ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ Том 2 (43), 2022 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 FACTORS OF VENTURE CAPITAL INVESTMENT ACTIVATION Telnova H. ABSTRACT Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Senior Research Fellow at The relevance of the topic consists in the fact that due to limited start-up capital, high the Department of Organization of Scientific Work and Gender Issues, risk and uncertainty about profitability, lack of experience and, consequently, a positive Kremenchuk Flight College of Kharkiv credit history, venture capital is recognized as the main source of financing the devel- National University of Internal Affairs, opment of many companies in the early stages. The purpose of the paper is to prove Ukraine; the hypothesis of the determining influence of fiscal factors of stimulation of research ORCID: 0000-0002-5724-7229 and development and a set of stable economic and political preconditions for expanding Petchenko М. the presence of venture capital in the country. Based on the data of twenty European Ph. D. in Economics, Associate countries for 2007—2018 (240 observation points), a regression dependence of the Professor at the Department of Social amount of invested venture capital on tax preferences in research and development, and Economic Disciplines, Kharkiv National University of Internal Affairs, research and development costs and country risk were constructed. The assessment of Ukraine; the parameters of the created regression model made it possible to prove that it can be e-mail: klk.nauka@gmail.com used for forecasting volumes of investment of venture capital at the change of the ORCID: 0000-0003-1104-5717 (Corresponding author) factors of fiscal policy and reduction of macroeconomic risks. The directions of activation of venture financing for the countries are formed: for the development of high technol- Tkachenko S. ogies and the implementation of innovative ideas, the state should apply tax benefits Ph. D. in Economics, Associate and preferences for research activities of small and medium enterprises; expansion is Professor, Head of the Department of necessary for state support for innovation through the consolidation of state and local Social and Economic Disciplines, Kharkiv National University of Internal budgets on research programs, the creation of research and production clusters, tech- Affairs, Ukraine; nology incubators, support for individuals in their innovation initiatives; the high risk of ORCID: 0000-0002-5816-4185 the country not only leads to a decrease in the inflow of foreign venture capital: domes- tic investors will withdraw their venture capital and direct it to countries where the Hurzhyi Т. Ph. D. in Economics, Head of the Post- political and economic situation is more stable, which further deepens the economic graduate and Doctorate Department shocks of the national economy and leads to political ones. The implementation of these of Dnipropetrovsk State Technical measures will promote the development of high-tech enterprises, job creation in the University, Dnipro, Ukraine; ORCID: 0000-0003-3206-7448 country by overcoming the problem of limited financial resources through investment of venture capital. Pyrohov S. Ph. D. student, Dnipropetrovsk State Keywords: venture capital, factor, fiscal policy, risk, model Technical University, Dnipro, Ukraine; ORCID: 0000-0002-8656-758X JEL Classіfіcatіon: G24, H20, G32, O10, O30 INTRODUCTION Received: 04/11/2021 Due to limited start-up capital, high risk and uncertainty about profitability, lack of work Accepted: 15/12/2021 experience and, consequently, a positive credit history, venture capital is recognized as Published: 29/04/2022 the main source of financing the development of many companies at the early stages. It is a long-term investment in innovative and high-tech projects. Due to the high risk and, at the same time, the possibility of obtaining high profits, venture financing activ- ities are influenced by a number of factors. The task of a venture investor is to assess business initiatives, the conditions of their implementation, the potential for profit. According to the association Invest Europe [1], whose statistics are recognized by the European Commission and the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and De- © Copyright velopment) as an authoritative source of data on European private and venture capital, 2022 by the author(s) venture capital in 2020 reached almost 15.5 billion Euros. The predominant sources of financing for venture capital in Europe are government agencies (30 %), family offices & private individuals (18 %), and funds & other asset managers (16 %) [1]. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Venture capital investments in 2020 reached 12 billion Euros. If in 2019 most invest- Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 ments took place at the stage of formation of companies (product or service was fully 46 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE Volume 2 (43), 2022 developed, technologies were tested for mass production and sale), then in 2020 the initial investment is 52 % of total venture capital. The most funded companies are in the field of ICT, biotechnology and healthcare, and consumer goods and services [1]. However, it should be noted that the data on the presence of venture capital differ across European countries, confirming the view that there are macroeconomic preconditions that act as incentives or disincentives for the development of venture capital. THE ANALYSIS OF THE RESEARCH AND STATEMENT OF THE TASK Research by foreign scholars [2] on the venture capital impact on socio-economic indices of countries indicates that venture capital has a positive influence on company growth, and the effect of its investment is manifested in the growth of the economy and employment increase. A number of studies by foreign authors deal with identifying risk factors in venture financing. J. Brander, R. Amit, W. Antweiler [3] study the pooling of investment capital in venture funds and prove their effectiveness through the possibility of portfolio diversification and risk reduction. M. Cherif, S. Elouaer [4] point out that, in addition to contracting, phased financing is an effective mechanism for venture capitalists via reducing problems within formation a symmetry and con- trolling the risks posed by managerial behavior. Other researchers determine the dependence of venture financing models due to the differences in venture capital sources. Comparing the sources of funds and investment activities of venture capital in Germany, Israel, Japan and the United Kingdom, scientists [5] find out that the sources of venture capital funds differ significantly in different countries: bank capital predominates in Germany, corporate capital in Israel, insurance companies in Japan and pension funds in the United Kingdom. The authors point out that this difference in funding sources creates differences in investment models: banks and pension funds support venture capital investment at a later stage than individual and corporate funds, especially in Israel and the UK. G. Andrieu [6] proves the existence of differences between different types of venture funds, in particular, related to banks or industrial companies. A team of researchers [7] on the basis of econometric analysis finds out that funds with bank venture capital show a lower financial risk than companies that do not attract it. Other authors [8] argue that a larger state share in venture capital is associated with a longer duration of the investment. Y. Li and S. Zahra [9] study the level of venture capital activity in different countries and suggest that its differences depend on the levels of formal institutional development, namely the response to incentives provided by formal institutions depending on different cultural conditions. The authors prove that formal institutions have a positive effect on the level of venture capital activity. In our opinion, the study of venture capital should continue in the direction of determining the fiscal and economic-political factors influencing its formation and investment, namely: influence on the formation of venture capital in the country of state support for innovation through a system of expenditures and tax preferences for research and development, as well as systems of possible political, financial, credit and economic shocks, which are specific to a particular country and are embodied in the risk assessment of the country. THE PURPOSE OF THE PAPER The purpose of the paper is to prove the hypothesis of the determining influence of fiscal factors of incentives of research and development and a set of stable economic and political preconditions for expanding the presence of venture capital in the country. To achieve this purpose, it is necessary to use methods of econometric modeling in the processing of a sufficiently repre- sentative statistical sample. To compile the statistical base, annual data for twenty European countries in the period 2007—2018 were used, i.e. modeling is based on 240 observation points. RESEARCH RESULTS OECD statistics were selected as the information base for the data on venture capital (y) by European countries [10] (Table 1). DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 47 ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ Том 2 (43), 2022 Table 1. The amount of invested venture capital by European countries, USD million Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Austria 85.42 90.77 103.99 57.48 135.35 56.14 78.76 79.25 124.72 62.96 121.76 102.02 90.42 116.67 Belgium 268.89 180.36 214.96 124.12 167.00 121.51 157.75 164.38 109.17 167.38 230.76 343.27 395.83 431.92 Czech 3.46 60.85 38.60 30.60 12.80 6.75 5.90 7.35 2.84 5.00 6.80 17.97 27.20 16.23 Republic Denmark 259.02 260.46 110.48 85.28 202.25 100.23 113.27 89.65 80.62 102.52 114.19 363.32 352.44 284.32 Estonia 2.22 6.11 6.39 9.11 2.25 9.70 6.58 14.10 4.21 8.02 1.75 