With the development of the new business economy, flexible employment as a brand new employment model has attracted much attention in the market. It has been reported that the number of flexibly employed people has reached more than 200 million in 2021, and the overall market size of China's flexible labor has reached 1.1 trillion in 2022 and 1.34 trillion in 2023. Flexible labor platforms are favored by local governments and enterprises as a platform that connects enterprises with freelancers, transforming the traditional employment relationship between enterprises and laborers into a cooperative relationship between enterprises and laborers, and serving both the functions of reducing enterprise costs and promoting employment. More than 1,000 flexible labor platforms in provinces such as Tianjin, Hunan, Jiangsu, Liaoning, and Jiangxi have obtained the qualification of commissioned collection. However, some of the flexible labor platforms have been suspected of tax evasion and false invoicing, and have been disqualified from collecting tax on behalf of enterprises, and are facing administrative and criminal risks. In this article, we will focus on the tax-related risks of flexible labor platforms with practical cases to help platform enterprises achieve tax compliance.

Article 63 of the Tax Collection and Administration Law provides for four situations that are recognized as tax evasion, including forgery, alteration, concealment, unauthorized destruction of account books and bookkeeping vouchers, overstating expenditures or omitting or understating revenues in the account books, and refusing to make a declaration or making a false tax declaration after being notified to do so by the tax authorities. Whether constitutes tax evasion is often related to the tax recovery period. In practice, due to the lack of clarity of laws and regulations, "failure to make a tax declaration" is tax evasion controversy, this article from a judicial decision, from the elements of tax evasion, the application of the recovery period and other perspectives to analyze this issue.

Since the revision of the Provisional Regulations on Consumption Tax in 2008, the scope of consumption tax levy and exemption for chemical products produced with crude oil and coal as raw materials has been controversial.After the online launch of the refined oil invoice module in 2018, the state has continued to strengthen the collection and management of consumption tax on the whole chain of the petrochemical industry. In particular, since August last year, the issue of levying consumption tax on chemical products such as crude oil products and coal-based oils as naphtha has been more prominent in Shaanxi, Shanxi, Inner Mongolia and Xinjiang, which has had a huge impact on the chemical industry in these places.

The recent cases of suspected false invoicing by individuals have been occurring frequently, throwing the potential tax risks behind this behavior into the public eye. Through the combing and analysis of the cases, it can be found that the natural person invoicing cases show the characteristics of industrialization: firstly, more than half of the cases disclosed so far are construction enterprises, mainly because of the serious shortage of input invoices, and the construction enterprises try to use their employees or fiscal platforms to issue invoices on behalf of the construction enterprises; secondly, the flexible labor enterprises have triggered the tax audit due to the large number of individuals involved in the invoicing; moreover, the industries of medicine and freight transport choose to issue invoices through individuals due to the existence of problems such as the difficulty of obtaining input invoices. In addition, pharmaceuticals, freight transportation and other industries choose to issue invoices on behalf of individuals due to the difficulty of obtaining input invoices and other problems. Previously, Hwuason systematically elaborated the concept of personal invoicing and related risk points through the article "Case Study: Analyzing Five Major Tax Risks of Personal Invoicing". In this article, we try to start from the industry where personal invoicing cases occur frequently, talk about the root causes of the cases, and analyze the risks of personal invoicing in combination with cases.

The pharmaceutical industry has a bearing on people's livelihood, and is one of the areas that receive the most attention from regulators. In order to solve the problem of pharmaceutical companies in circulation to extract funds for commercial bribery, drug prices are too high, in 2017, the State Council Medical Reform Office began to implement the "two-invoice system". The "two-invoice system" has compressed the original multiple circulation links of medicines, and to a certain extent, it has cracked down on the phenomenon of price increases at various levels after the drugs leave the factory. However, the reform did not completely solve the chronic problems of the pharmaceutical industry, and the tax-related risks faced by pharmaceutical enterprises have not been eliminated. In recent years, the tax authorities at all levels announced the typical tax cases, there is no lack of pharmaceutical enterprises. This year, the General Administration of Taxation "officially announced" that pharmaceuticals are still the key area of supervision. In view of this, this article combines the current policies and regulations and typical cases to analyze and summarize the tax-related risk points in the pharmaceutical industry, so as to put forward tax compliance recommendations for pharmaceutical enterprises and help their healthy development.

Tax-related issues are inevitable in enterprise bankruptcy proceedings, and it is of great significance for the smooth and efficient operation of the bankruptcy mechanism to appropriately deal with the historical tax arrears of the bankrupts, the nascent taxes and fees during the bankruptcy proceedings, and the post-bankruptcy tax and fee write-off issues. The Announcement of the State Administration of Taxation on Several Matters Concerning Tax Levy and Administration (Announcement No. 48 of 2019 of the State Administration of Taxation, hereinafter referred to as "Circular No. 48") is the main document in the field of tax levy and administration to deal with the tax-related issues in the liquidation procedures of enterprise bankruptcy, and it has responded to some of the convergence issues between the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law and tax levy and administration, but there are still many difficulties in application in practice. However, there are still a lot of difficulties in application in practice. Article 4 of Article 48 stipulates that in the bankruptcy liquidation procedure, the tax authority shall declare to the bankruptcy administrator the taxes owed by the enterprise (including education fees and local education surcharges), late payment fees, penalties, and interest generated by special tax adjustments in the claim filing period, and the author will analyze the common tax-related disputes in the bankruptcy procedure from the content of the four declarations, and the article will discuss the issue of taxes owed in order to provide a basis for the analysis. This article firstly discusses the issue of tax owed for reference.

In practice, some local governments, in order to attract investment, grant the land use right through auction and listing in accordance with the law, and then return the land grant payment in the form of support, incentives, subsidies, etc. However, due to the huge amount of land grant payment, whether to offset the land price has a significant impact on the capital cost of enterprises. However, due to the huge amount of land rebate, whether or not to offset the land price in the land value-added tax settlement has a significant impact on the capital cost of enterprises. At present, the national level has not yet clarified the land value-added tax treatment of land rebates, but some localities have made provisions for the deduction of land rebates from the corresponding land costs. Enterprises that do not deduct the land value from the rebates and include the full amount of the land premiums paid in the land costs are exposed to the risk of recovering the land value-added tax.

The software industry is one of the industries that China has vigorously pursued the development of, and through the implementation of tax incentives to promote the industry to maintain high quality and stable development. However, in recent years, the cases of software enterprises' false invoicing, fraudulent export tax rebates and tax evasion have erupted one after another, which triggered the concern of all sectors of the society about the tax-related problems of the industry. The technological attributes of software products have put a veil of mystery over them, making it more difficult for tax authorities to carry out audits. Therefore, this year, the State Administration of Taxation will include software enterprises in the focus of the fight, and joint investigations by multiple departments. In view of this, this paper reveals the irregular business model of software enterprises through three hot cases in the software industry, and analyzes the compliance construction of software enterprises, in order to provide suggestions for promoting the healthy development of the software industry.