What are the contributions to snt. Targeted contributions to SNT. Differences from membership fees, principle of collection, size. Who can create TSN

HOW TO CORRECT THE ERROR IN THE NAME OF THE OWNER IN THE LAND STATEMENT DOCUMENT? A client turned to us for help in connection with a refusal to state registration his ownership of the garden plot. Can SNT take a plot from its owner? The owner, having arrived at his land plot, found that the locks on the entrance gates, in the house and in the garage had been changed. When the gardener turned to the chairman of SNT, the latter explained that the land plot was returned to the ownership of SNT based on the decision of the general meeting of SNT members and sold to another person on conditions favorable to SNT. Surprisingly, this is not a fictional and completely real story.

Membership and earmarked contributions to a horticultural partnership under the new law

As you can see, the target contribution is set only for the acquisition (creation) of public facilities. If the target contribution is set for you for other purposes (covering legal costs, a bonus to the chairman of the board of SNT, tax on common land, organizing a harvest holiday, etc.), the establishment of such a contribution is illegal! So, representing the interests of the defendant-gardener in one of the cases, we achieved a refusal in the claim to recover from him in favor of SNT a targeted contribution to cover the legal costs of SNT incurred by the partnership in litigation with other gardeners. 2. Who is obliged to pay the earmarked contribution? The Law on Horticultural Associations provides that joining the SNT is voluntary.

Therefore, those gardeners who did not want to become a member of SNT are gardening on the territory of SNT in individually.

How not to pay snt contributions

It states that the owners of land plots intended for gardening or truck farming must carry out mandatory procedures to determine the boundaries of the plots. It is necessary to complete the survey procedure by the end of 2018. Therefore, it is not worth panicking now, the Russians still have 1 year left to carry out land surveying.
You can do without the land survey procedure if:

The land was registered as property.
Problems with neighbors are not foreseen - they will not figure out where the border between your sites should pass.
There are no plans to make transactions with such real estate.

In other cases, land surveying is simply necessary. It will be possible to register the ownership of real estate - or to make any transaction with it - in 2018, but you will only have to go through the obligatory procedure to determine the boundaries of the site.

Payment of membership fees in snt

A member of the organization, according to Article 12 of the same law, can be:

Only individuals.
Owners of plots intended for horticultural or horticultural activities and located within the boundaries of the territory of SNT or ONT. You should have with you the relevant documents confirming the ownership of the site.
Persons who wrote personal statements to the board of the partnership. The document should contain the applicant's initials, residence address, postal address where a letter can be sent, and email and agreement to comply with the organization's charter.

Do not forget that the SNT or ONT bodies must, within 3 months, issue the applicant with a membership card or other documentation that confirms membership in the partnership.
In case of refusal, the applicant must be informed that membership has been refused.

Membership dues to snt law 2018

Note that to create a SNT or ONT, a minimum of 3 votes of citizens acting as founders are required. The decision must be made at the general meeting of the owners. The bodies of the partnership include:

Chairman.
General meeting.
Revision Commission.

Initially, a sole proprietor is formed in the partnership. executive agency- chairman.

He is the initiator of the partnership. Further, a permanent acting collegial executive body is formed - the board of the partnership. Important: the partnership must include at least 7 people! In addition, the meeting should draw up a list of members who will be united in new organization, indicating the full name, title documents and cadastral numbers of all sites.

Snt membership fee

To do this, you must meet the requirements:

Have the infrastructure of a cottage village.
Placed within the boundaries of the settlement.
All households must be classified as residential.
The type of permitted use of land must be changed to individual housing construction for each owner.

It will be easy to get a residence permit in such a village. News about membership fees in SNT and taxes in 2018 - what are the changes for the wallets of summer residents, and what to expect in the future? Let's talk about the innovations that relate to the financial side:

The most main news for all gardeners and gardeners - the entrance fees were canceled.

How much to pay membership fees in snt to the owner of two plots?

In confirmation of the receipt of funds, the payer is issued a receipt for the incoming cash order (clause 5.1 of the Bank of Russia Ordinance No. 3210-U dated 11.03.2014 "On the procedure for maintaining cash transactions legal entities and a simplified procedure for conducting cash transactions individual entrepreneurs and small businesses "). If the accountant, when accepting funds, does not issue a receipt for the cash receipt, then the gardener will not be able to confirm that the contributions were paid to him. The fact is that the confirmation of the transfer of funds can only be a written document, in this case, a receipt.
Testimony or oral assurances do not confirm the transfer of money. How much to pay membership fees to SNT to the owner of two plots? Thank you, Tatyana, for a quick response and, most importantly, a correct one, in accordance with the law.

Features of the new law on garden and horticultural partnerships - 2019

Based on the definition of the targeted contribution (Article 1 of the Law on Horticultural Associations), targeted contributions are paid only by members of the SNT. In practice, questions often arise about what contributions an individual gardener should pay, should an individual gardener pay a targeted contribution? An individual gardener is not obliged to pay either targeted or any other fees that are set in the SNT. The law only provides for the right of such gardeners to take part in the costs of purchasing (creating) public facilities.
In this case, the amount of payment for the use of such property cannot exceed the amount of payment for such gardeners, which is established for members of SNT (Article 8 of the Law on Horticultural Associations). The only thing that you are obliged to pay as an individual gardener is a fee for using public facilities on the basis of an agreement concluded with SNT. 3.
What kind of associations do you need to transform into? NEW LAW ON SNT AND GARDENERS Fight against share withdrawal joint company from the spousal section and assets by an unscrupulous founder ( The Director General) 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 reduced prices. Has the project for the organization and development of the SNT territory been canceled? In connection with the numerous questions of gardeners, our lawyers for SNT clarify the question of whether it is possible to organize the territory of SNT (other gardening and summer cottage non-profit associations of citizens), as well as to divide the land plot of such an association, use a document such as "Organization and Development Project" or is it finally canceled? The floor is given to our country lawyers.

Payment of membership fees in snt under the new law

Info

What buildings are being built on garden plots? On such land, only non-capital buildings and structures are allowed. They cannot be registered as property - even if they look like an object of capital construction. Remember that non-capital buildings are built without a foundation.

They can be demolished / moved / disassembled. Self-construction of the object is possible capital construction on a plot intended for gardening. But it will not work just to issue a real residential building according to the documents - it will be considered a barn, or another outbuilding. It will be possible to register it only if the type of permitted use of land changes.
Registration in SNT in 2018 and 2019 - changes in the law on garden partnerships, myths and reality It is possible to register in SNT both now and in 2018.

Payment of membership fees to snt under the new law on gardeners

What are dacha or garden associations for: SNT, DNT, garden or dacha cooperatives? First of all, to create comfortable conditions for the use of their personal land plots, summer cottages, garden houses. To meet their needs in passage, travel, water supply and sewerage, 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, playgrounds and sports grounds, waste collection areas, fire fighting and similar structures.

In SNT1, such common property is created (acquired) at the expense of earmarked contributions. The law, establishing the obligation of SNT members to participate in the creation of common property, regulates the procedure for establishing targeted contributions and their payment.

Hello.

You have the right to leave SNT and conclude an agreement with them for this you need to contact the chairman.

