights in relation to the property belonging to it, guided by other rules. He, as the sole owner, according to Article 209, paragraph 2 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, is not limited by anything:
"The owner has the right on your own perform any actions with respect to the property belonging to him that do not contradict the law and other legal acts and do not violate the rights and legally protected interests of other persons, including alienate his property into the ownership of other persons, transfer to them, while remaining the owner, the rights of possession, use and disposal property, pledge property and encumber it in other ways, dispose of it in another way.
In many gardening partnerships established before 1995, i.e. before the entry into force of the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (01.01.1995), public lands (PZO), which are part of the IOP, were transferred to them in collective joint ownership. The Civil Code of the Russian Federation does not contain such a concept. However, certificates of state registration of the right to PDO, received during the period when the provision on granting land on the basis of the right of collective joint ownership was still in force (Articles 8-9 of the Land Code of the RSFSR), have not lost their legal force and confirm the existence of the right to PDO:
Clause 9 of Article 3 of the Federal Law of October 25, 2001 “On the Enactment of the Land Code of the Russian Federation” states that “state acts, certificates and other documents certifying rights to land and issued to citizens or legal entities before the Federal Law was put into effect” On State Registration of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions Therewith, have equal legal force with entries in the USRR.
For example, according to clause 1 of the Charter of snt "Star" "the right to collective joint property to public land is confirmed by the Decree of the Head of the Administration of the Noginsk District of the Moscow Region No. 3707 of November 1, 1993 and the Certificate of Ownership of Land - RF V 50-16 No. 502078 of December 20, 1994.
The subject of law here are individuals, the list of which is attached to the title document (in some cases there is no such list). There is an opinion that the subject of the right under consideration may be a legal entity (snt), but we do not agree with it, since in accordance with Article 8 of the Land Code of the RSFSR “In a collective joint property of citizens lands of collective farms, other cooperative agricultural enterprises, joint-stock companies, including those created on the basis of state agricultural enterprises, and land for common use of horticultural partnerships - by decision of the general meetings of these enterprises, cooperatives and partnerships. The Code does not mention such a subject of law as a legal entity.
Proponents of a different point of view as an argument most often cite the following excerpt from the same article of the Code: “Lands for common use of gardening partnerships transferred to them free of charge and not subject to division. However, we emphasize that the norms of the legislation in force at that time, on the basis of which local authorities provided land plots for ownership, did not allow transfer of land, including those intended for horticulture, to the ownership of legal entities.
Based on the foregoing, there is no reason to assert that the horticultural partnership a certificate for collective joint ownership confirms the ownership of the partnership as a legal entity. AT this case partnership is exclusively organizational and administrative activities regarding the PDO, as, in fact, is established by the Federal Law of August 15, 1998 No. 66-FZ.
The same supporters of the point of view about the subject of law - a legal entity on collective joint property, bring another powerful argument in their favor. Like, if a legal entity pays taxes on PDO, then it is the owner.
To refute this argument, we present an excerpt from the letter of the Office of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for the Moscow Region dated 14.07.2006. No. 19-47-I / 0803: "for land plots used by citizens - members of gardening associations, with they have the right ownership or permanent (perpetual) use (which arose before the entry into force of the Land Code of the Russian Federation) and lifelong inheritable possession of land plots, and documents certifying them(including those issued prior to the adoption of Federal Law No. 122-FZ "On State Registration of Rights to Real Estate and Transactions with It" by executive authorities and local governments in the prescribed manner), land tax should be levied on members of gardening associations on the basis of the tax notices for the payment of land tax calculated according to the information provided to the tax authorities by the bodies of Rosnedvizhimost, Rosregistration and local governments in the manner prescribed by Article 396 of the Code.
Before issuance members of horticultural associations evidence for the right to own land, the land tax payers are partnerships that submit tax declarations on land tax to the tax authorities both for public lands and lands, the rights to which are not formalized by members of gardening partnerships in the manner prescribed by law.
