<<
>>

development of legal regulation of institute of responsibility for infringements of taxes and tax collections of the Russian Federation

In this paragraph we will track development of rules of law of legal responsibility for infringements of legislations on taxes and tax collections in the Russian Federation.

The tax Code of the Russian Federation

In NK the Russian Federations in 2013-2015 have occurred the considerable changes mentioning tax legal relations, and also institute of legal responsibility, and in some cases essentially changing developed system of relations and representations.

From them it is necessary to note:

- The federal act from 28.06.2013 № 134-FZ «About modification of separate acts of the Russian Federation regarding counteraction to illegal financial operations» or FZ «About counteraction to illegal financial operations»;

- The federal act from 02.07.2013 № 153-FZ «About modification of a part the first the Tax Code of the Russian Federation» or FZ «About an obligatory pre-judicial order settlement of tax disputes»;

- The federal act from 23.07.2013 № 248-FZ «About modification of parts the first and the second the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and some other acts of the Russian Federation, and also for a recognition become invalid for separate positions of acts of the Russian Federation» or FZ «About perfection of tax administration»;

- The federal act from July, 23rd, 2013 №212-ФЗ «About modification of article 220 of a part of the Russian Federation second the Tax code» or FZ «About a new order of application of a property deduction»;

- The federal act from April, 2nd, 2014 №52-ФЗ «About modification of parts the first and the second the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and separate acts of the Russian Federation».

- The federal act from June, 8th, 2015 № 150-FZ «About modification of parts the first and the second the Tax code of the Russian Federation and Federal act article 3« About modification of parts the first and the second the Tax code of the Russian Federation (regarding the taxation of profit of the controllable foreign companies and incomes of the foreign organisations) »;

- The federal act from November, 4th, 2014 № 348-FZ «About modification of a part the first the Tax code of the Russian Federation»;

Let's result some innovations containing in the acts set forth above, concerning responsibility for tax infringements.

So, the Federal act from June, 8th, 2015 № 150-FZ article 109 NK the Russian Federation establishing circumstances, excluding responsibility for fulfilment of a tax offence, is added by item 2, marking impossibility of impeachment of persons for the offences connected with acquisition, use or the order property the controllable foreign companies. The given innovation is caused by a state policy directed on deoffshorizatsiju of domestic economy, amnesty of capitals.

Changes have concerned also item 1 of item 119 NK the Russian Federation, that is «... The liability of infringement of term of representation of the tax return is applied to all persons, obliged it to represent. The size of the penalty is estimated from the sum not paid in time.».

The given innovation extends responsibility for untimely representation of the tax return besides tax bearers as well on other persons to whom the Russian Federation is assigned by norms NK a duty on tax return representation. In particular, item 5 of item 174 NK the Russian Federation establishes a circle of persons, VAT not being tax bearers, but obliged under certain conditions to represent the tax return.

In this connection, as marks Bryzgalin A.V., the legislative resolution of dispute about has taken place, whether can be the subject of responsibility the person, obliged to present the tax return, but not having the status of the tax bearer under corresponding tax [113]. Earlier given problem dared at level YOU Russian Federation in favour of the persons, obliged to present the declaration [114].

Besides, the amendment toughens an order of definition of the size of responsibility for untimely representation of the declaration. If earlier the penalty was estimated at the rate from not paid sum of the tax which are coming under to payment (surcharge) on the basis of this declaration since January, 1st, 2014 it is estimated, starting with not paid in established by the legislation on taxes and tax collections term of the sum of the tax which is coming under to payment (surcharge) on the basis of this declaration.

Thus, if earlier the tax bearer could be limited to the minimum penalty of 1000 roubles for failure to meet a date of representation of the declaration, having paid to the moment of its representation all sum of the tax which is coming under to payment (surcharge) on the basis of this declaration now for the minimum responsibility it is necessary that this sum has been paid not simply by the moment of representation of the declaration, but also in established by norms NK the Russian Federation term. In case of non-observance of this closing date, the size of the penalty will be defined starting with the sum not paid in this term reflected in the tax return even if by the moment of its representation this sum is paid completely.

