резюме_ПС_английский_26 10 2018 (1138458), страница 2
Текст из файла (страница 2)
Yuzhakov // Public Administration Issues. – 2015. –№ 4. – P. 41-64.10Chaplinsiy, A.V. Risk management in the implementation of state control in Russia / A. V.Chaplinsky, S. M. Plaksin // Public Administration Issues. – 2016. – № 2. – С. 7-29.11Tamarov, P. A. Management of intraday liquidity: optimization of payments and regulation / P.A.Tamarov / / Banking.
– 2015. – № 1. – P. 28-33.7Issues of supervision in the national payment system are considered exclusivelyfrom a legal point of view. They does not examine the methodology of supervision inpayment systems 12 . Thus, the implementation of risk-based supervision of paymentinfrastructure services operators is extremely relevant.The international empirical studies allows to determine the following factors thataffect the smooth functioning of payment systems: external factors, considering theimpact of macroeconomic parameters on the volume of transfer through the paymentsystem 13 and internal parameters for evaluation of the transfers in the payment system 14.These two groups of factors are important for assessing the level of risk of paymentinfrastructure service providers, but cannot be analyzed in detail due to the lack ofstatistics.The above studies are largely based on theories that study the asymmetry ofinformation, in particular the theory of adverse selection, as well as the theory of moralhazard.
Mechanisms of payment systems’ supervision can also be viewed in the contextof Supervisory control theory (Ramadge–Wonham). In addition, there are theoreticalmodels that consider the impact of transfers within the payment system on a number ofmacroeconomic parameters, in particular, inflation 15 . Thus, to classify paymentinfrastructure service providers according to the level of risk, it is necessary to take intoaccount their dependence on external factors.
It is also worth mentioning that J. Tiroleand J. Rochet conducted a comprehensive theoretical analysis of risks in the field ofpayment systems, considered the role of the Central Bank in assessing the financialsolvency of the participants of the payment system, operators. One of the idea of theirstudy was the confirmation that the Central Bank should control the stability of thepayment infrastructure.12Gridchin, V. A. Supervision and oversight of the national payment system: the activities of the Bankof Russia for the Central Federal District / V. A. Gridchin // Money and credit. – 2016. – № 10. – P.16-19.13For example, Hasan, R.
S. Retail payments and the real economy – Frankfurt am Main: EuropeanCentral Bank, 2013.14For example, Belousov, V. G., money and credit / V. M., Usoskin, V., Belousov, V., liquidityRegulation as a factor of payment systems development. – 2014. – №3. – P. 57-64.15Geanakoplos, D. Credit cards and inflation / D. Geanakoplos // New Haven: Cowles foundationPaper – 2011. – № 1330. – p. 325-353.8In terms of different approaches, in the dissertation research, statisticallysignificant indicators of sustainability of payment infrastructure service operators areempirically determined.1.4.Data descriptionAs already mentioned, two groups of indicators have been identified for empiricalanalysis: financial and institutional.
It was used the dataset of the Information AgencyMobile, information from the website of the Bank of Russia, as well as data from theSPARK database were used. Part of the statistical database was collected by the authoron the basis of information provided in the Register of operators of payment systems, aswell as taken from the Rules of payment systems. The financial indicators were alsosupplemented by data from the Bank of Russia.Based on the data collected, a binary panel regression and two logistic regressionswere constructed. In addition to econometric modeling, the study conducted a legalanalysis of the regulatory system in this area.2. The content of the dissertation2.1.
Factors of sustainability of payment systemsFederal law No. 161-FZ of 27.06.2011 «On the national payment system»contains minimum requirements for payment infrastructure service providers. At thesame time, article 16 of this Federal law establishes that the operator of the paymentsystem independently determines the financial and technological requirements for thepayment infrastructure service providers.
As a result the operators of payment systemsset different requirements. The application of such requirements does not always ensurethe sustainability of the payment infrastructure services operator. Moreover, the lawcontains a minimum list of requirements for payment system operators and paymentinfrastructure service providers aimed at assessing their financial condition. Forexample, this Federal law establishes that an organization that is not a credit institution9and wants to become an operator of the payment system must have net assets of at least10 million rubles.The international experience of the European Central Bank and the FederalReserve System demonstrates the feasibility of applying financial indicators such as theauthorized capital, net assets, equity, cash and liquid assets.
The volume of currencyassets and the value of securities can be used as indicators of liquid assets.The key role of institutional indicators influence is confirmed in theoreticalstudies. In particular, the sustainability of the payment infrastructure services operator isaffected by the availability of services, for example, intraday credit. If the operator ofthe payment system at an early stage has identified the requirements for the availabilityof intraday credit, such operators will demonstrate greater sustainability. The significantexternal indicator is the category information payment system (nationally important,socially important and systemically important).
The importance of the payment systemis determined based on the amount of funds transferred through the payment system, aswell as the number of transfers. The analysis of empirical studies demonstrated therelationship between the external macroeconomic environment and the state of paymentsystems. The stability of the payment infrastructure services operator will be affected bymodel of risk management, as well as the structure of the payment system. Thus, thepresented study focuses on financial and institutional indicators.2.2. Binary probit regression estimates of the factors of sustainability of paymentinfrastructure service providersTo assess the significance of financial and institutional indicators, twoeconometric models were constructed: a model with financial variables and a modelwith institutional variables. The model based on financial indicators allowed to define aset of financial indicators and their target values.
The model, taking into account theinstitutional characteristics of the payment system, allows to determine itsorganizational aspects that have an impact on the stability of the payment infrastructureservices operator.10The fact of registration in the Register of payment system operators is indicator ofsustainability. Accordingly, the sustainability s can be associated with data about theexception from the Registry of operators of payment systems. If the operator wasexcluded from the Registry, the value of this indicator for the operator was equal to – 1,if not excluded – 0.
It was also necessary to assess the target values of indicators thatguarantee the sustainability. For financial indicators, as well as for the indicator ofexperience, the variables reflecting the target values of indicators were selected. Thesignificance of the dummy variables, in addition to the significance of the financialindicator, will determine the required target value.Model with financial variablesThis model is based on annual statistical data from 2014 to 2017 16 .Thefinancial model includes the following indicators (table 1), taking into account the targetvalues of indicators. In total, the financial indicators were divided into 3 main groups:liquidity indicators, indicators of asset quality, indicators of liabilities. Data on threegroups of these indicators were taken from the Bank of Russia website, Mobile database,and SPARK Agency data.Table 1 – System of financial indicators reflecting the stability of the operator'sparticipant in the payment system, million rublesVariable nameForeign currencyMinimum valueMedium valueLiquidity indicatorMaximum valueMore 3000More 6000More 9000More 1000More 2000More 3000assetsCashIndicators of asset qualityNet assetsMore 2000More 6000More 4000Authorized capitalMore 100More 200More 300Net profitMore 0More 50More 100Indicators of liabilities16The period from 2014 was chosen because the first exceptions to the Register of payment systemoperators were made in 2014.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
