@ARTICLE{26583261_44956822_2011, author = {I. Lagutin}, keywords = {, financial control, regional financial control, principles of regional financial controlssubjects of the Russian Federation}, title = {New Law on Audit Bodies in Russia's Regions and Municipalities: Features and Prospects }, journal = {}, year = {2011}, number = {3}, pages = {66-74}, url = {https://law-journal.hse.ru/en/2011--3/44956822.html}, publisher = {}, abstract = {Lagutin Igor  - Assistant Professor, Department of Financial Law, Law faculty,National Research University Higher School of Economics, PhD (law). E-mail: lagutinigor81@mail.ruAddress: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation.The aim of the article is to characterize the Federal Law On General Principles of Organizing and Activity of Audit Bodies in the RF Federal Subjects and Municipalities. The focal points of the article are: 1) evaluating originality and usefulness of the act which is the first to introduce single principles for audit bodies in the RF federal subjects and municipalities, 2) the comparative analysis of normative clauses of this law and the applicable laws in the RF regions. It is noted that the acting audit bodies have unequal legal status, number of employees, financing etc., which is an obstacle for an efficient financial control over public budgets in the regions. Some of such bodies are autonomous and have a legal status, others are the branches or offices of legislative bodies. As the advantages of the law, the author mentions the codification of the basic and special powers of the bodies in question. As to the disadvantages, the author arranges them in five groups. First, this is the general nature of its norms, inappropriate ambiguities in wording. Second, the principles of the activity of the audit bodies are discussed in the law separately without sufficient division and the definitions given relate only to the second group of principles. Thirdly, the law does not specify any relevant principles of the liability in the bodies. Fourth, the author sees nothing new in the law as to the structure of the bodies, and the concept of the performance of audit. In this regard, the federal law looks inferior to the legislative in some RF regions, in particular Perm, Kaluga, Nizhniy Novgorod. Finally, the law contains an excessive number of recommendations and references to the acts of regional and municipal levels. The latter will decrease the efficiency of its provisions.}, annote = {Lagutin Igor  - Assistant Professor, Department of Financial Law, Law faculty,National Research University Higher School of Economics, PhD (law). E-mail: lagutinigor81@mail.ruAddress: National Research University — Higher School of Economics, 20, Myasnitskaya str., Moscow, 101000, Russian Federation.The aim of the article is to characterize the Federal Law On General Principles of Organizing and Activity of Audit Bodies in the RF Federal Subjects and Municipalities. The focal points of the article are: 1) evaluating originality and usefulness of the act which is the first to introduce single principles for audit bodies in the RF federal subjects and municipalities, 2) the comparative analysis of normative clauses of this law and the applicable laws in the RF regions. It is noted that the acting audit bodies have unequal legal status, number of employees, financing etc., which is an obstacle for an efficient financial control over public budgets in the regions. Some of such bodies are autonomous and have a legal status, others are the branches or offices of legislative bodies. As the advantages of the law, the author mentions the codification of the basic and special powers of the bodies in question. As to the disadvantages, the author arranges them in five groups. First, this is the general nature of its norms, inappropriate ambiguities in wording. Second, the principles of the activity of the audit bodies are discussed in the law separately without sufficient division and the definitions given relate only to the second group of principles. Thirdly, the law does not specify any relevant principles of the liability in the bodies. Fourth, the author sees nothing new in the law as to the structure of the bodies, and the concept of the performance of audit. In this regard, the federal law looks inferior to the legislative in some RF regions, in particular Perm, Kaluga, Nizhniy Novgorod. Finally, the law contains an excessive number of recommendations and references to the acts of regional and municipal levels. The latter will decrease the efficiency of its provisions.} }