In civil enforcement cases, tax authorities often issue letters to enforcement courts requesting assistance in withholding taxes for the transfer registration of auctioned real estate. Once the enforcement court approves the tax authority's request, using the auction proceeds to pay the tax authority will directly affect the creditor's interest in obtaining repayment. This phenomenon also widely exists in enforcement cases where the creditor is a mortgagee. Many mortgagees are deeply confused by the huge discrepancy between the priority of mortgage rights recognized by the Tax Collection and Administration Law and the actual situation, and they often have no way to seek redress or obtain relief. Taking a case as the starting point, this article focuses on analyzing that the tax authority's act of sending a letter requesting assistance in withholding taxes and the court's act of cooperating in withholding taxes lack legal basis, and sorts out and analyzes different legal remedies for creditors, aiming to provide practical references for resolving such disputes and safeguarding creditors' rights and interests.

In August 2025, the Fushun Intermediate People's Court made a judgment on whether the container bag factory constituted a case of obtaining false VAT special invoices in good faith. This judgment has prompted many tax professionals to think about obtaining false VAT special invoices in good faith. This article intends to explore the historical origin of the false VAT special invoice obtained in good faith, and believes that under the current era background, the constituent elements of the false VAT special invoice obtained in good faith should be revised for readers' reference.

On June 20th, the "Regulations on the Reporting of Tax-Related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (State Decree No. 810) was officially released. [It stipulates the first centralized reporting of identity and income information of operators and practitioners within platforms from October 1st to 31st.]{.mark} This regulation will have profound impacts on internet platforms, their operators, and practitioners. Subsequently, on June 26th, the State Taxation Administration (STA) successively issued the "Announcement on Matters Concerning the Reporting of Tax-Related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (STA Announcement [2025] No. 15, hereinafter referred to as "Announcement 15") and the "Announcement on Various Matters Concerning Withholding Reporting and Agency Reporting for Practitioners within Platforms by Internet Platform Enterprises" (STA Announcement [2025] No. 16, hereinafter referred to as "Announcement 16"). This article will systematically analyze the impacts on platform enterprises and related practitioners based on the specific content of the aforementioned new regulations.

Since the implementation of the judicial interpretations on tax-related crimes issued by the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as "the two Supreme Judicial Organs"), the applicable boundaries between the Crime of Falsely Issuing Special VAT Invoices, the Crime of Illegally Selling Special VAT Invoices, and the Crime of Tax Evasion have been subject to ongoing disputes, often leading to confusion in practical determination of charges. The key to clarifying the application of these charges lies in identifying which function of the invoice the perpetrator actually exploited. In accordance with the spirit of the judicial interpretations of the two Supreme Judicial Organs, the Crime of Falsely Issuing Special VAT Invoices applies only when the VAT deduction function of the invoice is utilized; if other record-keeping functions of the invoice are exploited, this crime is not constituted. This article takes a case of a petrochemical enterprise evading taxes by reselling refined oil inventory data as an example, and analyzes the differences and application rules among the three crimes from the perspectives of legislative intent, protection of legal interests, and constitutive elements, aiming to provide useful references for tax-related criminal defense.

Recently, tax authorities and courts have announced multiple cases of tax violations by pharmaceutical companies, involving tax risks related to false invoicing and improper enjoyment of tax preferential policies. Based on this, this paper analyzes the tax risks faced by pharmaceutical companies through specific cases, and proposes corresponding strategies for the administrative responsibility or criminal responsibility faced by pharmaceutical companies.

Preferential tax and fee policies play an important role in encouraging enterprise innovation, promoting regional coordinated development and releasing the vitality of economic development. Whether it is tax rate preference, tax base preference or tax amount preference, there are strict application scope and conditions. At present, in practice, some enterprises cheat to enjoy tax benefits by means of fictitious business, split income, false reporting materials, etc., which leads to the risk of tax evasion and false opening. In tax collection and management, in recent years, tax authorities in many places have strictly investigated the illegal acts of defrauding and enjoying tax concessions. According to the data of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, during the "14th Five-Year Plan" period, the national tax authorities have investigated and dealt with 21,800 cases of defrauding and illegally enjoying tax concessions, and collected 26.9 billion yuan in taxes. Based on the case disclosed by State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, this paper analyzes the compliance points that enterprises should pay attention to when applying preferential tax and fee policies under the current collection and management situation.

In practice, some construction enterprises have their previously obtained invoices identified as abnormal vouchers because the upstream construction contractors have escaped or lost contact. Consequently, they receive handling and penalty decisions from the tax inspection bureau, facing obligations to pay back taxes, late payment fees, and being characterized as having evaded taxes. Combining current tax policies and practical operations, this article sorts out the response measures for enterprises and provides tax compliance guidance.

In recent years, the tax authorities have carried out the "strong foundation project" of tax collection and management under the condition of digital transformation, and promoted tax administration according to law, tax administration by numbers and strict tax administration. In terms of tax management by numbers, tax authorities in many places use big data analysis and other technical means to jointly realize tax management by multiple departments, accurately discover taxpayers' tax-related risks and crack down on tax-related violations. Enterprises in the coal industry have tax-related risks to varying degrees in mining, sales and equity transfer. In view of the characteristics of the coal industry, some local tax authorities have recently innovated a new tax supervision model to urge taxpayers to pay back taxes and fees and improve tax compliance. Based on the latest tax supervision measures in the coal industry, this paper takes the links with frequent tax risks as the starting point to provide reference for tax compliance of enterprises in the coal industry.