So, the horticultural associations were supposed to be the payer of the PDO tax until the common lands were registered in collective joint ownership. In the near 90s, when wholesale privatization began, most garden associations, which were allocated land plots with different ownership rights (for example, the right of permanent perpetual use), took advantage of the right to privatize land plots. The personal plots of citizens were assigned to each citizen with the receipt of a certificate of ownership individually for each, and the PDO was issued in accordance with Art. 8 of the Land Code of the RSFSR. Then the title document for the PDO was issued. At the same time, the obligation to pay the PDO tax was to be transferred to citizens - participants in collective property.
However, the Federal Tax Service, referring to the fact that the legal entity collects membership fees and pays tax at their expense, continues to demand land tax declarations from the legal entity. Although this is illegal, but why the FTS needs extra trouble ...
The chairmen, in the old fashioned way, do not refuse illegal actions and carry in the tax declaration for the PDO from a legal entity that, in principle, does not have a tax base for accrual, since there is no land in ownership, and therefore there is no tax charge. All this is fraught with certain consequences, such as the accrual of penalties for unpaid land tax on time. So, saving themselves from the hassle, the Federal Tax Service is pushing citizens into a debt hole, and the chairmen silently indulge this.
Moreover, if a legal entity is liquidated, for example, for debts, then the lands are most likely to be taken away in the first place, even if they were owned by citizens, BUT THE LEGAL ENTITY PAYED the land tax for many years, and not citizens - co-owners of the PDO. Accordingly, the court has the right to take this into account.
(see also Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 23, 2009 “On some issues that arose among arbitration courts when considering cases related to the collection of land tax).
We hope that we managed to convince readers that PDO is the property of citizens - individuals, namely, the team of the partnership. What specific team (the one that was at the time of registration, or the one that exists now) is a debatable question. But the fact that the subject of property rights is a collective, that is, a group of INDIVIDUALS, is clearly not subject to discussion. The horticultural partnership is only a payer of PDO taxes, but not the owner of the PDO.
The right and its components to common lands are implemented in accordance with the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, that is, similar to the right of common joint ownership. The owners also bear the burden of maintaining public lands together. And the payment for the possession, use and maintenance of the PDO, as part of the IEP, in our opinion, should be included in earmarked contributions.
Here it is necessary to note a few more nuances regarding the PDO. The first is that, unlike the IOP, created for earmarked contributions, public lands are in no way tied to membership in the SNT. With the termination of membership, the fate of the IEP, created on earmarked contributions, is known - it still belongs to the right of common joint ownership snt members, since this is how Federal Law No. 66 interprets it. Moreover, regarding the reimbursement of the gardener who left the partnership for his expenses incurred in order to create common property, Article 16, clause 4 of Federal Law No. citizen from among the members of such an association or the liquidation of such an association” must be spelled out in the charter of the association. Regulations on the procedure for the return of targeted contributions, as such, the law FZ No. 66-FZ of April 15, 1998 does not contain.
Let us turn to the Charter of snt "Star". According to clause 4.1.6. snt member has the right "when alienating or selling a garden plot, simultaneously alienate to the acquirer right use public property as part of snt in the amount of earmarked contributions used to create public infrastructure snt. Let's turn a blind eye to the fact that such a wording contradicts Federal Law No. 66, which says (Article 19, clause 1, clause 6): “when alienating a garden, garden or summer cottage land plot”, a member of the SNT has the right to “simultaneously alienate to the acquirer share common use property as part of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit partnership in the amount of earmarked contributions. Even the Law contains a gap here, because in common joint no ownership shares.
The creators of the Charter of snt "Zvezda" went even further and leave the alienator only the possibility of transferring the right to use the IOP, somehow forgetting about the rights of ownership and disposal! This is with regard to the members of St. BUT " person who left(excluded) from the members of snt, do not return targeted contributions made by him for the construction, repair and operation of public infrastructure elements ”(clause 4.4.7. of the Charter), that is, he (a person who has withdrawn from membership) is not only deprived of his right to an IEP, but also cannot receive compensation for it will be able.
