The taxation of private income, turnover and profit remained the most effective mode of restricting accumulation in the private sector through the NEP. The effectiveness of other modes like the sale of state industrial products or the extension of credit from nationalised banks was limited. As the dearth in the supply of fabricated consumer goods grew more acute in the mid-1920s, state industrial and trade undertakings were instructed to reduce sales to private traders. Traders responded by substituting private industry or crafts for state industry as a source for this merchandise, that source being an economic sector that lay beyond stringent state regulation. In addition, the implementation of centrally set restrictive supply policies against traders was hampered by the fact that the heads of trusts and syndicates often preferred private traders to the consumer co-operatives to market their output. The marketing strengths of the private sector that underlay this preference included its dense and far-flung network of outlets, traders’ better adaptability to consumer demand patterns and their readiness to pay in cash to a greater extent than could be anticipated from the co-operatives. Likewise, reducing or blocking credit from the public sector was also an instrument of limited effectivity. Enterprises in the private sector were less reliant on credit than were state or co-operative undertakings. When the stream tended to dry up, traders reacted by converting optimal volumes of their capital into merchandise, by circulating these inventories at faster tempos or by seeking expensive loans from private lenders.


Private Enterprise Private Capital Private Entrepreneur Private Income Trade Enterprise 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 2.
    A. Gur’ev, ‘Evoliutsiia patentnogo sbora’, VF, No. 23 (68), 8 June 1923, 20–21Google Scholar
  2. M.M. Zhirmunskii, ‘Sotsial’nyi kharakter zakonodatel’stva po oblozheniiu torgovli’, VF, No. 3, March 1925, 81Google Scholar
  3. A. A. Baranov, Nalogi i sbory, 1924, 5, 8, 9, 17Google Scholar
  4. P. P. Genzel, Nalogi Soiuza SSR, 1926, 22–23Google Scholar
  5. I. M. Kulisher, ‘Novaia finansovaia politika i oblozhenie torgovli i promyshlennosti’, Ekonomicheskoe Vozrozhdenie, No. 1, 1922, 22–23.Google Scholar
  6. 4.
    N. Makovetsky, ed., Spravochnik dlia russkikh i inostrannykh kommercheskikh deiatelei, Petrograd, 1923, 116Google Scholar
  7. M. S. Miller, ‘Taxation in Soviet Russia — I’, The Slavonic Review, IV: 10, June 1925, 132.Google Scholar
  8. 5.
    N. Makovetsky, ed., Spravochnik, 105–108.Google Scholar
  9. 6.
    I. Syr’nev, ‘Rezultaty pervoi kampanii podokhodno-poimushchestvennogo naloga’, VF, No. 44 (89), 2 November 1923, 17–20.Google Scholar
  10. 8.
    V. P. Dmitrenko, Torgovaia politika sovetskogo gosudarstva posle perekhoda k Nepu, 1921–1924 gg., 1971, 160–161.Google Scholar
  11. 10.
    Miller, Taxation’, The Slavonic Review, 1925, 131.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    Dmitrenko, Torgovaia politika, 160.Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    Ginzburg, ed., Chastnyi kapital v narodnom khoziaistve SSSR. Materialy komissii VSNKh, 1927, 16.Google Scholar
  14. 31.
    E.H. Carr, Socialism in One Country, 1924–1926, London, 1970, I: 489.Google Scholar
  15. 32.
    M. M. Zhirmunskii, ‘Problema chastnogo kapitala’, VF, No. 9, September 1926, 17Google Scholar
  16. Garr, Socialism in One Country, I: 489Google Scholar
  17. Elise Kimmerling, ‘Civil Rights and Social Policy in Soviet Russia, 1918–1936’, TRR, 41: 1, January 1982, 28.Google Scholar
  18. 33.
    Zhirmunskii, ‘Problema’, VF, 1926, 17.Google Scholar
  19. 34.
    L. F. Morozov, Reshaiushchii etap bor’by s nepmanskoi burzhuazei (1926–1929), 1960, 44Google Scholar
  20. Michal Reiman, The Birth of Stalinism: The USSR on the Eve of the ‘Second Revolution’, Bloomington, 1987, 404–405Google Scholar
  21. Gregory Y. Sokolnikov and associates, Soviet Policy in Public Finance 1917–1928, Stanford, 1931, 179.Google Scholar
  22. 35.
    Morozov, Reshaiushchiii etap, 44.Google Scholar
  23. 38.
    M. S. Miller, ‘Taxation in Soviet Russia — II’, The Slavonic Review, V: 15, March 1927, 501Google Scholar
  24. Trifonov, Ocherki istorii, 137Google Scholar
  25. Postnikov, ‘Oblozhenie’, in Ginzburg, ed., Chastnyi kapital, 198.Google Scholar
  26. 39.
    Piatnadtsatyi konferentsiia VKP(B). Stenogrqficheskii otchet, 1927, 130; EZ, No. 252 (2371), 31 October 1926, 3; Carr and Davies, Foundations, I: 795–796, 795n.Google Scholar
  27. 42.
    Leon Trotsky, The Challenge of the Left Opposition 1926–1927, edited by Naomi Allen and Grorge Saunders, New York, 1980, 306–307.Google Scholar
  28. 50.
    S. G. Strumilin discovered that by 1924/25 the weight of taxes on private capital exceeded the volumes of their ‘net accumulation’ and occured at the expense of their personal consumption. See Postnikov, ‘Oblozhenie’, in Ginzburg, ed., Chastnyi kapital, 186; Dmitrenko, Torgovaia politika, 183.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Arup Banerji 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arup Banerji
    • 1
  1. 1.Eurasia ProgrammeIndira Gandhi National Centre for the ArtsNew DelhiIndia

Personalised recommendations