Field tax audit

Field tax audit is established in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. All formal nuances are defined by such document as the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. What should I focus on first?

All the legal nuances of such an important state event as a field tax audit I found here: http://vnproverka.narod2.ru

In this article I will try to explain everything in human language. In the beginning of my career I worked in the tax inspection in the department of " documentary checks of limited liability companies and joint-stock companies ". Now such departments are called the department of exit tax inspections , so such an event as a field tax audit is conducted in this department.

Over time, it became clear that the additional charge of taxes is inherently a technology and the primary task of the tax inspector is not to identify any specific violations, but a complete audit of the enterprise, so to speak, analysis of business processes, such as sales, purchases, production,

After analyzing all the business process, the so-called risks are identified at the level of business processes, as a result of which there are options for additional taxation.

Such options for additional taxation as a result of a field tax audit tax inspector can identify, as a rule, three or four.

After determining the options for additional taxation, risks are identified for challenging the arguments of the tax authorities. Yes, yes - it is from this that the tax inspector is insured, from the possibility of the taxpayer's objection. But as a rule, only 10 percent of all taxpayers dare challenge the arguments of the tax authorities, the rest of the organization resignedly pay all the additional taxes.

It is because of this that it is very important to correctly answer the questions of tax inspectors, especially if an interrogation report is being drawn up.

For example, a tax inspector asks the chief accountant:

- Do you have a separate accounting for VAT in respect of taxable goods (works, services) and sold at a rate of 10 and 18 percent?

The chief accountant somehow, perhaps from confusion, says that he does not. The tax inspector makes up the record of the interrogation and adds this explanation to that same interrogation record.

Accordingly, the tax inspector makes additional taxation at the rate of 18 percent from the whole turnover.

Further, the accountant brings that same separate account to the tax inspector and asks to correct the act, but the tax inspector states that the accountant made separate records during the audit, and at the time of the tax declaration for the value- added tax , there was no separate accounting. Accordingly, additional taxes are recorded in the tax audit certificate, further in the decision.

This situation is very difficult to challenge in court, therefore it is more reasonable to involve independent auditors for tax consultations even during the on- site tax audit and to write all questions of tax inspectors to the sheet first.

After that it is necessary to get a consultation from the auditors, what and how to respond to the tax inspector.

It also happens that the director and (or) the chief accountant, say that they did not actually carry out certain economic transactions, but only formalized the documents in order to pay less taxes.

In such cases, as a rule, the tax authority imposes a violation as an abuse of the right to obtain tax benefits.

The fact is that the organization must carry out actual activities, and pay taxes on the basis of those economic operations that are necessary for the production process.

Thus, in all cases, it is necessary to consult, consult and again consult with auditors who have 4-5 years of practice in the tax authorities and 7-10 years of practice of auditing and protecting large organizations during on-site tax audits.