As for the PDO, which are in collective joint ownership, no one can deprive you of the right to them when you leave the members of the SNT, since neither the Law nor the Charter provides for this. While you have not made the conditions for transactions (for example, sale, donation, inheritance), i.e. until your memory has a new owner, to whom, according to the law will cross your right on the PDO and personal plot, you remain the full owner regardless of membership in the snt. Of course, the question of what documents confirm this right, especially in the absence of a list of persons constituting the same team in the title document, remains rather vague. But even so, the right of ownership does not disappear anywhere!
The second nuance regarding the PDO is that the Law allows, under a special procedure, to transfer these lands from the collective joint property of gardeners to the individual property of SNT as a legal entity. Because the norms No. 66-FZ provide for the execution of a PDO only for a legal entity. In accordance with Article 14 of this law, land plots related to public property are provided to horticultural, gardening or summer cottages. non-profit association as a legal entity in the property.
Of course, the paragraph of paragraph 4 of Article 14 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ on assigning public lands to a legal entity contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation, according to which everyone has the right to own property, own, use and dispose of it both individually and jointly with other persons, but this fact is of little concern to current legislators.
So, if desired, gardeners can change the legal regime of PDO: transfer PDO from the joint ownership of gardeners to the ownership of SNT as a legal entity. In this case, the mechanism for making decisions about the fate of the PDO becomes very simple: all decisions about the fate of the PDO are made by the General Meeting of Members of the SNT (meeting of authorized persons) by a simple majority of votes. In the event that the subject of the right to the PDO is a group of individuals, decisions on the order of the PDO are made only with the consent of ALL OWNERS.
The general meeting, by a very simple procedure, can make a decision with some vague wording such as: "to optimize the use and disposal of the PDO in order to obtain additional financial resources."
In the intervals between the General Meetings, based on this decision, the Board will decide, for example, to lease the PDO to some organization on unclear terms, and retroactively report to the next General Meeting. Or they may decide to sell part of the PDO to someone on the same unclear terms. In the first case, it will be the execution of the “optimization of the use of the PDO”, in the second case, the execution of the “optimization of the disposal of the PDO”.
In addition to the above, even with a conscientious Chairman, if debts arise from SNT as a legal entity, the PDO can be transferred to another legal entity as compensation for debts in court. In this case, another legal entity will receive the right to dispose of the land, the right to charge a fee for use and possession, while the amount of the fee is not limited in any way.
That is, when deciding on the re-registration of common lands from the collective joint ownership of gardeners to the ownership of a legal entity, each gardener renounces his part of the common property and transfers it to the ownership of SNT forever!
After the protracted clarifications on the PDO, we want to return to the subjects of ownership of the IOP. They remain the same: an individual (persons) and snt, as a legal entity. Such a diversity of ownership rights to public property, land plots in the organization of the activities of horticultural associations, taking into account the provisions of Art. 1 RF LC and art. 271 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation is fraught with negative consequences for members of the association, which can ultimately lead to possible loss of property:
- RF LC, article 1, clause 5: “The unity of the fate of land plots and objects firmly associated with them, according to which all objects firmly associated with land plots follow the fate of land plots, except for cases established by federal laws”;
- Civil Code of the Russian Federation Art. 271 clause 1: “The owner of a building, structure or other real estate located on a land plot owned by another person has the right to use the land plot provided by such a person for this property”;
- Civil Code of the Russian Federation Art. 271 clause 2: "When the ownership of real estate located on someone else's land is transferred to another person, it acquires the right to use the relevant land on the same conditions and to the same extent as the previous owner of the property."
As we can see from the above, if any real estate is being built on the lands of common use, owned by citizens and being part of the IOP, at the expense of a special fund, i.e. for membership or entry fees, then the owner of this property (snt as a legal entity) acquires at least the right to use the land plot under this property. At the same time, the owner of the property does not pay any fee for the use of the storage facility (in the absence of a lease agreement).
For example, the estimate adopted at the meeting on 07/06/2013 includes a special contribution for the construction of a playground. Although the Charter of St. Zvezda does not at all contain a definition of what special contributions are and which fund is formed from them, we believe that special contributions go to a special partnership fund, from which common property is created - the property of a legal entity.