It is necessary to note one more innovation, in particular change of item 6 of item 93.1 NK the Russian Federation according to which responsibility for non-presentation of documents and the information within the limits of "counter" check is differentiated.

This amendment differentiates responsibility of the person for non-presentation by it within the limits of "counter" check, on the one hand istrebuemyh documents, and with another - istrebuemoj information. The given amendment is caused by necessity of differentiation by the legislator of concepts "information" and "documents", recognising that the information can be as is given the shape the document with certain standards, requisites, and to be in any form and (or) to be present at the isolated, unsystematized kind. So, according to item 11 of item 11 NK the Russian Federation, item 1 of item 2 FZ from 29.12.1994 № 77-FZ «About an obligatory copy of documents» to the information concern any data irrespective of the form of their representation, and the document is a material object with the information fixed on it in the form of the text. As well judiciary practice repeatedly paid attention to distinction of concepts "document" and "information". [115 [116]

Meanwhile, as marks Bryzgalin A.V. if to address to item 129.1 NK the Russian Federation in it there is a speech about responsibility for «wrongful non-disclosure of data», but not for «non-presentation of documents». That is before acceptance of the given amendment there was a contradiction between the maintenance of norms of item 6 of item 93.1 and item 129.1 NK the Russian Federation in spite of the fact that in the first of these norms direct sending to the second contained. However in a disposition of item 1 of item 129.1 NK the Russian Federation is small, but all the same the reservation that the sanction of this norm is applied in the absence of signs of the tax offence provided by item 126 NK the Russian Federation. Therefore in judiciary practice quite often there were questions on that norm what of two named articles and in what cases it is necessary to apply [117].

According to the given amendment, now responsibility under item 126 NK the Russian Federation is provided «for refusal of the person of representation istrebuemyh in frameworks« counter »checks of documents or their non-presentation in target dates». Thus, it is necessary to speak about unification of a liability of infringement of a duty on representation of documents as the checked person in frameworks kameralnoj or exit check, and the third party within the limits of "counter" check.

Besides the subject structure of responsibility under item 2 of item 126 NK the Russian Federation «Non-presentation to the tax organ of the data necessary for realisation of the tax control has been expanded extends and on physical persons.

The given amendment excludes restriction on application of the tax responsibility provided by item 2 of item 126 NK the Russian Federation, in the relation only the organisations, and, accordingly, extends possibility of its application also concerning individual businessmen and the physical persons who are not individual businessmen.

At the same time, the Federal act from May, 2nd, 2015 №113-ФЗ article 126 has been added by point 1.2., establishing responsibility for «... Non-presentation by the tax agent when due hereunder calculation of the sums of the tax to incomes of the physical persons estimated and withheld by the tax agent, in the tax organ in an account place.». The given innovation expands a circle of subjects of the given tax offence, extending the influence on tax agents. Besides, the given law has added NK the Russian Federation with article 126.1 establishing a new tax offence, connected with representation by the tax agent of the documents containing doubtful data, to the tax organ.

Further it is necessary to notice, that from a position of an administrative jurisdiction and remedial activity, it is necessary to pay attention on containing in current amendments, definitions and differentiations of concepts "complaint" and «the reclaiming petition. So, amendments to article 138 NK the Russian Federations« an appeal Order »fix the law of persons in a general view, whose rights are broken by illegal certificates, actions and bezdejstvijami tax organs and their officials, on their appeal in the higher tax organ or in court.

The legislator enters definition of such concepts as "complaint" and the "reclaiming petition" having certain differences. So, first, a complaint subject is the certificate which has entered validity of the tax organ, act or omission of its official. Whereas a reclaiming petition subject is the certificate of the tax organ which has not entered validity. Secondly, a reclaiming petition subject is not any certificate of the tax organ, but only what is accepted by results of consideration of materials of tax check, namely: the decision on attraction to tax responsibility or the decision on refusal in attraction to tax responsibility [118]. Accordingly, at the analysis of norms NK the Russian Federation, anyhow concerning complaints, it is necessary to establish every time, whether they extend for the purpose of maintenance of a uniform legal regime and on reclaiming petitions or not [119].

