Peter's internal activities since 1700

(continuation)

But, caring about increasing the people's welfare, Peter I could not wait until the improvement of the national economy naturally increased state revenues. The war required a lot of money. The needs of the state treasury thus came into conflict with the interests of the national economy. Peter, against his will, was forced to increase treasury revenues and increasingly exploited the payment power of the people, creating new taxes and more strictly collecting old taxes. Therefore, despite Peter’s constant concerns about increasing the people’s well-being, the economic situation of the people suffered greatly from the government’s financial measures. According to the tax-paying people, life became harder under Peter: “The world is burdened with rubles, half rubles, and carts.” And for reasons of researchers, under Peter, taxes were increased significantly. The increase in tax burdens was supplemented by the abuses of the administration that collected taxes. Although Peter severely punished these abuses, he could not stop them completely. Because of the hardships of the state, the people either went to become Cossacks or wandered to the borders of Poland, and escapes under Peter took on large proportions.

But Peter I still managed to significantly increase state revenues. This was achieved by increasing indirect taxes and direct tax reform. As for indirect taxes, Peter not only did not reduce the old payments, but also found new objects of taxation. After 1700, salt mines, beekeepers, fisheries, and mills became quitrent items for the state treasury. The system of state-owned monopolies (for example, drinking and tobacco) flourished under Peter and was associated with a system of tax farming. In need of funds, Peter sometimes invented taxes that were strange, from our point of view: a duty was imposed on the beards of “bearded men” who did not want to shave; duties were taken from the baths; very high prices were charged for oak coffins, the sale of which became a state monopoly. The schismatics had to bear a double tax salary; Thus, not only real needs, but also objects of moral order became a source of government income. Under Peter, a special position of “profit-makers” was created, whose duties were to monitor the correct receipt of income into the treasury and collect new taxable items (of such profit-makers, Kurbatov, who later was the vice-governor of Arkhangelsk, was especially noticeable: he proposed the introduction of stamp paper). In 1710, Peter even had the idea of ​​a general and permanent income tax, which, however, was not put into action. Indirect taxes under Peter, as far as can be judged by some data, accounted for more than half of state income.

The other half (about 5 million rubles) was provided by direct poll tax. We have already considered its establishment. About 6,000,000 souls were recorded in the first tax audit. Of these, each landowner peasant paid 70 kopecks. per year, state peasant - 114 kopecks, city dweller - 120 kopecks. According to calculations (which can be made only approximately), the per capita tax was much heavier than the previous household and land taxes and gave the government a much larger amount, compared with the fees of the 17th century.

Thanks to his financial measures, Peter significantly increased the amount of state income. At the very end of the 17th century. state income slightly exceeded 2,000,000 rubles; in 1710 the treasury received 3,134,000 rubles. According to the calculation of 1722, income had already increased to 7,850,000 rubles, and according to the calculation of 1725 - to 10,186,000 rubles. [To correctly understand the relationship between these figures, you need to know that in the first years of the 18th century. Peter “damaged” the coin in order to increase government funds. Previously, “efimok” (thaler) was equal to the average Russian half; Peter minted a whole ruble from a thaler (with the inscription “new coin” or “good coin” - “price is a ruble”), and minted half a ruble into half a thaler. Thus, the amount of silver in the ruble was halved, and accordingly the denomination of the ruble decreased.] Huge deficits in the first years of the 16th century. decreased towards the end of Peter's reign, although in his declining years he still did not cease to need money.

Silver ruble with the image of Peter I, 1723

So, the economic and financial policies of Peter I led to different results. Guided by the idea of ​​improving the situation and expanding the sphere of activity of the people's labor, Peter was put in a difficult position: the financial interests of the country directly contradicted the economic needs of the population. Trying to raise the economic well-being of the people, Peter at the same time was forced to severely exploit their ability to pay. The military and other needs of the state required immediate satisfaction, immediate and intensified collections, and the economic situation of the people could only be improved through prolonged efforts. That is why Peter achieved a more tangible result in what required a quick decision - in finances; Meanwhile, in the matter of economic reforms, he managed to sow only the seeds of fruitful undertakings and almost did not see their germination; on the contrary, he felt that his financial measures sometimes even more upset the very national economy, the prosperity of which he sincerely and strongly desired.

Despite all the failures in this area, Peter, however, took a big step forward compared to his predecessors; in the 17th century only vaguely felt the need for economic reform and only a few people were aware of the path it should take. Peter made this reform one of the main tasks of government activity, clearly posed the question and indicated where and how to seek its solution. This is his great merit.

