Legal regulation of liability for tax offnces and tax dispute resolution in Georgia, Moldova and Russian Federation
https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(3).46-68
Abstract
The subject. For many years, Georgia, Moldova and Russia were part of the same state, which a priori indicates the existence of a similar legal system. Despite the positive experience of the European Economic Community, the trends that the USSR faced at the end of the XX century were reversed: the former republics gained independence and started to form their own legal systems. It seems appropriate to put forward the hypothesis that the newly formed States should have used a common legal heritage and/or tried and tested foreign examples of normative acts. However, this does not seem to be the case.
Purpose of the study. The article represents an attempt to verify the aforementioned hypothesis and deals with selected provisions of the national legislation of Georgia, Moldova and Russia that, from one hand, relate to taxation and, from the other, are of general character, i.e. can be applied not only to particular cases.
Methodology. The research was carried out with the application of the formally legal interpretation of legal acts as well as the comparative analysis of Georgian, Moldovian and Russian legal literature. Structural and systemic methods are also the basis of the research,
The main results. The content of tax laws determines the chosen model of the distribution of law provisions on liability for breach of tax legislation, i.e. the fact whether such laws contain provisions on liability. The compulsory administrative stage of dispute resolution has proven to be ineffective for taxpayers, tax representatives and third parties. As for the international resolution of tax disputes there is a wide diversity of applicable means (particularly, arbitration which is not characteristic for the national order) and of specific dispute resolution mechanisms. Conclusions. Despite certain differences, the legal regulation of liability and dispute resolution in Georgia, Moldova and Russia is very similar. However, it is necessary to take into account the distinctive features arising from the limitation of the territorial legal effect of the norms of Georgia and Moldova.
About the Authors
Roman A. Shepenko
MGIMO University, Moscow
Russian Federation
Doctor of Law, Professor, Department of Administrative and Financial Law
Russian Federation
Doctor of Law, Professor, Department of Administrative and Financial Law
Lia Nani
MGIMO University, Moscow
Russian Federation
PhD student, Department of Administrative and Financial Law
Russian Federation
PhD student, Department of Administrative and Financial Law
References
1. Okrotsvaridze Z. The Mechanisms of Improving the Conditions for an Efficient Use of Land for Agricultural Purposes. Cand. Diss. Thesis. Tbilisi, 2006. (In Georg.).
2. Balyuk N.N., Zamulko V.V., Krasyukov A.V. et al. 101 Terms of Tax Law: a Brief Legislative and Doctrinal Interpretation. Moscow, Infotropic Media, 2015. 452 p. (In Russ.).
3. Abramchik L.Ya. Tax Law of Belorussia, in: Karaseva (Sentsova) M.V., Schekin D.M. (eds.). Tax Law of Eastern Europe States. The General Part: Belorussia, Poland, Russia, Slovakia, Ukraine, Czech Republic. Moscow, Wolters Kluwer, 2009. P. 11–102. (In Russ.).
4. Gvaramadze T. Sanctions for Tax Code Violations. Journal of Law, 2012, pp. 50–55.
5. Condor I. Drept financiar roman. Partea I. Evolutie. Notiuni generale. Sitemul bugetelor publice [Romanian financial law. Part I. Evolution. General terms. The system of public budgets]. Bucharest, Monitorul Oficial, 2000. 214 p. (In Rom.).
6. Bratus' S.N. Legal Liability and Legal Order (a Sketch on Theory). Moscow, Gorodets Publ., 2001. 416 p. (In Russ.).
7. Solov'yev O.G. Tax Crimes: Criminological and Criminal Characteristic. Yaroslavl, Yaroslavl State University Publ., 2001. 66 p. (In Russ.).
8. Caraiani Gh., Diaconu G.S. Tehnici vamale de facilitare a comertului international [Customs techniques of international trade facilitation]. Bucharest, Lumina Lex, 2003. 300 p. (In Rom.).
9. Kakabadze S.S. The Georgian Documents of the Institute of the Peoples of Asia of the USSR Science Academy. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1967. 511 p. (In Russ.).
