Podcast "Rules of the Game": accounting subtleties for technological (and other) business
Hi GT! Today I decided to share with you a transcript of one of the episodes of the “Rules of the Game” podcast, in which I communicate with tax experts.
/ Images Images Money CC
Alina: Let's talk about why [an entrepreneur] is important not only to [mechanically] engage, but also to be interested in accounting. There are many situations when there are some things that the entrepreneur did not know about.
')
Today we will discuss the most interesting cases: non-standard, complex, unusual things that are worth considering. If they find some response in your entrepreneurial soul, then it’s time to check that you are doing well.
Sergey: It’s not even about unusual things, but about so ordinary that many people don’t think about it. Every year the control in the field of taxation for entrepreneurs seriously increases. This is a common vector not only of our country, but also for Europe, where control is exercised at a completely different level.
Until now, it was believed that there are some offshore zones. Now the majority of offshore zones are no longer offshore, taxation has appeared in them. Someone jokes that “one of the most offshore zones is Russia”, a country where you can still “gossip” somewhere.
But if we don’t even talk about “deliberate hooliganism,” but about disorder or simply irresponsibility in terms of tax accounting, reporting and running a business, then good times are already in the past. Now there are a lot of regulations and [cases of arbitration] practice, which play into the hands of entrepreneurs. The most interesting thing is that sometimes “pure” entrepreneurs, who do not even think about “tax optimization” or about cheating, sometimes fall under the distribution.
The first thing I would like to remind everyone who works on the classical tax regime or with a VAT payer: the tax inspectorate has already implemented the VAT ASC system for two years, which connects all invoices issued and accepted. An invoice is a document issued along with a sale or purchase, on which VAT is accrued and calculated.
Until 2015, the tax inspectorate did not “see” the documents, but “saw” only the totals: how many entered, how many were released and how much tax was charged; if desired, she could request documents. If there was a question why such a small tax turned out, the tax started to understand, send inquiries.
Now everything happens automatically. A register of all invoices issued and received is submitted automatically with each declaration in electronic form. This happens for all counterparties. When the tax inspectorate servers process these documents, supply chains, money and commodity chains are joined, and the system looks for gaps.
Breaks - this is the case when you showed the document, and your counterparty - no. During the first launch of this system, a lot of breaks were [revealed], not even because the documents were not carried out, but because they had a different number, or the accountant incorrectly reflected them. In this case, the tax inspectorate automatically sends requests for confirmation of these documents.
If there is a difference in the numbers, there is nothing terrible, the documents are sent electronically, and that’s the end of the questions for the company. But if earlier there were fewer risks for an unscrupulous counterparty (“The counterparty did not show something in the statements? did not show implementation (did not want, or the accountant did not reflect this in the statements), the question of your deduction, which you receive from this operation, is being questioned.
Moreover, the latest practice (at the level of letters from regional inspections to specific inspections by districts) shows that a large segment of operations is in doubt, and there are signs that existing companies may have, but which are not interpreted by tax inspectorates, as well as by courts. in favor of the entrepreneur.
Alina: Signs under which a completely legal business can fall?
Sergey: Yes. [These signs are important to know] so that a company receiving VAT deductions can be sure that all these deductions will not be removed. Previously [for this] a field check was required without fail, and it is still needed in some cases. Now the tax inspectorate reconciles invoices, somehow analyzes them and simply sends requests for additional taxes.
Entrepreneur surprised. He has documents, there is a company that provides him with services. To which the tax inspectorate says that it does not need to prove anything, and sends the entrepreneur to the court. And then there is a very interesting incident.
If we touch on arbitration practice: there are criteria by which any transaction can be invalidated. There are classic things, such as finding a company not at the legal address. Many companies are not at the legal address, because they were first registered in one place, then moved to another office and for some reason did not change their legal address. This is not a crime.
Further, for example, the CEO is also the founder, he is also the chief accountant. There are many operating companies with such indicators. This is not because the director is trying to evade responsibility, but because it is his own business, he is alone there: the Swiss, and the reaper, and the player. Further more interesting. For example, the lack of payments characteristic of a standard business.
Alina: For the okvad in which the company works?
