Chronology of Cynicism: 30 Years of Tax Breaks for Refineries – Who Will Pay? | SforNews Investigation

CHRONOLOGY OF CYNICISM: 30 YEARS OF THE SAME SCHEME

An Investigation into Alexander Shokhin’s Proposal for Tax Benefits for Oil Refineries

DISCLAIMER

This material is an analytical investigation into the RSPP proposal to extend the federal investment tax deduction to oil refining. The material is based on open data and public statements. We do not provide legal assessments but analyze the systemic logic of this proposal. All conclusions are probabilistic in nature.

INTRODUCTION: THE HEIGHT OF CYNICISM

Alexander Shokhin, head of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP), has proposed extending the federal investment tax deduction to oil refining. Companies restoring refineries after drone attacks would be able to reduce their profit tax by the amount of their investments.

It sounds like support. But this is the height of cynicism in the current situation.

Why? Because for 30 years, these companies have been extracting profits rather than investing in modernization. They privatized plants built at state expense. They received benefits under the Euro-5 technical regulation — and failed to deliver on their promises.

And now that a crisis has arrived, they are once again asking for money. From the state. That is, from us.

CHRONOLOGY OF CYNICISM: 30 YEARS OF THE SAME SCHEME

Stage	What Happened	Who Won	Who Borethe Costs
Privatization(1990s)	Refineries built at state expense were transferred to private owners	VICs (vertically integrated companies), management	The state, citizens
Operation (2000–2020)	Profits were withdrawn as dividends and to offshore accounts; no modernization took place	VICs, shareholders	The state, citizens
Euro-5 TechnicalRegulation(2010s)	The state granted benefits and deferrals in exchange for investment commitments	VICs	The state (foregone tax revenue), citizens
Drone Attacks(2026)	Damage, productionstoppages	—	The state, citizens
New Benefits(2026)	RSPP requests a tax deduction for recovery	VICs	The state (foregone tax revenue), citizens

The result: over 30 years, the VICs received assets, profits, and tax breaks. The state and citizens received costs and risks.

And now the burden is once again being placed on the people, not on the oligarchs.

THESIS 1. THE STATE IS ITS CITIZENS, NOT ITS GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES

The state is not the Kremlin. Not the White House. Not bureaucrats. Not oligarchs.

The state is 146 million citizens. Those who pay taxes. Those who work. Those who face the consequences of decisions made without their participation every day.

When the state grants tax breaks to oligarchs, it takes resources from citizens:

It is not the oligarchs who pay. It is the people.

THESIS 2. THE PURPOSE OF THE STATE IS TO PROTECT ITS CITIZENS

The purpose of the state is to uphold the rule of law, protect human rights and freedoms, and seek paths to social compromise between various strata of society.

What does this mean in the context of oil refineries?

Principle	How It Should Be	How It Is
Rule of law	The law is the same for everyone	VICs receive benefits; independent players do not
Protection of human rights	Citizens have the right to affordable fuel	Prices rise while benefits go to oligarchs
Social compromise	Balance between different social strata	Private profits, state-covered losses

The state should protect citizens. But it is protecting the interests of oligarchs.

THESIS 3. WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DEMAND

Citizens have the right to demand from the state:

We have the right to demand answers. Because the state is us.

THESIS 4. THIS IS NOT SUPPORT — THIS IS A LAST ATTEMPT TO SQUEEZE MORE MONEY OUT OF THE COUNTRY

For 30 years, oligarchs have been extracting profits from the country. They built plants at state expense. They privatized assets. They bought yachts and football clubs.

And now that a crisis has come, they come to the state and say: “Give us money. Otherwise, the industry will collapse.”

But the industry will not collapse because the state failed to give benefits.

It will collapse because they failed to invest in it when they had the chance.

This is not support. This is a last attempt to squeeze more money out of the country. Once again, the burden is being placed on the people, not on the oligarchs.

THESIS 5. WHAT IS ACTUALLY NEEDED

1. Not benefits, but an inspection

Before giving money, we need to check:

2. State equity participation

If the state gives money, it should receive a share in the assets. Or the right to control investments.

3. Tying benefits to results

Benefits should not be granted on a promise, but after investments are confirmed. With independent audits and public reporting.

4. Personal responsibility

Top managers and shareholders who extracted profits should bear responsibility for the state of the assets.

5. Beneficiary audit

Before granting benefits, we should understand:

MAIN CONCLUSION

The dots over the i’s have been placed.

The state is us. And we have the right to demand justice.

This bill cannot be settled with tax breaks. It should be paid by those who created the problem.

A QUESTION TO READERS

Dear readers, are you willing to pay for the restoration of refineries through your taxes, tickets, and groceries?

Or is it time to ask those who extracted profits for 30 years to pay?

We have the right to demand answers. Because the state is us.

P.S. We have prepared a full breakdown of the entire history of Russian oil refineries — from privatization to Euro-5 and the 2026 drone attacks. It will be published this evening. Subscribe to SforNews so you don’t miss it.

This material was prepared by the editorial board of “Kafedra” and SforNews. When citing, reference to the original source is mandatory.

Follow new investigations on SforNews (https://sfornews.com/)