In March 2022, the Inspection Bureau of Xiantao Municipal Taxation Bureau received a piece of information on a major risk case source passed from the higher level. The information showed that three energy trading companies in Xiantao City, Company F, Company R and Company T, had inconsistent names of goods purchased and sold and were suspected of false invoicing. Inspectors of the three companies associated with the investigation found that there is a company named J company energy trading company and T company for the same address, the same time registered, and its situation is very similar to the above three companies, but also engaged in petroleum and related petrochemical products wholesale business, and there is a discrepancy between purchase and sale of goods and other cases.

Editor's Note: Recently, the case of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax on the online freight platform of "Shen Shi Sheng Xin logistics platform", which has attracted much attention, ushered in the judgment of the second instance. The court of second instance changed the original crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax to the crime of illegally selling special invoices for value-added tax, which triggered many thoughts on the handling of tax-related cases on the online freight platform. This paper holds that the behavior of "paying invoices later" on the network freight platform does not constitute tax loss under the background of real transportation business, and should not be regarded as the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, but it should not be punished as the crime of illegally selling special VAT invoices. If criminal responsibility needs to be investigated, the "late compensation" behavior of the platform is more suitable for the crime of false invoicing, which is more in line with the legislative purpose and legal interest protection principle of the crime.

Editor's Note: By combing through cases in practice, there are two main types of business models for Flexible employment platforms, namely, the "Agent Invoicing" model, which controls the invoicing of enterprises in the park, or the "Self-invoicing" model, which directly invoices in its own name. However, whether it is the "Agent Invoicing" model or the "Self-invoicing" model, Flexible employment platforms are subject to greater tax risks, and can easily be considered by public prosecutors and law enforcement authorities as having committed crimes of false invoicing. In the context of the increasingly strict regulation of tax rebate policy and the gradual strengthening of the national authority's crackdown on tax-related crimes, how should Flexible employment platforms deal with the tax-related risks? This article will focus on two invoicing modes and comment on them from the perspective of tax law principles and practices.

In recent years, the real estate industry has been experiencing an economic downturn, and real estate enterprises, serving as debtors and mortgagors, have simultaneously become tax debtors. On the one hand, when the debtor is unable to repay debts, the real estate mortgagee may have the priority to be compensated for the debts through discounted sale or auctioning or selling the mortgaged property, as stipulated in the Civil Code. On the other hand, after obtaining auction proceeds through the auction of real estate conducted by the people's court, it becomes possible for the tax authorities to pursue unpaid taxes and auction corresponding tax payments, thus creating a conflict between taxes and mortgage claims. So, what is the order of repayment for auction proceeds in such cases? This article will discuss the distribution order of auction proceeds between real estate mortgage rights and the state's tax collection rights to satisfy the readers' curiosity.

Capital financing is crucial to the normal operation of enterprises, in order to improve the efficiency of capital utilization, reduce financing costs, the situation of capital borrowing between related enterprises is more common, some groups of companies also through the establishment of capital pools to enhance the liquidity of internal funds, minimize the cost of external borrowing. From a tax perspective, the borrowing behavior between enterprises involves the recognition of interest income of one party and the cost of the other party, in order to prevent the use of capital borrowing between related parties for profit transfer, illegal cost deduction, the tax authorities are usually based on the principle of deemed sales or arm's length principle of the capital borrowing between related parties to make adjustments, and some enterprises have "one in and one out of a borrowing mode between related parties". Some enterprises have the improper understanding that "the lending mode between related parties does not involve tax obligations, and the gratuitous lending without obtaining actual income is not subject to tax", which leads to the consequences of paying back taxes, charging late fees and even characterizing tax evasion. This paper analyzes the pre-tax deduction of interest cost under interest-free lending between related parties and compensated lending and the tax risk of individual shareholder's borrowing from practical cases and puts forward preventive and responsive suggestions for readers' reference.

China's partnership tax payment method is "share first and tax later", therefore, when the investment and financing platform type partnership obtains profits by transferring equity and other capital operation methods and distributes them to individual partners, if the individual partners who obtain the profits are tax residents of China, they are usually required to pay an individual income tax at a rate ranging from 5% to 35% of the operating income. Individual Income Tax. If the individual partner is a non-resident outside China, it is controversial in practice as to whether he/she should be taxed as a resident individual or whether he/she should be subject to preferential treatment or preferential tax rate under a tax treaty. This article briefly analyses this difficult practical issue and puts forward tax-saving compliance suggestions.

As tax authorities continue to strengthen the supervision of personal tax, the tax-related risk of natural persons is also getting higher. At the same time, the two high judicial interpretations will be the past double high people through the signing of “yin and yang contract” and other forms of hiding or dismantling the income of tax evasion of the usual tricks clearly included in one of the tax evasion behavior, for the judicial organs to combat the double high people to evade taxes to provide a clear and operable guidelines, resulting in a higher criminal risk. Based on this, this paper intends to analyze the causes of the severe tax risk of double-high individuals from the common forms of tax risk of double-high individuals in practice as a starting point and reveal the changes of the tax risk of double-high individuals after the introduction of the two high judicial interpretations, with a view to providing the double-high individuals with strategies to cope with the situation.

ecently, the Procuratorate Daily reported a case in which the real controller of a coal-using enterprise purchased coal from a small coal kiln without a ticket, and then found a third party to issue an invoice on his behalf, and the real controller was eventually convicted and sentenced for the crime of illegally issuing VAT invoices. However, in judicial practice, many judicial authorities have convicted and sentenced the person for the crime of illegally purchasing VAT invoices in the same case. The maximum penalty for the crime of false invoicing is life imprisonment, while the maximum penalty for the crime of illegal purchase is five years. The difference in the characterization of the two crimes is so great that "different sentences for the same case" undermines the fairness and authority of the judiciary and damages the legitimate rights and interests of the defendants. After the two high judicial interpretation, for the behavior of truthfulness on behalf of the characterization, the supreme law and the supreme prosecutor successively issued "understanding and application" of the viewpoints and there are different. Based on this, this paper intends to start from the two cases, in the two high judicial interpretation of the background, and strive to clarify the truth on behalf of the act of crime and non-crime, the crime and the crime, with a view to make the criminal law of the basic principle of criminal responsibility and criminal punishment in the tax-related crimes can be truly realized.