10. Apostol Tofan D. Drept administrative [Administrative law]. Vol. I. Bucharest, All Beck, 2003. 494 p. (In Rom.).
11. Bene F.Gh. Cod de bune practice in colectarea creantelor fiscal [The code of best practices in the collection of taxes]. Bucharest, C.H. Beck, 2011. 460 p. (In Rom.).
12. Iorgovan A. Drept administrativ roman [Romanian administrative law]. Vol. I. Bucharest, All Beck 2005.
13. Arama E. Istoria dreptului romanesc [History of the Romanian law]. Chisinau, Tipografia Centrala, 1995. 236 p. (In Rom.).
14. Lazarevskiy N. Liability for Damages Caused by Public Officials. Saint Petersburg, Slovo Publ., 1905. 32 p. (In Russ.).
15. Tarasov I.T. A Sketch on the Science of Financial Law, in: Golden Pages of The Financial Law of Russia. Vol. IV. Moscow, Statut Publ., 2004. 618 p. (In Russ.).
16. The System of Soviet Socialistic Law (Theses). Moscow, Narkomyust Publ., 1941. 17 p. (In Russ.).
17. Kudrvavtsev P.I (ed.). Legal Dictionary. Part II. Мoscow, Yurid. Lit. Publ., 1956. 664 p. (In Russ.).
18. Grigalashvili E.G. The Results of Reforming The Tax System of Georgia and The Perspectives of Its Development. Teoriya i praktika obshchestvennogo razvitiya = The Theory and Practice of Social Development, 2013, no. 10, pp. 361–365. (In Russ.).
19. Dascalu D., Alexandru C. Explicatiile teoretice si practice ale Codului de procedura fiscala [Theoretical and practical comments to the Code of tax procedure]. Bucuresti, Rosetti, 2005. (In Rom.).
20. Stalans L.J. Citizens’ Procedural Expectations for An Upcoming Tax Audit: Their Nature and Formation. Social Justice Research, 1992, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 93–107. DOI:10.1007/BF01048379.
21. Bulding tax culture, compliance and citizenship: A global source book on taxpayer education. OECD. Paris, 2015. 195 p. DOI: 10.1787/9789264205154-en.
22. Nadaraya L., Rogava Z., Ruhadze K. Commentaries to the Tax Code. Sec. 156-310. Tbilisi, 2012.(In Georg.).
23. Tsiklauri I. Distinctive Features of The Georgian Model of Resolution of Tax Disputes and The Necessity of Its Reformation. The Legal Journal, 2012, no. 1–2 (3–4). (In Georg.).
24. Dauceanu C. Nota la Decizia nr. 75 din 7 septembrie 1992 a Curţii Supreme de Justiţie [Note to the Decision nr. 75 from September, 7th, 1992 of the Supreme Court of Justice]. Dreptul, 1993, no. 2. (In Rom.).
25. Clipa C. Organe si proceduri administrativ-jurisdictionale [Jurisdictional administrative bodies and procedures]. Bucuresti, Hamangiu, 2013. 552 p. (In Rom.).
26. Sechter F., Oprescu Gh. Controlul administrativ al aplicării si respectării dispoziţiilor legale si supravegherea procurorului – garanţii de asigurare a legalităţii în administraţia de stat [Administrative control of the implimentation and enforcement of the prosecutor – guaranties for the observance of legality within the state administration]. Jurnalul national, 1964, no. 10. (In Rom.).
27. Enescu M. Deciziile autorităţii tutelare ca organe de jurisdicţie [Decisions of the guardianship authorities as jurisdictional bodies]. Studii si cercetari juridice, 1964, no. 4. (In Rom.).
28. Dariescu N.C. Drept procedural fiscal [Procedural tax law]. Iasi, Lumen, 2009. 235 p. (In Rom.).
29. Ciobanu V.M. Tratat teoretic si practic de procedura civila. Teoria generala [Essay on the theory and practice of civil procedure. General theory]. Vol. I. Bucharest, National, 1996. 509 p. (In Rom.).