Addition

Poll tax and the results of the financial reform of Peter I (based on lectures by V. O. Klyuchevsky)

Capitation tax

Direct taxation suffered a radical revolution under Peter I. The “household number” has long been a worthless basis for taxation, and Peter’s new office ruined it even more. It was unprofitable to distribute taxes according to the censuses of 1710 and 1717, which showed a large decrease in households compared to the census of 1678. Government statistics, protecting government interest, came up with an ingenious combination: as the basis for the new provincial division of 1719, it based the list of household numbers compiled from censuses of different years, selecting suitable numbers from previous censuses. The result was brilliant: the number of tax households, which according to the 1678 census did not exceed 833 thousand, now, after a twice-certified decline, has exceeded 900 thousand, even without the townspeople. This statistical tomfoolery of the then office deprived household taxation of any practical meaning and forced them to look for another salary unit, and the censuses of 1710 and 1717 they pointed directly to it, revealing a curious phenomenon clarified in the mentioned book by Mr. Miliukov: the decline of households occurred in some places simultaneously with the increase in population. The average composition of the tax court thickened and reached five and a half male souls instead of the usual three or four. With household taxation, this increase for the treasury was lost: all that remained was to move on to capitulation. The idea of ​​a universal tax originated in Moscow financial minds back in the time of Sofya, Prince Golitsyn. The publicists of Peter I also did not come up with anything smarter than the male head: with this salary unit they hoped to eliminate the ruinous unevenness of household taxation. From this point of view, Nesterov advocated for a head tax in the interest of equalizing the taxation of the chief fiscal as early as 1714; after him, others wrote about the benefits of shifting taxes from households “to individuals,” or to families.

Peter seems to have been rather indifferent to the economic and legal development of a new taxation system; he was more occupied with the quartermaster side of the matter - the provision of the army and navy. He did not understand the question of coordinating military spending with the payment forces of the people. He looked at the Russian payer with the most cheerful gaze, suggesting in him an inexhaustible supply of all kinds of tax contributions. Projectors and profit-makers wrote to him that his “low subjects” were extremely burdened and, if they were burdened more, the land would be left without people, and in 1717 he wrote to the Senate from France that “even without a great burden, people can still find money”; money will be needed - to temporarily add duties on all sorts of trades, to introduce “capitalization in cities and other similar things, which will not ruin the state,” and where embezzlement appears, “so that there will be an immediate inquisition and execution.” Without thinking about the comparative conveniences or inconveniences of different salary units: yard, family, worker, soul, leaving this to the Senate, Peter saw in the tax issue only two objects: the soldier who must be supported, and the peasant who must support the soldier. In November 1717, while in the Senate, Peter I himself wrote a decree, set out in that volatile style that yielded only to the experienced exegetical instinct of senators: “Dispose of the land army and naval recruits, in addition to salaries, and provisions for peasants, how many souls or households one “Whatever is more convenient, soldiers and dragoons and officers of ranks other than generals, applied to current taxes, for as this is established, they will be free from all other taxes and work.” So, all direct taxes were supposed to be replaced by one military one, whether household or per capita, it makes no difference or has not yet been decided; this tax was distributed to peasants based on the cost of maintaining a soldier, dragoon and officer. A few days later, distribution was preferred according to souls, “working persons,” and the Senate, interpreting Peter’s decree, on November 26, 1718 ordered that the entire male rural arable population be listed, everyone “without passing by from the oldest to the very last baby.”

We already know how slowly and with what difficulties the census was carried out with its verification and revision. Several results from it have been preserved at different times, among which it is difficult to understand: the number of souls according to them fluctuates between 5 and almost 6 million. The Senate estimate of the poll tax for 1724 has been preserved, to which in 1726 the Chamber Collegium, by decree of the Supreme Privy Council, added a list of actual receipts of the poll tax for the estimated year with the designation of arrears by province. Adopted as a guide for the quartering of regiments and for tax accounting in 1724, the Senate estimate with the painting added to it represents a verified image of the capitation system for the first year of its operation and for the last year of the life of its creator, without the changes that it was subjected to shortly after his death. According to this statement, the total tax population is 5,570 thousand souls, including 169 thousand urban ones. The per capita salary was established in connection with the progress of the census: initially calculated at 95 kopecks, it later dropped to 74 kopecks; in order to equalize the burdens of all souls on the state peasants, in exchange for payments to the owners, an additional 4-hryvnia tax was imposed; City tax residents paid 1 ruble 20 kopecks per soul.

The meaning of the poll tax

This tax, the “capacity”, with its salary unit, audit soul, confused many. Even such an ardent defender of the reformer as Pososhkov does not see any use in it and refuses to understand it, “since the soul is an intangible thing and incomprehensible to the mind and has no price: grounded things should be valued,” land ownership. Pososhkov looked at the matter from a national economic point of view, completely alien to Peter I in this matter. There are no souls in the national economy, but only capital and labor; The actual payers could, of course, only be workers, and not old people and infants. Peter had at hand a ready-made model for taxation according to the labor force: this is the Baltic peasant tax, or gak, in which 10 workers were considered from 15 to 60 years old. Peter did not think about rational taxation, but about income-free income. With the performers and financial concepts that he had, no rational system of taxation could be successful. Given the impossibility of sophisticated registration of productive forces, a simple arithmetic calculation of the living cash of the male sex was left, without neglecting the babies born yesterday. The audit soul was such a calculation, appropriation salary unit, purely fictitious. The matter was not about national economic policy, not even about financial policy, but simply about the tax accounting of the Chamber Collegium for the department of salary collections. It was left to the payers themselves to put vital meaning into this fiction, and they invested it over time. The revision soul began to be understood as a certain measure of labor force and means applied by a tax-paying person to the corresponding tax-paying plot of land or trade, with the share of the state tax due to them according to the allocation. In this sense, the peasant speaks about half, a quarter, about the octah of the soul, without thinking of quarreling with psychology.