It is necessary to note and the amendment in абз1. Item 1 of item 120 NK the Russian Federation which excludes restriction regarding a circle of subjects of the tax responsibility provided by item 120 NK the Russian Federation. Before the subject of responsibility for gross violation of rules of the account of incomes both either) expenses and (or) objects of the taxation the organisation, but not individual businessmen could be only.

One more innovation which should be noted, the establishment of the general obligatory pre-judicial order of the appeal nenormativnyh tax organs (item 138 item 2) is

The given innovation is the central link in the Federal act from 02.07.2013 № 153-FZ «About modification of a part the first the Tax Code of the Russian Federation» which enters an obligatory pre-judicial order of settlement of all tax disputes. To it such order it agree item 5 of item 101.2 NK the Russian Federation extended only on the certificates of the tax organ accepted by results of consideration of materials of tax checks [120].

Experts and experts state many opinions on advantages and lacks of this innovation. So, for example, FNS Russia considers, that tax bearers will win from obligatory pre-judicial settlement: it not only will allow to reduce terms for consideration of complaints, but also will accelerate process of correction of the infringements revealed during pre-judicial trial. Among other advantages of pre-judicial procedures it is possible to name their availability to citizens and the enterprises of small and average business. The complaint does not demand filling of the formalized statement of claim and payment of the duty and court costs and lawyers, that on, our sight, is the positive moment at realisation of a policy of decrease in administrative barriers to subjects of enterprise activity.

To lacks of such order lawyers carry taking place infringements following, first, by tax organs of terms of consideration of reclaiming petitions, secondly, a formalistic approach to their consideration at which in most cases the higher tax organ upholds the decision subordinate [121 [122]. In the first case from the specified lacks the legislator has provided for tax bearers a certain legal guarantee in the form of reference to the court possibility at nonacceptance by the tax organ in decision target dates under the complaint (reclaiming petition). This first conditional exception of a rule about an obligatory pre-judicial order. It is necessary to notice, that this moment is considered and at definition of the initial moments of terms on a reference to the court at the subsequent appeal nenormativnyh tax organs.

Coming back to a question on advantages and lacks of an establishment of an obligatory pre-judicial order of the appeal, it is necessary to pay attention to Makarova A.M.'s opinion, the chairman of Committee on the budget and taxes of the State Duma which has called into question expediency universalizatsii such order, noticing, that in «... A case of the obligatory pre-judicial appeal the tax bearer of the decision on stay of operations under accounts of the tax bearer in the bank, the given circumstance can lead to growth of losses of this tax bearer caused by wrongful acts of the tax organ, coming under to compensation from the budget.» . For elimination of the given problems of Makarov A.M. suggested to consider possibility of an establishment for separate kinds nenormativnyh delays of their introduction into force before acceptance by the higher tax organ of the decision under the complaint, with simultaneous granting to the head of the tax organ of the right of application in necessary cases corresponding obespechitelnyh measures.

According to the Federal act from April, 2nd, 2014 №52-ФЗ since July, 1st, 2014 such kind of responsibility as «.otvetstvennost for non-presentation by banks of data on opening, closing (change of requisites) accounts, the contribution (deposit) of the physical person who is not the individual businessman has been entered...».

Besides it is necessary to note and some problems regarding the circumstances softening responsibility tax responsibility. In - the first, normative acts do not open the answer to a question on possibility of additional decrease in the size of the penalty responsible bodies (vessels) if at awarding judgement by the tax organ extenuations have already been considered. However judiciary practice specifies that the court has the right to lower the penalty imposed by inspection even more. For example, FAS the Ural district in the decision from 05.02.2013 № Ф09-13747/12 has specified, that at an estimation of validity and legality of the decision of inspection the court has the right to check harmony of a measure of responsibility. If the court establishes softening responsibility of the offender of circumstance it has the right to change the challenged decision regarding definition of the size of the sanction. Also in judiciary practice it is noticed, that decrease by inspection of the size of sanctions does not deprive possibility court in addition to reduce the penalty sum (decisions FAS of Far East district from 14.11.2012 № Ф03-5181/2012, FAS the Ural district from 23.06.2011 № Ф09-3165/11, etc.).