17.90 40.06 25.21 Finland 183.40 221.76 130.06 137.03 121.75 103.49 169.66 163.87 121.35 143.68 156.83 265.47 321.57 564.49 France 1079.59 982.68 718.03 735.73 703.62 609.87 880.42 798.35 942.55 960.59 1,423.64 1751.67 2164.94 2326.90 Germany 1097.06 1614.46 908.71 933.25 1010.17 734.43 972.55 910.65 969.84 1,212.78 1,459.84 1772.35 2379.67 2218.85 Hungary 12.45 15.53 1.75 24.97 52.70 45.34 29.13 58.50 67.49 46.85 42.74 86.97 154.87 143.38 Ireland 100.28 132.74 111.98 64.56 89.42 96.23 158.94 99.84 97.94 240.10 140.14 352.40 184.93 388.13 Italy 171.66 277.63 122.60 106.90 149.53 133.16 111.95 73.09 76.69 87.56 119.07 221.06 261.12 386.28 Luxembourg 21.53 49.14 7.99 4.65 7.70 15.09 9.25 5.70 6.54 4.37 18.78 18.73 17.31 51.02 Netherlands 350.76 407.82 226.85 199.34 233.90 225.04 266.96 242.53 190.09 250.04 394.58 489.65 701.94 1029.89 Norway 368.06 266.38 181.60 226.55 179.24 133.88 92.44 120.30 72.12 111.28 100.02 98.31 158.31 118.40 Poland 65.73 97.18 1.61 5.15 39.53 13.33 21.71 31.69 33.85 50.59 55.27 43.82 112.98 127.83 Portugal 154.63 84.16 48.65 73.41 17.68 19.54 51.81 72.85 65.11 22.95 29.25 42.68 51.49 43.52 Slovenia 0.66 0.74 1.00 0.44 2.93 1.93 5.96 2.88 3.81 3.92 2.58 0.35 - 3.01 Spain 368.56 406.37 285.82 283.18 343.94 268.64 229.82 376.08 477.79 487.90 618.95 632.09 655.18 918.38 Sweden 572.69 598.42 318.84 364.78 356.34 288.43 324.16 382.61 193.09 261.57 279.73 517.07 402.57 526.29 United 2033.48 2188.74 951.77 959.95 1124.94 944.49 820.15 1101.27 1207.20 1006.67 2405.17 2747.64 3349.98 3192.65 Kingdom Source: OECD data [10] It is a recognized fact that venture capital is mostly used to finance innovative projects. In our opinion, the factors of fiscal policy (taxation and public funding of research and development) contribute to attracting investment in the form of venture capital. The statistical base on the level of tax preferences for research expenditures for small and medium-sized enterprises (it is mostly their research that mainly requires funding from venture funds) is formed on the basis of [11] (Table 2). Table 2. The level of tax preferences for research expenditure Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Austria 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.17 Belgium 0.1 0.13 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.15 Czech Republic 0.27 0.23 0.21 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 Denmark -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0 0 0.07 Estonia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Finland -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.28 0.22 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 France 0.21 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.44 0.44 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43 0.41 Germany -0.03 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.19 Hungary 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.16 0.11 0.11 0.26 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.22 0.2 0.2 0.19 Ireland 0.21 0.21 0.26 0.26 0.25 0.27 0.26 0.27 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.32 Italy 0.12 0.12 0.12 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 -0.02 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.09 0.07 0.11 Luxembourg -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 Netherlands 0.24 0.24 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.27 0.26 0.26 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Norway 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.22 Poland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.06 0.11 0.22 0.22 0.22 Portugal 0.28 0.28 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.4 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 0.39 Slovenia 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.2 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.21 Spain 0.39 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 Sweden -0.02 -0.02 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 -0.01 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.11 United Kingdom 0.11 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.23 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 Source: OECD data [11] Gross input for research work, which we propose to determine as the second factor (x2) – Table 3, include the total input of all resident companies, research institutes, university and government laboratories. 