The poll tax was the successor to the household tax, which was distributed under Peter I according to the outdated census of 1678. The tax fiction, which lasted to this day, could not pass without leaving a trace on the people's consciousness. For two centuries, the tax payer was perplexed about what and from what, in fact, he pays. Pososhkov writes that even the gentlemen of the nobility did not understand what a peasant yard was as a unit of payment: some counted yards by gates, and others by hut smoke, without realizing that a peasant yard was a “land holding”, a plot of land. The audit soul was even more incomprehensible than the tax yard, and no matter what intricate interpretations the people put into such financial institutions, the question remained why the clerks came up with such payers who could not pay for themselves. State service turned into a capricious demand from the authorities. The state, fenced off by the office, moved away from the people, as something special, alien to them: a bad school for instilling a sense of state duty among the people, and Chichikov’s dead souls were a well-deserved epilogue to this “harm of mental exactions,” as the same same man poisonously defined the poll tax Pososhkov. The implementation of Peter I's tax reform strengthened this impression. To justify the capitation tax, a twofold goal was put forward: equalization of subjects in government payments and an increase in government revenues without burdening the people. But the decrees on the poll tax from the peasants did not explain what a revision soul was - whether it was only a counting unit or also a layout unit; Only the decree of 1722 on taxes from the townspeople explained: “And they should make up the cities among themselves according to wealth.” The per capita tax was collected from the rural population according to the exact meaning of its name: it was not only calculated in estimates by the number of souls, but during collection it was distributed directly per person, and not per worker.

There were complaints about “aggravation and inequality among the people,” about the fact that a meager peasant with 3 small sons should pay twice as much as a rich peasant with one son. The uniform leveling tax actually increased the natural inequality of family composition and wealth. It is difficult to determine the severity of the poll tax in comparison with the household tax due to the incommensurability of these salary units and the lack of data. One might think that Manstein, who remembered and heard a lot about Peter’s last years, in his notes conveyed the opinion of his contemporaries about the poll tax, writing that Peter was forced to collect a double tax against the previous one. This is a conclusion taken by eye, and not by precise calculation. Household tax varied extremely by locality and category of payers. The courtyards of the townspeople and palaces were lined more heavily than those of the black fields and churches, and these were heavier than those of the landowners. Moreover, homogeneous households in different regions paid unequally: in the Kazan province, an average of 49 kopecks in salary taxes fell on the landowner's yard, and in the Kyiv province - 1 ruble 21 kopecks. This visible digital inequality partly equalized the differences in local economic conditions. The huge decline in households, revealed by the 1710 census in the central and northern provinces, destroyed all egalitarianism. There, with the ongoing household taxation according to the 1678 census, the surviving households had to pay almost twice, paying for empty households, and in the provinces of Kyiv, Kazan, Astrakhan and Siberian, where there was an increase in households, household payments decreased. Under such complex and even confusing conditions, the poll tax responded differently to different payers: it generally increased the direct tax, but for some only by an insensitive percentage, and for others twice, three times or even more. Average household tax per peasant household in three provinces. Arkhangelsk, Kazan and Kyiv, around 1710 significantly exceeded half of the per capita tax from the average 4-person peasant household (190 and 74x4 = 296 kopecks).

The already most disadvantaged landowner peasants suffered the most. The direct household tax spared them in consideration of their heavy lordly duties. The poll tax fell on them in the same amount as the better-established palace and church peasants, tripling and in some places even quadrupling their salaries. Justice demanded that the landowners proportionately reduce their exactions from the peasants, and this, it seems, was expected by the government. In the interest of equalization, it was proposed to impose an additional payment on top of the general capitation tax on state peasants, free from the master's demands, applying to "how the landowners will receive from their peasants or in some other manner, as is more convenient and without embarrassment to the people." This additional fee was calculated at 40 kopecks. But the landowners did not even think of being content with just 4 hryvnia. On the contrary, the increased costs of service and payment of government duties, which fell on the incomeless servants, the landowners completely and even in excess transferred to their peasants and raised the peasant quitrent to an exorbitant height, taking advantage of the absence of a legal quitrent norm: in the era of revision, according to Pososhkov, from the peasant yard, the landowner received “8 rubles or less,” and the Brunswick resident Weber, who collected good information about her situation during his stay in Russia (1714 - 1719), notes in his notes (Das veranderte Russland), that it was a rare peasant who paid the landowner more than 10 - 12 rubles in rent, therefore, a peasant who paid about 10 rubles was not rare. Taking only 7 rubles and something (60 rubles in our money) for the yard, we find that with a 4-per capita yard, the landowner quitrent was too twice as large as the poll tax and was almost five times higher than 40 kopecks, the normal amount of the landowner quitrent according to the decree.