Secondly, there is no clearness and clearness in applications of extenuations in the presence of the circumstances aggravating responsibility of the offender. The operating tax laws do not contain the express prohibition on decrease in the size of the penalty by court or the tax organ in case are found out both softening, and aggravating responsibility of the tax bearer of circumstance.

If to address to judiciary practice, that, for example, FAS the Ural district in the decision from 17.09.2009 № Ф09-7041/09-С3 has specified that reduction of the sum of the tax sanction in connection with presence of aggravating circumstances does not contradict the current legislation. In a substantiation of the position the court has specified the following: «Considering, that item 114 NK the Russian Federation does not contain instructions about an awarding punishment order at simultaneous presence of circumstances softening and aggravating tax responsibility, the court of court of cassation believes, that reduction of the sum of the tax sanction in connection with presence of aggravating circumstances does not contradict the current legislation».

By definition YOU the Russian Federation from 17.12.2009 № ВАС-16805/09 it has been given up in transfer of the given case to Presidium YOU the Russian Federation. From its part YOU also has noticed, that: « As the circumstances softening responsibility, independent discharge of duty on representation of tax returns, admission of a tax offence, absence of negative consequences for the budget is recognised. The argument of the applicant about inadmissibility of application of the simultaneous account both aggravating, and circumstances softening responsibility, is not based on tax laws ».pri it taking place negative decisions of vessels, as a rule, are based on concrete circumstances of business. So, for example, FAS the Moscow district in the decision from 24.02.2010 № And - А41/641-10 has specified, that concerning the tax bearer come under to application aggravating and extenuations as the enterprise and supposed earlier similar infringements, and the size of the penalty imposed by the tax organ do not come under to application, is insignificant (an order 3 000 rbl.).

Thirdly, in the legislation on taxes and tax collections the question on possibility in the presence of extenuations of decrease in the penalty collected in the minimum size, provided by the legislation is not settled. In public authorities the decision is a question ambiguously. So, the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation believes, that decrease in the penalty below the minimum size probably as NK the Russian Federation does not contain restrictions on application of item 112 and 114 NK the Russian Federation concerning the minimum sizes of penalties, including the penalty established by item 119 NK the Russian Federation. In letters of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation from 16.05.2012 № 03 02-08/47, from 25.09.2012 № 03-02-08/86 it is noticed, that in the presence of extenuations the tax organ or court can reduce the size of the sanction below the minimum size established by item 1 of item 119 NK the Russian Federation ». Judiciary practice adheres to the Same opinion. So, FAS Northwest district in the decision from 20.08.2012 on business № А26-11937/2011 has specified, that norms NK the Russian Federation do not establish any restrictions for reduction by court of the size of tax sanctions in the presence of extenuations, including concerning the minimum size of the penalty. Hence, in the presence of such circumstances the court has the right to reduce the penalty sum even if it is equal to the minimum size of the sanction provided by item 119 NK the Russian Federation.

At the same time, FNS Russia it do not agree with the given position. In letter FNS of Russia from 26.11.2010 № ШС-37-7/16376 it is explained, that the minimum sum of the sanction established by item 119 NK the Russian Federation (1000 rbl.), it is impossible to reduce in connection with presence of established items 112 NK the Russian Federation the softening

Circumstances. However in connection with absence of the express prohibition on decrease in tax sanctions below the lowest limit opinion FNS of Russia cannot be recognised by proved enough, as judiciary practice in the given question completely on the party of the tax bearer.