Sergey: No, just for entrepreneurs. For example, there are no payments for stationery, rent, for water. Further, if we talk about the tax component, these are the minimum contributions to the budget.
If you take a company that has recently been operating and, in fact, unprofitable, has a small amount of incoming money, it has really quite insignificant tax deductions. On this basis, each such company is an "unreal" business. Next: the minimum or close to the minimum wage. If we talk about a startup where people work almost for an idea, many of them really have a minimum wage.
And there are many such criteria. Each of them does not play a significant role. But in the aggregate ... It is clear that almost every small company that has recently been formed is just starting to work, and it looks something like this. And there are a lot of such companies for a long time.
And then the questions begin to documents. How are they signed, who are they signed when the seal was stamped? In addition to the documents themselves, for example, the consignment note and the invoice, the tax inspectorate, as well as the court, necessarily requests confirmation of the fact that the goods are actually available.
Everything is more or less simple with the goods: it is somewhere in the warehouse or it is not in the warehouse, it is put into operation. But when a product is not found, they often request documents that, for example, are related to its delivery. Many entrepreneurs in their car are carrying goods and do not arrange delivery. We are not talking about KAMAZ sand, but, for example, about server equipment, which is expensive, but it is easier to transport it on your SUV.
Of course, the entrepreneur can not give such documents. And the company in which he bought the equipment has one founding director, the authorized capital is 10,000 rubles from her, she has recently been organized, is not at the legal address, does not pay enough taxes, doesn’t have a lot of people, has a cheap rent, and even documents There is no delivery.
The tax inspectorate, like the court, in most cases regards such an operation as an unrealistic movement of goods, and will remove such tax deductions. It is clear that this is aimed at reducing the number of “cashiers”, reducing the share of “tax optimization”. But almost everyone can get into this situation.
If we talk about checking counterparties, there is such a thing as the “due diligence principle”. Many have heard about it. When concluding an agreement with the counterparty, it is necessary to request the constituent documents from him, a scan of the director's passport in order to understand whether this company is operating or not. In the tax code, there is no concept of “due diligence principle” at all. This is a thing that is used conceptually in some way, but is not fixed by law.
From July they promised us to post all information on the statements, fines, the amount of taxes paid, the average salary for each company on the tax inspectorate website.
Sergey: Previously, the tax inspectorate, coming with an on-site inspection, said: “Guys, what kind of activities do you have? What is this deal? They explained to her that the company [counterparty] was normal. The constituent documents were requested from them, a scan of the director's passport, their charter was honored, they all gave documents. They are located in another city, they have not seen them live, but there is correspondence, there is a website.
In this case, the tax inspectorate did not manage to operate with the amount of taxes and penalties (if the company-counterparty does not pay taxes, and it has large fines), because the entrepreneur did not have access to this information.
Alina: The tax service could not ask if you knew about it, or why you did not find out. And now, in theory, you should be aware of such problems of your counterparty.
Sergey: Yes. Information is posted publicly. It does not work out otmazatsya on the principle "I did not know." You can go to the site of the tax inspection, and see if there are fines or not.
At the same time, please note that the mere fact of having fines or tax evasion does not mean that the counterparty is bad, produces bad products. As a result, the choice of counterparty will be built by the entrepreneur, not only on the basis of the best conditions or some amenities and flexibility in the service, he, apparently, should proceed from indicators such as tax deductions.
I chose the cheapest supplier who works with a small margin, produces high-quality goods, but he didn’t work with the accounting department at some point, and the fine is hanging. With that, these are normal guys. But you cannot buy from them, because there is a high probability that with some disassembling the document from them may not be taken into account and the deduction may be removed.
Alina: That is the most dangerous thing that threatens, is it a tax deduction? Or are there any other serious consequences?
Sergey: If we talk about tax deductions and losses of an entrepreneur, based on the removal of these tax deductions, we will not pay attention to real or not, we have a period of tax limitation. This is 3 years. For 3 years, when taking a deduction, an entrepreneur will have to pay taxes, fines for not paying these taxes and penalties (sometimes they are not a penny) that they have “dropped” from the moment of the operation.