According to Article 8 of the Federal Law of 15.04.1998 N 66-FZ (as amended on 03.07.2016) "On horticultural, horticultural and suburban non-profit associations of citizens"

8. Conducting gardening, truck farming or dacha farming on an individual basis

1. Citizens have the right to carry out gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis.
2. Citizens engaged in gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis on the territory of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association have the right to use infrastructure facilities and other common property of a horticultural, vegetable garden or dacha non-profit association for a fee on the terms of contracts concluded with such an association in writing in the manner specified general meeting members of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association.
In the event of non-payment of the contractual fees for the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or summer cottage non-profit association on the basis of a decision of the board of such an association or a general meeting of its members, citizens engaged in gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis are deprived of the right to use the facilities infrastructure and other common property of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association. Failure to pay for the use of infrastructure and other common property of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association shall be collected in court.
Citizens engaged in gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis on the territory of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association, can appeal to the court against decisions of the board of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or summer cottage non-profit association or a general meeting of its members on refusal to conclude contracts on the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of such an association.
The amount of payment for the use of infrastructure facilities and other common property of a horticultural, horticultural or dacha non-profit association for citizens engaged in gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis, provided that they make contributions for the acquisition (creation) of the specified property cannot exceed the amount of the payment for use of the specified property for the members of such an association.

You can appeal all illegal decisions of the SNT board or the general meeting of its members to refuse to conclude agreements on the use of infrastructure facilities of such an association in court.

Was the lawyer's answer helpful? + 0 - 0

Resolving the stated requirements, guided by the provisions of Art. 1102 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Article 8 of the Federal Law of<дата>No. 66-FZ "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha non-profit associations of citizens" (hereinafter - Law No. 66-FZ), taking into account the explanations given in the Review judicial practice on issues arising from the consideration of cases related to horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha non-profit associations for 2010-2013 (approved by the Presidium The Supreme Court RF<дата>), the court of first instance came to a well-founded conclusion that the requirements of SNT were satisfied, since the need to participate in the partnership's expenses for the maintenance of infrastructure by a person who manages the gardening on an individual basis is not related to the actual use of such infrastructure by the citizen, at the same time, the occurrence of the corresponding obligation is due only to the facts of the citizen's ownership of the land plot, its location within the boundaries garden partnership and incurring by such a partnership (both actual and planned) the costs of maintaining the common property.
*****
The court of first instance correctly indicated that the costs of the partnership for the payment wages, compulsory payments, as well as other costs of the partnership (the purchase of stationery, transportation costs, etc.) are aimed at ensuring the performance of the partnership's administrative and economic functions related to the maintenance of common property, in connection with which the requirement to collect unjust enrichment from the defendant in in the amount of 9204 rubles were lawfully satisfied by the court.

There are a lot of such solutions, and in general, they are still uniform, regardless of your use of infrastructure facilities, you must maintain them.

Was the lawyer's answer helpful? + 0 - 0

Collapse

Clarification of the client

Lawyer, Tomsk

Chat

Hello! Since you do not use water and other infrastructure of SNT, you must first apply in writing to the Chairman of SNT, if there is a refusal on his part, you can appeal in court.

According to Art. 421 and 445 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, legal entities and individual citizens are free to conclude contracts and it is prohibited to coerce them. If someone does not want to sign the contract, then the other party can go to court and ask to oblige the person to sign the contract. From the moment such a court decision comes into force, the contract is considered concluded

According to the law on horticultural partnerships, citizens can work individually and they have the right to use, and also have the right not to use, SNT infrastructure facilities for a fee on the terms of contracts adopted in these partnerships. However, the amount of payments from individuals and from members of the partnership must be the same. Hence the conclusion - the conclusion of an agreement on the use of infrastructure facilities of a garden partnership for citizens who work is mandatory by virtue of law.

Was the lawyer's answer helpful? + 0 - 0

Collapse

received
fee 100%

Lawyer, Saratov

Chat

9.4 rating
expert

Did I understand correctly that under the new law, I still have to pay for everything? and there is no way to draw up some kind of contract, where there will be a list of certain services with tariffs. If, for example, they do not provide water for half the summer and the electricity is turned off, I can file a lawsuit against gardening, what would these payments be calculated?
Irina Vladimirovna Shukova

https: //rg.ru/2017/07/30/fz217 ...
Article 55. Procedure for the entry into force of this Federal Law

1. This Federal Law comes into force from January 1, 2019, with the exception of Article 51 of this Federal Law.

Irina Vladimirovna, this law has not yet entered into force, it is difficult to say which path the judicial practice will take, it may still be amended, therefore it is still premature to give consultations on it. According to the old law on SNT, taking into account the position of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, they are obliged to pay contributions regardless of membership and use of a land plot. If the service is not provided to you, you need to record the fact, and accordingly demand a reduction in fees, at the same time you have the right to conclude an agreement on the use of SNT infrastructure facilities (if you are not a member of it), where the fee will be indicated, but the tariff will be the same as for everyone - if it was adopted by the general meeting of SNT, regarding services - then as you agree, by virtue of Art. 421 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - freedom of contract, you can specify any conditions in the contract, here only the will of the chairman of SNT, but I draw your attention if any decisions (in terms of tariffs, etc.) are adopted by the general meeting - they will be obligatory for you and the court will be on the side of SNT.

Was the lawyer's answer helpful? + 0 - 0

Collapse

received
fee 100%

Lawyer, Saratov

Chat

9.4 rating
expert

If, for example, they do not provide water for half the summer and the electricity is turned off, I can file a lawsuit against gardening, what would these payments be calculated?
So you have to pay? what if gardening does not provide services? those new law not beneficial for individuals?
Irina Vladimirovna Shukova

http: //www.consultant.ru/docum ...
Article 5. Conducting gardening or horticulture on land plots located within the boundaries of the territory of horticulture or horticulture, without participation in a partnership

1. Horticulture or horticulture on garden plots or garden plots located within the boundaries of the territory of horticulture or horticulture, without participation in a partnership, may be carried out by owners or, in the cases established by part 11 of Article 12 of this Federal Law, by rightholders of garden or vegetable gardens land plots who are not members of the partnership.
2. The persons specified in part 1 of this article shall have the right to use the property of common use located within the boundaries of the territory of gardening or horticulture, on equal terms and in the amount established for the members of the partnership.
3. The persons specified in part 1 of this article, are obliged to pay for the acquisition, creation, maintenance of common property, current and overhaul capital construction projects related to property of general use and located within the boundaries of the territory of gardening or truck farming, for the services and work of the partnership for the management of such property in the manner prescribed by this Federal law for the payment of contributions by members of the partnership.
4. The total annual amount of the payment provided for by part 3 of this article is established in an amount equal to the total annual amount of the target and membership fees a member of the partnership, calculated in accordance with this Federal Law and the charter of the partnership.

