Russian peasant farming has been leading its history since the period of Stolypin's reforms in 1906. It was his ideas that largely formed the basis of the new agrarian policy of perestroika Russia, when domestic agriculture came to a new stage in its development. In 1990, after a long period of collective farms and state farms, they again spoke of private peasant farms. At the same time, an appropriate legal framework was established to regulate their work. Today, the legal basis for peasant farms is Federal Law No. 74-FZ of June 11, 2003 (as amended on December 25, 2012).
By stimulating the rise of agriculture, the government supports the creation and growth of peasant associations. In many regions, land for farming is provided free of charge, initial subsidies and soft loans for development are allocated. Nevertheless, far from everyone who lives on the labor of the earth decides to officially register their activities. In many ways, obtaining income from a personal garden is more affordable and profitable.
One of the first pitfalls awaiting a young peasant-farm economy is the lack of status of this association of citizens. Under the terms of the 1990 Law, peasant farms were registered as legal entities. Today this requirement has been canceled, only the head of the farm is executed by the entrepreneur, while remaining an individual. But when reporting, the rules established for legal entities still apply. There is confusion, exacerbated by the fact that many previously established farms did not change their status (this is permissible).
The division of property shares in a situation where one of the participants leaves the peasant farm is also problematic. More precisely, such an option is not foreseen at all; only monetary compensation is assumed that is proportional to the contribution made. The division of property is permissible only when all its members leave the peasant farm, completely ceasing its activities. Obviously, the risk of losing their property stops potential farmers.
Significant legal difficulties are encountered by members of the peasant economy in the event of the sudden death of their head. Answers to questions about how in this case to be with the share of the deceased, how to re-register the economy and its property, remain largely ill-conceived.
Another major issue: social support. On the one hand, members of the peasant farm receive the right to a social package in full. These are seniority, pension accruals, medical insurance policy, payment of sick leave and annual leave, payments for pregnancy and childcare, etc. However, in practice, people run into problems. So, for example, peasant farming submits reports once a year. And to confirm income in USPN it is necessary to provide data for 3 or 6 months. Due to this discrepancy, many farm members cannot receive legal benefits and payments. This is also the reason for the unpopularity of peasant farms among the population.
The wording of the types of activities that can be engaged in peasant farming is also causing many questions. According to the text of Art. 19 of Law No. 74-FZ, the main activities should be the production and processing of self-produced agricultural products. However, this provides relative freedom in the selection of additional activities that do not always coincide with the main ones. At the same time, their specific enumeration is not regulated anywhere. Consequently, each region is free to interpret in its own way whether it is permissible for the peasant farm to create, for example, a canning workshop, an atelier for sewing fur products or producing wool yarn. Indeed, in fact, all such types of activities may be considered processing of agricultural products, or may not be recognized as such.
Due to such flaws in the legal rules governing the activities of farms, many do not decide on the official registration of entrepreneurship, preferring to derive income only from personal holdings. Of course, the prospects are less, but the responsibility is not so terrible.