48 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE Volume 2 (43), 2022 Table 3. Gross input for research, USD million Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Austria 9,946 10,721 10,427 11,148 11,232 12,351 12,524 13,159 13,143 13,699 13,758 14,272 14,653 14,127 Belgium 8,923 9,384 9,487 10,068 10,792 11,411 11,712 12,098 12,648 13,310 14,294 15,595 17,616 8,923 Czech Republic 4,247 4,152 4,129 4,361 5,167 5,873 6,234 6,643 6,853 6,122 6,818 7,557 7,904 * Denmark 6,824 7,485 7,841 7,627 7,802 7,917 7,962 7,937 8,516 8,901 8,674 8,967 9,056 * Estonia 417 467 444 514 806 767 631 539 563 492 537 619 743 * Finland 8,098 8,650 8,395 8,596 8,607 7,972 7,605 7,290 6,688 6,523 6,739 6,895 7,085 * France 52,675 53,766 56,044 56,271 57,850 58,969 59,574 61,190 61,629 61,077 61,945 62,813 64,053 * Germany 88,724 95,206 94,163 97,655 104,287 107,565 106,323 110,276 114,098 116,904 124,577 128,824 132,511 * Hungary 2,385 2,468 2,660 2,690 2,863 3,007 3,378 3,420 3,534 3,180 3,703 4,467 4,577 * Ireland 3,129 3,365 3,706 3,727 3,673 3,682 3,739 3,943 3,839 3,882 4,421 4,572 5,084 * Italy 27,435 27,911 27,762 28,240 28,057 28,594 28,932 29,761 29,995 31,017 31,620 33,119 34,254 * Luxembourg 824 830 820 770 769 667 707 716 769 802 798 761 752 * Netherlands 13,743 13,641 13,490 13,985 15,680 15,807 17,761 18,158 18,282 18,724 19,518 19,614 20,423 * Norway 4,688 4,933 4,957 4,885 5,040 5,199 5,349 5,533 6,062 6,258 6,683 6,814 7,021 * Poland 4,460 4,957 5,621 6,351 6,900 8,279 8,294 9,249 10,232 10,134 11,410 14,052 16,079 * Portugal 3,643 4,693 4,977 4,920 4,591 4,167 3,967 3,893 3,820 4,014 4,280 4,503 4,782 * Slovenia 941 1,110 1,143 1,311 1,556 1,608 1,594 1,510 1,433 1,352 1,317 1,434 1,556 * Spain 20,706 22,312 22,098 22,075 21,467 20,291 19,637 19,392 19,815 19,883 20,818 21,864 22,468 * Sweden 13,850 14,794 13,848 13,689 14,212 14,320 14,625 14,284 15,489 15,949 16,940 17,056 17,743 * United Kingdom 41,543 41,340 41,036 41,165 41,888 40,643 42,696 44,476 45,666 46,830 48,268 50,275 51,702 * * Data are not published. Source: OECD data [12] Of course, public sources make up only a part of funding, but the effect of such an infusion into the field of science should become the basis for the public policy of financing innovative development. It is appropriate to determine the indicator of the country risk premium as the last factor (x3) of the model. Its statistics are published by the famous expert A. Damodaran [13], and it compiles a number of political, financial, credit and economic components (Table 4). Table 4. Country risk premium Country 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Austria 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.006 0.000 0.004 Belgium 0.005 0.011 0.005 0.004 0.011 0.011 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.009 0.007 0.008 0.001 0.006 Czech Republic 0.011 0.021 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.005 0.006 Denmark 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Estonia 0.011 0.021 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.008 0.010 0.006 0.007 Finland 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.006 0.000 0.004 France 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.006 0.006 0.008 0.007 0.006 0.007 0.002 0.005 Germany 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Hungary 0.012 0.026 0.024 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.038 0.038 0.039 0.031 0.025 0.031 0.011 0.021 Ireland 0.000 0.000 0.005 0.023 0.036 0.036 0.038 0.024 0.019 0.017 0.010 0.012 0.002 0.008 Italy 0.008 0.015 0.009 0.008 0.015 0.026 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.027 0.022 0.031 0.018 0.021 Luxembourg 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 Netherlands 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 Norway 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.000 Poland 0.012 0.024 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.010 0.012 0.009 0.008 Portugal 0.008 0.015 0.009 0.013 0.041 0.049 0.054 0.038 0.039 0.036 0.029 0.031 0.006 0.021 Slovenia 0.008 0.015 0.009 0.008 0.013 0.026 0.038 0.038 0.035 0.031 0.018 0.022 0.011 0.012 Spain 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.004 0.013 0.030 0.033 0.029 0.030 0.027 0.022 0.022 0.007 0.016 Sweden 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 United Kingdom 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.002 0.006 Source: Damodaran online data [13] Based on the above data, regression modeling was performed by 260 points (because of the lack of data on gross ex- penditures for research work for 2020, the indicators for 2007-2019 are included). It allowed determining the dependence DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 49 ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ Том 2 (43), 2022 of the amount of invested venture capital (y) on the preferences in taxation of research and development (x1), the amount of research and development expenditure (x2) and the country risk (x3): у = 10.2829 + 689.2021∙х1 + 0.0136∙х2 – 6296.2675∙х3. (1) Let us assess the parameters of the created model. The multiple correlation coefficient is R = 0.7857, the determination coefficient, respectively, R2 = 0.78572 = 0.6173. Thus, it is possible to confirm the existence of a close relationship between the amount of invested venture capital and the above factors. Let us check the significance of the parameters of the multiple regression equation by t-statistics. Ttable = (256; 0.025) = 0; (2) 𝑡0 = 0.304 ≻ 0; 𝑡1 = 5.052 ≻ 0; (3) 𝑡2 = 18.263 ≻ 0; 𝑡3 = 3.667 ≻ 0. (4) Thus, the statistical significance