Many enterprises, especially sole proprietorships and partnerships, require employees to provide invoices of not less than the amount of wages when they are paid, on the one hand out of the need to help employees avoid personal income tax, and on the other hand in order to inflate the cost of the enterprise and increase the pre-tax deduction. Recently, an enterprise was sentenced for accepting false invoices for wages, and the court found that the enterprise constituted the crime of false invoicing and sentenced the main responsible person to 2 years and 6 months of imprisonment. As a matter of fact, invoice-for-salary has become an open secret to avoid payroll tax, which is characterized by the fact that it is not legal and compliant in itself, and bets entirely on the intensity of the tax authorities' audit, hiding serious administrative and criminal risks.

The epidemic has promoted the development of the digital economy, and new types of business such as Internet taxation, flexible labor, network freight, cloud crowdsourcing, etc. are rapidly developing on the wind of favorable national policies. However, capital disordered expansion buried hidden dangers, digital economy, platform economy compliance still has a fairly long way to go, especially tax compliance should be paid attention to. And in this process from disorder to standardization, some unscrupulous elements use the digital economy, platform economy coat to engage in illegal and criminal behavior and the whole industry has a negative impact, and some platforms in the operation process of non-compliance behavior is also gradually exposed. This article will analyze the prevention and resolution of tax risks under the digital economy and platform economy by taking recent cases as an entry point for the readers.

Because most of the cases of false VAT invoices are accompanied by the phenomenon of fund return, the tax authorities pay special attention to the flow of funds when dealing with this type of cases, but does it necessarily belong to false invoicing as long as there is the apparent behavior of fund return? If it is really difficult for enterprises to obtain input invoices, how should they respond? In the situation of the tax authorities to crack down on the case of false invoicing, how should enterprises carry out risk prevention?

VAT levied or not levied on a company's investment in an intangible asset at value

There are various ways to cheat export tax rebates, but it is difficult to disguise and change the nature of tax cheating, and once the amount of cheating export tax rebates reaches the legal prosecution standard, which is in line with the criminal composition stipulated in Article 204 of the Criminal Law, criminal liability will be investigated in accordance with the crime of cheating export tax rebates. At the same time, in order to achieve the purpose of cheating the state tax rebate, the tax fraud case may also involve the situation of forging the flow of funds and invoices, and thus may be suspected of the crime of false VAT invoices and other crimes. Therefore, the tax-related risks faced in the case of fraudulent export tax rebates are extremely high, and taxpayers should familiarize themselves with the potential risks common to the export tax rebate business and adopt effective defense strategies to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests.

Article 201 of the Criminal Law of China provides for the provision of the reasons for tax evasion, i.e., after the tax authorities have issued the notice of recovery according to the law, the person shall not be held criminally liable for making up for the tax due, paying the late payment penalty, and has already been subject to the administrative penalty. However, in judicial practice, how to apply the tax evasion blocking provisions for individual cases is still controversial, this paper intends to analyze the application of the tax evasion blocking provisions through a typical case.

In recent years, the heavy tax burden in the manufacturing industry has become a common problem faced by many enterprises, and the iron and steel industry, as an important basic industry of the national economy, is also similarly faced with a high tax burden pressure. Since April 1, 2019, the central government has opened a tax reduction initiative, and the value-added tax of the manufacturing industry has been reduced from 16% to 13%. So what is the current tax burden situation of China's steel industry? What tax-related problems do steel enterprises face in the development process? This article will analyze these issues.
In recent years, the international political and economic situation is complex and severe, and the downward pressure on the domestic economy has increased. The country continues to implement a proactive fiscal policy and prudent monetary policy, maintaining the general tone of seeking progress while maintaining stability. Counter-cyclical regulation has been adopted, and a series of "stable growth" policies have been introduced and are being implemented with increasing vigour. The fundamentals of the long-term economic improvement has not changed; promote consumption, tax cuts and fee reductions, "make up for short boards" and other policy effects gradually appeared, is conducive to stimulate demand and reduce costs. Steel industry continues to promote in-depth structural reform of the supply side, vigorously energy saving and emission reduction, the operation of the overall stability, but also facing a significant decline in efficiency, tax pressure and environmental protection pressure to increase the difficulties.

In recent years, the petrochemical enterprises to change the invoice suspected of false billing criminal cases continue to break out across the country, the judicial processing and refereeing results around the world are different, and the practical world is very controversial. The core of the dispute is whether changing the invoice name of "heavy oil", "crude oil", "residual oil" and other types of component oils to "fuel oil" and then using it to offset consumption tax constitutes a violation of the law. After the invoice name of "heavy oil", "crude oil", "residual oil" and other types of component oils was changed to "fuel oil", the act of using the invoice name for false offsetting of consumption tax constituted a tax evasion crime or a false VAT invoice crime. The core of solving this controversial issue is to clarify the essential difference between the crime of false invoicing and the crime of tax evasion. The author starts from a case of a petrochemical enterprise in Hainan Province that changed its invoices.