30. Dariescu N.C., Dariescu C. Discutii si propuneri de lege ferenda cu privire la competent organelor fiscale [Discussions and proposals de lege ferenda in respect to the competence of tax authorities]. Revista Transilvaneana de Stiinte Administrative, 2009, no. 1 (23), pp. 52–66. (In Rom.).
31. Anitei N.-C. Regulile de competenţă generală, materială, teritorială şi special a organelor fiscale conform dispoziţiilor Noului Cod de procedură fiscal [Rules on general, subject matter, territorial and special competence of tax authorities purusant to the provisions of the new Code of tax procedure]. Curierul fiscal, 2016, no. 5, pp. 186–190. (In Rom.).
32. Kekeliya M. Ancient Georgian Legislation, Court and Judicial Procedure. Tbilisi, Tbilisi University Publ., 1986. 313 p. (In Russ.).
33. Dzhuansheriani D. The Life of Vahtang Gorsala in Monuments of Georgian Historical Literature. Vol. 4. Tbilisi, Metsniereba Publ., 1986. 150 p. (In Russ.).
34. The Code of Laws of Beka and Agbuga. Тbilisi, Academy od Science of Georgian SSR Publ., 1960. 82 p. (In Russ.).
35. Kovalevskiy M. Law and Custom in the Caucasus. Maycop, Afisha Publ., 2006. 319 p. (In Russ.).
36. Esadze S. A Historical Note on the Administration of Caucasus. Book 1. Тiflis, 1907. 616 p. (In Russ.).
37. Chikhladze N.V. Important Questions of the Formation of the Tax System of Georgia. Finansy i kredit = Finance and Credit, 2005, no. 26(194), pp. 62–68. (In Russ.).
38. Areshidze G. The Formation of the State and Administration in the New Georgian state. Kavkaz. Ezhegodnik KASMI = Caucasus. The yearly issue of KASMI. Yerevan, 2006. Pp. 46–76. (In Russ.).
39. Kadagidze N. The Distinctive Features of Issues Arising from the Georgian Administrative Judicial Procedure in the Course of Reviewing Labor Law Cases. Yuzhnokavkazskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal = South Caucasus Law Journal, 2011, no. 2, pp. 107–110. (In Russ.).
40. Dascalu D. Tratat de contencios fiscal [Essay on the tax dispute]. Bucharest, Hamangiu, 2014. 1056 p. (In Rom.).
41. Fanu-Moca A. Contenciosul fiscal [The tax dispute]. Bucharest, C.H. Beck, 2013. 480 p. (In Rom.).
42. Clima N., Rotaru A. Litigii fiscale [Tax Disputes], in: Poalelungi M. Manualul judecătorului pentru cauze civile [The Textbook of Judges for Civil Cases]. Ed. 2. Chisinau, 2013. P. 632–703. (In Rom.).
43. Dastic A. Contenciosul administrativ in Republica Moldova [The administrative dispute in the republic of Moldova]. Doct. Diss. Thesis. Chisinau, 2006. 165 p. (In Rom.).
44. Kopaleishvili M.V. Human Rights and the Jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Georgia. 1996-2012. Tbilisi, 2013. (In Georg.).
45. Burlacu M, Rusu S., Roscovan E. Ghid de mediere a conflictelor fiscale [Guide on the mediation of tax disputes]. Chisinau, «Cu drag» SRL, 2010. 14 p. (In Rom.).
46. Krikorian J.D. International Trade Law and Domestic Policy: Canada, the United States, and the WTO. UBC Press, 2012. 320 p.
47. Züger M. Arbitration Under Tax Treaties: Improving Legal Protection in International Tax Law. Amsterdam, IBFD Publ., 2001. 276 p.
48. Poalelungi M. Obligatiile pozitive si negative ale statului prin prisma CEDO [Positive and negative obligations of the state within the European Charter of Human Rights]. Doct. Diss. Thesis. Chisinau, 2015. 324 p. (In Rom.).
Review
For citations:
Shepenko R.A., Nani L. Legal regulation of liability for tax offnces and tax dispute resolution in Georgia, Moldova and Russian Federation. Law Enforcement Review. 2020;4(3):46-68. https://doi.org/10.24147/2542-1514.2020.4(3).46-68
Views:
483
Email this article 