One can only wonder where the peasants got the money for such payments given the narrow space of monetary peasant earnings at that time, at least half of which was covered by bread or work. This means that the per capita tax, smoothing out old tax irregularities, strengthened or introduced new ones, pulled up the various local and class levels of tax ability that arose from life under one schematic, clerical yardstick, and, in general, significantly aggravated the burden of direct taxation and, thus, did not achieve any of its goals - neither the equalization of government payments, nor the increase in treasury revenues without burdening the people. There is also official, and very clear, evidence of failure to achieve this last goal. In the mentioned statement of the Chamber Collegium of 1726 we read that in 1724 the per capita collection was shortfall by 848 thousand, and this is 18% of the total per capita collection according to the estimate of that year. The Chamber Collegium attached the following plaintive note to its statement: “And about the above-described collection to the Chamber Collegium, governors and vice-governors, and governors, and chamberlains, and zemstvo commissars announce with denunciations and reports: those per capita money for salaries must be collected in full in no way impossible, namely because of the endless peasant poverty and the shortage of grain and the exclusion from salary books written twice and three times and because of the sheer emptiness and the devastation of fire and for the dead and those who ran away unknown and for those recruited and for the elderly and crippled and the blind and orphans young and homeless children from soldiers' uncultivated children." This is like a posthumous certificate issued to Peter for the poll tax by his main financial institution.

Budget 1724

In other taxes, salary and non-salary, the same phenomena were repeated: exaggerated demands of the treasury, inspired by need and the prejudice that money can always be found, and the silent response of the payer - a huge shortfall. The profit-makers were zealous in inventing various duties and levies on trades and lands, and the salaries of taxes of this category from approximately 1.5 million in the first years of the century were raised in 1720 to almost 2.6 million, but the receipts, even minus the excess, amounted to half a million shortfall, almost 20% against the estimate. The financial successes achieved by Peter are revealed from his last revenue budget for 1724, which was made up of the per capita tax, which began to be collected that year, and from other fees, customs, tavern, fishing, etc. From the expenditure budget I will give only the main one article - military expenditure.

Revision souls:

Serfs........................4364653 (78%)

State peasants............1036389 (19%)

Posad people. ........................... 169426 (3%)

Total................................................... .....5570468

From them the capitation(from 40 k.) ...................4614637 rubles

Other income...................................4,040,090 rubles

Total................................................... .....8654727 rubles

Military expenditure:

For the ground forces (from capitation) 4,596,493 rubles

To the fleet……..................................1 200 000

Total................................................... ......5,796,493 rubles

Results of financial reform

These incomplete, minimal figures from the documents of 1724 provide, however, several expressive results of the financial reform; in the reports of subsequent years, the quantities increase, but the proportions change little. The connection of this reform with the military, as its engine, stands out sharply: expenditure on the army and navy reaches 67% of the total estimated income, and in relation to the actual revenues of that year rises to 75.5%. The army began to cost the country much more than it cost 44 years ago, when less than half of the then income was spent on it. Further, the estimated income of 1724 was almost three times higher than the income of the deficit year of 1710. This success was achieved by the per capita tax, which increased the treasury's salary income by more than 2 million. But in the first year, the capitation according to the chamber-college list I mentioned gave a shortfall of 848 thousand. This means that the 15-year struggle with the 1710 deficit of 13% of expenses ended with a shortfall of 18% of the per capita salary, i.e., significant damage to the very weapon of struggle. Thirdly, by the end of his reign Peter was 3 1/2 times richer than his older brother: having transferred the budgets of 1680 and 1724. with our money, we find that the first extended up to 20 million, and the second - up to 70. But Peter became rich due to a sharp change in the tax system: the per capita taxation was bent in the other direction. Before her, direct taxes were inferior to indirect ones (end of lecture LI).

Peter's intense concerns about the development of trade and industry, and national economic turnover gave hope for a further increase in indirect taxation. Something different happened: the capitation gained a decisive advantage, reaching 53% of the estimated income. This means that, with a lack of capital and turnover available for taxation, it was necessary to burden the same bare common labor, the same “working people”, already sufficiently burdened, and in this direction to reach an uncrossable limit. Meanwhile, observers of their own and others got the impression from the state of affairs that given the vastness of the state and its natural wealth, the tsar could have received much more income without the burden of the people. Peter himself thought the same; at least in the regulations of the Chamber College of 1719, an original or borrowed idea was expressed that “there is no state in the world that could not bear the imposed burden, if, however, equality and dignity in taxes and expenses is examined.”