What do we get? On the land plot (it was not specified which one), which is in the collective joint ownership of citizens (COP), according to the decision of the General Meeting, the construction of a playground should take place. As we remember, the right to dispose of the PDO should be exercised only with the consent of ALL owners. Recall that the right of disposal is expressed in the right of the owner to sell, mortgage the land, donate it, exchange it, bequeath it by inheritance, lease it in parts or in full, transfer to another person for free use.
In fact, the meeting decides on the disposal of the PDO, and this decision is valid until proven otherwise. Further, on the lands of common use - the property of citizens, the construction of a real estate object will take place, which will belong to a legal entity!
Of course, in the absence of the interest of the owner of the land plot in preserving the property, he has the right to demand that the owner of this property demolish it and restore the site to its original state. However, due to various circumstances (for example, when the value of real estate built on such a land plot significantly exceeds the value of the plot itself allocated for development), the court may recognize the ownership of the land plot for the property owner(legal entity). Here is such a graceful expropriation of land from the population.
So, finally, in our reasoning, we return to the stated issue of earmarked contributions. In the situation described above, if the funds for the playground were included in earmarked contributions, as provided for by Federal Law No. 66, then SNT members would have the ownership of the property, most of whom probably also own the PDO.
Of course, this does not change the fact that it is illegal for the General Assembly to decide on the order of the PDO. However, as we remember, it is valid until someone manages to challenge it in court. But until then, a lot of firewood can be broken. To build many real estate objects, thereby free of charge by acquiring a part of the PDO for use snt (the most harmless option).
In the case of inclusion of expenses for the creation (acquisition) of objects of common use in targeted contributions, at least members of the SNT remain insured against the "weaning" of objects of property. Since the created property will replenish the rest of the mass common joint property. The rest (non-members) can only wait until changes are made to the Charter that will restore justice and establish the procedure for compensating earmarked contributions. But that's another matter.
The main issue, for drawing attention to which we advocated in this article, is the responsible attitude of gardeners to classifying various expense items as earmarked contributions. We insist that it is impossible to support the inclusion of expenses for stationery and household goods in earmarked contributions. As well as it is unacceptable to attribute to some special contributions what is actually an object (property) of common use and should belong to members of the SNT on the basis of common joint ownership.
Does it still seem random to you to include in special contributions the costs of replacing a transformer with TP 421 () or building a playground ()? And these endless expenses for “household goods and materials”, “Internet for accounting”, “audit services”, which are included in targeted contributions? I wonder what kind of objects common property are made of them?
We believe that this is a conscious redistribution of funds in favor of snt, which we, gardeners, for the most part indulge. For greater persuasiveness, we quote from the recommendations of lawyers to the Chairmen of the SNT on the legal advice website: “Realization of the last aspect by the members of the SNT can lead to a steady desire to participate in solving common property issues and set high membership fees” (meaning the aspect that it is precisely from earmarked contributions that common joint property of members partnerships, not office supplies).
And now a few conclusions as a summary of the article:
1. Of course, the amount of contributions to a horticultural partnership can and should be determined based on the planned needs for cash taking into account existing market prices for goods, works and services necessary for the SNT and the total number of members of the SNT - payers of contributions. However, the erroneous or intentional attribution of the costs of acquiring (creating) objects of common use not to target, but to membership fees, is fraught not only for gardeners, but also for a legal entity with negative consequences. Because it is a legal entity that is easy prey for raiders.
2. It is absolutely inexpedient to change the old certificate with the form of ownership "collective joint" to a certificate of a new type, since the Law does not oblige citizens to do so. It is even dangerous, since the association of citizens - the collective is one right, and the organization - legal. face others. The current imperfect laws, plus a high background of corruption, can easily make people who are completely outsiders and who have nothing to do with the gardening association as owners of common lands. And then it's a matter of technology - pay for the passage to your site, if you can't - leave, leave the land or give it away for nothing.
