Russian researchers proposed a typology of GR models based on an understanding of the role of business as a subject of social policy in modern Russia. Models of "suppression" and "coercion" provide for administrative pressure. Power requires business investments in the implementation of social programs and projects, using an administrative resource. The model of "patronage" presupposes compensation of business expenses for the implementation of social programs in the form of access to power-controlled resources. In this model there is a place for bargaining on the terms of business support for social power programs. In the model of "non-interference of power" the authorities are not interested in social policies conducted by the business. In the “partnership model”, the state authorities realize the importance of business in the development of social and economic relations and builds a constructive dialogue with business, while taking decisions the state is oriented towards the interests of business structures. Under Russian conditions, this model is the most acceptable, since it works on the principle of "profitable for everyone - beneficial to everyone". In the model of "domination", relations between the parties are built on the domination of the state. This model is based on paternalism in the relations that is expressed in ensuring a certain support (financial, administrative, etc.) activity of business structures, delivery of preferences in exchange for loyalty to the government. The ignoring model assumes lack of interaction and is transitional. It is supposed that the state ignores business. . It happens when the power is concentrated on various political and economic problems. In the model of "competition" one subject tries to foresee actions of the competitor. The lack of dialogue and the solution of tasks by efforts of one actor aren't effective. The “confrontation model” assumes active and dynamic interaction of business. The authorities consider the business that does not want to "build in" into the paternalistic model, is dangerous and tries to complicate its activities.

Turovsky studied the factors defining the interest of business groups in entry into regional and local government and influencing on it. Models of management of economy in regions differ that exerts impact on model of interaction of the power and business. The researcher has defined five main models of interaction between business and government elites in the regions of Russia, determined by the extent of their merging and level of conflict:

· The functional model assumes mutual distancing of the power and business. According to the author, the model hampers the development of corruption and preferentialism in relations between government and business.

· The partnership model is characterized by the development of common interests of the state and business related to the development of the region and attraction of investments.

· The model of state patronage - is when the government seeks to control the activities of business entities, preventing reverse effect. The division of business into a "loyal" and "disloyal" and the corresponding system of benefits and privileges arises as a result. Regional authorities of Russia are trying to establish such a model.

· The symbiotic model assumes merging of the power and business. The interests of approximate business become priority for the regional power, high degree of dependence of the power on business is noted.

· The conflict model is characterized by the absence of stable relations between business and power elites. In the region, there are many "twin" relationships between officials and businessmen, and there is no coordinating center for organizing conflict-free interaction, for example, the governor.

Russian business in its development faces barriers in the form of dishonesty of representatives of public authorities that distort the business environment. In many regions, business is held hostage to the personal interests of regulators, representatives of regional and local authorities. Large business, lobbying interests in power, tries to protect itself from prosecutions of security officers, instead of to grow up a new generation of businessmen which can be led. Public authorities have created high degree of uncertainty, business "is in fear", can't carry out long-term planning as there is no concrete framework, condition and laws. For example, in the brewing industry, key laws affecting the distribution of beer products are adopted quickly and without preliminary discussions in society and business. This is the law prohibiting the sale of alcohol at night, the prohibition of drinking alcohol in public places, the ban on advertising beer on television, and so on.

Business in Russia has the extensive nature of development today, new rules and procedures of business are constantly adopted, the internal and external environment of business is unstable, the majority of relationship with the state is based on a personal contact. Nevertheless, attempts of creation of rational business exist.

The main problem in Russia is the lack of the correct laws in the sphere of lobbyism and their observance. The researcher A. Pavroz considers that legally mature lobbyism helps the state to pursue the balanced policy. The need to create a competent law on lobbying exists in Russia, and not only to legalize the actions of big business, but also to allow other economic actors to effectively promote their interests. However, in order to create a really good law, it is necessary to have a base of developed social and economic relations and mechanisms for a dialogue between business and government.

We can identify a number of specific features that are characteristic GR in modern Russia. The first feature is a high role of top managers in GR. This is due to the importance of the work and the lack of qualified top managers in the field of GR.

The second feature of modern Russian GR is a presence at the large companies of the "core" deputy (or groups of deputies) in the State Duma. As a rule, it is the former employee of the company, or the independent deputy to whom the company has helped to be elected.

The third feature that capital offices of the companies carry out GR at the federal level. The solution of tasks of GR of regional level is shifted to affiliated structures in regions, or not carried out at all.

The fourth feature is the lack of transparent budgets. The official budgets of GR companies cover only direct costs. Informal budgets of GR surpass official many times over. The most part of GR activity is hidden and is conducted on informal channels.

The interaction of business structures and public authorities in the regions depends on relationships and changeable sentiments. For example, if the governor and his team are changing in the region, all the rules are changing, building a business for the future becomes difficult.