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

In 1724, a general population census was completed in Russia, which did not include clergy and nobles. Based on the results of this event, a tax was determined, which from now on had to be paid by all men in the country, including newborn children and the elderly. The poll tax is a special form of tax levied on certain residents of a country for the benefit of the state treasury. It should be recalled that a similar tax (tax or tax) existed in Rus' since the 15th century; church ministers and the highest privileged classes were also exempt from its payment.

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

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

The gradual increase in government spending could not but affect the amount of tax levied on the common population of the country. By 1794, the poll tax had risen to one ruble. Since the mid-19th century, the amount of tax began to depend entirely on the place of residence of its payer. Residents of cities were required to annually pay a tax to the state in the amount of 2 rubles 61 kopecks. The poll tax of the villagers by this time amounted to 1 ruble 15 kopecks.

For several decades, this type of tax was the main source of state revenue. With the introduction of (surcharge on the price for a product or service), its importance for maintaining the state treasury has decreased significantly. In 1863, the collection of poll taxes from the burghers (lower urban class) and guilds (artisans, craftsmen, their students and assistants) was stopped throughout almost the entire territory of the Russian Empire (with the exception of Siberia and Bessarabia).

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

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

Prerequisites for reform

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

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

The essence of the tax

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

Beginning in 1724, the following per capita tax rates were established:

• 70 kopecks from each person, regardless of his age.
• 1.2 rubles from those who were not peasant dependents.

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

The capitation tax significantly increased budget revenues. In 1725, only about 9 million rubles in taxes were collected, while in the middle of Peter’s reign, about 3 million rubles were collected.

When, with the conquest of Livonia, Estland and Finland, the tension of the Northern War began to weaken, Peter had to think about putting the regular army he created on a peaceful footing. Even after the end of the war, this army had to be kept under arms, in permanent quarters and in government pay, without being sent home, and it was not easy to figure out where to go with it. Peter drew up a sophisticated plan for the quartering and maintenance of his regiments. In 1718, when peace negotiations with Sweden were underway at the Åland Congress, he gave a decree on November 26, stated, according to his habit, in the first words that came to his mind. The first two paragraphs of the decree, with the usual hasty and careless laconicism of Peter’s legislative language, read: “Take fairy tales from everyone, give them a year’s time, so that the truthful ones bring how many male souls there are in each village, declaring to them that whoever hides something, then it will be given to the one who announces it; write down how many souls a private soldier will cost with a share of the company and regimental headquarters for him, putting the average salary." Further, the decree, equally unclear, prescribed the procedure for its execution, threatening the executors with confiscations, cruel sovereign wrath and ruin, even the death penalty, the usual embellishments of Peter’s legislation. […] A one-year deadline was set for submitting tales about souls; but until the end of 1719, fairy tales arrived from only a few places, and then most of them were incorrect. Then the Senate sent guards soldiers to the provinces with instructions to chain the officials who collected the fairy tales and the governors themselves in irons and keep them in chains, not releasing them anywhere until they sent all the fairy tales and the statements compiled from them to the office established for the census in St. Petersburg. Strictness did little to help matters: the presentation of fairy tales was still continuing in 1721. The slowdown was primarily due to the difficulty of understanding the confusing decree, which required a number of explanations and additions. At first it was understood to mean that it concerned only the owning peasants; but then it was ordered that the servants who lived in the villages should be included in the fairy tales, and they demanded additional fairy tales. Another obstacle appeared: sensing that things were leading to a new heavy tax, the owners or their clerks wrote their hearts out, “with great secrecy.” By the beginning of 1721, more than 20 thousand hidden souls had been revealed. […] Finally, with the help of the strictest decrees, torture, confiscations, which lubricated the rusty wheels of the government machine, by the beginning of 1722, according to fairy tales, 5 million souls were counted. […] A secondary revision of fairy tales revealed a huge secret of souls, reaching in some places up to half of the available souls. The initially calculated fabulous figure of 5 million became impossible to guide when deploying regiments on a heart-to-heart basis. […] The auditors were ordered to “completely” finish their work and return to the capital by the beginning of 1724, when Peter ordered the start of the poll collection. None of them returned on time, and all notified the Senate in advance that the matter would not be completed by January 1724; they were extended until March, and the correct poll tax was postponed until 1725. The reformer did not wait six years for the end of the work he had undertaken: the auditors did not return even by January 28, 1725, when he closed his eyes. […]

http://magister.msk.ru/library/history/kluchev/kllec63.htm

The capitation census completed the cruel simplification of the social composition carried out by Peter's orders: all intermediate layers were, without attention to the existing law, squeezed into two main rural states - state peasants and serfs, and the first of these states included single-lords, black-mown peasants, Tatars, Yasash and Siberian arable servicemen, spearmen, reiters, dragoons, etc. The area of ​​serfdom has expanded significantly, but has serfdom suffered any changes in its legal composition? […] The lack of law opened up wide scope for practice, that is, for the arbitrariness of the strongest party - the landowners.

