Recently, a number of medical device enterprises have not only been subject to tax recovery and late payment fees, but also administrative penalties and lower tax ratings due to concealment of income, false listing of expenditures and other illegal acts, triggering a series of tax risks. Serious cases will face criminal sanctions. In view of this, this paper will take the pharmaceutical enterprises tax evasion, false opening as a starting point, through the case form to summarize the pharmaceutical enterprises tax evasion, false opening of common situations, and legal risk analysis, in order to provide suggestions for pharmaceutical enterprises to prevent tax risks.

Recently, a municipal tax bureau served 10 transportation companies with the Decision on Tax Treatment. According to the information contained in the document, the 10 companies had fled and lost contact, had no operating qualifications, and had no transportation vehicles under their names, but had issued external transportation invoices and obtained invoices for fuel and road transportation fees. The tax authorities will characterize their external invoices and invoices obtained as false invoicing. In view of this, this paper takes the case of false invoicing by the transportation enterprises as the starting point, analyzes the risk of transportation enterprises in carrying out the business of transporting without their own vehicles, and provides the defense space for the transportation enterprises for the reference of the transportation enterprises.

Recently, a local tax bureau issued two Notices of Tax Matters, ordering the individual who acquired the land use right and transferred it to the outside world to declare and pay the taxes and late fees involved in the two transactions. Based on the background of this case, this article will analyze the differences between civil law and tax law, the tax basis of the transactions involved, and whether the recovery period is applicable.

Recently, the material of a listed company issuing A shares to a specific target was officially accepted by Shenzhen Stock Exchange. Previously, the Shenzhen Stock Exchange had inquired about the fact that the paid-in capital of its subsidiaries had not been withheld and remitted to the natural person shareholders for a tax of 16.47 million yuan. Based on this case, this paper intends to distinguish between the tax violations of withholding agents "withholding but not withholding" and "withholding but not paying", and analyze the taxpayer's responsibility when withholding agents fail to fulfill their withholding obligations according to law.

There are many controversies about how to deal with the enterprise tax allowance in bankruptcy proceedings. Bankrupt enterprises usually do not meet the conditions of tax refund due to insolvency and other reasons, and they generally have no output tax to deduct because of the suspension of business. In practice, in the case that the bankrupt enterprise has no VAT arrears, some managers advocate offsetting the tax arrears of other taxes of the bankrupt enterprise with the tax credits, while some tax authorities think that the tax credits of VAT can only offset the tax arrears of other taxes. This involves the connection and application of tax legal rules and civil and commercial laws. Starting from a judicial case, the author will discuss the definition of the nature of the value-added tax allowance in bankruptcy procedures, and further discuss the application of the right of set-off in the bankruptcy field for readers' reference.

Since the Criminal Law Amendment (VII) added the administrative predicate of tax evasion, the issue of the convergence of execution and punishment of tax evasion has been a hot topic of discussion in practice.2023 On October 10, the Supreme Court issued a typical case involving the protection of the property rights of private enterprises and the legitimate rights and interests of entrepreneurs in retrial, and the fifth case of the acquittal of Meng Mou in a retrial of tax evasion, which provided a more clear interpretation of the provisions of the fourth paragraph of the crime of tax evasion, while the defendant initiated the retrial procedure through the form of protest by the procuratorate, which demonstrated the importance of safeguarding the defendant's right to judicial remedy. At the same time, this case was initiated by the defendant through the form of the Procuratorate's protest, which plays a good role as a model for safeguarding the defendant's right to judicial remedies. This paper intends to start from the case, the administrative preliminaries of tax evasion and the relevant provisions of the initiation of retrial procedures.

Since 2022, various regions have successively carried out rigorous remediation of fuel dispenser cheating behavior, and some regions have achieved results. Recently, Zhejiang Province Market Supervision Administration summarized the effectiveness of the inspection since the launch of the special governance action of fuel dispenser measurement accuracy in March this year, and released the top ten typical cases of this special governance. Among them, shaoxing zhuji investigated and dealt with a cheating gasoline dispenser oil sales case, the party in August 2022 from others to buy an illegal modification can be cheated through the instrument to control the actual amount of fuel dispenser, as of the time of seizure, the party has been the use of the above gasoline dispenser sales of diesel fuel more than 15 tons, the amount of money involved in the case amounted to more than 100,000 yuan. Because of the large amount of money involved, Zhuji City Bureau of this case is suspected of constituting a crime of fraud according to the law transferred to the public security organs to deal with. It can be seen that cheating on gasoline dispensers not only involves tax evasion, but may also be suspected of other crimes.

Recently, an inspection bureau of Hainan Provincial Taxation Bureau announced a Notice of Administrative Penalties, which characterized the tax evasion of a real estate enterprise that had been revoked for 12 years and refused to declare enterprise income tax and urban land use tax after being notified to do so by the tax authorities, and proposed to impose a fine of 50% of the amount of the enterprise income tax to be paid within the period of the recovery of the penalty. Based on the factual information disclosed in the notification letter, this article will summarize and analyze the facts of this case.