E. Yasin considers that two resisting forces - the government and a money power - exist in Russia. Rules of the game need to be created to solve the conflicts between them.

Several effective GR tools developed in Russia. The first is an establishment and maintenance of direct personal contacts. For example, the business actors participate or organize a public action (a forum, a conference).

The direct forms of GR communications meaning existence of direct contact of group of pressure with "an access point" have various forms: influence through providing expert information to institutes of the power, participation of businessmen in meetings of committees and the commissions at parliament and executive departments, development of ready bills and their further advance. The most effective GR in the organization is carried out by its head. In the Russian ratings of GR-managers, the lobbying resource of top people is almost always higher than that of professional lobbyists.

The researchers began to study the interaction of state and business in the beginning of the 20th century. In accordance with research trends and approaches at different times, the view on GR was from different directions. In this chapter, we collected the most famous studies of GR.

Analysis of literature has shown that the typologies of current GR models are based on theories of elitism, new institutionalism, networks. The theory of elites presupposes a distance between power elites and business and hierarchical access to elites. In the new institutional approach, the interaction of business and government takes place within an institutional framework. As part of the network approach, all participants are in the political and management network, and the weight of each participant depends on its access to the "nodes".

We considered a pluralistic and neo-corporatist model of interaction between the state and business. In a pluralistic model, business groups operate on the basis of individualism. Neocorporatism assumes that the main actors in interaction with the state are professional and social organizations. In practice, pure models do not occur in the relationship between business and the state, but there is always a predominance of features of a single model.

The study of liberal and coordinated models of interaction between business and the state is relevant. In a liberal model, social issues are resolved within the framework of market relations, but in a coordinated way thanks to the cooperation of stakeholders.

Throughout a theoretical research the concept of lobbyism, its difference from GR and its place in Russia has been considered. We consider lobbying as one of GR technologies, features of lobbying follow from type of representation of interests - pluralism or corporatism.

Besides, we have analyzed researches of the Russian GR. In Russia effective GR in many respects depends on influence of the person who is carrying out interaction with the state. Large companies try to have "their" person in government. Until recently, there was a tendency to lobby the State Duma. However, with the increase in the real influence of the president and government on the economy and production sectors, the trend has changed. As a rule, companies are oriented to interaction with federal authorities, so most of them have their offices in Moscow.

Not all companies allocate expenses on GR in separate article, most often expenses are hidden. As for regions, personal interaction with the head of the region or the cities is built on the place. It isn't long-term.

Tendencies in the relations of the Russian business and the state for long years changed, included personal protection of authorities, attempts to build equal "rules of the game" for all. Within GR a huge number of tools is used: participation in expert communities; presence at meetings at the Ministries; organization and holding of conferences and seminars; use of the public capital of the head of the organization; working visits of the managements; work with the commissions, audits, reports.

Thus, further we analyze the creation of GR strategies of transnational brewing companies in Russia.

2. Analysis of the GR-strategy of the brewing industry in Russia

2.1 The brewing industry in Russia and its role in Russian politics

Historians believe that the first mention of the regulation of brewing was in 1290 in Nuremberg when it was forbidden to use oats, wheat and rye in the preparation of beer products. The first regulatory "Law on the cleanliness of beer" (Reinheitsgebot) was adopted in 1516 by William IV.

In Russia, S. Witte in 1894 for the first time tried to regulate alcohol production. With the outbreak of the First World War, the Russian government introduced a complete ban on the sale of alcohol, but a year later the ban on beer was lifted. The Bolsheviks allowed the sale of beer to 12 degrees. Later, in order to combat the alcoholization of the population, the plan for the Fourth Five-Year Plan included the production of only beer, wine and champagne.

In December 1958, with the adoption of the resolution "On Strengthening the Struggle Against Drunkenness and on Establishing Order in the Trade in Strong Liquor," the production of beer and grape wine was increased instead of vodka. The trend continued with the 1972 resolution. As part of the Gorbachev campaign against alcoholism, they fought with all alcohol.

In the post-Soviet period, large world beer producers came to Russia, which significantly increased production and expanded the assortment.

In 2009, the "Concept of State Policy on Alcohol Abuse and Alcohol Abuse Prevention among the Population of the Russian Federation for the Period to 2020" was approved. The main purpose of the concept is to change the structure of consumption of strong alcohol in favor of the weak. However, a number of legislative barriers in the brewing industry hamper the achievement of this goal.

Today, the world brewing market is represented by two types of beer producers - traditional and craft breweries. Craft breweries produce small volumes and sell goods in the production region, paying more attention to experiments with flavors. It is believed that crafted beer is built in between wine and traditional beer.

Traditional breweries are large factories producing beer under famous brands for mass demand. This is the type of transnational breweries.

