Abstract: This article examines the questions pertinent to the theoretical category of the form of government. Currently, within the national legal literature prevails the elementary approach that suggests distinguishing the form of government and the political regime. The author determines the need in updating such approach. The political-legal processes demonstrate the increased correlation between the indicated elements of the forms of government, which no longer allows considering them as the independent substances. Therefore, the theory of state and law must implicitly shift towards systemic approach, which takes into account the interaction of the categories and answers the questions on the concept of the form of government, principles of classification and principles of the structure of public authority. The author carefully examines the types of relation between the form of government and the political regime, as well as proposes the new classification of the governments into monocratic and polycratic.

Abstract: This article examines the various problematic aspects. Special attention is given to consideration of concept of the form of government, which in traditional sense has the tripartite structure: form of governance, political regime, and form of territorial configuration. However, some of the Russian authors arrive at an opinion that the political regime cannot be among of the aforementioned elements. Such factor generates another problem – the correlation between the political regime and form of governance, which allows finding the interdependencies that change the form and content of the government. Moreover, the author concludes that the political regime is capable of transforming the form of governance. The indicated thesis substantiates temporality of the form of governance, as well as the third problematic aspect. Temporality of the form of governance becomes a certain substrate for the refusal of binary classification (monarchy and republic). This generates the need for implementing the new criteria for aspectual determination of the structure of public authority. The conducted analysis demonstrated that the indicated demand can be filled by the approach of dividing into the monocratic and polycratic form of governance.  

Abstract: This article examines the various problematic aspects. Special attention is given to consideration of concept of the form of government, which in traditional sense has the tripartite structure: form of governance, political regime, and form of territorial configuration. However, some of the Russian authors arrive at an opinion that the political regime cannot be among of the aforementioned elements. Such factor generates another problem – the correlation between the political regime and form of governance, which allows finding the interdependencies that change the form and content of the government. Moreover, the author concludes that the political regime is capable of transforming the form of governance. The indicated thesis substantiates temporality of the form of governance, as well as the third problematic aspect. Temporality of the form of governance becomes a certain substrate for the refusal of binary classification (monarchy and republic). This generates the need for implementing the new criteria for aspectual determination of the structure of public authority. The conducted analysis demonstrated that the indicated demand can be filled by the approach of dividing into the monocratic and polycratic form of governance.  

Abstract: The present article is devoted to the issues related to regulation of tax relations. Modern legal realities demonstrate the tendency to change ways and instruments that are used to resolve tax disputes. The object of the present research is the Judgement of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation no. 9 dated March 23, 2017 and Decree of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 39 dated December 8, 2017. These constitutional acts legalise implementation of civil institutions for public interests of tax authorities. Comparative analysis of the existing legislation and aforesaid acts prove that at the present time tax authority has all rights to appeal to courts of general jursdiction to seek compensation for tax arrears using Article 1102 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on unjustifiable enrichment. Moreover, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation allows an opportunity to hold an individual liable for a failure to pay corporate taxes. These approaches are not typical for Russian legal activity as a result of mixed private and public law instruments. Thus, the author concludes that mechanisms described by Tax Code of the Russian Federation are inefficient in achieving goals and tasks of fiscal authorities. At the same time, if this problem is not solved legally, it can create disbalance between public and private interests.