This is a new law. But if the service is not provided to you, then naturally you do not have to pay for it: for example, there is no water or electricity - another question is how to fix it. And the payment for the maintenance of the property (it was the Claimant who declared the requirements by virtue of Article 1102 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which provides that a person who, without grounds established by law, other legal acts or a transaction, acquired or saved property (acquirer) at the expense of another person (victim), is obliged return to the latter the unjustly acquired or saved property (unjust enrichment), with the exception of the cases provided for in Article 1109 of this Code.The rules provided for by this Chapter shall apply regardless of whether the unjust enrichment was the result of the behavior of the acquirer of the property, the victim himself, third parties, or occurred apart from their will.
During the period of the defendants' membership in SNT "Rus", common property was erected (built) for membership fees, including the defendant's fees (roads, passages, fire reservoirs, turning platforms and areas of use objects, including their sanitary protection zones, waste collection areas, gatehouse, common gate and fence, power lines).
Since the defendants did not enter into an appropriate agreement with the plaintiff, while using the plaintiff's infrastructure facilities, which, in turn, are not gratuitous, a non-contractual obligation arose on the part of the defendant as a result of unjust enrichment.
The court correctly proceeded that the defendants, without the grounds established by the transaction, saved the property (money), which, according to Art. 1102 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are obliged to return.
The arguments of the appeal by B.L., U. that the court incorrectly assessed the evidence presented, namely, the defendants should not bear the costs of maintaining the common property of SNT Rus, since contracts for the maintenance of infrastructure were not concluded with them, the power transmission line and the gas pipeline to their plots are not summed up, there is no structure on the U. site, they cannot serve as grounds for canceling the court decision, since, according to clause 2.7 of the “Review of judicial practice on issues arising in the consideration of cases related to horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha non-profit associations, for 2010 - 2013 "(approved by the Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on 07/02/2014) - expenses incurred by a non-profit association for the maintenance of infrastructure and other common property of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association in the absence of an agreement with citizens engaged in gardening, horticulture or dacha farming on an individual basis and using the specified property are unofficial enrichment of these citizens.

Was the lawyer's answer helpful? + 0 - 0

Collapse

All legal services in Moscow

material taken from the site http://za-snt.ru

internal economic

It is clear that the costs of SNT are a fairly stable value, well-established, largely tied to the parameters of public property, and therefore to the size of the plots, so if five plots of land in SNT from five owners are transferred to one person, this will not decrease in any way. in particular, the running costs of SNT, which will remain the same. But if contributions are levied in an equal amount from all members of the SNT, then they will now be distributed to a smaller number of members, therefore, the amount of contributions for each member of the SNT will increase. This is beneficial for those who have plots or the number of plots they own more than the SNT average. Thus, the "large landowners" in SNT are trying to shift the maintenance of their property onto the shoulders of the owners of smaller plots of land.

property equality of members of the SNT.

land plot».

in the amount of targeted contributions

membership fees

Non-payment earmarked contributions

.

Arbitrage practice,

it should be noted that:

internal affair
is not entitled imperatively

In recent years, on the Internet and in the press, the issue of the procedure for collecting contributions to the SNT has been actively discussed. At the center of the discussion is the problem of "how to charge": should all members of the SNT pay equal membership and targeted fees, or can / should fees be collected from a hundred square meters, a plot, or according to another principle?

The removal of this seemingly purely internal economic, SNT problems, not only to the public, but also to the courts of general jurisdiction - this is the merit of a relatively small number of clever citizens who realized that you can have good property in SNT and, under certain circumstances, minimize the payment for it.

Example: You acquire several plots in SNT for yourself and require you to pay contributions as for one plot, since, supposedly, the rights of all SNT members are equal, everyone receives services from the SNT governing bodies in an equal amount, which means that contributions for members SNT must be equal. That is, you, having, for example, five plots or ten plots of 10 acres, will pay the same fees as a member of SNT who owns one plot of 10 acres or even half of a plot (five acres). Everything is simple - both tastefully and profitably - for yourself.

The resolution of disagreements regarding the procedure for collecting fees passed to the judicial plane. Unfortunately, disputes between members of SNT and garden partnerships are not considered in arbitration courts, but in courts of general jurisdiction. This is somewhat illogical, since more and more often these disputes affect the issues of the economic and economic activities of SNT, and, according to their jurisdiction, such disputes should fall within the competence of economic (arbitration) courts, but today Article 2251 of the Arbitration Procedure Code of the Russian Federation does not classify SNT as subjects of arbitration procedural relations in cases of corporate disputes, although non-commercial partnerships are classified as such entities. It seems that there is a flaw in the legislator, which does not yet take into account the scale, complexity and importance of SNT activities.

Courts of general jurisdiction first listened to the voice of the "oppressed landlords" of the SNT. To some extent, this was justified by the fact that initially in the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, horticultural and dacha associations citizens "of 05/15/1998 - the main law currently in force governing the activities of SNT - when creating horticultural associations, a member of such an association was provided only one land plot, that is, when the SNT was created, all its members were equal in property terms - each owned only one site and in these conditions had equal rights and obligations, including property. The aforementioned norm was provided for by Part 2 of Art. 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" and was the only rule of this law that directly indicated property equality of members of the SNT.
However, the Federal Law of June 26, 2007 No. 118-FZ made significant changes to the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens": in particular, the above-mentioned part 2 of Art. 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" became invalid on July 3, 2007. Thus, from July 3, 2007, the only legal basis for property equality of SNT members was canceled.

Social relations and economic conditions existing for 2010-2011 are fundamentally different from 1998, the year of adoption of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens." As a result of the abolition of the above part 2 of Art. 15 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, horticultural and dacha associations of citizens" and the implementation by SNT members of transactions for the purchase and sale of land plots in garden partnerships, a situation often arises when members of SNT are in an unequal position, primarily in terms of land ownership... There are persons who own one plot, there are owners who own two, three, four plots. There are plots that are jointly owned by two or even three persons.
Unequal property status of SNT members (that is, for example, ownership of an unequal number of plots with a separate number according to the master plan or shared joint ownership of one plot with a separate number according to the master plan) gives rise to inequality in terms of the rights and obligations of members of the SNT ... And the mechanism for the realization of inequality of property in the rights and obligations of members of the SNT is not only not prohibited, but is also provided for by the norms of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05/15/1998.
Nowhere, not in Art. No not a single direct statement of the law, not a single word that SNT members have the same rights and obligations.
On the contrary, para. 1) Part 2 of Art. 19 Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05.15.1998 indicates that a member of SNT “Must bear the burden of maintenance land plot». Two sites are a double burden, three sites are a triple burden. Art. 210 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation also provides that the owner himself bears the burden of maintaining the property belonging to the owner.

SNT members are owners of not only land plots. According to the law, the common property of SNT, created (acquired) for targeted contributions of its members, is located jointly owned by members of SNT(part 2 of article 4 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens"). Consequently, SNT members also bear the burden of maintaining common property. Moreover, the volume of the burden of maintaining common property in SNT is directly dependent on the number of sites owned by a member of SNT, which is confirmed by para. 6) Part 1 of Art. 19 Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, horticultural and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05.15.1998: a member of SNT, when alienating a garden plot, at the same time alienates to the acquirer a share of common property as part of SNT in the amount of targeted contributions ... If a member of SNT purchased two sites in the same SNT, then he simultaneously has the right to two shares in common property, jointly owned by members of SNT. Accordingly, it must contain both of these shares in the common property of SNT.

