Since this year, tax cases related to invoicing by natural persons have occurred frequently, involving both enterprises of the invoiced party and natural persons of the invoicing party. For the invoicing party, the invoicing party should pay VAT and income tax according to the law, otherwise, it will face the risk of tax evasion or even tax evasion; for the invoiced enterprise which accepts the natural person to provide services, whether it can obtain the invoice issued on behalf of the invoicing party or whether the invoices are legally compliant, etc., will have different impacts on the invoicing party. This article will analyse and sort out the risks faced by the invoicing party and the invoiced party under different circumstances, so as to help enterprises improve tax compliance and safeguard their legitimate rights and interests.

On August 1, 2024, the Regulations on Fair Competition Review (Decree No. 783 of the State Council of the People's Republic of China) (herein after referred to as "Regulations") came into force, clarifying for the first time in the form of administrative regulations the object of fair competition review, review standards, review mechanism and supervision and guarantee, filling the legislative gap of the fair competition review system. It fills the legislative gap of the fair competition review system. Chapter II of the Regulations sets out the review criteria for local governments to formulate financial incentive policies, which also suggests that enterprises obtaining financial incentives should pay attention to the compliance of the policies and measures they enjoy. The fiscal subsidy policy has a facilitating effect on the development of the renewable resources industry, and its compliance and stability will have an impact on the business model of renewable resources enterprises. In the period of high-quality development, renewable resources enterprises should take into account the relevant provisions of the Regulations to sort out potential risks and actively adapt to the new development model.

In March 2024, the “two high courts” announced eight typical cases together with the much-anticipated “Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in Handling Criminal Cases of Endangering Tax Collection and Administration”, in which the case of Shi 's tax fraud through low-value and high-value declarations was exemplary for clarifying the definition of crimes and non-crimes of export tax rebates. Recently, many cases of tax fraud by under-reporting have broken out in practice. In view of this, this paper analyzes the core of the frequent low-value overstatement tax fraud cases by analyzing the tax fraud case of Shi , and gives the ideas of defending the low-value overstatement tax fraud cases for the benefit of the readers.

With the release of the “two high” tax-related judicial interpretations, as well as the Supreme Prosecutor in conjunction with the Ministry of Public Security and other departments jointly issued the “handling of the use of agricultural products export tax fraud criminal cases joint meeting minutes”, the current export enterprises due to the acquisition of agricultural products invoices false open, high open, open, fill in the list of errors and other factors outbreak of the risk of tax fraud is increasingly high! . However, due to the decentralized nature of agricultural production and the characteristic of “self-invoicing and self-counterbalancing” of agricultural products purchase invoices, the phenomenon of non-compliance and mis-invoicing is not uncommon in practice. In order to deeply analyze the mode of agricultural export industry and its key points of defense, this article will take the case as the entry point, deeply analyze two common export modes and their risks, and give suggestions to effectively reduce the tax-related risks according to the previous case experience.

Article 204(2) of the Criminal Law stipulates that the crime of tax evasion is to be dealt with when a person fraudulently obtains the tax he or she has paid. There is a big controversy in the field of practice about what is meant by “taxes paid”, which leads to a huge difference in the understanding between the case-handling authorities and the persons involved in the case when calculating the amount of money involved in the case as well as determining the offense in some of the cases and makes it difficult to stop the dispute. Recently, I observed that Ningbo Procuratorate issued a typical case of fraudulent export tax rebate, in which the procuratorate explicitly applied Article 204(2) of the Criminal Law and pointed out that “the tax paid in the case should be deducted from the amount of the crime of fraudulent export tax rebate”. This case has certain practical significance in defining “paid tax”, but undeniably there are still many problems that need to be further clarified. This article will take the case as an entry point to analyze and elaborate the author's viewpoints in depth for the benefit of the readers.

Editor's Note: On 9 February 2024, the State Council proposed to "initially build a waste recycling system by 2025"; on 7 March 2024, the "Action Plan for Promoting Large-scale Equipment Renewal and Consumer Goods Trade-in" was released, ushering in new development opportunities for the renewable resources industry. However, with the implementation of the new policy of "reverse invoicing" and the outbreak of the financial refund issue, the renewable resources industry has also ushered in new challenges. China Tax will launch a series of articles on tax compliance in the renewable resources industry. Based on the business model of the renewable resources industry, this series will analyse the tax risks of the key nodes in the upstream and downstream chains in the light of the new tax policies in the industry in recent years, so as to help taxpayers to clarify the direction of business adjustment and tax compliance. As the first part of the series of tax compliance in the renewable resources industry, this article will analyse the business models of "retailer - recycling", "recycling - recycling", "recycling - purchasing/selling/producing", and "recycling - production". This article will summarise the typical tax risks in the "retailer-recycling", "recycling-recycling", "recycling-recycling", "recycling-recycling", and "purchasing/selling/production" segments, providing reference for enterprises to identify their own tax risks.

Editor's Note: Since the beginning of this year, multiple departments such as the Audit Bureau and the National Tax Bureau have clearly requested strict investigation of irregular tax incentives and fiscal refund policies issued by various regions. In response, regions such as Jiangxi, Zhejiang, Shanxi, and Tianjin have launched a series of documents in response to central guidance, and the cleanup work for local tax incentives and fiscal refund policies is in full swing, which has had a significant impact on relevant private enterprises. Based on this, This article will systemically interpret the legal responsibilities of illegal tax incentives and fiscal refunds, further analyze the adverse impacts on relevant enterprises, and propose response recommendations, combined with relevant documents issued by various departments in recent months.

On July 24, 2023, the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China held a meeting to analyze and study the current economic situation, pointing out that at present, the supply and demand relationship in China's real estate market has undergone significant changes. Against the background of the impeded operation of the real estate market and the continued downturn in real estate development investment, real estate development enterprises are facing different degrees of capital pressure. At present, housing prices around the world continued to decline, property transactions plummeted, real estate development enterprises sales revenue is far lower than expected at the beginning of the project development, the project profit shrinks significantly. In the past, many real estate development enterprises acquired land use rights in the form of transferring the equity of the project company through open share field transactions, in which the transferor did not pay the land value-added tax, and the subsequent project company needed to bear a huge amount of land value-added tax due to the extremely low land price paid for the land use rights in real estate liquidation. When the real estate price was high, the project company was still able to bear the cost of real estate development including the tax burden. Now that the real estate market is in the doldrums and the profitability of the project has been greatly reduced, the real estate development company may face the risk of not being able to pay the huge amount of land value-added tax. At the same time, according to the previous tax collection and management practice, the transferor of the land use right in the field of explicit shares is also facing the risk of being penetrated to collect land value-added tax or even characterized as tax evasion. In addition, the legal risks faced by the transferring parties are also more complicated due to the different operations of enterprises in the process of land acquisition, establishment of project companies and equity transfer. Based on this, this paper analyzes the tax risks of the equity transferor and transferee in the field transaction of explicit shares based on the current situation of real estate market for readers' reference.