Maria Girich: “Maternity capital for the second child should be larger than for the first”

«Today, maternity capital is given to families who have their first child. And if almost Rb700,000 is given for it, then for the second child — only Rb220,000.

It is important to realize that fertility is really stimulated by the birth of the second child, not the first. The decision to give birth to the first child is most often made without taking into account any state support. The birth of the second and subsequent children is often associated with the financial capacity of the family, so the maternity capital may have the character of an «economic» argument when making a decision.

This is confirmed by a number of studies. For example, earlier NES experts found that maternity capital is effective for the birth of the 2nd and 3rd child: from 2007 (since the introduction of maternity capital) to 2017, the share of births of 2nd and 3rd children increased 2-fold. Moreover, the birth rate began to grow actively in the summer of 2007 — 9 months after the announcement of the introduction of the federal maternity capital program (the birth rate jumped by 10%). At the same time, initially (until 2020) the maternity capital program was designed for the second and subsequent children, but not for the first-born. And at that moment it showed its effectiveness. At the same time, the first-born child is most often born regardless of economic aspects, so it is important to support the birth of the second and large families (from three children). Therefore, it is possible to return to the model until 2020 and redistribute the largest part of the maternity capital to the second child.

According to OECD research, maternity capital in all its forms, including tax deductions, baby bonuses and other payments, stimulate fertility. For example, the newborn allowance introduced in Quebec, Canada, in 1988 provided a lump-sum payment of CAD 500 for the birth of the 1st and 2nd child and 8 quarterly payments of CAD 375 for the birth of the 3rd child and subsequent children. These amounts were indexed in subsequent years, but the program was discontinued in 1997. Researchers have estimated that the birth rate increased by 12% overall during this period (Milligan 2005). However, the program was expensive: it cost CAD 1.4 bn over 8 years, based on today’s prices — CAD 25,000 for each child born. A similar program in Australia increased the birth rate by about 3.2% over 10 years.

At the same time, the UN study notes that the maternity capital policy in Russia has had a negative impact — the birth rate has increased primarily in poor, poorly educated families, although maternity capital can really stimulate the birth rate, especially if it is provided for the 2nd and subsequent children, which can indirectly stimulate the birth of the 1st child.

Answering the question — what are the alternatives, it is possible to shift spending on the maternity capital program from stimulating the birth of the first child to stimulating the birth of the second child," the expert said.