If these amounts exceed the threshold indicators (since July 2016, the large size is 5 million and the especially large size is 15 million), then usually the tax inspectorate does not deal with such cases, they are automatically transferred to the investigating authorities, mainly UBEP.
Alina: Is this already criminal liability?
Sergey: Yes, criminal liability for tax evasion. The article for non-payment of taxes equated to fraud, enrichment by illegal means. The conversation with the tax inspectorate is built in the same way, the conversation with the economic crime department is built in a completely different way, there is five to seven years or even ten years at stake.
Alina: It turns out that an entrepreneur needs not only to understand how his business works, with whom to work, who is a reliable counterparty, we must also constantly check this counterparty and be sure that everything is in order.
Sergey: Yes. When the ASC VAT system did not work the way it should work, we had an interesting situation. The tax inspectorate inspected the construction company and requested all documents for 3 years for the largest purchases and contracting services. The company provided all the documents, and the tax authorities took and sent counter requests for confirmation of documents to the companies from which the purchases were made.
But this is a building. The construction business, it is like this: the crisis - everything collapses, there is no crisis - everything opens again. Percentage of 30-40 companies did not respond to requests for inquiries and did not send documents, because they no longer existed or did not operate. By objective indicators, these are big companies that went bankrupt and closed. At the same time, among them were, frankly, the companies of “optimized taxation”.
The amount, of course, was not reduced to zero, because if the on-site checks come, they most likely know where they are going. But the bottom line is that the existing organizations fell under the hand. The first time, when this field test passed, the entrepreneur had a panic, he could not think that everything would turn out that way.
Alina: It turns out that if you worked with a company that, for one reason or another, is not operating now, it’s closed, you better have the maximum amount of evidence that you worked and received some services from it, goods, so that it would be somewhere fixed.
Sergey: And not just somewhere fixed. If you look at the arbitration practice, the court takes into account the following level of materials: if it is a screenshot of a correspondence or a site that may not exist, it must be printed and certified with a signature and stamp indicating which browser, IP address, computer inventory number is printed . This is necessary so that it is impossible to create this correspondence in retrospect.
Yes, there are “craftsmen”, and, probably, some tricks can be applied. But in the format of current work, if you follow everything we are talking about, it will probably be almost impossible to do business. Or you will need an individual who will record all interactions with counterparties.
We, for example, understand by our clients that the tax court often asks if you personally saw the director of the company-counterparty, whether you exchanged business cards. In the format of Moscow, you can still meet. But try to meet with the director of AlfaStrakhovaniya or Sberbank. With Sberbank, everyone works. And did everyone greet me with Gref's hand?
In many companies, the interaction is at the level of managers, and the leaders in general do not see each other and do not know. And why is this important? Often, when “debriefing” with documents, the counterparty receives a request. And he says: “And I did not sign the document! Not my signature! ”Or, for example, there is an examination, and it turns out that this is not the director’s signature. And then a lot of options.
Some of the courts take the position of an entrepreneur and say that the director might not know that they signed for him, or there could be a power of attorney, a facsimile. If the seal is worth it, and the product really exists, there is a confirmation in the invoices, or it is in stock with some markings, then you can close your eyes to the signature, the main thing is that the seal is there, they have been assured.
And in many cases, and vice versa comes out. When it is impossible to prove the availability of a product or transaction, all the factors speak against it, so also the signature turns out to be invalid, or it turns out that the document was not signed by the director.
Alina: So, if you worked with some unscrupulous contractor who provided the service not in full size, and at the same time forged signatures or forced someone to sign for the director, did you [the partner company] also answer for this?
Sergey: Even taxes will force to pay. By the way, you are ironic in vain about whether they specifically do it or not. I know a number of organizations in which for some time the director did not specifically sign the acts himself, he asked someone to do it for him. If there are any scrape, he will say that he did not sign anything, and in general there wasn’t. This also happens.
Therefore, it is about not only requesting copies of constituent documents, scanning director's passports, but (at the conclusion of the contract), personally looking at who signed it, or somehow verifying signatures.
PS Transcript of the first issue with analysis of the myths about modern accounting. And themed post .
