Funds for the development of higher education institutions and capital expenditures are allocated in the amount of 0.3 % of total funding. Although the funds for the development of higher education institutions have never been allocated in the required amount, some years ago, they were 3.5 %. They were spent on the material and technical re-equipment, repairing of premises, purchase of vehicles, appliances, and laboratory equipment. In 2000–2016, most developed countries in Europe, except for Italy, Ireland, and Portugal, systematically increased their higher education expenditures for capital needs. Leaders of higher education capital expenditures are Canada, Czech Republic, Sweden, Lithuania, and Latvia. Ukraine has reduced capital expenditure in higher education to zero» [38].

In Ukraine, the rate of education expenditures as a share of GDP is quite high compared to other countries analyzed, but it should take into account the fact of the shadow economy in Ukraine, which reduces the size of real indicators, and the fact that the cost per student Ukraine will unequivocally «paste back» [36].

Financing of higher education in Ukraine has been carried out from the Budget for over twenty years, as free economic education institutions have the status of budgetary institutions. Funds are allocated from general and special funds. The monograph [39] analyzes in detail the situation in Ukraine on this issue. However, many specific problems in the field of higher education funding are waiting to be resolved.

By the way, the legitimacy of the allocation of funds received by the HEI from the provision of educational services, research and international grants to the budget category for two decades raises reasonable doubts. Their annual total amount is comparable to the amount of funding for higher education from the general fund. The significant amount of these funds causes the reluctance of the leaders of the Cabinet of Ministers to remove them from the category of budget.

First, such a step, purely formally, will significantly reduce the size of the country’s budget, which to some extent characterizes the efficiency of the Government. Thus, the withdrawal from the special fund of the Budget of funds received by the HEI from the provision of educational services, research and international grants is a deliberate deterioration of the formal performance of its activities.

Secondly, the funds received by the HEI from the provision of educational services, research activities and international grants are removed from the restrictions on their use, which are typical of budget funds. Apparently, these restrictions, in the opinion of the leadership of the Cabinet of Ministers, provide both efficiency of use and protection against abuse by the heads of HEIs.