of all regression coefficients is confirmed. Let us check the hypothesis about the general significance of the created regression equation by F-statistics: F = 137.625; Fkp (3;256) = 0. (5) As factual value F > Fkp, the coefficient of determination is statistically significant and the created regression equation is statistically reliable. Besides, paired correlation coefficients |r|<0.7, which indicates the lack of multicollinearity of factors. The significance of the additional inclusion of the factor (private F - criterion) was also assessed, which made it possible to determine that all the factors listed in the model (x1, x2, x3) should be included in the model after the introduction of factors хj. Thus, the created regression model can be used to forecast the amount of venture capital investment during changes in fiscal policy factors and reduction of macroeconomic risks. We consider that the hypothesis of the determining influence of fiscal factors of stimulating research and development and a set of stable economic and political preconditions on the expansion of the presence of venture capital in the country is proved. This allows us to form directions for intensifying venture financing for countries: ▪ for the development of high technologies and the implementation of innovative ideas, the state should apply tax benefits and preferences for research activities of small and medium enterprises. Taking into account the lack of direct and rapid economic effect from research (compared with industrial or commercial enterprises), the tax load hinders the development of research, limiting venture capital investment; ▪ expansion requires state support for innovation through the consolidation of state and local budgets on research programs, the creation of research and production clusters, technology incubators, support for natural persons in their innovation initiatives; ▪ the high risk of the country not only leads to a decrease in the inflow of foreign venture capital: domestic investors will withdraw their venture capital and direct it to countries where the political and economic situation is more stable, which further deepens the economic shocks of the national economy and leads to political ones. Accordingly, the government should seek to resolve political conflicts or overcome political instability, provide a high-quality legal framework for business, reduce corruption, and lay the grounds for macroeconomic stability [14; 15]. It is believed that the implementation of a set of these measures will promote the development of high-tech enterprises, and job creation in the country by coming to the problem of limited financial resources through the investment of venture capital. CONCLUSIONS Based on the data of twenty European countries for 2007—2019 (260 observation points), a regression dependence of the amount of invested venture capital on tax preferences in research and development, research and development costs and country risk has been created. The assessment of the parameters of the created regression model made it possible to 50 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 FINANCIAL AND CREDIT ACTIVITY: PROBLEMS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE Volume 2 (43), 2022 prove that it can be used for forecasting the amounts of investment of venture capital at the change of factors of fiscal policy and reduction of macroeconomic risks. On the basis of the conducted econometric analysis, the directions of practical realization of its results have been estab- lished. They consist in proving the hypothesis of the determining influence of fiscal factors of stimulating the research and development and a set of stable economic and political preconditions on the expansion of the presence of venture capital in the country. The directions of activation of venture financing for the countries have been formed. The prospect of further research is to identify institutional factors that hinder the development of venture funds in coun- tries. REFERENCES / ЛІТЕРАТУРА Investing in Europe: Private Equity activity 2020. analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 27, 95–111. (2021). Invest Europe. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2010.06.003. https://www.investeurope.eu/research/activity- Venture capital investments. (2021). OECD. data/#login-modal. Retrieved November 3, 2021, from Bertoni, F., Colombo, M. G., & Grilli, L. (2011). https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=VC_ Venture capital financing and the growth of high- INVEST#. tech start-ups: Disentangling treatment from Implied tax subsidy rates on R&D expenditures. selection effects. Research Policy, 40 (7), 1028– (2021). OECD. Retrieved November 3, 2021, from 1043. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=RDS Brander, J.,Amit, R., & Antweiler, W. (2002). Venture UB#. Capital Syndication: Improved Venture Selection Gross domestic spending on R&D (indicator). (2021). versus the Value-Added Hypothesis. Journal of OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/d8b068b4-en. Economics and Management Strategy, 11, 423–452. Damodaran online. (2020). Country Risk Premiums. Cherif, M., & Elouaer, S. (2008). Venture Capital Retrieved from Financing: A Theoretical Model. The Journal of http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar. Applied Business and Economics, 8 (1), 56–81. Kolotii, Yu. S., & Petchenko, M. V. (2018). Suchasnyi Mayer, C., & Schoors, K., & Yafeh, Y. (2005). stan venchurnykh fondiv v Ukraini [The current state Sources of funds and investment activities of venture of venture funds in Ukraine]. Hlukhivski naukovi capital funds: evidence from Germany, Israel, Japan chytannia – 2018: zb. materialiv VIII Mizhnarodnoi and the United Kingdom. Journal of Corporate internet-konferentsii molodykh uchenykh i studentiv, Finance, Vol. 11 (3), 586–608. 4–6 hrudnia 2018 roku [Glukhiv Scientific Readings – Andrieu, G. (2013). The impact of the affiliation of 2018: Coll. Proceedings of the VIII International venture capital firms: A survey. Journal of Economic Internet Conference of Young Scientists and Surveys, 27 (2), 234–246. Students, December 4–6, 2018]. (pp. 14–16). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6419.2011.00702.x. Glukhiv [in Ukrainian]. Croce, A., D’Adda, D., & Ughetto, E. (2015). Venture Petchenko, M. V., Yakushev, O. V., Yakusheva, O. V., capital financing and the financial distress risk of & Zubarieva, H. M. (2021). Finansove upravlinnia portfolio firms: How independent and bank-affiliated korporatsii: empirychne doslidzhennia faktoriv vplyvu investors differ. Small Business Economics, 44, 189– na zaluchennia pozykovykh koshtiv [Financial 206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-014-9582-4. management of corporations: an empirical study of factors influencing the attraction of borrowed funds]. Buzzacchi, L., Scellato, G., & Ughetto, E. (2013). The Visnyk Cherkaskoho natsionalnoho universytetu investment strategies of publicly sponsored venture imeni B. Khmelnytskoho. Ekonomichni nauky – capital funds. Journal of Banking & Finance, 37, 707– Bulletin of Cherkasy National University named after 716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.10.018. B. Khmelnytsky. Economic sciences, 2, 54–60 [in Li, Y., & Zahra, S. (2012). Formal institutions, Ukrainian]. culture, and venture capital activity: a cross-country DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591 51 ФІНАНСОВО-КРЕДИТНА ДІЯЛЬНІСТЬ: ПРОБЛЕМИ ТЕОРІЇ ТА ПРАКТИКИ Том 2 (43), 2022 Тельнова Г. В., Петченко М. В., Ткаченко С. О., Гуржий Т. О., Пирогов С. А. ФАКТОРИ АКТИВІЗАЦІЇ ІНВЕСТУВАННЯ ВЕНЧУРНОГО КАПІТАЛУ Актуальність теми полягає в тому, що через обмеження стартового капіталу, високий ризик і невизначеність щодо прибутковості, брак досвіду роботи й, відповідно, позитивної кредитної історії венчурний капітал визнається осно- вним джерелом фінансування розвитку багатьох компаній на ранніх стадіях. Метою роботи визначено доведення гіпотези про визначальний вплив фіскальних факторів стимулювання наукових досліджень і розробок та сукупності стабільних економіко-політичних передумов на розширення присутності венчурного капіталу у країні. На підставі даних двадцяти країн Європи за 2007—2018 рр. (240 точок спостереження) побудовано регресійну залежність об- сягів інвестованого венчурного капіталу від преференцій в оподаткуванні діяльності з наукових досліджень і роз- робок, обсягів витрат на наукові дослідження і розробки та від ризику країни. Оцінка параметрів побудованої ре- гресійної моделі дозволила довести, що вона може бути використана для прогнозування обсягів інвестування вен- чурного капіталу під час зміни факторів фіскальної політики і зниження макроекономічних ризиків. Сформовано напрями активізації венчурного фінансування для країн: для розвитку високих технологій і впровадження іннова- ційних ідей державою мають застосовуватися податкові пільги та преференції для науково-дослідної діяльності суб’єктів малого і середнього підприємництва; розширення потребує державна підтримка інноваційної діяльності через консолідацію коштів державного і місцевих бюджетів на програмах наукової діяльності, створенні науково- виробничих кластерів, технологічних інкубаторів, підтримки фізичних осіб в їхніх інноваційних ініціативах; високий ризик країни не тільки зумовлює зниження притоку іноземного венчурного капіталу: внутрішні інвестори за цієї умови будуть виводити свій венчурний капітал у країни, де більш стабільна політична та економічна ситуація, що ще більше поглиблює економічні шоки національної економіки і призводить до виникнення політичних. Реалізація комплексу означених заходів сприятиме розвиткові високотехнологічних підприємств, створенні робочих місць у країні через подолання проблеми обмежених фінансових ресурсів за допомогою інвестування венчурного капіталу. Ключові слова: венчурний капітал, фактор, фіскальна політика, ризик, модель JEL Класифікація: G24, H20, G32, O10, O30 52 DOI: 10.55643/fcaptp.2.43.2022.3591