/ Images Images Money CCAlina: Let's talk about why [an entrepreneur] is important not only to [mechanically] engage, but also to be interested in accounting. There are many situations when there are some things that the entrepreneur did not know about.
')
Today we will discuss the most interesting cases: non-standard, complex, unusual things that are worth considering. If they find some response in your entrepreneurial soul, then it’s time to check that you are doing well.
How to listen to the audio version of the podcast:
Do you all well
Sergey: It’s not even about unusual things, but about so ordinary that many people don’t think about it. Every year the control in the field of taxation for entrepreneurs seriously increases. This is a common vector not only of our country, but also for Europe, where control is exercised at a completely different level.
Until now, it was believed that there are some offshore zones. Now the majority of offshore zones are no longer offshore, taxation has appeared in them. Someone jokes that “one of the most offshore zones is Russia”, a country where you can still “gossip” somewhere.
But if we don’t even talk about “deliberate hooliganism,” but about disorder or simply irresponsibility in terms of tax accounting, reporting and running a business, then good times are already in the past. Now there are a lot of regulations and [cases of arbitration] practice, which play into the hands of entrepreneurs. The most interesting thing is that sometimes “pure” entrepreneurs, who do not even think about “tax optimization” or about cheating, sometimes fall under the distribution.
The first thing I would like to remind everyone who works on the classical tax regime or with a VAT payer: the tax inspectorate has already implemented the VAT ASC system for two years, which connects all invoices issued and accepted. An invoice is a document issued along with a sale or purchase, on which VAT is accrued and calculated.
Until 2015, the tax inspectorate did not “see” the documents, but “saw” only the totals: how many entered, how many were released and how much tax was charged; if desired, she could request documents. If there was a question why such a small tax turned out, the tax started to understand, send inquiries.
Now everything happens automatically. A register of all invoices issued and received is submitted automatically with each declaration in electronic form. This happens for all counterparties. When the tax inspectorate servers process these documents, supply chains, money and commodity chains are joined, and the system looks for gaps.
Breaks - this is the case when you showed the document, and your counterparty - no. During the first launch of this system, a lot of breaks were [revealed], not even because the documents were not carried out, but because they had a different number, or the accountant incorrectly reflected them. In this case, the tax inspectorate automatically sends requests for confirmation of these documents.
If there is a difference in the numbers, there is nothing terrible, the documents are sent electronically, and that’s the end of the questions for the company. But if earlier there were fewer risks for an unscrupulous counterparty (“The counterparty did not show something in the statements? did not show implementation (did not want, or the accountant did not reflect this in the statements), the question of your deduction, which you receive from this operation, is being questioned.
Moreover, the latest practice (at the level of letters from regional inspections to specific inspections by districts) shows that a large segment of operations is in doubt, and there are signs that existing companies may have, but which are not interpreted by tax inspectorates, as well as by courts. in favor of the entrepreneur.
Alina: Signs under which a completely legal business can fall?
Sergey: Yes. [These signs are important to know] so that a company receiving VAT deductions can be sure that all these deductions will not be removed. Previously [for this] a field check was required without fail, and it is still needed in some cases. Now the tax inspectorate reconciles invoices, somehow analyzes them and simply sends requests for additional taxes.
Entrepreneur surprised. He has documents, there is a company that provides him with services. To which the tax inspectorate says that it does not need to prove anything, and sends the entrepreneur to the court. And then there is a very interesting incident.
If we touch on arbitration practice: there are criteria by which any transaction can be invalidated. There are classic things, such as finding a company not at the legal address. Many companies are not at the legal address, because they were first registered in one place, then moved to another office and for some reason did not change their legal address. This is not a crime.
Further, for example, the CEO is also the founder, he is also the chief accountant. There are many operating companies with such indicators. This is not because the director is trying to evade responsibility, but because it is his own business, he is alone there: the Swiss, and the reaper, and the player. Further more interesting. For example, the lack of payments characteristic of a standard business.
Alina: For the okvad in which the company works?
Sergey: No, just for entrepreneurs. For example, there are no payments for stationery, rent, for water. Further, if we talk about the tax component, these are the minimum contributions to the budget.