Transnational brewing companies occupy a leading place in the world market. In 2014, Anheuser-Busch InBev, SABMiller, Heineken and Carlsberg produced 47% of the world's beer. This market share giants sought for almost 15 years, conducting "universal consolidation". In 2016, in continuation of the merger strategy, AB InBev bought SABMiller.

Regional brewing markets vary considerably. This is due to the type of state's economy, with legislation, excise taxes, demand, religion. In Europe and America brewing is regulated by special laws. 171 There is a single Federal Law for the entire alcohol industry.

An important player in the international brewing market are brewing associations. The American Brewers Association includes more than 4,380 U.S. brewery members and 46,000 members of the American Homebrewers Association. This is more than 70% of the brewing industry. "The Brewers of Europe" unites 29 national associations from European countries, includes 8500 breweries and promotes their unified position in Brussels. In addition, there are organizations that promote the development of brewing, for example, the Siebel Technology Institute in the United States and the Institute of Brewing and Distillation in the UK.

Over the years, the brewing industry in Russia has fulfilled 100% of the tax liabilities to budgets of all levels. The brewing industry is characterized by the absence of a shadow market, as brewing is time-consuming and complex. In addition, breweries create jobs in different regions of Russia, including in related areas.

The Russian beer market is one of the largest in the world. Within the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union (EEMA), Russia and the participating countries are actively working to integrate the brewing market. The adoption of the Technical Regulations of the Customs Union "On the Safety of Alcohol Products" is actively discussed. It is supposed to consolidate international norms of brewing and composition of brewing products. For the development of communications in 2012, the Union of Russian Brewers signed an agreement on cooperation with the Guild of Brewers of Belarus and the Union of Brewers of Kazakhstan.

The active development of the Russian market began in the 90s. Brewing production contributed to the development of related industries: agriculture, machine building, glass and packing production, etc. After the crisis in 1998, foreign companies began to actively enter the brewing market.

With the beginning of the international economic crisis of 2008, there is a regression in the brewing industry. In 2010, the excise tax on beer grew by 200%. The rate of excise tax has become higher than in Germany and the Czech Republic. From 2010 to 2014, beer production fell by a quarter. In 2011, the amendment to 171 Federal Law equated beer to strong alcohol, strict restrictions on advertising spread to the brewing industry, a ban was imposed on the sale and consumption of beer in public places, for sale in non-stationary retail (kiosks). Since 2012, the number of breweries in Russia has begun to decline. To date, the excise tax rate on beer and spirits is approximately equal. In 2017 beer sales decreased by 4-5%. Brewers consider one of the reasons there is excessive regulation of the market. Its role was played by the fall in real incomes of the population, an increase in excise tax, the prohibition of production and sale in plastic containers of more than 1.5 liters, the introduction of the EGAIS system. In 2018 the brewers count on the World Cup.

The Russian brewing market is an oligopoly. Until 2012, 5 large foreign companies were represented on the market: SABMiller RUS, Moscow-Efes Brewery, Carlsberg group, SUN InBev, and United Heineken Breweries. Since 2012, the company "SABMiller RUS" was joined to the "Moscow-Efes Brewery". In 2014, 84% of the market was controlled by 4 foreign companies - Efes, Baltika (Carlsberg), SUN InBev, Heineken. In the spring of 2018, AbInVev and Anadolu Efes merged business in Russia.

Today, 3 transnational players are represented on the Russian brewing market: AB InBev Efes Group, Heineken, Carlsberg group. In 2017, the first place in terms of revenue goes to Baltika, the second to SUN InBev, the third to United Heineken Breweries and the fourth Moscow-Efes Brewery.

Baltika has been producing beer since 1990, it belongs to the Danish company Carlsberg and is the largest Russian exporter. "SUN InBev" exists in the Russian market since 1999 and is a division of the international brewing concern "Anheuser-Busch InBev". "United Breweries Heineken" is the Russian subdivision of the international concern "HEINEKEN N.V." since 2002. "Moscow-Efes Brewery is a division of the international brewing company Anadolu Efes in Russia since 1997.

The brewing industry fully fulfills its tax obligations to the budgets of the Russian regions. Nevertheless, it was subjected to more than 40 legislative restrictions at the federal and regional levels. The production of beer has greatly decreased. Brewers appeal that the production of beer in addition to income creates jobs, promotes the development of innovation, agriculture, and reduces the use of strong drinks in society.

In the current geopolitical trend, sanctions, as well as a program to combat alcoholism, it is increasingly difficult to lobby the interests of brewers effectively. Western companies very tightly regulate the costs of GR-activities, have internal codes and extensive experience of lobbying practices around the world. In addition, Russian legislation strictly controls the activities of non-residents. Therefore, the brewing industry has exemplary GR, which differ in transparency and exclude corruption and shadow practices.

In addition to transnational brewing corporations, business associations play a significant role in GR. Influential associations are authorized by producers to represent a single industry position, to which the state listens.

