Regarding tax-related criminal cases directly investigated by public security authorities where judicial organs have yet to render final dispositions, can tax authorities issue administrative penalty decisions? This issue has been subject to differing interpretations in practice. Drawing on a real-world case, this article explores the core principles of legal application and coordination between administrative and criminal enforcement, aiming to provide guidance for handling similar cases.

Editor's Note: China's tax collection and administration adopts a model where audit-based collection is the principle and assessed taxation is the exception. The primary theoretical and practical rationale is to strive for consistency between the taxes collected by the tax authorities and the economic substance of the enterprise. Assessed taxation, as a simplified administration method, offers high efficiency and is particularly applicable in specific scenarios and industries. However, it has also led to cases of tax evasion. In recent years, with increased intensity in tax supervision, cases where prior assessed taxation is subsequently adjusted retroactively are not uncommon. Taxpayers face risks including being required to pay back taxes, late payment fees, and even having their actions classified as tax evasion resulting in penalties. Under what circumstances might assessed status be denied? What measures can taxpayers take to protect their legitimate rights after the denial of assessed status? This article will provide a brief analysis.

Editor's Note: The tax-related chain of the coal industry runs through all links such as mining, purchase and sale, and equity transfer, and there are many tax-related risks. In the mining process, the tax declaration of "small taxes" such as resource tax and water resource tax is easily ignored. In the purchase and sale transactions, the problem of false issuance and tax evasion is frequent due to the lack of source invoices. In some cases, there is also the problem of false issuance in transport invoice, and the problem of tax payment caused by the transfer of equity in coal mining enterprises is also very common. Based on the cases of tax collection and management in the coal industry disclosed by local tax authorities this year, combined with the trend of tax big data supervision upgrading under the "counting taxes", this paper analyzes the tax-related risks and tax compliance suggestions in the coal industry for readers' reference.

Editor's Note: In market operations, some enterprises holding special administrative licensing qualifications often adopt the contract operation mode to entrust both their qualifications and business premises to third parties for operation, so as to monetize resources. However, if such a mode lacks standardized tax compliance arrangements, it is likely to trigger disputes over tax payment and liability division. Combining a typical case of contracted operation of a commercial and trade enterprise, this article explores core issues such as the attribution of liability for paying tax arrears, the identification of tax-paying subjects and compliance paths, so as to provide practical reference for relevant enterprises.

Editor's Note: In recent years, live streaming e-commerce, as a vital component of the digital economy, has experienced rapid development. Concurrently, its tax compliance issues have gradually become a key focus of regulatory attention. To meet the tax collection and management needs of new business models, the State Taxation Administration and other departments have introduced policies such as the "Regulations on the Reporting of Tax-Related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"), marking a new stage of precise and transparent tax supervision driven by data. This article analyzes tax risks under different types of live streaming models in light of the new regulations and proposes systematic compliance recommendations to help relevant entities adapt to changes in the regulatory environment.

Recently, many cross-border e-commerce merchants have received text messages from tax authorities, informing them that their reported third-quarter VAT sales revenue was lower than the revenue reported to the tax authorities by the internet platform companies. They are advised to self-check for underpaid taxes and correct their declarations. Why have tax risks suddenly surged for cross-border e-commerce? Why is there a discrepancy between taxpayer declarations and platform-reported data? Can income from fake transactions be deducted? Can commissions paid to platform companies be offset as input VAT or deducted before tax? What should be done if purchase invoices are not obtained for goods? Cross-border e-commerce faces numerous tax challenges. This article aims to address current hot issues and provide tax compliance advice for cross-border e-commerce for reference.

Editor's Note: The renewable resources, coal and other industries are generally natural persons and self-employed. Because natural individual retail investors cannot issue special VAT invoices, production enterprises usually add trading companies into the purchase and sale chain to realize their rights and interests deduction, and obtain special VAT invoices from trading companies. After the judicial interpretations of the two taxes were promulgated, some local courts held that the above situation was that the production enterprise realized the input deduction of the business that could not be deducted according to law through the fictitious trading company, which was a fictitious trading entity and constituted the crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax. Is the business model of the above-mentioned industries such as renewable resources a "fictitious transaction subject"? How to characterize trading companies and downstream production enterprises for the adjustment of business model with real transactions? This article will discuss this.

Editor's Note: Land Value Added Tax (LVAT) is a key tax for regulating the real estate market and participating in land revenue distribution, and the standardization and unification of its administration have always attracted much attention. Recently, the State Taxation Administration (STA) issued the Announcement on Several Administrative Guidelines for Land Value Added Tax (Exposure Draft) (hereinafter referred to as the "Announcement") to solicit public opinions. Prior to this, based on industry observations, Huashui Tax released the 2025 Compliance Report on Land Value Added Tax in the Real Estate Industry, which pointed out that current LVAT risks are highly concentrated in the standardized application of substantive tax elements. In practice, tax-enterprise disputes frequently arise over core tax system elements such as the period for collecting deductible items, exemption from LVAT for government land repossession, and the selection of allocation methods. The root cause lies in insufficient institutional supply. This Announcement serves as a crucial supplement to the national-level LVAT system, addressing concerns from frontline practice and market entities. This article will analyze each of the eight specific clauses of the Announcement, aiming to provide references for both tax authorities and taxpayers to accurately grasp the policy intent and actively participate in opinion feedback.