If you take a company that has recently been operating and, in fact, unprofitable, has a small amount of incoming money, it has really quite insignificant tax deductions. On this basis, each such company is an "unreal" business. Next: the minimum or close to the minimum wage. If we talk about a startup where people work almost for an idea, many of them really have a minimum wage.
And there are many such criteria. Each of them does not play a significant role. But in the aggregate ... It is clear that almost every small company that has recently been formed is just starting to work, and it looks something like this. And there are a lot of such companies for a long time.
And then the questions begin to documents. How are they signed, who are they signed when the seal was stamped? In addition to the documents themselves, for example, the consignment note and the invoice, the tax inspectorate, as well as the court, necessarily requests confirmation of the fact that the goods are actually available.
Everything is more or less simple with the goods: it is somewhere in the warehouse or it is not in the warehouse, it is put into operation. But when a product is not found, they often request documents that, for example, are related to its delivery. Many entrepreneurs in their car are carrying goods and do not arrange delivery. We are not talking about KAMAZ sand, but, for example, about server equipment, which is expensive, but it is easier to transport it on your SUV.
Of course, the entrepreneur can not give such documents. And the company in which he bought the equipment has one founding director, the authorized capital is 10,000 rubles from her, she has recently been organized, is not at the legal address, does not pay enough taxes, doesn’t have a lot of people, has a cheap rent, and even documents There is no delivery.
The tax inspectorate, like the court, in most cases regards such an operation as an unrealistic movement of goods, and will remove such tax deductions. It is clear that this is aimed at reducing the number of “cashiers”, reducing the share of “tax optimization”. But almost everyone can get into this situation.
If we talk about checking counterparties, there is such a thing as the “due diligence principle”. Many have heard about it. When concluding an agreement with the counterparty, it is necessary to request the constituent documents from him, a scan of the director's passport in order to understand whether this company is operating or not. In the tax code, there is no concept of “due diligence principle” at all. This is a thing that is used conceptually in some way, but is not fixed by law.
From July they promised us to post all information on the statements, fines, the amount of taxes paid, the average salary for each company on the tax inspectorate website.
What is the message here?
Sergey: Previously, the tax inspectorate, coming with an on-site inspection, said: “Guys, what kind of activities do you have? What is this deal? They explained to her that the company [counterparty] was normal. The constituent documents were requested from them, a scan of the director's passport, their charter was honored, they all gave documents. They are located in another city, they have not seen them live, but there is correspondence, there is a website.
In this case, the tax inspectorate did not manage to operate with the amount of taxes and penalties (if the company-counterparty does not pay taxes, and it has large fines), because the entrepreneur did not have access to this information.
Alina: The tax service could not ask if you knew about it, or why you did not find out. And now, in theory, you should be aware of such problems of your counterparty.
Sergey: Yes. Information is posted publicly. It does not work out otmazatsya on the principle "I did not know." You can go to the site of the tax inspection, and see if there are fines or not.
At the same time, please note that the mere fact of having fines or tax evasion does not mean that the counterparty is bad, produces bad products. As a result, the choice of counterparty will be built by the entrepreneur, not only on the basis of the best conditions or some amenities and flexibility in the service, he, apparently, should proceed from indicators such as tax deductions.
I chose the cheapest supplier who works with a small margin, produces high-quality goods, but he didn’t work with the accounting department at some point, and the fine is hanging. With that, these are normal guys. But you cannot buy from them, because there is a high probability that with some disassembling the document from them may not be taken into account and the deduction may be removed.
Alina: That is the most dangerous thing that threatens, is it a tax deduction? Or are there any other serious consequences?
Sergey: If we talk about tax deductions and losses of an entrepreneur, based on the removal of these tax deductions, we will not pay attention to real or not, we have a period of tax limitation. This is 3 years. For 3 years, when taking a deduction, an entrepreneur will have to pay taxes, fines for not paying these taxes and penalties (sometimes they are not a penny) that they have “dropped” from the moment of the operation.
If these amounts exceed the threshold indicators (since July 2016, the large size is 5 million and the especially large size is 15 million), then usually the tax inspectorate does not deal with such cases, they are automatically transferred to the investigating authorities, mainly UBEP.
Alina: Is this already criminal liability?
