Business splitting: compliance with the principle of tax certainty in law enforcement practice
https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(2).41-48
Abstract
The subject. The problems of business splitting, when several new business entities are created on the basis of an existing organization in order to maintain a preferential special tax regime, are considered in the article.
The aim of this paper is to find out criteria of unjustified tax benefit in the cases concerning business splitting.
The methodology. The author uses methods of theoretical analysis, particularly the theory of integrative legal consciousness, as well as legal methods, including formal legal method and analysis of recent judicial practice.
The main results, scope of application. The problems of assessing the circumstances of cases involving the application of a business splitting scheme by the taxpayer are inextricably linked to the assessment of the validity of the tax benefit. According to the author, splitting schemes should not be considered as tax evasion, but as an abuse of law. In addition, in order to substantiate the conclusion that a taxpayer has applied a business splitting scheme, the tax authority must have evidence that will indicate that the taxpayer has committed deliberate concerted actions together with persons under its control, aimed not so much at dividing the business as at obtaining an unjustified tax benefit as a result of using such a scheme. Judicial practice is quite ambiguous.
Conclusions. The author comes to the conclusion that еhe key concept subject to criticism is the blurred criteria for obtaining tax benefits for taxpayers and the definition of the edge when it passes into the category of unjustified tax benefit.
Keywords
Tax law,
business splitting,
tax security,
tax offenses,
tax evasion,
law enforcement,
judicial practice
Supporting agencies: Russian Foundation for Basic Research
About the Author
Karina A. Ponomareva
Dostoevsky Omsk State University, Omsk
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
PhD in Law, Associate Professor, Department of State and Municipal Law
ResearcherID: N-7562-2016
References
1. Zaripov V.M. Is business fragmentation a scheme or not? Zakon.ru. Available at: https://zakon.ru/blog/ 2017/08/29/droblenie_biznesa_-_shema_ili_net (accessed on 22.12.2019). (In Russ.).
2. Artjukh A.A. Premature joy: about the sensational Decision No 1440-O and the special opinion of judge Aranovskiy. Zakon.ru. Available at: https://zakon.ru/blog/2017/08/04/prezhdevremennaya_radost__o_ nashumevshem_opredelenii_1440-o_i_osobomu_mnenii_sudi_aranovskogo (accessed on 04.02.2020). (In Russ.).
3. Arakelov S.A. Anti-tax avoidance norms in international practice. New legislative tools to combat tax evasion in Russia. Zakon = The Law, 2018, no. 5, pp. 109–115. (In Russ.).
4. Zaripov V.M. Tax benefit: above the baseboard. Zakon.ru. Available at: https://zakon.ru/blog/2017/6/ 20/nalogovaya_vygoda_vyshe_plintusa (accessed on 28.02.2020). (In Russ.).
5. Vinnitskiy D. V. Conscientiousness, reasonableness of benefits, limits of rights implementation, or How the Russian tax law appeared at the forefront of the fight against the evil nesting in taxpayers. Zakon = The Law, 2018, no. 11, pp. 44–57. (In Russ.).
6. Demin A.V. Uncertainty in tax law and ways to overcome it. Doct. Diss. Yekaterinburg, 2014. 452 p. (In Russ.).
7. Leoni B. Freedom and Law. Moscow: IRISEN Publ., 2008. 308 p. (In Russ.).
8. The Ministry of Finance did not support tax reconstruction when punishing evading firms. RBC. Available at: https://www.rbc.ru/economics/10/01/2020/5e1701989a79471afad28a4a (accessed on 28.02.2020). (In Russ.).
9. Shishkin R.N. Tax benefit in business splitting: the position of tax authorities and courts. Moscow, Rossiyskaya Gazeta Editorial Board Publ., 2019. Issue 3. 176 p. (In Russ.).
10. Peresedov A.M. Signs of illegal crushing of business and its essential differences from legal optimization of expenses. Bezopasnost' biznesa = Business Security, 2019, no. 1, pp. 47–51. (In Russ.).
11. Volkov A.V., Blinkov O.E. Business splitting: legal problems. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Yuridicheskie nauki = Bulletin of the Perm University. Legal science, 2019, no. 2, pp. 261–280. (In Russ.).
12. Krasjukov A.V. Tax deviation. Finansovoe pravo = Financial Law, 2020, no. 1, pp. 25–29. (In Russ.).
13. Review of positive decisions of courts on splitting for taxpayers for 9 months of 2019. Klerk.ru. Available at: https://www.klerk.ru/blogs/compliance/491335/ (accessed on 28.02.2020). (In Russ.).
14. Ponomareva K.A. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on combating tax abuse: an example of the Decision of 4 July 2017 No 1440-O, in: Pepelyaev S.G. (ed.). Nalogovoe pravo v reshenijah Konstitucionnogo Suda Rossijskoj Federacii 2017 goda : po materialam XV Mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. 13 – 14 aprelja 2018 g., Moskva = Tax law in the decisions of the constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in 2017: based on the materials of the XV international scientific and practical conference, 13-14 April 2018, Moscow. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2019, pp. 122–130. (In Russ.).
15. Vasileva E.G., Petukhov E.V. Criminal-legal aspects of illegal VAT compensation as a result of obtaining an unjustified tax benefit. Nalogi = Taxes, 2019, no. 3, pp. 27–31. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Ponomareva K.A. Business splitting: compliance with the principle of tax certainty in law enforcement practice. Law Enforcement Review. 2020;4(2):41-48. https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(2).41-48
Views:
840
Email this article 