As to judicial-arbitration practice on administrative violations in sphere of taxes and tax collections, studying of several materials of affairs (Decision VS the Russian Federation from 10.03.2011 N 78-AD11-1; Decision VS the Russian Federation from 24.02.2005 №11АД05-2; Decision VS the Russian Federation from 18.08.2011 №46-АД11-10; Decision VS from 25.07.2012 №16-АД12-5, etc.) has shown the Russian Federation, that specificity of offences in the field of taxes and tax collections is shown that tax organs, receiving what either the message or the document, cannot define at once, whether took a place an offence. For this purpose the expiration of certain term (term of giving of the message on opening of the account, term of granting of the tax return, term of performance of the commission about granting of documents etc.) is necessary, in most cases, . Only after the lapse of this term defined by the law probably realisation of the actions directly directed on fixing of the fact of an offence and proving of fault of the certain person. The exception is constituted by the offences provided by item 15.11 KoAP the Russian Federation as pravoprimenitelnaja practice develops in such a manner that the given offences come to light only during carrying out of exit tax checks. Thus during tax check all circumstances of a perfect offence are established actually. As a result employees of tax organs need to issue properly only evidentiary base on business about administrative violation and to leave it in court. As practice testifies, a unique occasion to commencing a suit is the occasion provided by item 1 ch. 1 items 28.1 KoAP the Russian Federation, - direct detection by the officials, authorised to constitute reports on administrative violations, the sufficient data specifying in presence of event of administrative violation. Differently, employees of tax organs independently elicit the facts of offences, using various sources of the information. The basis for commencing a suit are the sufficient data specifying in presence of signs of structure of an offence. Taking into account the aforesaid those data, in most cases, are the data specifying in infringement of terms defined by the law.

Besides a number of changes of tax laws has mentioned carrying out rules kameralnoj checks, procedures of stay of operations under accounts, the mechanisms of tax regulation directed on increase of appeal of investments into securities etc.

On the basis of the spent analysis of last amendments in the tax laws, concerning institute of responsibility for tax offences, it is possible to draw a conclusion that innovations NK the Russian Federation accepted for 2013-2015, in particular, expansion of subject structure of a liability of infringement of term of representation of the tax return,

Representations of the documents containing doubtful data, introduction of the new tax offences connected with activity of tax agents and the foreign organisations, change of penal actions, unifitsirovanie a duty liability of infringement on representation of documents as the checked person in frameworks kameralnoj or exit check, and the third party within the limits of "counter" check, universalizatsija the obligatory pre-judicial

The appeal the tax bearer of decisions of tax organs, introduction of the extenuations connected with tax amnesty of capitals, they show, that partially concerning a material component, in the majority are directed on specification of a remedial component of manufacture on affairs about offences in the field of taxes and tax collections. Besides, introduction of institute of the obligatory pre-judicial appeal by the tax bearer of decisions of the tax organs, accessible to citizens and subjects of business, on the one hand reduces expenses for fillings of the formalized statement of claim and for the size of payment of the duty and court costs and lawyers, with another - in case of the appeal the tax bearer of the decision on stay of operations under accounts of the tax bearer in the bank, the given circumstance can lead to growth of losses of this tax bearer caused by wrongful acts of the tax organ.

Thus, presence both positive, and negative effects speaks to us about ambiguity of last innovations of the tax laws, concerning responsibility institute for

Offences in the field of taxes and tax collections, in a context of a main objective of the state Policy of Law.

The code about administrative violations in the Russian Federation

In KOAP the Russian Federations for last years also have occurred some changes mentioning tax legal relations, and also institute of legal responsibility from which it is necessary to note the following:

- The federal act from December, 28th, 2009 №380-ФЗ «About entering

Changes in the Code of the Russian Federation about the administrative

Offences »;

- The federal act from July, 27th, 2010 №239-ФЗ «About modification of the Code of the Russian Federation about the administrative

Offences »

- The federal act from July, 23rd, 2013 №248-ФЗ «About modification of parts the first and the second the Tax code of the Russian Federation and some other acts Russian

Federations, and also about a recognition become invalid for separate positions of acts of the Russian Federation »;

- The federal act from October, 14th, 2014 №307-ФЗ;

- The federal act from March, 30th, 2015 № 67-FZ;

- The federal act from October, 5th, 2015 №275-ФЗ «About modification of the Federal act« About competition protection »and separate acts of the Russian Federation»

Let's designate the general tendencies of development KoAP the Russian Federation on key sections.