Sergey: Yes, criminal liability for tax evasion. The article for non-payment of taxes equated to fraud, enrichment by illegal means. The conversation with the tax inspectorate is built in the same way, the conversation with the economic crime department is built in a completely different way, there is five to seven years or even ten years at stake.
Alina: It turns out that an entrepreneur needs not only to understand how his business works, with whom to work, who is a reliable counterparty, we must also constantly check this counterparty and be sure that everything is in order.
Sergey: Yes. When the ASC VAT system did not work the way it should work, we had an interesting situation. The tax inspectorate inspected the construction company and requested all documents for 3 years for the largest purchases and contracting services. The company provided all the documents, and the tax authorities took and sent counter requests for confirmation of documents to the companies from which the purchases were made.
But this is a building. The construction business, it is like this: the crisis - everything collapses, there is no crisis - everything opens again. Percentage of 30-40 companies did not respond to requests for inquiries and did not send documents, because they no longer existed or did not operate. By objective indicators, these are big companies that went bankrupt and closed. At the same time, among them were, frankly, the companies of “optimized taxation”.
As a result, the tax deduction, which was not paid for in 3 years, exceeded 17 million. With the problems eventually figured out. Lawyers gathered evidence that companies did exist and that the deals were real. Evidence is both e-mail correspondence with screenshots and requests for business proposals.
The amount, of course, was not reduced to zero, because if the on-site checks come, they most likely know where they are going. But the bottom line is that the existing organizations fell under the hand. The first time, when this field test passed, the entrepreneur had a panic, he could not think that everything would turn out that way.
Alina: It turns out that if you worked with a company that, for one reason or another, is not operating now, it’s closed, you better have the maximum amount of evidence that you worked and received some services from it, goods, so that it would be somewhere fixed.
Sergey: And not just somewhere fixed. If you look at the arbitration practice, the court takes into account the following level of materials: if it is a screenshot of a correspondence or a site that may not exist, it must be printed and certified with a signature and stamp indicating which browser, IP address, computer inventory number is printed . This is necessary so that it is impossible to create this correspondence in retrospect.
Yes, there are “craftsmen”, and, probably, some tricks can be applied. But in the format of current work, if you follow everything we are talking about, it will probably be almost impossible to do business. Or you will need an individual who will record all interactions with counterparties.
We, for example, understand by our clients that the tax court often asks if you personally saw the director of the company-counterparty, whether you exchanged business cards. In the format of Moscow, you can still meet. But try to meet with the director of AlfaStrakhovaniya or Sberbank. With Sberbank, everyone works. And did everyone greet me with Gref's hand?
In many companies, the interaction is at the level of managers, and the leaders in general do not see each other and do not know. And why is this important? Often, when “debriefing” with documents, the counterparty receives a request. And he says: “And I did not sign the document! Not my signature! ”Or, for example, there is an examination, and it turns out that this is not the director’s signature. And then a lot of options.
Some of the courts take the position of an entrepreneur and say that the director might not know that they signed for him, or there could be a power of attorney, a facsimile. If the seal is worth it, and the product really exists, there is a confirmation in the invoices, or it is in stock with some markings, then you can close your eyes to the signature, the main thing is that the seal is there, they have been assured.
And in many cases, and vice versa comes out. When it is impossible to prove the availability of a product or transaction, all the factors speak against it, so also the signature turns out to be invalid, or it turns out that the document was not signed by the director.
Alina: So, if you worked with some unscrupulous contractor who provided the service not in full size, and at the same time forged signatures or forced someone to sign for the director, did you [the partner company] also answer for this?
Sergey: Even taxes will force to pay. By the way, you are ironic in vain about whether they specifically do it or not. I know a number of organizations in which for some time the director did not specifically sign the acts himself, he asked someone to do it for him. If there are any scrape, he will say that he did not sign anything, and in general there wasn’t. This also happens.
Therefore, it is about not only requesting copies of constituent documents, scanning director's passports, but (at the conclusion of the contract), personally looking at who signed it, or somehow verifying signatures.
PS Transcript of the first issue with analysis of the myths about modern accounting. And themed post .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/373549/
All Articles