[…] The state of serfdom was addressed to Peter not by its legal side, but only by its fiscal side, and here he well understood his official interest. […] But Peter imposed a tax on the right of slave ownership, imposing a state tax on every male slave soul under the responsibility of the owner. Peter thought about his treasury, and not about people's freedom, he was looking not for citizens, but for tax-payers, and the per capita census gave him more than one hundred thousand new tax-payers, although with great damage to law and justice. For all its apparent financial irrationality, capitation taxation, however, in the 18th century. had a beneficial effect on agriculture. […] Since the time of Peter, the poll tax, detached from the land, tied peasant labor more and more tightly to the land. Thanks to the poll tax, not only to her, but in any case to her. Russian land in the 18th century. swung open like it had never swung open before. This is the meaning of the poll tax: while not being a revolution in law, it was an important turn in the national economy.

Klyuchevsky V.O. Russian history. Full course of lectures. M., 2004. http://magister.msk.ru/library/history/kluchev/kllec63.htm

INTRODUCTION OF THE CAPITAL TAX

From 1678 to 1724 there was household taxation. This meant that the unit of taxation for peasants and townspeople was the “yard”. In other words, census takers traveled around villages and towns and recorded not the people themselves, but the number of households in which they lived. Thus, for each settlement or land holding (votchina or estate), and then for the county, a so-called “yard number” was formed, which formed the basis of all tax calculations.

During the years of the Northern War, taxes and duties grew continuously and at the end of Peter's reign they became very heavy for the peasants. Many payers abandoned their farms, yards and fled to the Don, abroad, to other possessions. A “loss of households” began to form. It was technically very difficult to keep a record of empty, “declining yards.”

In 1710, the authorities nevertheless conducted a new household census, but the expected result – an increase in the “household number” in comparison with the previous census of 1678 – did not happen. On the contrary, it decreased by 20%! In 1715, it was decided to conduct another census. And again, failure - the “yard number” did not exceed the previous value. It is noteworthy that his officials began to receive information that the “yard decline” was caused not only by the flight or high mortality rate of the peasants, but also by their stubborn reluctance to bear heavy duties. This was evident from the fact that the number of households did not increase, but the population of the courtyard meanwhile grew. This meant that peasant families were not divided as before, and young peasants did not build their own courtyards, but lived in the courtyard of their parents. And all this was done in order to avoid paying taxes.

As a radical measure, Peter I decided to change the principle of taxation and make the unit of taxation not the “yard”, but the “male soul”. It is important that Peter I decided to carry out tax reform simultaneously with the reform of the maintenance of the army. An army of 200,000, huge at that time, returned to the country after the war, and it had to be placed somewhere and supported with some money. And here Peter I again resorted to the Swedish experience. For a long time, Swedish soldiers lived in those areas where their regiments received money for their maintenance. It was convenient - money from payers went directly to the cash registers of the regiments assigned to them. Peter I decided to reproduce this system.

On November 26, 1718, a decree was issued to conduct a capitation census in the country. All landowners and elders submitted registers, or, as they said then, “fairy tales,” indicating the number of men living in each village, hamlet, and estate. During 1719, the tales were mostly collected. But the authorities became aware of numerous facts of fraud: every third payer avoided the census. Then they decided to assemble special military teams and conduct a check, or, as they said then, an “audit,” of the number of male souls.

Checking the population turned out to be a difficult task, and the work of the auditors dragged on until 1724. As a result, by 1724 it became known about 5 million 656 thousand male souls. By this time, calculations had already been made for the maintenance of the army. According to the 1720 project, the cost for a cavalryman was 40 rubles, and for an infantryman - 28.5 rubles; in general, expenses for the entire army reached 4 million rubles. The amount of tax per head was determined by dividing 4 million rubles by 5.6 million souls. It turned out that the poll tax amounted to 74 kopecks. This is how the capitation system began its long (over 150 years) history. It was convenient for the authorities - dozens of taxes and taxes were immediately cancelled, and there were fewer problems with collecting and sending taxes to the center. The regiments were located in those districts from which they received money. Regimental officers, together with zemstvo commissars selected from local nobles, collected the capitation directly into the regimental treasury. In general, the poll tax was not heavier than the household tax, but it still turned out to be very painful for the payers. They, as before, had to pay for the dead, those who fled, and the sick. After all, the next check of fairy tales - a revision - after 1724 was organized only in 1742! The soldiers began to settle in villages, which caused more trouble for the peasants. In addition, with the introduction of the poll tax, state control over its subjects increased. After all, everyone should be written down in fairy tales; it became difficult for the peasant to go out to earn money. There was no need to talk about leaving for a new place of residence or work, since until the next revision it was forbidden to leave those places where peasants were recorded in fairy tales. The tax reform of Peter I - the introduction of the poll tax - had a colossal impact not only on finances, but also on the social structure of the population.