In Russia, the most influential branch organization is the Union of Russian Brewers. Its members produce more than 90% of beer in Russia, it is a member of the World Brewing Alliance. Since 1999, the Union has initiated legislation regulating the industry, creates self-regulatory documents, represents the industry in GR, interacts with legislators, monitors information on the industry as a whole. All transnational brewing companies operating in Russia are part of the Union. This gives the Union the right to express an industry-wide position.

In 2012, small and medium-sized breweries merged into the National Union of Producers of Beer and Beverages. The noncommercial branch organization "Association of participants of the beer and nonalcoholic market" unites not only the product producers, but also distributors and service organizations. Craft breweries are part of the Craft Depot union, created in 2015.

Brewing companies in tandem with the Union of Russian Brewers began to develop relations with public authorities since the formation of the Union. Large companies submit proposals regarding lobbying and GR for consideration. The Union agrees proposals with all participants, and in communication with the authorities expresses a single industry position. This allows brewers to be heard.

In the beginning of 2000 the Union successfully lobbied the reduction of customs duties on foreign equipment for brewing. By 2005, the rate was reduced by 50%.

In 2003, the Union of Russian Brewers adopted the Code of Honor for Russian brewers. He describes the principles of competition, advertising, responsibility to the consumer. In 2014, a new edition of the code was introduced. The Union did not stop there, and in 2009 adopted the Commercial Communications Code, which ordered beer producers to restrict the stricture of the federal law "On Advertising".

In support of the ban on the sale and consumption of beer by minors, the Union of Russian Brewers in 2004 proposed to fix this at the legislative level. The main instrument GR was an open letter to VV Putin with a proposal. The Union implemented a number of programs in support of the ban, organized information and advertising campaigns. The result was the legislative enactment of the ban.

To strengthen the interaction of the brewers and the Russian agrarian sector with the prospect of import substitution, the Union of Russian Brewers has concluded several agreements with the State Commission for Testing and Preservation of Selection Achievements.

In order to develop legislation in the field of technical regulation taking into account the interests of beer producers, the Union has communicated with the National Institute of Technical Regulation.

The mechanism of interaction between brewers and authorities that is popular in Russia is meetings at forums, conferences, format of round tables. In 2013 at the forum "Beer-2013" the current GR of the Union of Russian Brewers was discussed. The Union initiated the testing of means for measuring the volume of brewing products produced and invited representatives of the Rosalkogolregulirovanie. The results showed errors in the operation of the measuring instruments, the expert working groups decided to send an appeal to the Government of the Russian Federation with the justification of the need to postpone the introduction of the declaration from July 1, 2013 to January 1, 2015. The Union also made an exception to the Technical Regulation "On the Safety of Alcohol Products" plastic containers for brewing products and the cancellation of the notification of the start of production of alcoholic beverages.

Another popular platform for interaction between state and business representatives is the Eurasian Brewery Forum. In 2014, representatives from Russia, Kazakhstan and Belarus discussed the problem of excise taxes, regulation of the turnover of brewing products, plastic packaging and technical regulation.

This is an example of the fact that in Russia the authorities are open to dialogue. The well-coordinated and clear work of the Union shows the state of shortcomings in innovations that can have serious consequences not only for the brewers, but also for the government itself.

Next, we will consider 6 topics on the agenda of the GR brewing industry for several years. These 6 directions (excise, 171 federal law, advertising, ban of plastic packaging, state information system, licensing) are case studies.

2.2 Lobbying of the brewing industry on excises

We consider how the brewers managed to stop the critical growth of excise tax on brewing products.

In 2010, the excise rate on beer was unexpectedly increased by 3 times for brewers compared to 2009. While the excise tax on strong alcohol was increased by only 10%. The tax burden on beer and vodka has roughly equaled, which runs counter to the world practice, where the fight against alcoholism implies a high difference in the tax performance of strong and weak alcohol. The government explained such an act by the desire to raise the excise tax on beer before the Central European.

This decision was made by the authorities during the economic crisis, thereby aggravating it for the brewing industry. Whereas in world practice, governments support budget-forming industries and make allowances for their early restoration. Nevertheless, the regulatory decision significantly supplemented the state budget. In 2010, excise receipts to the budget amounted to 81.98 billion rubles, with 66 billion in 2009.

The government commission, chaired by Deputy Prime Minister A. Khloponin in 2015, approved a government card, which set the task to increase budget revenues from excise taxes and reduce alcohol consumption. The map explained the annual increase in excise taxes from the brewing industry. Manufacturers of the industry understood that the increase in excise tax meant a decline in production indicators and a reduction in revenues to the budget. As for strong alcohol, its taxes remained frozen. The main task for strong alcohol was to fight against the shadow market.