SNT members bear the burden of maintaining common joint property primarily by paying membership fees... According to par. 7 tbsp. 1 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05/15/1998, membership fees are funds periodically contributed by SNT members to pay employees who have concluded employment contracts with such a combination, and other running costs of such a combination. Many items of estimates of operating costs are directly related to the number of sites owned by a member of SNT. In particular, these are the costs of paying for outdoor lighting (the number of outdoor lighting poles is directly proportional to the number of plots), the cost of winter cleaning of roads (the length of the roads to be cleaned is also directly proportional to the number of plots), garbage disposal (more plots owned by one person - more buildings, more the size of the farm, more garbage), the salary of an electrician (directly proportional to the length of power lines and the number of poles, and, consequently, the number of sites), etc.
So, for example, if one member of SNT owns two plots of 9 acres each (according to the master plan), the total length of the boundaries of which along the streets is, for example, 60 meters, then his share in the maintenance of public property (in the current expenses of SNT ) it is necessary to pay for snow cleaning and maintenance of power lines and poles, as well as roads over a length of 60 meters, in a serviceable condition. For comparison: a neighboring plot with an area of 9 acres, owned by one owner, stretches along the street for only 30 meters. If the owner of two plots and the owner of one plot pay the same membership fees, it turns out that the owner of the larger plot maintains his two shares in common property at the expense of the owner of the smaller plot, and this is essentially unjust enrichment.

Non-payment earmarked contributions in SNT for each land plot with a separate number according to the master plan also has serious negative legal implications... Land plots are transferable and divisible. If a member of SNT owns several plots with separate numbers according to the master plan, acquired by him from the previous owner / owners, then, as stated above, he always has not one, but several shares in common property, since together with these plots the previous owner of each plots transferred to this member of SNT his share of common property in the amount of earmarked contributions made by the previous owner in accordance with para. 6, part 1 of Art. 19 Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05.15.1998.
If a member of SNT does not pay earmarked contributions to any of the several land plots belonging to him, he thereby does not create / increase the share of common property attributable to this site. In the event of the subsequent alienation of such a site, which does not account for the share of common property, the rights are violated potential buyer to become a member of SNT, since he will not be able to become a member of SNT, after all, it is impossible to collect targeted contributions for already created property from newly joining SNT members according to the decision of the Solnechnogorsk City Court dated 04/05/2007, and persons who do not have a share in public property are no one will not accept SNT members - why share your property for free? Failure to pay targeted contributions for each of the negotiable sites also violates the rights of SNT as a legal entity, as it makes it impossible for it to increase the number of its members.

Thus, non-payment of targeted contributions for each land plot by members of SNT-owners of several negotiable land plots contradicts Part 3 of Art. 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation that the exercise of human and civil rights and freedoms should not violate the rights and freedoms of others.
In addition, the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05.15.1998 does not contain any prohibitions regarding the principle of collecting contributions to SNT.

In addition, the system of levying contributions on property grounds (for example, as a percentage of monthly earnings, scholarships, pensions) is widespread. in various non-profit organizations, such as public organizations (parties) and trade unions, which, like SNT, are non-profit organizations for Russian legislation and in which the members of these organizations have equal rights and obligations, but the amount of contributions paid by them is not the same and depends on the current financial situation of each specific member of the organization. So, for example, according to the Instruction on the procedure for paying and recording monthly trade union membership fees in the trade union organization of St. Petersburg State University, drawn up on the basis of Art. 28 of the Law of the Russian Federation "On trade unions, their rights and guarantees of activity" the size of monthly trade union membership dues is set at 1% of monthly income. Another example: according to paragraphs. 2.3 and 2.4 of the Charter of the non-profit public organization- the party of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation - its members have equal rights and obligations, but in accordance with paragraph 10.7. Of the Constitution of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, membership fees are paid by members of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation in the amount of at least 1 percent of income.
Thus, the equality of rights and obligations of members non-profit organization does not automatically entail equal membership and other fees.

Considering all of the above, as well as the relevance of the problem of paying contributions to the SNT, legislatures are also taking steps on the settlement of disputable legal relations. Thus, the State Duma is currently considering the bill No. 444626-4, presented by the deputies of the State Duma GV Kulik, AN Khairullin, VA Dubovik. and others, referred to as "On Amendments to the Federal Law of the Russian Federation" On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens " in accordance with the norms of legislative acts Russian Federation ). The bill is going through the second reading, and although it has not yet been adopted and has not become law, its text shows direction of the legislator's thought... In particular, this bill No. 444626-4 proposes to be included in par. 11) Part 1 of Art. 21 the following changes: "Contributions and payments, as a rule, are calculated in proportion to the area of the occupied land plot".

According to the current legislation of the Russian Federation, the procedure for collecting membership and other fees in non-profit organizations is the right and internal affair of a legal entity - the non-profit organization itself and is determined by its Charter and decisions of the governing bodies of the non-profit organization.
Article 21 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05/15/1998 in this regard gives broad powers to the general meeting of SNT members, without setting any restrictions on the competence of the general meeting: Para 10) part 1 of Art. 21 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05.15.1998 establishes that the exclusive competence of the general meeting of SNT includes making decisions on the formation and use of the property of such an association, on the creation and development of infrastructure facilities, as well as setting the size of target funds and related contributions. Abs. 18 Art. 21 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha associations of citizens" dated 05/15/1998 authorizes the general meeting (meeting of authorized representatives) to consider any issues of the activities of such an association and make decisions on them.

Arbitrage practice, taking into account the objective change in property relations in SNT, it also recognizes the rights of SNT as a legal entity and takes into account the realities of the economic practice of horticultural associations.
Law enforcement practice Russian ships general jurisdiction in connection with the resolution of the problems of the principles of collection of contributions reflect, in particular,

The decision of the Taldom City Court of the Moscow Region of March 29, 2010 in civil case No. 2-284 / 10 on the claim for recognizing partially illegal the decision of the general meeting of SNT "Narciss",
Determination of the Judicial Collegium of the Moscow Regional Court of May 20, 2010 on the cassation appeal on the above decision of the Taldom City Court, case No. 33-9748,
The decision of the Taldom City Court of the Moscow Region of January 27, 2010 in a civil case No. 2-99 / 10 on a claim against SNT "Narcissus" on recognizing the actions as illegal and recovering losses,
Determination of the Judicial Collegium of the Moscow Regional Court dated March 16, 2010 on the cassation appeal on the above-mentioned decision of the Taldom City Court, case No. 33-5068.

The above decisions of the Taldom City Court established that:

the law does not provide for the procedure for payment of membership fees and their size;
consideration and resolution of this issue is attributed to the competence of the general meeting of SNT in accordance with Article 21 of the Federal Law "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha non-profit associations of citizens";
the court is not a body with the power to intervene in economic activity gardening partnerships, and therefore does not have the right to oblige SNT to establish the size of contributions on a different basis, including depending on the number of members of the partnerships - individuals.

The judicial board of the Moscow Regional Court confirmed the legality and validity of these court decisions of the Taldom District Court.
Summarizing the above, it should be noted that:

the establishment of the principles (procedure) for collecting contributions to the SNT is internal affair SNT as a legal entity and its law;
deciding on the principle of collection of contributions relates to exclusive competence of the general meeting SNT and is decided by the majority of SNT members in accordance with general principles civil law, including the principles of rationality and justice, reasonable management;
the courts are not bodies with the authority to interfere with the economic activities of SNT, and is not entitled imperatively to impose SNT one or another procedure for collecting contributions.