1 2

According to Federal acts №380-ФЗ and №307-ФЗ essential innovations of first section KoAP the Russian Federation is addition and specification by the legislator in item 1.3.1 of terms of reference of subjects of the Russian Federation, including in tax sphere (the item and, item 72 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). [123 [124]

In these changes definition kompetentsy their officials on application of norms of the Code about administrative violations of the Russian Federation is traced not only accurate fastening of powers of subjects of the Russian Federation, regarding an establishment and application of norms of the regional legislation in the given sphere, but also.

In second section KoAP the Russian Federation the innovations, concerning administrative responsibility, were is connected with changes of the branch legislation, and also specification of understanding of the term "official". To item 2.4 KoAP the Russian Federations for last years were made To the note numerous additions and specifications. So, in concept the official, by the Federal act from March, 30th, 2015 №67-ФЗ now are included, «... The physical persons who are founders (participants) of legal bodies, heads of the organisations which are carrying out powers of individual executive powers of the organisations, legal bodies being founders.», and the federal act from October, 5th, 2015 №275-ФЗ «.litsa,

Carrying out functions on the organisation and carrying out obligatory according to the legislation of the Russian Federation of the auctions, including members of the competitive commission, the auction commission. ». The given innovations urged to solve questions of differentiation of administrative responsibility of legal bodies from responsibility of the physical.

Besides, the legislator has decided to return a frequency sign in a design of norms about administrative responsibility.

As to third section KoAP the Russian Federation it in it also there are some innovations in sphere investigated by us.

So, the Federal act from June, 8th, 2012 №65-ФЗ, enters such kind of administrative punishments as obligatory works. Separately, it is necessary to note the tendency to differentiation of measures of administrative responsibility and possibility of application of such measure as the prevention for for the first time perfect administrative violations (the Federal act from July, 27th, 2010 №239-ФЗ).

Concerning fourth section KoAP the Russian Federation it is necessary to note appointment possibility «... The administrative penalty in the size of less minimum size...» (The Federal act from December, 31st, 2014 №515 - FZ)

Besides, for the coordination with amendments in NK the Russian Federations, №248-ФЗ are made by the Federal act of change to names of some articles, in particular in item 15.6 KoAP the Russian Federation.

It is necessary to note and the Code of administrative legal proceedings KAS accepted in 2015 the Russian Federation which systematised rules for the resolution of disputes between citizens and the state, the norms regulating an order of administrative legal proceedings at the permission of administrative affairs by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and vessels of the general jurisdiction.

On the basis of this document the Supreme Court and general jurisdiction courts will consider cases, in particular, about contest of standard legal acts, decisions and actions (inactivity) of authorities, and also business about collecting of taxes from physical persons. To number of innovations KAS the Russian Federation which will simplify a life to all participants of disputes, it is possible to carry possibility of electronic giving of remedial documents, and also receptions on electronic channels, decisions and other documents proceeding from vessels. It is possible to consider as a positive innovation introduction of a principle of active participation of court by the consideration of administrative business expressed in the right vessels under the initiative to reveal and obtain on demand the proof, important for the correct resolution of dispute.

According to KAS the Russian Federations to number of administrative affairs concern affairs about collecting of obligatory payments and sanctions from physical persons (item 3 ch. 3 items 1 KAS the Russian Federation).

Since September, 15th, 2015 on affairs about collecting of taxes and sanctions from physical persons inspectors are obliged to be guided by positions KAS

The Russian Federation. To receive debts from the physical person tax specialists initiate litigation by giving of the administrative statement of claim (item 286 KAS the Russian Federation). Affairs about collecting of taxes from physical persons should be considered till three months (ch. 1 items 289 KAS the Russian Federation).