In 2015, the Eurasian Brewery Forum was held, the agenda of which was an increase in excise taxes. Brewers offered to make tax break for low-alcohol beer. Following the discussion, the government did not support the reduction in the excise tax on low-alcohol beer. Then the Union of Russian Brewers announced its intention to achieve a two-three-year moratorium on state regulation of the brewing industry. This would help the brewers develop a plan for further development of the industry. The Union in an open letter to V. Putin expressed a single industry position on the freezing of excises and separate regulation.

The position of the industry was heard and in 2016 and 2017 rates of excise on beer with a share of alcohol 0.5 - 8.6% practically did not increase and amounted to 20 and 21 rubles, respectively. This had a positive impact on the industry, letting it grow stronger.

In 2016, State Duma deputy V. Zvagelsky and business representatives met in the framework of the AlcoCongress meeting. According to him, the Ministry of Finance approved proposals to reduce excise taxes on alcohol.

When in 2016 the Ministry of Finance proposed to introduce an excise on non-alcoholic beer, explaining this by a fashion for such beer among people with above-average prosperity, the Union of Russian Brewers convinced the ministry to abandon the idea. The State Duma retained zero rate for non-alcoholic beer for 2017-2019. Nevertheless, the government can introduce such excise at any time. Now, non-alcoholic beer is on the list of excisable goods, but it has zero excise tax. This is an unprecedented case in the world practice.

Producers of beer believe that raising excise taxes is not an effective tool for replenishing the state budget. This can exacerbate the crisis of the brewing industry and worsen the investment climate. In addition, a predictable increase in the price of the final product will lead to an increase in the share of consumption of strong alcohol.

As practice shows, an increase in excise taxes on the brewing industry does not help to reduce the alcoholization of the population. World practice shows that the consumption of alcohol can be reduced by shifting demand for strong alcohol in the direction of the weak. Because of high excise taxes on beer, the situation is that pure alcohol in beer costs more than in vodka. Therefore, socially unprotected and low-income groups choose strong alcohol.

2.3 Government relations of the brewing industry in the context of regulation

Another important agenda for brewers is the 171 Federal Law regulating the brewing industry, which was established in 1995 for strong alcohol. Over time, it was introduced more than 300 amendments, from 2011 the law began to spread its effect to the brewing industry. To date, the law seems to be a snowball, has many contradictions and does not always accurately determine the types of products. Reforming the law and creating separate regulation is the main task for the brewing industry.

The regulation of a strong and low-alcohol industry by unified norms runs counter to the concept of reducing alcohol consumption of the population, where the main task is to reduce the consumption of strong alcohol in favor of the weak.

Brewers offer to create separate regulation for beer, wine and strong alcohol. In their opinion, this will reduce the regulatory burden on the industry, make beer more affordable for consumption in comparison with strong alcohol, stimulate the development of brewing and related industries, increase the competitiveness of Russian beer in the international market.

In the State Duma, the Chairman of the Committee on Economic Policy, V. Zvagelsky, promotes the proposal for creating separate legislation for the brewing industry. The deputy talked with beer producers at the annual forum "AlcoCongress 2016". In the same year, legislators and representatives of the executive branch made various proposals aimed at weakening the regulation of the brewing industry. An expert area for regulating the industry was created: the Subgroup on Regulation of the Brewing Industry under the Governmental Commission for Enhancing Competitiveness and Alcohol Market Regulation, chaired by Deputy Minister of Economic Development O. Fomichev. The subgroup developed separate regulations for the brewing industry based on 171 Federal Law.

Already at the end of the year, experts commissioned by the Working Group on Improving the Effectiveness of State Regulation and Competition in the Alcohol Market under the Governmental Commission for Enhancing Competitiveness and Alcohol Market Regulation sent a proposal to the Ministry of Economic Development for separate regulation for brewing products. Experts suggested developing a special federal law to improve the regulation of the brewing industry. In their view, this will avoid excessive stress on the brewing and related industries, as well as ensure competitiveness in the international market.

The topic of creating a separate law was also touched upon in the framework of AlcoCongress-2017. 171 The Federal Law is rather complicated for users without special legal training. Constant amendments and contradictions made it confusing and not relevant for the tasks facing it. This determines the urgency of creating a new, ultimately understandable document, where a separate regulation will be prescribed for different types of alcohol products - beer, champagne, wine. This proposal is supported not only by brewers, but also by wine and champagne producers. The Union of Russian Brewers is actively engaged in preparing the law.

In 2016 at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Khloponin noted that the government is ready to listen to the brewers at a meeting of the government commission to increase the competitiveness of the alcohol market and discuss separate regulation of the industry and excises in the long run.