Thus, SNT and its members, without any doubt, have the right to independently decide which principle of collecting membership and targeted fees is more suitable for a particular gardening partnership. The main thing is that the general meeting (meeting of authorized representatives) of SNT:

was carried out in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Law "On horticultural, horticultural and suburban non-profit associations of citizens" and the Charter of SNT,
had a quorum and a properly drawn up protocol drawn up by authorized persons.

So go ahead, SNT, and - good luck to you!

To view the photographs posted on the site in an enlarged size, click the mouse button 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 a 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 SNT. How? How? Remember. If you, dear gardener, have also been to other pages of the SNT Pishchevik site, you probably paid attention to the fact that everywhere one thought passes through the content of the pages as a refrain:

SNT develops and flourishes where gardeners annually, with care, with sense, 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, he will simply drive him to death. This is exactly what many do. gardeners for years, decades, without investing anything in the development of their own SNT, becoming like a beggar who never had anything and no idea how to deal with a horse that suddenly fell from the sky to him. Such SNT it simply falls apart and any creative activity, including on individual sites, gradually freezes and fades away.

Very often in this regard, one 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-question, there is an elementary misunderstanding main goal and the tasks of SNT, as such. Namely:

1. Horticultural, vegetable gardening, dacha non-profit partnership(cooperative, partnership) are established by citizens to solve general problems of gardening, truck farming and dacha farming. One gardener cannot solve global resource-intensive tasks. For this, SNT is created as an organization of gardeners.

From opponents you can hear further: "And 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, and 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 plots, individual garden plots are cut for citizens. Driveways, streets, walkways and other infrastructure elements are organized inside each section. 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 an action on the part of public authorities and self-government bodies is the resolution of the mayor's office of Kaliningrad No. 334 of 03/07/1995 "On the provision of citizens - members of the Pishchevik gardening partnership of the Moscow region in the common share ownership of common lands and ownership (or lease ) the land plots they occupy "and Resolution No. 2232 of 08/07/2002" On Amending the City Mayor's Resolution on the Allocation of Land to Gardening 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 common land.

From all this, one important conclusion follows, which is necessary for understanding the entire SNT system:

3. If the gardener has property, then he freely owns it, uses it, disposes in accordance with Art. 209 "Content of the property right" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which constitutes the property right. From this right, the burden and risk of maintaining property are simultaneously imposed on the owner (Article 210 "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, thousand ... gardeners, which does not include gardeners' plots?" With their individual garden plots, everything is more or less clear. If you took ownership of it, then you need something from this land, and you will operate it in accordance with the permitted use. The same applies to other gardeners who own individual plots.

And who should organize the disparate individual gardeners to maintenance of common land..? Think correctly, gentlemen-comrades, general meeting, board and other bodies of SNT. They are also called upon to control gardeners within the limits of their competence and authority. This is confirmed by Article 14 of FZ-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 meeting of gardeners is held. And only after state registration of 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 in the past, land plots were provided to citizens as part of SNT. Even though they were called differently.

The arguments in favor of organizing SNT as a legal entity, given above, are not limited to 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 SNT, as an organization, as a legal entity:

Allocation of land for gardening, gardening, dacha farming involves the creation of an association of citizens, which is designed (we will rephrase the law a little) not only to assist in solving general social and economic problems, but also to organize the maintenance of 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 the investment of funds, and in most cases - money.

And then we can safely say that the investment of money by gardeners in the maintenance of a land allotment within the boundaries of SNT is nothing more than the periodic surrender of funds by all owners of individual garden plots, 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 to SNT.
Purpose, principle of collection, size.

Membership fees are the basis for the existence of SNT

Solving general socio-economic problems, SNT, as an organization, creates an infrastructure that is quite specific for this particular association.

Infrastructure- is a set of objects, property, systems and services, governing bodies necessary for the functioning and provision of conditions for the normal life of SNT.

From the definition it follows that only everything taken together: common property with governing bodies, control, hired workers and constitute this very infrastructure that 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 "Burden of Property Maintenance"

The owner bears the burden of maintaining the property belonging to him, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.

If the board and the like SNT-shnye bodies do not do anything for months, years, decades, then this is not only to blame governing body, consisting of loafers, but also a general meeting of all members of the SNT, which from year to year elects loafers to the governing bodies and does not require any work from them.

It is also important to note that the board, which receives pennies for its labor (this is the very minimum that must be maintained), and does not have the means to develop and maintain the efficiency of other elements of the infrastructure, will not work. "Not to fat, maybe I would live," - very accurately said for such SNT.

It would seem that membership fee and all of the above has no connection. But this is not the case. The connection is direct, immediate.

Membership dues of gardeners, just, are called upon, based on the definition given in FZ-66 of 15.04.98, to maintain the entire infrastructure of a gardening partnership. And Article 19 of the said federal law only only confirms this:

FZ-66 of 15.04.1998, article 19 "Rights and obligations of a member of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association"

horticultural, horticultural or suburban non-profit association

bear the burden of maintaining the land plot and the burden of responsibility for violation of the law;
...
timely pay membership and other fees stipulated 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 operability) of the SNT infrastructure.

Let's figure it out further. Suppose we have a certain amount, which has been carefully calculated by the board, and which will presumably be included in the estimate with a proposal for the general meeting to approve it as an expenditure part of the estimate. The income part of the estimate automatically follows from the expenditure part and, accordingly, the size membership fees for each gardener (in more detail the estimate, its preparation and calculation of contributions will be discussed below). It is here that the general meeting is marking time for a long time, because due to high costs the treasury of SNT should naturally receive large revenues from the contributions of the members of the partnership. Nevertheless, after trampling and letting off steam, the meeting still approves the income and expenditure estimate by everyone who wants it. And an accountant can now easily calculate membership fees for any gardener. And by what principle, how? On these issues in worldwide network there are incessant battles without the rules of decency, without victories and defeats of the participants. Everyone remains unconvinced. 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 FZ-66 of 04/15/1998, there is no clear definition on what principle a gardener must donate to SNT. But this does not mean at all that in SNT it is possible to do as the general meeting, the board pleases. This is what many shallow law gardeners think. But sometimes even the fee-based courts also believe that the assembly can do anything. This opinion is erroneous. We'll figure it out, gentlemen-comrades.

Example: On March 29, 2010, the Taldomsky District Court of the Moscow Region in civil case No. 2-284 / 10 to SNT "Narciss" on recognizing the decision of the general meeting as partly illegal and obliging to make settlements with individuals according to the list, decided to dismiss the plaintiff's claim. Almost simultaneously with the first, a little earlier, on January 27, 2010, the Taldomskiy District Court made a similar decision in civil case No. 2-99 / 10 to SNT "Narcissus" to declare the actions unlawful and recover damages, rejecting the claim. The essence of the lawsuits is that the plaintiffs did not like the decisions of the general meetings of SNT "Narcissus" regarding the establishment of the size and principles of collection of membership and targeted contributions (the decisions of the Taldom court with the necessary comments can be seen by following this link).

When analyzing our near-member issues on contributions, we are only interested in the general important conclusion made by the judges from the whole variety of words, sentences, legal phrases and conclusions, namely:
SNT and its members have the right to independently decide which principle of collection of membership and targeted fees is more suitable for your particular partnership... The main thing is to observe the following:
- the general meeting must be held in compliance with the norms of the Federal Law-66 of 15.04.98 and the charter of SNT;
- the general meeting must have a quorum, and according to the results of the meeting, a properly drawn up minutes.

