The management of budget allocation is not standardized, and the discipline of budget execution is not strong. First, some provincial special fund expenditure budgets have not been broken down into units and projects. In 2020 , the provincial special fund expenditure budget approved by the Provincial Department of Finance has not been broken down into units and projects. Second, the provincial state-owned capital expenditure budget was issued late. In December 2020 , the Provincial Department of Finance issued the investment funds of the Provincial Enterprise Science and Technology Innovation Investment Fund and special funds for the development of high-level talents. Third , the budget execution rate of some departments and units is low. The implementation rate of the 2020 project expenditure budgets issued by the Provincial Department of Finance to some provincial budget units is low.
Some matters in the financial final accounts (draft) are inaccurate. One is to underestimate provincial income. In 2020 , the Provincial Department of Finance used the urban radioactive waste collection and storage fee income of 1.5455 million yuan as the financial stock fund, which is not included in the provincial income. Second, the income from state-owned capital has not been turned over to the general public budget in full. In 2020 , the Provincial Department of Finance was required to pay 257.14 million yuan to the general public budget from state-owned capital gains , and actually paid 200 million yuan, a shortfall of 57.14 million yuan.
Budget performance management needs to be strengthened. First, the provincial budget performance management system has not been fully established. In 2020 , the Provincial Department of Finance did not formulate performance management measures for provincial-level transfer payments to local governments, provincial-level department expenditures, and provincial-level policy expenditures, and revised performance management work assessment methods (trial) in accordance with the requirements of implementation plan. Second, the special fund performance self-assessment, evaluation and post-investment project evaluation were not carried out. In 2020 , the Provincial Development and Reform Commission did not form a performance self-assessment report such as special funds for the development of modern service industries as required, did not evaluate the performance of the provincial industrial structure adjustment guidance special funds, and did not carry out post-evaluation work on completed investment projects.
8 colleges and universities have no budget and over-budget expenditures of 13.8656 million yuan. 3 cities and counties have no detailed budget preparation; 1 county has no budget allocation of 65 million yuan.
4 counties and districts have not implemented the requirements for publicity of charging standards; 9 cities, counties and districts have irregular management of industry associations; 8 counties and districts have irregular management and use of employment stabilization funds; 2 counties and districts have not reached the level of employment stabilization training. The result is that the number of employed people is small or no one is employed. The publicity of employment stabilization policies in 2 counties and districts is not in place.
1 entity failed to implement the centralized government procurement system of 1.7718 million yuan, paid 1 million yuan in advance for the project in violation of regulations, and irregularly managed 2.9733 million yuan of project funds.
58 large-scale scientific research equipment in 2 colleges and universities failed to achieve shared benefits; The internal budget review system for scientific research projects and the integrity system for the use of funds have not been established in 3 colleges and universities.
3 enterprises continued to increase their reliance on debt financing; 2 enterprises did not strictly implement the loan and risk classification and fund collection system; 1 enterprise issued an overdue entrusted loan of 421 million yuan; in 3 enterprises there is a lack of evaluation system for property acquisition effect.
External financing exceeds the limit approved by the board of directors. The loan is approved in reverse process, and financing guarantee is provided to the subordinate enterprises that exceed the debt index . 7 projects of 2 enterprises suffered investment losses or poor returns .
1 industrial project in 1 district has not established a mechanism for linking public interests; 4 environmental improvement projects in 2 counties and districts are idle, while the 2counties' rural domestic sewage and garbage treatment is not in place; the public service level of the 6 resettlement communities in 3 counties is low.
5 counties and districts did not work in place for the protection of biodiversity in Qinling Mountains.
117 enterprises in 4 counties (new towns) are not strictly controlled for water intake (use); 4 counties and districts have insufficient coverage of the construction of supporting pipeline networks for sewage treatment plants;The operation of domestic waste landfills in 3 cities and counties is not compliant.
4,055,700 yuan of non-standard implementation of medical insurance reduction and exemption policies in 2 cities; 2,290,000 yuan of illegal payment by medical insurance institutions in 6 cities ; 5,798,100 yuan of medical insurance funds illegally enjoyed by some medical institutions in 9 cities through excessive medical treatment and evasion of fees 10,000 yuan; 2,923 people from 6 cities participated in the insurance repeatedly.
1,453 key groups in 3 cities did not receive 469,000 yuan of pension subsidy funds ; 1,767,300 yuan of interest was understated in pension insurance accounts in 9 cities.
36 counties and districts did not set up special funds for improving the implementation level of compulsory education; 18 cities, counties, districts and schools did not implement the government procurement system 12.8396 million yuan.
34 housing projects in 5 districts have not been approved for construction; 4 cities, counties and districts have not established housing rental information service platforms; 13 2,389 lessees in 1 city, county and district are not qualified for affordable housing program; 5 cities, counties and districts have 11,987,800 yuan of rent receivable and uncollected.
7 projects did not strictly implement the basic construction procedures; 2 projects increased investment by 51.4093 million yuan due to unreasonable design or non-standard management; 8 projects over-calculated investment; 4 projects exceeded budget estimates ; 6 projects' completion acceptance has not been organized after the trial operation has been completed for 3 years.
5 enterprises did not contribute 687 million yuan to their subsidiaries; 6 enterprises did not have a sound legal person governance structure and internal control system; 3 enterprises retained special funds of 245 million yuan; the current accounts of 5 enterprises have been held for a long time and have not been cleared; 3 enterprises have long-term idle state-owned assets such as land; 55 construction projects of 8 enterprises are not strictly managed; 4 enterprises have not paid taxes and fees of 31 million yuan in time.
9 companies and 30 funds have a single fundraising channel , and the paid-in fund rate is only 33.65% ; 4 companies and 5 funds are not filed as required; 5 companies and 13 funds are idle with 829 million yuan; 753 million yuan of project investment in 4 funds of 2 enterprises has the risk of loss.
4 enterprises and their affiliated units did not strictly implement policies such as ecological environmental protection and land; 2 enterprises did not dispose of them within the prescribed time 11 " zombie companies " ; 3 companies have imperfect corporate governance structures; 3 companies have not fulfilled their business objectives, level reduction and other indicators.
No comments:
Post a Comment