In March 2024, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate jointly issued the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Handling of Criminal Cases Endangering Tax Collection and Administration (Judicial Interpretation No. 4 [2024]), which made a substantive restriction on the determination of the crime of falsely issuing special value-added tax invoices that has long been controversial. It clearly excluded false issuing behaviors that "are not for the purpose of defrauding or offsetting tax and do not cause losses of tax due to deduction" from the scope of this crime, and at the same time triggered adjustments in the application of charges for invoice-related crimes. In addition, the Supreme People's Court has refined adjudication rules through various means such as issuing authoritative interpretation articles, typical cases, and judge training materials, which has aroused sustained attention from both theoretical and practical circles.

From the perspective of judicial practice, the criminal crackdown on traditional key charges has maintained a high-pressure posture. The number of cases involving the crime of falsely issuing special value-added tax invoices still dominates, and it has always been the core of the crackdown in the field of tax-related criminal law. At the same time, the judicial practice of charge diversion has become increasingly active. For false issuing of special invoices that do not have the purpose of defrauding tax and do not cause losses of state tax due to deception, the crime of falsely issuing special value-added tax invoices is no longer simply applied for conviction and punishment. Instead, such behaviors are gradually diverted to be evaluated under charges such as the crime of falsely issuing invoices, the crime of illegally selling special value-added tax invoices, the crime of illegally purchasing special value-added tax invoices, and the crime of tax evasion. From the perspective of public effective judicial documents, although signs of charge diversion have emerged, a significant trend has not yet been formed. Based on the judgment of the judicial cycle law from case filing to judgment, the number of diverted cases involving the crime of falsely issuing invoices and the crime of tax evasion may increase exponentially in the future. Relevant market entities need to accurately grasp the subjective purpose and objective harmful consequences of invoice-related behaviors, and in the context of the current tax-related criminal judicial trends, safeguard their legitimate rights and interests in accordance with the law to achieve a good defense effect where the punishment fits the crime.

The Research Report on Judicial Adjudication Trends of Tax-related Crimes (2026) is based on the data of invoice-related criminal cases publicly available on the China Judgments Online from the date of implementation of the two Supreme Authorities' tax-related interpretation on March 20, 2024 to December 31, 2025, combined with typical cases and relevant judicial developments released by the Supreme People's Court, as well as the defense practice experience of Huashui Law Firm in representing many successful cases. It sorts out the adjudication trends of invoice-related tax crimes, disputes over the boundaries of charges, and summarizes the key points of targeted defense strategies, aiming to provide professional references for enterprises to effectively identify, prevent and resolve tax-related criminal risks.

Contents:

I. Latest Developments in Criminal Justice of Tax-related Crimes

II. Observations on Judicial Adjudication Trends of Invoice-related Cases

III. Analysis of Typical Cases of Tax-related Crimes

IV. Key Points of Defense Strategies in Tax-related Criminal Cases

V. Prevention and Response to Tax-related Criminal Risks for Enterprises