3. It is necessary to achieve the termination of the payment of taxes on PDO by a legal entity from membership fees. As we remember, membership fees are equal to the property of a legal entity, and PDO is still the property of citizens. To do this, you need to contact the tax service at the location of the snt with a letter in which you should inform that the PDO belongs to citizens on the basis of the right of collective joint ownership and ask, on the basis of a certificate for the PDO and in accordance with Chapter 31 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, to charge land tax on each owner of a personal site. Attach a copy of the PDO certificate, a list of citizens who are co-owners of the PDO. The Federal Tax Service itself will calculate the tax and send out tax notices.
4. It is necessary to develop a clear position as to which contributions should include fees for the use of common property, including the PDO. In our opinion, in order to avoid unnecessary difficulties with the subsequent attribution of the object of common use to the property of individuals or a legal entity, it is necessary to include such a fee in targeted contributions. So the owners of the IOP - members of the SNT will bear the burden of maintaining THEIR property. The payment for the IEP owned by the legal entity, respectively, should be included in membership fees.
5. As for individual gardeners and other snt. As we remember, according to p. 4.4.7. Charter of the snt "Star" "to a person who retired (expelled) from the members of the snt, do not return targeted contributions made by him for the construction, repair and operation of public infrastructure elements. We consider this clause of the Charter to be contrary to Article 16, clause 4 of the Federal Law No. 66, which states that the Association’s Charter states “ procedure for paying the value of a property or the issuance of part of the property in kind in the event of a citizen's withdrawal from the membership of such an association or the liquidation of such an association. The Law does not mention that earmarked contributions are not subject to compensation.
In our opinion, an adequate wording for this paragraph of the Articles of Association would be something like: “to the person leaving the partnership, the value of his part of the property of common use is paid to him in the amount of targeted contributions made by him from the funds of the trust fund, unless otherwise provided by the Articles of Association. In case of refusal to receive compensation, the person leaving the partnership retains the right to a part of the IEP. In this case, it will be very easy to determine the amount of the payment; it is enough to add up the targeted contributions paid by the gardener during his membership. At the same time, part of the IOP is alienated in favor of the remaining participants in joint ownership.
In the Statutes of many syndicates, the following wording is common: “contributions for the creation of common use property are reimbursed to those who leave the partnership, minus the cost of depreciation of the common use property.” However, in this case, the payment of compensation stumbles over the cost of depreciation, and if the board (meeting), going towards the gardener, does not determine the cost of depreciation by a willful decision, the exiting one will have to decide the issue of the cost of depreciation, perhaps only within the framework of a forensic audit examination, whose cost may turn out to be much more than the amount of targeted contributions made to the cash desk of the partnership. The above wording, obviously, will not benefit anyone, complicating the procedure for the return of contributions for the gardener, and threatening the partnership with significant legal costs when collecting contributions paid through the court. At the same time, we consider it unlawful to completely deprive a departing member of the SNT of compensation for his part of the IEP.
6. Further, it is necessary to provide for the case when the departing member (but still a member of the SNT), when alienating the site, alienates its part of the IOP to the acquirer in the amount of earmarked contributions. Of course, we do not agree with the wording on this issue of the Charter (clause 4.1.6.) of the Zvezda snt. Yes, and in Law No. 66-FZ, eclecticism is noticeable: on the one hand, the Law states that the IEP of members of the snt is jointly owned (that is, without determining shares), and on the other hand, it points to the mode of shared ownership.
We believe that this contradiction can be eliminated by introducing into the Charter of the Zvezda snt approximately the following wording: “when alienating a garden plot, a snt member has the right to simultaneously alienate to the acquirer a part of the common use property as part of the snt, proportional to the size of the earmarked contributions made by him. At the same time, his membership in the SNT is terminated, and compensation for part of the IOP is not paid to him. Here we mean that he has the right to compensate for his losses in the event of alienation at the expense of the acquirer (for example, by increasing the cost of the site).