In 2017, separate regulation was discussed by A. Khloponin and the Union of Russian Brewers at the Russian Investment Forum in Sochi, attended by representatives of key ministries, the Federation Council, regional authorities and leading economic institutions. A. Khloponin supported the idea and passed it to the working group on improving the efficiency of state regulation and competition on the alcohol market for consideration and transfer to the Governmental Commission for Enhancing Competitiveness and Alcohol Market Regulation.

Within the framework of the forum "Beer-2017" a round table "Separate regulation of the alcohol market: the formation of unified national approaches to the production and turnover of brewing products" was held, which brought together representatives of the brewing business, associations and the state. The Union presented the concept, as well as the drafted bill of separate regulation.

Discussion of the creation of a separate law was continued at the Gaidar forum in the framework of the panel discussion "Variants of regulation of the alcohol market and their social and economic effects." Anna Dupan, director of the Institute for Problems of Legal Regulation of the School of Law at the Higher School of Economics, believes that the separate regulation of alcohol will increase the transparency of the market.

Representatives of the Higher School of Economics and the Union of Russian Brewers joined forces and prepared a concept of separate regulation for the production and turnover of beer for the Ministry of Economic Development. The main arguments for creating a separate regulation were the following:

· According to the "Concept of Implementing the State Policy on Reducing the Scale of Alcohol Abuse and Prevention of Alcohol Abuse among the Population of the Russian Federation for the Period to 2020," the emphasis on strong alcohol consumption should be shifted towards beer, which should be more accessible.

· The brewing industry is a budget-forming industry for many regions. For several years, beer excise receipts exceeded the preliminary calculations of the Federal Treasury.

· Brewing requires expensive raw materials and qualified personnel. The industry does not have a shadow market.

The proposals for the concept were as follows :

· All prohibitions and restrictions related to the production, turnover and advertising of brewing products should be established only at the federal level. Granting such powers to subjects of the Russian Federation can negatively affect the transparency of the market and competition.

· Remove restrictions on the place and time of sale of brewing products.

· To change the excise tax ratio for weak and strong alcohol in favor of a significant increase in strong.

· Revise the system for measuring the volume of production and take into account a variety of technological nuances.

· It is proposed to review the limitations of advertising for beer.

· Develop a motivation system for producers and sellers to target soft and non-alcoholic beer.

The Brewers registered the expected result of the innovations:

· Legal regulation will become relevant, systemic and useful for the development of the industry.

· The culture of alcohol consumption will shift from strong drinks to weaker ones, alcoholization of the population will decrease.

· The law will promote the development of related industries.

In parallel with the concept of separate regulation, the Union of Russian Brewers and representatives of the Higher School of Economics prepared a draft of amendments 171 of the Federal Law. According to A. Dupan, the project is created on the model of the Tax Code and has 5 chapters. The first chapter contains the general norms of production, turnover, sales of products, the powers of regulatory bodies. The second chapter prescribes control and responsibility. Separate regulation of spirits, wine and beer is given in a separate chapter. Also, the licensing norms for each type of alcohol products are separately spelled out. The new law should become structured and understandable.

The proposals were preceded by numerous discussions. The choice was between creating three separate laws for strong alcohol, wine and beer, or creating one law that enshrines separate regulation. As a result, experts dwelled on the creation of a single law, in which all aspects of the alcohol market. According to A. Dupkan, making amendments and making references within one legal act is more logical and easier for both business and state.

In many European countries (Germany, Belgium, England) for beer, separate legislation is provided. In these countries, the distribution of alcohol consumption outweighs the use of low-alcohol beverages, and the brewing industry is a budget-based.

If we compare the regulation of the brewing industry in Russia and the EEA countries, we see that in Belarus beer is used as a food requirement, Kazakhstan is allowed to sell beer in kiosks.

At the time of writing, no legal acts have been adopted regarding separate regulation. Discussions and consideration of the concept are continuing.

2.4 Opposition to licensing of the brewing industry

Another important issue for brewers is licensing. With the addition in the 171 Federal Law of the names "beer" for a drink containing at least 50% of the ingredients combined and a "beer drink" for the rest of the species, many manufacturers began to produce beverages with the addition of alcohol, which have nothing to do with beer, and call them " beer beverage ". The Brewers appealed to the Rosalkogolregulirovanie (RAR) to abandon the term "beer drink" and solve the problem. In return, Rosalkogolregulirovanie proposed to introduce licensing of drinks made on the basis of beer. Rosalkogolregulirovanie explained the need to introduce licensing a large number of counterfeit products found during inspections. One of the listed violators, the president of the company "RUDO" wrote a letter to the Union of Brewers, in which he denied the allegations of the Rosalkogolregulirovaniye and proposed a number of measures to improve the situation in the alcohol industry. Brewers believe that the problem can be solved by canceling the term "beer beverage" or clarifying it to exclude non-malted products from it.