Firstly, decisions cannot be made without a comprehensive study of the norms of legislation, and no one did this, because it should be understood that the court made certain conclusions in strict accordance with the plaintiff's statement of claim, his evidence and the arguments (evidence) of the defendant. In other words, when considering these cases, the court did not prove anything to the plaintiff and the defendant. The judge only gave a legal assessment of the parties' arguments and made a decision on this basis. It is not his duty to comprehensively study the issue, this duty rests with the plaintiff and the defendant.

Secondly, in the cases with the Taldomskiy court, the plaintiffs lost because they could not prove their case. Moreover, they were initially wrong, not understanding the norms of the legislation.

Thirdly, the defendant, in his case, citing only one article 21, paragraph 1, paragraphs. 10 "" FZ-66 of 15.04.98 on the priority of making a decision by the general meeting of members of SNT on contributions managed to win.

Continuing the topic of court decisions of the Taldom District Court, we will add only that principle of collection of membership fees nevertheless, it is determined by law and does not depend on the will of the general meeting (we emphasize - the principle of collection of fees, not the size). Even if this fact does not lie on the surface of the law in its direct presentation. That is why gardeners, SNT boards, lawyers, "zhurnalyugi" are fighting to the death, and many cannot come to a final conclusion. And you and I, dear gardener, will ourselves find all the evidence and come to the same conclusion. This will happen not because we are the smartest, but because we have all the materials of all battles on hand and are able to draw the correct conclusions from them.

1st principle: One site - 1 member of the SNT - one vote at the meeting - one membership fee. All membership fees are equal.

Mandatory taxes and payments established by the state through tax legislation.

Payments by agreement of owners for the maintenance and preservation of property.

"And why, - let me ask, - 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 different taxes for their plot in comparison with the plots of neighbors? And why, suddenly , out of nothing, the direct content of its huge site should be calculated somehow differently? "

Let's consider the issue from one more side. The owner of a larger plot of land unambiguously derives more benefits for himself. This includes a larger harvest, more opportunities for recreation (pool, garage, chicken coop, bathhouse, gazebo, etc.). Someone will say that this has nothing to do with SNT and common land. Has, even what. SNT and was created in order to combine material and financial resources gardeners and provide everyone with equal conditions for gardening and recreation on their plots.

If the gardener, by virtue of owning a large plot (or even several plots), gets more from his plot (plots), then why should the provision of all these benefits be determined by equal contributions? The guard, making a round of the territory of the partnership, spends more time on a larger site; the board, fulfilling its duties even with the same amount of work, ultimately gives the owner of a larger plot to extract more material benefits for himself. Let's turn to the letter of the law.

FZ-66 from 15.04.1998. Article 19. "Rights and obligations of a member of a horticultural, horticultural or suburban non-profit association"

2. A member of a horticultural, horticultural or suburban non-profit association is obliged:
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 one who bought it. That is, the owner of two plots needs to maintain 2 plots, respectively, pay 2 membership fees, or rather one fee, but double. In any other case, the economic component of income in horticultural partnership slowly but surely will 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 SNT and membership fees were paid from 100 sites, then this should always be the case. By the way, for tax authority it will remain so. They absolutely do not care how many members of the SNT remained in the partnership, the tax is calculated on the area of the plots. Therefore, the owners who bought neighboring plots pay and must pay for those members who left SNT in accordance with the requirements of Article 18 of the Federal Law-66 "Membership in a horticultural, vegetable gardening 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 follows the most 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 the amount is different for gardeners. A gardener who owns a large plot pays a larger membership fee.

Membership fees

More recently, in our SNT, no one had a clue about the existing FZ-66 of 04/15/98 and all those 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 where this calculation ended. If you think about it, it becomes clear that these contributions had nothing to do with the actual costs of SNT this 2010. Indeed, why not pay 100 rubles or 500 rubles per hundred square meters. At the meeting, people suggested that. Nobody substantiated anything by calculations.

In 2011, thanks to an acquaintance with FZ-66, the general meeting of members of our ancient SNT, finally, adopted an income and expense estimate, which almost corresponds to the norm of paragraph 1 of paragraphs. 12 article 21 "". We will not analyze the estimate by element 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, the board before the general meeting, at which the income and expenditure estimate was to be approved, worked in advance (not 2 weeks in advance) in all respects for the expenditure part of the estimate in strict accordance with that given in Article 1 of FZ-66.

SNT expenses include all SNT expenses that the society is ready to incur in the next year. These expenditures will accurately correlate with the maintenance of the SNT infrastructure and the injection of part of the funds from contributions to the 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 includes expenses for stationery, travel to organizations and departments, telephone calls, training and re-certification of personnel, tax and other mandatory payments, expenses for organizing and holding general meetings, repairing equipment, public roads, etc., etc. ., etc. In a word, the expenditure part of the estimate, which forms the membership fee, will include all those SNT expenses that do not create and develop infrastructure, but only contain 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 help of a special fund, i.e. part of the membership fees, as a rule, are designed to serve the infrastructure of the SNT. This is the office equipment of the board, common fence around SNT, a board building, a gatehouse for guards, a barrier at the entrances to SNT, fire-fighting equipment, etc. That is, the property and objects that were not created for targeted contributions, and which, by virtue of the method of creation, acquisition, become the property of SNT, as a legal entity.

It is this property of common use, created with the funds of a special fund formed from membership fees, is divided in the event of liquidation of SNT equally between all members of SNT, tk. this property is not shared. This property is not allocated or issued in parts, in monetary terms in cases of a member of SNT leaving the association, selling a plot, donating, etc. This property is transferred to the maintenance of the new member of SNT along with the garden land plot from the old member (who sold, donated the plot, or somehow transferred ownership).

Will the membership fees be the same for all gardeners? The answer is obvious - no, they won't.

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 spent on the maintenance of infrastructure;
the size of an individual garden plot (s) of a gardener;
participation (non-participation) of the gardener in the creation, acquisition, reconstruction, modernization of common property for targeted contributions.
It should be remembered: The property created on earmarked contributions is, despite the way of creation, on membership fees, and not on earmarked ones).

If a gardener did not pay a targeted contribution, for example, for the construction of a power transmission line, and his site is not connected to the power line, then such a gardener should not and is not obliged to pay a membership fee for the maintenance of a power transmission line.

A question may arise about the legality of calculating a membership fee from gardeners who did not hand over the target fee to power lines, but, for example, use street lighting, passages to SNT in the dark. This case should 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 distribute the electricity consumed by the lighting system equally to all owners of power lines.

In order for all gardeners to pay some part of the membership fee for the maintenance of the lighting system (do not confuse it with the kWh of electricity consumed by the lighting system - this is a communal payment), you must first gather SNT members for a general meeting and decide on the maintenance of the lighting system, of course , having coordinated this issue with the owners of power transmission 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 shared with respect to the entire power line. That is, there will be shared owners of power lines (gardeners), and there will also be a shared 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 be rolled out by gardeners.

But, if this does happen, then according to the share in the lighting system (similar to the share of SNT in power transmission lines), gardeners will be obliged to hand over a membership fee for the maintenance of the lighting system (replacement of lamps, routine inspection, salary of an electrician, etc.). Note that the owners The power lines will continue to pay the membership fee for the maintenance of the 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 SNT in relation to:
- for gardeners in terms of all, without exception;
- for gardeners in terms of the maintenance of property (objects) of common use, created for targeted contributions, and who own this property (objects) on the right of ownership.
This calculation will, as a whole, make up the income part of the SNT estimate.

