|
Library
|
Your profile |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|
Taxes and Taxation
Reference:
Akopdjanova, M. O.
About the Blanket Dispo sition of the Russian
Criminal Law on Tax Crime as Provided
by Article 199.1 of the Criminal Code
of the Russian Federation
// Taxes and Taxation.
2012. ¹ 11.
P. 46-51.
URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=62008
Akopdjanova, M. O. About the Blanket Dispo sition of the Russian Criminal Law on Tax Crime as Provided by Article 199.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian FederationAbstract: The article is devoted to the question about the ‘blanket nature’ of disposition of the Russian criminal law on tax crime. The author describes the main features and peculiarities of discovering such a deed and analyzes the causes and peculiarities of imposing tax responsibility on a tax agent. Based on the analysis of the applicable criminal and tax legislation and law enforcement practice the author makes a conclusion about the need in improving a number of rules regulating the process of transferring tax by tax agents. At the end of the article the author concludes that suppression of the aforesaid crime can be achieved through raising control and interaction with law-enforcement and tax authorities which would ensure the right conditions of transport operation. Due to the ‘blanket nature’ of the criminal law as provided by Article 199.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the former can be applied and improved during man datory accounting of enforcement of applicable tax legislation as well as law enforcement practice in this sphere allowing to specify features of components of such a crime. Keywords: law, disposition, tax, levies, crime, responsibility, punishment, taxpayer, benefit, responsibility.
This article can be downloaded freely in PDF format for reading. Download article
This article written in Russian. You can find original text of the article here . References
1. Arkhiereyskiy A.B. Sudebnye garantii pri perekvalifikatsii sdelok nalogo-vym organom / A.B. Arkhiereyskiy // Vash nalogovyy advokat. – 2007. – ¹ 11. – S. 121-129.
2. Bryzgalin A.V. Sokrytie ili neuchet: k voprosu o kvalifikatsii sostavov na-logovykh prestupleniy v sfere nalogoo-blozheniya / A.V. Bryzgalin // Nalogovyy vestnik. – 1997. – ¹ 11. – S. 10-15. 3. Volzhenkin B.V. Ugolovnaya otvetstven-nost' za nalogovye prestupleniya / B. Volzhenkin // Zakonnost'. – 1994. – ¹1. – S. 8-14. 4. Efimychev P.S. Predmet i predely do-kazyvaniya po ugolovnym delam o nalo-govykh prestupleniyakh / P.S. Efimychev // Zhurnal rossiyskogo prava. – 2001. – ¹ 9. – S. 26-31. 5. Lopashenko N.A. Ugolovnaya otvetstven-nost' za nalogovye prestupleniya / N.A. Lopa shenko // Nalogovye i inye ekonomicheskie prestupleniya. Sbornik nauchnykh statey. Vypusk 2. – Yaroslavl', 2000. – S. 49-50 |
© 1998 – 2024 Nota Bene. Publishing Technologies. NB-Media Ltd.
Eng
