Abstract: The subject of the study is the concept of taxpayer integrity in the US law enforcement practice, in particular, the approach of the US tax authorities and the US Tax Court in applying this concept when considering tax disputes. When considering this issue, it was revealed that the signs of the taxpayer's integrity are fixed in the US Internal Revenue Code in Article 1.6664-4. In accordance with the provisions of this article, no fine may be imposed in accordance with section 6662 in respect of any part of the underpayment if the taxpayer proves that there was a reasonable reason for such part and that the taxpayer acted in good faith.     The main conclusion of the study is that the existence of a legal norm defining the signs of a taxpayer's good faith in the US tax legislation allows taxpayers to avoid a fine in case of incomplete fulfillment of tax obligations by providing a reasonable reasonable reason.
In addition, we can conclude that when determining the legality of accepting expenses for the purpose of reducing the income tax base, the US Tax Court takes into account the nature of the appearance of these expenses (case Neonatology Assocs., P.A. v. Commissioner - 115 T.C. 43, 99 (2000), aff'd, 299 F 3d 221 (3d Cir. 2002))

Abstract: Spread of the possibility of free movement of capital from one jurisdiction to another allows the companies incorporated in high-tax countries, to use low-tax or tax-free jurisdictions for conducting business and, as well as reducing tax burden. One of the mechanisms of tax evasion is the creation of controlled foreign companies that can delay the payment of dividends to the parent company, i.e. the payment of income that will be taxed in the country of tax residence of the parent company. The countries, in turn, adopt CFC rules (controlled foreign companies riles) to prevent tax evasion, which may change due to various circumstances. The CFC rules are aimed at determining the actual tax liability of the taxpayer. However, there are situations when CFC rules are implemented in a broader approach – for example, a wide range of entities would fall under the definition of “controlled foreign companies” or “controlling entities”, which may result in the fact that the conditions for application of CFC rules may arise for the entities that do not exercise control over a foreign company. In this case, CFC rules can worsen the situation of the taxpayer. This creates an abuse of the right of controlling authorities in terms of preventing tax evasion. In order to avoid such situations, it is necessary to improve the CFC rules by limiting the circle of entities and clearly distinguishing between abuse of the rights and lawful actions in implementation of CFC rules.