The bill on the licensing of beer and beer production was submitted to the State Duma on March 3, 2014. It was proposed to oblige to receive a license of brewers, whose volume exceeds 100 thousand deciliters per year. The official response of the Government to the bill states that its provisions do not correlate with the concept of the Federal Law, and there has not been a sufficient law enforcement practice of state regulation of the production and turnover of beer and beer beverages. In the end, the Government of the Russian Federation did not support the bill. The Union of Russian Brewers opposed licensing. Its individual participants sent appeals to government agencies and the curator of the alcohol industry A. Khloponin. Appeals indicated that existing tools allow the state to fully control the brewing industry. Rospotrebnadzor controls production and turnover of products, there are no real reasons for introducing licensing of beer beverages. Analyzing the arguments of the brewers, Rosalkogolregulirovanie in the letter of reply to the Union agreed that licensing is unnecessary. In addition, the brewers appealed to the Ministry of Finance with a proposal to develop a simplified procedure for access to online sales, which does not require the receipt of licenses.

The issue of licensing is not yet closed. In 2018, the Ministry of Finance drafted bills on licensing and labeling beer. Nevertheless, beer and beer drinks are not included in the final list of goods subject to obligatory marking from 2019. At the April meeting of the government and brewing unions on licensing the brewing industry, the parties came to the conclusion that instead of licensing a register of producers. The format of the register has not yet been developed, but the participants in the brewing industry themselves actively participate in its creation. The National Union of Producers of Beer and Beverages proposed a number of criteria for inclusion in the register and created a vote. The Ministry of Finance and the RAR approved these criteria. The timing of the introduction of the registry has not yet been determined. In general, the brewing industry defended its position: licensing was not introduced. The active work of the Union of Russian Brewers helped convince the government of the uselessness of this idea. Nevertheless, this does not mean that the topic with licensing is closed. Most likely, after some time the government will again try to introduce it, and then the brewers will look for new arguments in support of their position.

2.5 Government relations of the brewing industry regarding a plastic bottle

For five years, brewers were concerned about the restriction of plastic containers. The brewing industry has made quite a few steps to self-restraint in the hope of avoiding legislative prohibitions.

In 2014, the State Duma adopted in the first reading a law prohibiting the bottling of beer into plastic over 0.5 liters and containing more than 4% alcohol. Restriction of plastic containers would lead to a significant increase in the price of beer, a reduction in production and a decrease in the receipt of excise taxes to the budget. This would have an impact on adjacent to the brewing industry, the production of plastic containers. The bill was adopted swiftly, there were no discussions with the profile ministries and business associations. The explanatory note to the bill informs that plastic packaging reduces the price of beer and gives an opportunity to buy immediately a large amount, which leads to alcoholization of the population. This identity goes against the antialcohol program, which aims to shift consumption of strong alcohol in favor of a weak.

The brewers reacted to the bill with letters to the Prime Minister of the Russian Federation DA Medvedev and the heads of the relevant ministries, where they reported that it would hit the production indicators of the brewing and related industries, would lead to a sharp increase in the price of beer, but would not yield results in combating alcoholism. The letter to D.Medvedev was signed by the leaders of six associations. The letter described the advantages and safety of plastic containers for beer production, and also requested to stop the adoption of the law. The result was a delay in the consideration of the bill in the State Duma.

Russian colleagues were supported by foreign brewers. The Union "Brewers of Europe" and the International Brewing Union sent a letter to the Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation Igor Shuvalov, where they declared the safety of plastic bottles and a negative impact on international investment. Director of the company "Bouquet of Chuvashia" wrote to the Deputy Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation A. Khloponin. The director of the Syktyvkarsky Brewery sent an appeal to I. Artemyev, head of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation.

This prompted the Union of Russian Brewers to voluntarily abandon the production of beer in a plastic bottle of over 2.5 liters for low-alcohol beer, and more than 2 liters for strong beer. The Brewers assumed that this was a reasonable compromise and would help legislators to abandon the ban. The result was the prevention of a complete ban on plastic bottles for bottling beer.

n the fall of 2015, brewers agreed to a voluntary limit of up to 1.5 liters of beer production in plastic. There was a lot of discussion with different moods around the limitation of a plastic bottle. Participants of the Union of Russian Brewers and the Association of Plastic Producers and Processors signed a memorandum "On Supporting Fair Competition and Preventing Discrimination of Certain Types of Packaging for the Production of Brewing Products." The producers agreed to conduct fair competition and not lobby for limiting the output of other producers. Aluminum and glass producers were invited to sign, but they saw a pressure on their industry and power, and informed Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Khloponin and the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) about it. Manufacturers of aluminum and glass have already received a warning from the FAS for the desire to "lobby for measures to increase the volumes and markets for the sale of glass products, including limiting the use of a plastic bottle".