To the norms "simplifying" a life to participants of administrative process, it is possible to carry possibility of consideration as production of under-quality goods (without hearing carrying out) has put practically any categories, except for cases of obligatory participation of the parties in business. For example, it is possible, when all persons participating in business, petitions for a legal investigation in their absence or when the petition for consideration of administrative business in an order of production of under-quality goods is declared by the administrative claimant are declared and the respondent does not object. In our opinion, production of under-quality goods will promote reduction of terms of the resolution of disputes. So, term of a legal investigation as production of under-quality goods constitutes only 10 days from the date of acceptance by definition court about a legal investigation in such order. Thus unlike the general monthly term on the appeal appeal of the decree accepted on administrative business, term for the appeal of the decision accepted summarily, about fifteen days are reduced.

KAS the Russian Federation provides the limited action of a principle of optionality of the parties. So, the court had a right not to approve the agreement on reconciliation of the parties if its conditions contradict the law or reciprocal concessions are inadmissible or break the rights, freedom and legitimate interests of other persons (ch. 5 items 137 KAS). On the one hand, the norm will promote reduction during a life of a principle of competitiveness, after all as the opponent to citizens the body possessing imperious powers acts. Certainly, such approach should help to exclude any pressure from authority, but there is opened a question on possibility of the reciprocal concession of the parties.

In our opinion, amendments to the administrative legislation of the Russian Federation, brought during 2010 - have enriched 2015 both material, and a remedial component of administrative process and manufacture on affairs about administrative violations, including in taxation sphere.

The most typical tendencies is the following:

- Integrated approach of updating of sections KoAP the Russian Federation, in particular, updating of general provisions and a remedial part;

- Flexibility of the administrative policy fixed in norms KoAP the Russian Federation, consisting as in strengthening of rigidity of sanctions for the most dangerous offences, and a humanisation of measures for offences of the small social danger, possibility mitigation of punishment of less minimum size of the administrative penalty etc.;

- New approaches to differentiation of administrative responsibility of legal bodies and physical persons;

- Returning of a sign of frequency in a design of norms about administrative responsibility and, hence, toughening of sanctions for repeated fulfilment of certain kinds of offences;

- Expansion of a kind of administrative punishments (obligatory works etc.).

- Attempts of differentiation of measures of administrative responsibility and possibility of application of such measure as the prevention for for the first time perfect administrative violations; considerable expansion of some offences for which fulfilment it is provided such administrative sanction;

- Fastening of power of subjects of the Russian Federation regarding an establishment and application of administrative responsibility;

- Detailed elaboration of signs of concrete structures of administrative violations;

As to crimes in tax sphere in UK the Russian Federations for last years were outlined the following legislative leadership, concerning systems of legal responsibility for tax laws infringements.

First, possibility of occurrence of institute of the criminal

Responsibility of the legal bodies, connected with publication on a site of Investigatory committee of the Russian Federation of the draught federal law «About modification of some acts of the Russian Federation in connection with introduction of institute of criminally-legal influence concerning legal bodies» [125].

Secondly, in April, 2013 the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation has prepared the bill which should toughen responsibility for non-payment of insurance premium payments. Since have cancelled ESN, and payments have transferred in off-budget funds, evasion from their payment is not provided criminally-right protection. Therefore the Criminal code can add with new articles which will establish responsibility for those who does not transfer into payments the budget or hides the property for payment of these payments, the debt on which has reached especially large sizes.

Thirdly, one of last innovations, with development of institute of legal responsibility for tax crimes, the Federal act № 308 «About modification in Ugolovnoprotsessualnyj the code of the Russian Federation» (further - the Law № 308) which has made changes to an order of excitation of criminal cases about the tax crimes provided by articles 198-199.2 of the Criminal code of the Russian Federation (further - UK the Russian Federation) is connected.