We are Peter the First Emperor and Autocrat of All Russia, and so on and so forth and so forth.

We have already indicated that all army and garrison regiments, both from the qualeria and the infantry, should be distributed according to the number of male souls, and supported by money collected from those souls, and for that purpose, to select zemstvo commissars by the landowner himself, among himself from the best people, one by one or two. And how did the colonel, and the officer, and also the commissar in collecting money: and in other matters, they were ordered to do so, instructions were given to them, and for the people's information, so that no offense or ruin would be caused to anyone from them, and from above I decree nothing They didn’t take it, and by our decree we ordered that it be announced to the people.

1. Why is per capita money required?

From each male soul, which, according to the current correspondence and according to the testimony of the staff officers, appeared to the zemstvo commissar, the zemstvo commissar was ordered to collect seventy four kopecks for the year, and for the third of the year, twenty-five kopecks for the first and second, and twenty-four kopecks for the third: and what’s more, they don’t have any money or grain taxes or carts, and they are not guilty of paying; except for money, as in the subsequent 7th paragraph it is announced: and for such matters, these decrees are signed by our Imperial Majesty’s hand, or by the hands of the entire Senate, and printed decrees will be published among the people.

2. At what time should you collect the per capita money?

It was ordered to collect that money for three terms. Namely: the first third in January and February, the second in March and April, the third in October and November, leaving nothing for milking, so that in the summer months the farmers would be busy working, and the regiments would have no shortage of salaries.

Poster about poll tax and other things on June 26, 1724 // Russian legislation of the 10th–20th centuries. In 9 volumes. T.4. Legislation during the formation of absolutism. Rep. ed. A.G. Mankov. M., 1986. pp. 202–203. http://www.hist.msu.ru/ER/Etext/taxes.htm

THE MAIN REASON FOR THE SCARY INCOME

Since the main reason for the scarcity of income was abuses during the census of households, Peter decided to introduce a capitation census. On January 22, 1719, a decree was issued: for the sake of favoring army regiments among the peasants of the entire state, take tales about male souls in all provinces; for hiding the souls of clerks, elders and elected people, the death penalty without any mercy. January 19, 1720, a new decree: although fairy tales are sent, only peasants are written in them, but courtyard servants and others are not written, which could be the same secret as in the courtyards, and therefore everyone who lives in the villages should be written. On December 16 of the same year, a new decree: the deadline for submitting fairy tales was set for July 20, and all the fairy tales were not submitted, the Landrats and Commissars write that the landowners, their people and peasants do not submit fairy tales, they are running from their yards and hiding, as a result of which those who disobeyed the decree are to be written off villages, and send them out to be searched. The decree of March 15, 1721 says that informers revealed the concealment of up to 20,000 souls, and therefore it was ordered to tell all landowners to announce the concealment without any fear, the guilty will not be punished, otherwise they will be punished according to previous decrees.

CENSUS OF TAXABLE POPULATION AND ITS VERIFICATION – “AUDIT”

Before Peter, direct taxes were levied either on cultivated land or on the yard. Peter introduced a poll tax instead of land and household taxes. According to the latest research, it happened like this: Peter wanted to place the army in permanent quarters in various provinces and entrust the maintenance of the regiments to the population of the district where the regiment was stationed. To do this, it was deemed necessary to calculate the amount necessary to maintain the regiment, list all tax-paying persons in the district and calculate how much money each person was required to contribute for the maintenance of the army. From 1718 to 1722, a census of the tax-paying population was carried out and its verification - “audit”; At first they wrote peasants and arable serfs, then they began to write non-arable dependent people in “fairy tales”; finally, they began to record “walking” (not assigned to classes) people. This census received the official name of a revision, and the censused people were called “revision souls.” Every revision soul was subject to the same tax, and responsibility for the correct receipt of the tax was placed on the landowner. Thus, the landowner received completely equal power over both the peasant and the slave. Here lay the basis for the de facto equation of peasants and slaves that followed.

In the hayfield. Prokudin-Gorsky. 1909

Capitation tax

Capitation tax - basic direct tax in the XVIII-XIX centuries. Introduced after Peter I 28 DK 1718-1724 per capita census- taking into account the male population for the transition to "population" and abandonment household taxation, existing since 1649 . Peter I issued a decree about this 24 JAN 1722, and the right to collect taxes was transferred landowners. Since that time, population censuses have been called audits.