In the same year, representatives of the industry met with the leadership of the Rosalkogolregulirovanie (RAR). In support of the norm of 1.5 liters for plastic containers for beer, the Deputy Chairman of the Committee on Economic Policy and Entrepreneurship of the State Duma of the Russian Federation Viktor Zvagelsky. According to him, such a norm is supported by the State Duma's profile committee, the government and vice-premier A. Khloponin.

In 2016, the law on limiting the production and turnover of alcoholic beverages in plastic more than 1.5 liters was signed. On January 1, 2017, the law came into force. Thus, the brewers were persuaded to increase the minimum volume for the production of beer in a plastic bottle from 0.5 liters to 1.5. For a long time, brewers have tried to make an amendment to permit the production of beer in plastic more than 1.5 liters for export. Russian beer is represented on the markets of Mongolia, Belarus, Uzbekistan. The Union of Russian Brewers achieved the inclusion of an export amendment to the bill, but was later rejected, arguing that it would be difficult to track which market produces products in large plastic bottles. In the summer of 2017 the export amendment was again introduced for consideration by the State Duma deputy I. Gilmutdinov. The amendment was adopted at the end of 2017, it allows from August 1, 2017 production and turnover of beer and beer beverages in plastic containers of more than 1.5 liters for export purposes.

The Union of Russian Brewers and its participants believe that the state is ready to consider the industry's position in various areas of regulation. The St. Petersburg Brewers' Forum showed a good dynamic of constructive dialogue between the industry and the authorities.

2.6 Government relations of the brewing industry on the issue of advertising

Since we equate beer with strong alcohol, strong restrictions on advertising of brewing products have come into force. According to the authorities, this contributes to the goals of the anti-alcohol campaign.

Since 2004, advertising of beer on television in the morning and afternoon, as well as in stadiums. Since 2005 beer advertising has been toughened and banned from using images of people and animals. In 2009, the bill on the complete ban on beer advertising was under consideration. Everything was limited to a ban on dialogue behind the scenes of advertising.

With the equating of beer to strong alcohol, the same advertising restrictions began to apply to him. Thus, from September 1, 2012, beer advertising was completely banned.

In 2014, the State Duma amended the Law on Advertising, allowing advertising of brewing products until the end of 2018, in accordance with the requirements of FIFA for the World Cup, which will be held in Russia in 2018.

The Union of Russian Brewers in 2016 adopted the Code of Commercial Communications on non-alcoholic beverages based on beer, which establishes voluntary restrictions on beer advertising in accordance with moral principles. In particular, advertising with religious or national overtones that offends the feelings of certain groups of people is prohibited. To advertise non-alcoholic beer, a special pictogram was introduced.

It should be noted that the brewers took a responsible approach to advertising beer. After the World Cup, the Union of Russian Brewers will continue to work on maintaining current advertising permits. Now brewing companies can place advertising in stadiums during competitions, in print media, in sports broadcasts and on sports channels. Manufacturers of beer actively promote the advertising of non-alcoholic beer.

Advertising of beer in the member countries of the Eurasian Economic Union: Armenia, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan is regulated milder, there is prohibited outdoor advertising and in social institutions, but it is allowed in print media and radio, as well as at night on television. In Kazakhstan beer advertising is completely banned. In the US and some European countries, beer advertising is restricted by domestic codes of manufacturers.

2.7 The reaction of the brewing industry to the introduction of the state automated information system

In 2015, the Unified State Automated Information System (USAIS) was introduced, to which all breweries with an annual turnover of more than 300 thousand deciliters were to be connected. The system already worked in the hard alcohol industry, but had a lot of mistakes and shortcomings, which created difficulties for producers. The Brewers held conferences, roundtables to share their experience in the system and discuss how to influence the state to improve it and make it easier to use. In 2015, in Novosibirsk, a round table "Issues of introducing USAIS for brewing products in wholesale and retail trade organizations" was held with the participation of breweries, regional authorities and Rosalkogolregulirovaniye. Producers proposed to postpone the introduction of the system for retail. According to the brewers, additional time contributed to understanding the implementation of the new system.

The introduction of USAIS required financial and time costs from enterprises and from outlets. The slightest mistake could cost a license and a fine. In addition, manufacturers could not ship products to retail outlets that were not connected to the system. Against the introduction of such a system were the Head of the “OPORA RUSSIA” Commission for Small Format Commerce and the Chairman of the Board of the National Union of Beer and Beverage Producers.

Branch associations actively interacted with authorities. Union of Russian Brewers November 20, 2015 wrote a letter to the Rosalkogolregulirovanie (RAR) with a request to postpone the introduction of the system and explain some of the points. In the response, the RAR considered that there were no problems with the system and it was senseless to introduce a delay.

In 2016 State Duma deputy Viktor Zvagelsky proposed to release from USAIS beer producers that produce less than 300 thousand deciliters per year.