As is known, to this law such affairs vozbuzhdlis only inspectors SK the Russian Federation exclusively on the basis of materials which specially have been for this purpose directed to their address by tax organs. The basic problem consisted that positions offered by the head of the state already contained earlier in UPK the Russian Federation, but have been excluded in 2011 [126]. Necessity to eliminate possibility of excitation of criminal cases about tax crimes if data necessary for it preliminary have found acknowledgement in materials of tax checks - the decision on attraction to tax responsibility was the main reason of amendment then.

The law №308 again gives possibility of excitation of criminal cases about tax crimes only on the basis of the statement for a crime or message on the perfect or preparing crime which can be received from various sources.

The given innovation in a complex will affect criminal manufacture, in particular:

- Considerably will expand a circle of persons which have possibility to initiate criminal case excitation;

- Considerably will expand the list of materials - the bases for criminal case excitation;

- Will expand the list of the public authorities, capable to affect excitation of criminal cases;

- Will lower reliability of the mechanism of clearing of criminal prosecution at payment of the sum of penalties or penej.

In our opinion, renewal of practice of use of criminal prosecution on tax crimes can become the additional tool of pressure upon business, that subsequently will lead to decrease in enterprise activity and development of shadow sector [127].

Besides, given innovation can lead to the following transformation of system of legal responsibility, in particular to:

- To formation law-enforcement and tax organs of absolutely different approaches to tax laws liability of infringement;

- To occurrence of a retaliatory and accusatory bias by consideration of infringements of tax laws owing to specificity of law enforcement bodies

- To duplication of functions tax and law enforcement bodies regarding an estimation of materials of business and qualification of infringements of tax laws;

- To decrease in quality of a consequence and materials of criminal cases about tax crimes in connection with an exception of obligatory expert "filter" in the name of tax organs.

The given measures the state all departs from idea of liberalisation of conditions of existence of business in Russia further and somewhat contradicts recently introduced institute of obligatory pre-judicial settlement of tax disputes. Thereby it is possible to allocate the key tendency in development of system of legal responsibility, namely, strengthening of a criminal component during struggle against tax evasion.

<< | >>
A source: VASKEVICH CYRIL NIKOLAEVICH. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OFFENCES In the field of TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS In the RUSSIAN FEDERATION. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Moscow, 2016. 2016

More on topic development of legal regulation of institute of responsibility for infringements of taxes and tax collections of the Russian Federation:

  1. THE CHAPTER II. DEVELOPMENT OF SYSTEM OF LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR INFRINGEMENTS OF THE LEGISLATION ON TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
  2. similarities and differences of administrative responsibility for infringements in sphere of taxes and tax collections in the Russian Federation from other kinds of legal responsibility
  3. foreign experience of regulation of responsibility for infringements of the legislation on taxes and tax collections
  4. THE HEAD III. PERFECTION INSTITUTE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR INFRINGEMENTS OF THE LEGISLATION ON TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS
  5. THE CHAPTER I. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY IN SYSTEM LEGAL OTVESTVENNOSTI FOR INFRINGEMENTS OF THE LEGISLATION ON TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS
  6. the Chapter I. General provisions of legal responsibility in the Russian legal doctrine and the legislation on taxes and tax collections
  7. 2.2 Subjects of offences in sphere of the legislation on taxes and tax collections of the Russian Federation
  8. § 1. Essence and the maintenance of institute of a legal liability of infringement of the legislation on taxes and tax collections
  9. VASKEVICH CYRIL NIKOLAEVICH. ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY FOR OFFENCES In the field of TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS In the RUSSIAN FEDERATION. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Moscow, 2016, 2016
  10. CHAPTER 1. OCCURRENCE And the DUTY TERMINATION ON TAX PAYMENT In SYSTEM of the RUSSIAN FISCAL LAW And the RUSSIAN LEGISLATION On TAXES AND TAX COLLECTIONS
  11. § 1. The control the credit organisations of observance by their clients of the legislation on taxes and tax collections