The income and expense estimates certainly include and (Art. 4, clause 2 FZ-66). But, targeted contributions are considered on the page "Target contributions to SNT. Differences from membership fees, the principle of collection, size". There, everything is detailed and laid out on the shelves.

There is one more 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 board of SNT cannot, has no right not to take into account all gardeners, including abandoned plots, in the income and expense estimates. Otherwise, active members of SNT at their own expense stupidly contain idlers who have not appeared in 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 that arise as a result of underfunding of the incoming part of the estimate due to non-received payments, the board has the right, is obliged to collect from non-payers through the court in accordance with the requirements of Article 7 "Powers of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or summer cottage non-profit association", Article 46 "Protection of the rights of horticultural, gardening, summer cottage non-profit associations and their members "ФЗ-66 dated 04.15.98 and articles: 210." Burden of property maintenance ", 244" Concept and grounds for the emergence of common ownership ", 249" Expenses for the maintenance of property in shared ownership "Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

In other words, without including in the estimate the contributions and payments of the owners of abandoned plots, SNT, thereby, allows violation of the law, including the rights of all active members of the partnership (), whom negligent management makes to pay for careless 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 by the estimate. And the more of them, the better the board works with non-payers. Of course, this means chronic defaulters, and not gardeners who delay the payment of contributions for a month, two, a year. What will happen with such unaccounted money, guess for yourself. There are several options: from theft, to putting money into business for the benefit of the whole partnership.

So, we quietly sorted out with membership fees to SNT: the purposes of their collection, collection principles, size calculations. Now let's go to the next page and arrange a debriefing of the targeted contributions. And this, believe me, is no less fascinating and even more incomprehensible area of payments in horticultural associations.

Contributions in the light of the law ФЗ №66-ФЗ dated 15.04.1998.

A gardening or summer cottage partnership, being a non-profit organization, usually has no profit. The activities of the partnership are carried out at the expense of its members, contributed in accordance with the decisions of the meetings to the partnership's cashier or to its current account. In accordance with article 21, clause 1, clauses 10-12 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ dated 04.15.1998 "On horticultural, vegetable gardening and dacha non-profit associations of citizens", to the exclusive competence of the general meeting of members of the horticultural, vegetable garden and dacha non-profit association (meeting authorized) include
"10) making decisions on the formation and use of the property of such an association, on the creation and development of infrastructure facilities, as well as setting the size of trust funds and corresponding contributions;
11) setting the amount of penalties for late payment of contributions, changing the timing of making contributions by low-income members of such an association;
12) approval of the income and expense estimate of such an association and making decisions on its implementation. "

According to Article 21, clause 3, clause 12 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998, "a general meeting of members of a horticultural, vegetable gardening or dacha non-profit association cannot be held in absentia if the agenda includes issues of approval of income and expense estimates, reports of the board and audit commission(auditor) of such an association. "

Article 22, clause 3, clause 4 of the Federal Law No. 66-ФЗ dated April 15, 1998 the competence of the board of a horticultural, horticultural or suburban non-profit association includes "drawing up income and expense estimates and reports of such an association, submitting them for approval to the general meeting of its members (meeting of authorized representatives). "

By the provisions of the law cited above, the requirements for the procedure for establishing contributions to the horticultural or dacha partnership are exhausted. O acceptable size the contribution and the procedure for calculating it, the law does not say at all, leaving this issue to the discretion of the general meeting, which approves this or that contribution as part of the income and expense estimate.

From a person or from a hundred square meters?

The membership fee consists of components, of which four are the most significant:
- encouragement to members of the board and its chairman;
- tax for common land;
- payment for the use of the property and services of the partnership (for the salary of an electrician, aquarius, watchman).
Obviously, in the amount of the share contributed to encourage the board, the members of the partnership should be equal, despite the inequality in the size of their land plots. This follows at least from the equality of membership rights for every gardener. The component of the tax for common land should be calculated in proportion to the area land plots... Payment for the use of the common property of the partnership should be collected only from those members who use these benefits, and taking into account the size of the users' land plots, which meets the requirements Article 249 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: "Each participant in shared ownership is obliged, in proportion to his share, to participate in the payment of taxes, fees and other payments on common property, as well as in the costs of its maintenance and preservation.".

It is quite understandable that the targeted contribution for the creation of infrastructure facilities for each member should be calculated in proportion to the area of the site, since the costs of laying a water supply system, roads, power lines are the higher, the larger the area of land plots of the members of the partnership.

What has been said about the methods of calculating membership and targeted contributions is nothing more than my wishes in this regard. Since direct instructions on the procedure for calculating contributions in the law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998 no, the members of the partnership have the right to establish themselves, within the framework of the Charter or the decision of the general meeting, the procedure for calculating and paying contributions.

Penalty (penalty) on contributions

According to Article 21 clause 1 clause 11 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998, the general meeting of the horticultural (summer cottage) partnership has the right to approve penalties for late payment of contributions. Special requirements on the amount and procedure for calculating penalties law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998 does not establish, therefore the rules apply to the default interest Chapter 23 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation "Ensuring the fulfillment of obligations"... Part two of this chapter in Articles 330-333 contains provisions on forfeit.

Article 330. Concept of forfeit
1. A forfeit (fine, penalty interest) is recognized as defined by law or contract sum of money, which the debtor is obliged to pay to the creditor in the event of non-performance or improper performance of the obligation, in particular in case of delay in performance. Upon a claim for payment of a penalty, the creditor is not obliged to prove the damage caused to him.
2. The creditor shall not have the right to demand payment of the forfeit if the debtor is not liable for non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of the obligation.

Article 331. Form of agreement on forfeit
An agreement on a forfeit must be made in writing, regardless of the form of the main obligation.
Failure to comply with the written form entails the invalidity of the agreement on forfeit.

Article 332. Legal penalty
1. The creditor shall have the right to demand payment of a penalty determined by law (legal penalty), regardless of whether the obligation to pay it is stipulated by the agreement of the parties.
2. The amount of the legal penalty may be increased by agreement of the parties, if the law does not prohibit it.

Article 333. Reduction of forfeit
If the penalty to be paid is clearly disproportionate to the consequences of the breach of the obligation, the court shall have the right to reduce the penalty.

Thus, the decision on penalties must be made by the general meeting and recorded in the minutes ( writing form). The members of the partnership, even if the procedures for holding the meeting and making a decision on the penalty have been observed, have the right to demand its reduction in court.

Indexation of contributions

In the event that a decision on penalties for late payment of contributions was not adopted by the meeting, the partnership still has the right to demand from debtor members the payment of overdue contributions, taking into account interest for unlawful withholding of funds. The demand for the gardener to collect the debt in the indexed amount can be declared in court. General Provisions on the indexation of cash and the collection of interest for the delay in their fulfillment of obligations are contained in article 395 Civil Code .