“He also has the right to alienate a part of the property of common use as part of the snt, proportional to the size of the earmarked contributions made by him, in favor of the rest of the participants in joint ownership. At the same time, his membership in the SNT is terminated, and compensation for part of the IEP is paid to him at the expense of the trust fund.
As a result, we get:
NEW NON-MEMBER OF SNT ——— PART OWNER OF IEP
May join the SNT without paying targeted contributions to the cash desk of the partnership, proportional to the part of the IOP. Keeping gardening on an individual basis, will be required to pay only the amount for the use of the IOP, not exceeding that for members of the snt.
NEW NON-MEMBER SNT ——— WITHOUT IOP PART
Can join the SNT with the payment of targeted contributions to the cash desk of the partnership, proportional to the part of the IOP. Keeping gardening on an individual basis, he will be obliged to pay not only the amount for the use of the IEP, but also to compensate for the costs of creating and acquiring the IOP, while becoming the owner of the corresponding part of it (see the previous paragraph). In case of unwillingness to acquire a part of the IOP in the property, he will pay the amount for the use of the IOP + an additional coefficient for not being the owner.
RETIRED SNT MEMBER ——— PART OWNER OF IEP
May re-enter the SNT without paying targeted contributions to the cash desk of the partnership, proportional to the part of the IOP. Keeping gardening on an individual basis, will be required to pay only the amount for the use of the IOP, not exceeding that for members of the snt.
RETIRED SNT MEMBER ——— WITHOUT PART OF IOP
May re-enter the SNT with the payment to the coffers of the partnership of targeted contributions proportional to the part of the IOP. Keeping gardening on an individual basis, he will be obliged to pay not only the amount for the use of the IEP, but also to compensate for the costs of creating and acquiring the IOP, while becoming the owner of the corresponding part of it (see the previous paragraph). In case of unwillingness to acquire a part of the IOP in the property, he will pay the amount for the use of the IOP + an additional coefficient for not being the owner.
Offering such a scheme for calculating compensation for targeted contributions, we put at the forefront the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, namely the sections of the Code devoted to the protection of property rights. So, according to Article 212, paragraph 2. The property may be in property of citizens and legal entities
, as well as the Russian Federation, subjects of the Russian Federation, municipalities». 
The wording of Article 4, Clause 2 of Federal Law No. 66 regarding the fact that in the snt “common property acquired or created by such a partnership at the expense of earmarked contributions is the joint property of its members”, we consider it incorrect and entails Negative consequences for both members and non-members of the SNT in the form of unnecessary confusion, red tape, problems with the conclusion of contracts for the use of IEP, etc. In addition, we consider it unconstitutional, since membership in the SNT is a voluntary matter, and, ceasing to be a member, the subject of law does not cease be a citizen. And no one has the right to deprive him of a part of his property.
In the formulations of the Charter we propose, we leave the citizen the right to choose: whether to be the owner of a part of the IOP with the termination of membership in the partnership and bear the burden of maintaining it on an equal basis with other owners, or to refuse a part of the IOP with the receipt of appropriate compensation. In case of refusal of a part of the IEP and gardening on an individual basis, he will pay a fee for the right to use the IOP using a multiplying coefficient, since he is not the owner.
Many may object that such a calculation of payments is contrary to the provisions of Article 8, Clause 2 of the Federal Law No. 66, which states that the amount of payment for the use of an IEP "cannot exceed the amount of payment for the use of the specified property for members of such an association." However, we hasten to draw the attention of readers to the clarification in the same article of the Federal Law No. 66: "provided that they make contributions for the acquisition (creation) of the specified property."
So, having paid earmarked contributions, citizen, although not a member of the SNT, formally still becomes the owner of a proportionally paid part of the IEP, and also bears the burden of maintaining it on an equal footing with the owner-members. Fair? In the event that he renounces his part of the property with the alienation of it in favor of the remaining co-owners, it is obvious that their shares of the IOP increase. Accordingly, the burden of maintaining property for its owners also increases. This percentage, which increases the burden of maintenance, that is, the payment for the use of IEP for owners, we propose to use as the basis for calculating the multiplying coefficient for non-members-non-owners.