Unit of taxation - soul. Charged from all men tax-paying classes any age. By the way, according to Slavophiles Serfdom was introduced by Peter I, who established the poll tax. The tax was for the landowners, monastic And palace peasants - 74 cop., For state peasants - 1 rub.14 ​​kopecks, for townspeople (merchants And artisans) - 1 rub. 20 kopecks. The introduction of this system made it possible to increase the total amount collected taxes 4 times. Wanting to strengthen the sole power Biron E.I. V 1740 reduced the poll tax by 17 kopecks. However, besides it, there were up to 40 species indirect taxes, as well as straight lines - recruiting, dragoons, ship and special "dues". Taxes were also imposed " walking people" And serfs. This category peasants, formed as a result of taxation reforms, will include black-growing peasants North, odnodvortsev southern counties, arable people of Siberia, Yasashnykh people of the Middle Volga region with a total population of 1 million.

To ensure the collection of taxes, as well as to make it difficult for peasants to flee, the government introduces passport system- every peasant who went to work more than 30 versts from his permanent place of residence, d.b. have a passport indicating the date of return home. Anyone who did not have a passport was subject to detention and interrogation personalities V voivodeship office. By decree Elizaveta Petrovna from 1741 all arrears for 17 years were forgiven, and in 1742 And 1743 The per capita tax was temporarily reduced by 10 kopecks. But indirect taxes have been increased - incl. prices for salt and wine. 3 MY 1783 capitation tax and serfdom were also extended to the territory Ukraine. After the introduction of the capitation tax, the concealment of “souls” became widespread. During the investigation, the sotskys and tens later showed that “they didn’t write those hidden in cash for the great scarcity”, that they had to pay capitation money the peasants are unable to. During the second audit in Komi region, they discovered many “souls” hidden during the first audit.

So, in Uzhginskaya, Koygorodskaya and Grivenskaya 235 male souls were hidden in the volosts, 45 souls in the Priluz volost, in Votchinskaya- 39 souls, etc. Peasants of Kiberskaya, Mezhadorskaya, Vizingskaya, Votchinskaya and a number of other volosts in 1730 did not begin to pay increased Yamskie money. Peasant electors, sotskys and zemstvos kissers of these volosts, who gathered for a general council in the Pyeldinsky volost, refusing to pay them, declared: “They will not pay such deyam money... and we do not believe the same decree.” In the first half of the 19th century. capitation tax respect merchants has already been replaced by the collection of "interest on capital". For the rest, it was still accrued based on each male soul recorded according to the corresponding audit. For example, starting from 1795 , the per capita tax from the peasants of the Komi region was already collected in full - 1.02 rubles. per soul per year. 18 DK 1797 by decree Paul I the annual salary of the capitation tax increased to 1.28 rubles. (including 2 kopecks for tax collection). At Alexandra I main size state taxes apparently continued to increase.

By manifesto from 2 FV 1810 it began to be charged in the amount of 2 rubles. from the audit soul and according to the manifesto from 11 FW 1812- 3 rub. from the heart. From the 1790s to 1812, formally, the per capita tax from the peasants of the Komi region increased from 0.72 to 3 rubles, i.e. almost 4.2 times. During the same time, outwardly no less noticeable, the main class tax from the state peasants of the region - the quitrent tax - increased. It was calculated and collected according to the same principle as the poll tax, i.e. by half-year, per audit person. Tax "on the maintenance of public places" in 1807 was charged in the amount of 0.18 rubles, per 1808 - 0.27 rub. from the heart. A similar situation occurred with the special levy “for the establishment of water and land communications,” which, according to the decree of 25 OK 1816 was determined at 0.25 rubles. from the heart 22 MR 1818- increased to 0.3 rub. and officially attached to the poll tax. Additions to the per capita tax salary followed in 1862 - due to the introduction of a “temporary tax”. He was appointed from 1863 differentiated by county of the country.

In Mezensky, Ust-Sysolsky and Yarensky districts of the Komi region, the “temporary fee” was determined at 12 kopecks. (in calculations credit rub.). However, in N. 1863 followed by a decree exempting “from additional poll tax all rural inhabitants of the Arkhangelsk and Yekaterinburg provinces, Solvychegodsk, Ust-Sysolsk and Yarensky districts of the Vologda province and Cherdyn district of the Perm province.” Therefore, the peasants of the Komi region paid the poll tax, until its abolition in 1886 , in the same size, i.e. 1 rub. from the revision soul of the item, taken into account according to the X revision in 1858-1859. The poll tax was canceled canceled Alexander II 18 MAY 1887 and replaced by other taxes. 9 FW 1897 A one-day population census was conducted. According to the Central Statistical Committee, the population Russia in 1897 it was 128.2 million. Human. 13 DK 1926 A new All-Union population census began.

Vizinga Power Political power Voivode Votcha (Volsya) State peasants State Griva Walking people Palace peasants Denga Money Desyatsky Dragoons Soul Zyryans Price index Capital Kopek Indirect taxation Credit (loan, loan) Credit cards (credit cards) Serfdom Peasants Merchants Personality Manifesto Monastery Taxes Odnodvortsy