Article 395. Responsibility for failure to fulfill a monetary obligation
1. For the use of strangers in cash due to their unlawful retention, evasion from their return, other delay in their payment, or unjustified receipt or savings at the expense of another person, interest is payable on the amount of these funds. The amount of interest is determined by the existing in the place of residence of the creditor, and if the creditor is entity, in the place of its location with the discount rate bank interest on the day of fulfillment of the monetary obligation or its corresponding part. When collecting a debt in court, the court may satisfy the creditor's claim based on the discount rate of the bank interest on the day the claim is filed or on the day the decision is made. These rules apply unless a different interest rate is established by law or contract.
2. If the losses caused to the creditor by the unlawful use of his monetary funds exceed the amount of interest due to him on the basis of paragraph 1 of this article, he shall have the right to demand from the debtor compensation for losses in the part exceeding this amount.
3. Interest for the use of other people's funds shall be charged on the day of payment of the amount of these funds to the creditor, unless a shorter period is established for the accrual of interest by law, other legal acts or an agreement.

Duration of contributions

V Clause 2 of Article 266 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation the definition of bad debts is given: "Bad debts (debts that are unrealistic to be collected) are those debts to the taxpayer for which the established limitation period has expired, as well as those debts for which, in accordance with civil law, the obligation was terminated due to the impossibility of its fulfillment, on the basis of an act of a state body or liquidation organizations ".

According to chapter 12 articles 196, 198, 207 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the general limitation period is set at three years. The limitation period cannot be changed by agreement of the parties. The limitation period also applies to penalties established by the meeting in relation to the delayed installment.

It should be noted that the monetary obligation even after the expiration of the limitation period can be fulfilled by the debtor voluntarily. In this case, the debtor is deprived of the right to demand the return of the paid funds even if he was not aware of the expiration of the limitation period. The corresponding rule is established article 206 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation: "The debtor or other obliged person who has fulfilled the obligation after the expiration of the limitation period is not entitled to claim the performed back, even if at the time of execution the specified person did not know about the expiration of the limitation period.".

The law does not provide for the return of targeted contributions

According to Article 19, clause 1, clause 6 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998 "On horticultural, horticultural and suburban non-profit associations of citizens", a member of a horticultural, horticultural or suburban non-profit association has the right "when alienating a garden, vegetable garden or summer cottage land plot, at the same time alienate to the acquirer a share of the property of common use as part of a gardening, vegetable gardening or summer cottage non-profit partnership in the amount of targeted contributions"... Thus, the law establishes the seller's right to sell the plot together with the corresponding share of the common property, but does not establish such an obligation. Which means: if the gardener who retired from the members of the partnership did not apply to the board for receipt of the share due to him in the property of common use, then this share is considered to be transferred to the new owner of the land plot.

Regarding the reimbursement of the gardener who left the partnership for his expenses incurred in order to create common property, in Article 16, clause 4 of the Federal Law No. 66-FZ of 15.04.1998 there is only one indication that "the procedure for the payment of the value of a part of the property or the issuance of a part of the property in kind in the event of a citizen's withdrawal from the members of such an association or the liquidation of such an association" is mandatory specified in the Charter. Regulations on the procedure for the return of earmarked contributions, as such, Federal Law No. 66-FZ dated 15.04.1998 does not contain.

Target contribution, its amount is approved by the general meeting. The value of a property, for example, can be determined by an independent appraiser. It is quite understandable that targeted contributions and value of property created at their expense- non-identical things. The inequality of contributions and value is caused by the deterioration of property, the rise in price or depreciation of property over time, even the fact that only part of the collected targeted contributions for the creation of property could be spent, while the other part was stolen.

Since the possibility and procedure for reimbursing the value of a share of common property to a gardener leaving the partnership is determined exclusively by the Charter, the practical feasibility of such compensation depends on its wording. In my opinion, the most progressive entry for the charter would be something like "leaving the partnership, the cost of his share in the common property is paid in the amount of targeted contributions"... In this case, it is very easy to determine the amount of payment; it is enough to add up the targeted contributions paid by the gardener during his membership.

The theoretical possibility of payment, with a small chance of its painless implementation, is given by the following record (I found in one of the current Statutes): "leaving the partnership shall be reimbursed contributions for the creation of common property less the cost of depreciation of common property"... Payment stumbles over the cost of wear and tear, and if the board (meeting), going to meet the gardener, does not determine the cost of wear by a strong-willed decision, the person leaving will have to decide the issue of the price of wear, perhaps only within the framework of a forensic audit, which may turn out to be more expensive than those paid to the partnership's cashier targeted contributions. The above wording, obviously, will not benefit anyone, complicating the procedure for the return of contributions for the gardener, and threatening the partnership with substantial legal costs when collecting the paid contributions through the court.

The court's decision and rulings given below illustrate well the different content of the concepts. target contribution and property value... In this case, a claimant who quit the horticulture business has shown a principled insistence on collecting earmarked contributions from the horticultural partnership, which he has paid for the entire period of his membership. The position of the court was no less principled. When considering the case in the first instance, in cassation, in the supervisory instance, the claim was refused with the wording "the return of earmarked contributions is not provided by law".

In the cassation ruling, among other things, it is indicated that a property use contract concluded between the gardener and the SNT upon withdrawal from membership, as an obstacle to the recovery of a share of the value of the property. Such an agreement allows "a question between a member who left SNT ... about the procedure for using the common property of the partnership created at the expense of earmarked contributions"... After concluding an agreement on the return of the value of the property, you can forget.

In my opinion, the plaintiff, when filing a claim, made a mistake in that the claim for the return of targeted contributions was declared by him as intangible. The requirement sounded: "oblige to return targeted contributions ..." In such claims, the claim must be material, i.e. should be written like this: "to recover from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff ... rubles", and the circumstances related to the recovered money, indicate in the grounds of the claim (targeted contributions were paid in the total amount .., according to the Charter, contributions or the value of property are returned to the withdrawing from the partnership, etc.). It is not necessary to disclose the purpose of the recovered money in the claim itself, so as not to principled the claim until it is categorically unsatisfactory.

What has been said in this chapter is true in relation to earmarked contributions directed, in accordance with Federal Law No. 66-ФЗ dated April 15, 1998, to the creation of common property of a horticultural or summer cottage non-profit partnership. As for membership fees, they are not subject to return or offset from the old owner against the new one in any case. The rather widespread illegal requirement of the management boards to the newly joined members of the partnership to pay membership fees for the previous owner should not be fulfilled. Such a claim can only be made against the previous owner, and never against the new owner of the land plot.

Dmitry Okhapkin, August 2011

What are the contributions to snt. Targeted contributions to SNT. Differences from membership fees, principle of collection, size. Who can create TSN

Membership and earmarked contributions to a horticultural partnership under the new law

How not to pay snt contributions

Payment of membership fees in snt

Membership dues to snt law 2018

Snt membership fee

How much to pay membership fees in snt to the owner of two plots?

Features of the new law on garden and horticultural partnerships - 2019

Payment of membership fees in snt under the new law

Payment of membership fees to snt under the new law on gardeners

Membership fees to SNT. Purpose, principle of collection, size.

Membership fees are the basis for the existence of SNT

The principle of collection of membership fees

1st principle: One site - 1 member of the SNT - one vote at the meeting - one membership fee. All membership fees are equal.

Membership fees

From a person or from a hundred square meters?

Penalty (penalty) on contributions

Indexation of contributions

Duration of contributions

The law does not provide for the return of targeted contributions

Membership fees to SNT.
Purpose, principle of collection, size.