The Category of Fairness of a Taxpayer and Its Reflection in Law Enforcement Practice
Abstract
Based on the analysis of current trends in the implementation of legal regulation of public relations, the influence of the case law on the development of tax law is illustrated. The purpose of this study is to clarify the role of case law in the formation of the category of taxpayer fairness and accordingly the development of tax law. The concepts and varieties of judicial doctrines, elaborated in the context of balancing private and public interest in taxation, are defined. It is stated that the analysis of the practice of application of tax and legal doctrines indicates the creation of guarantees for the provision of private and public interests in taxation, which are manifested in the inadmissibility of arbitrary approaches to the analysis of case files, evaluation of evidence, the establishment of legally relevant facts, etc. Considerable attention has been paid to the category of taxpayer fairness. Approaches to its understanding in scientific circles as well as its use in law enforcement practice are analyzed.
References
[2] Amirgalieva, S.N., Ostapenko, V.V., Ostapenko, E.V. 2004. Analysis of matrix-convex functions. Kibernetika i Sistemnyj Analiz 40(4): 99-109.
[3] Blazhivska, N. 2019. Tax and Legal Doctrines in US Jurisprudence. Paper presented at the Second International Scientific and Practical Conference ‘Tax and Customs Disputes Litigation: Problems, Challenges’, July 4-5, in Kyiv, Ukraine.
[4] Bulves AD v. Bulgaria. 2009. Statement No. 3991/03. http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/app/conversion/pdf/?library=ECHR&id=001-90792&filename=001-90792.pdf.
[5] Business Support Center v. Bulgaria. 2010. Statement No 6689/03. http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/bulgaria/BUSINESS%20SUPPORT%20CENTRE.pdf.
[6] Decision of the Supreme Court of 18.06.2019 in Case No. 804/1606/17. http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/82447207.
[7] Decision of the Supreme Court of 23.10.2018a in Case No. 814/3061/13-a. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77361537.
[8] Decision of the Supreme Court of 28.08.2018b in Case No. 803/1054/17. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/76307127.
[9] Decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of 09.09.2008 in Case No. 21-500vo08. http://search.ligazakon.ua/l_doc2.nsf/link1/VS080494.html; Decision of the Supreme Court of Ukraine of 01.06.2010 in Case No. 21-573vo10. http://search.ligazakon.ua/l_doc2.nsf/link1/VS100155.html.
[10] Decisions of the Supreme Court of 08.08.2018 in Case No. 820/4428/17, of 22.05.2018 in Case No. 826/14638/14, of 04.09.2018 in Case No. 826/18952/14, of 29.03.2018 in Case No. 826/3498/15. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua.
[11] Duxbury, N. 2008. The Nature and Authority of the Precedent. Cambridge University Press. http://bookre.org/reader?file=1062751&pg=1.
[12] Forsyuk, V. 2018. Judicial Doctrines as a Means of Counteracting Abuse of Law in Tax Relations. http://advisortax.org/?p=4947.
[13] Intersplav v. Ukraine. 2007. Application no. 803/02. https://taxlink.ua/ua/court/sprava-intersplav-proti-ykraini/uk/.
[14] Ivanov, V.V., Mishchenko, V.I., Maliutin, O.K. 2015. International experience of inflation targeting: Model of success for Ukraine. Actual Problems of Economics 166(4): 414-425.
[15] Komarek, Ja. 2011. Judicial lawmaking and precedent in supreme courts. LSE law. Society and Economy Working Papers 4: 3-4. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/220905.pdf.
[16] Kozyubra, M.I. 2016. Judicial lawmaking: an anomaly or immanent property of justice. Law of Ukraine 10: 38-47.
[17] Malyshev, B.V. 2004. Judicial precedent and style of legal thinking. Problems of the Philosophy of Law 2: 142-147.
[18] Mishchenko, S., et al. 2019. Growing discoordination between monetary and fiscal policies in Ukraine. Banks and Bank Systems 14(2): 40-49.
[19] Plaskova, N.S., et al. 2017. Methodological support of organizations implementing innovative activities investment attractiveness estimation. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics 8(8): 2533-2539.
[20] Pozdnyakova, U.A., et al. 2019a. The model of well-balanced taxation for overcoming the shadow economy in modern Russia. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control 182: 207-215.
[21] Pozdnyakova, U.A., et al. 2019b. The mechanism of tax stimulation of industry 4.0 in modern Russia. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control 182: 189-197.
[22] Regarding the provision of individual tax advice on sufficient ‘prudence’ and ‘reasonableness’ and the provision of information to third parties at the request of the taxpayer: Individual tax consultation dated 25.09.2018 No. 4147/6/99-99-14-02-02-15/IPK. https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/view/IPK01587?an=1.
[23] Rudenko, M.N., Hochradel, R. 2017. Assessing the impact of the competency level on the success of companies' integration. Economy of Region 13(1): 106-113.
[24] Schwabiy, K. 2018. State Tax Policy. Another Great Compromise. Alerta.
[25] Shchekin, D.M. 2006. Public interest as a tool for regulating tax relations. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Second International Scientific and Practical Conference ‘Tax Law in the Decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation’, April 15-16, in Moscow, Russian Federation.
[26] Smychok, E.M. 2015. Legal Presumptions in Tax Regulation. Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University.
[27] Tax Code of Ukraine. 2011. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2755-17?find=1&text=%EF%F0%E0%E2%EE%EC%B3%F0%ED%EE%F1%F2%B3#w11.
[28] The Decision of the Administrative Court of Appeal of December 17, 2015 in Case No. 2a-6776/12/1470. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/54682055.
[29] The Decision of the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine of 06.09.2016 in Case No. 826/23325/15. http://www.reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/61251208.
[30] The Decision of the Supreme Court of 16.01.2018a in the Case No. 2a-7075/12/2670. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/71630425.
[31] The Decision of the Supreme Court of 23.10.2018b in Case No. 814/3061/13-a. http://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/77361537.
[32] What is driving tax morale? Public Consultation Document. OECD. 2019. https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-global/compilation-public-comments-what-is-driving-tax-morale.pdf.
[33] Zatsarinnyi, Е.I., et al. 2017. Current trends in the financial market development. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics 8(8): 2629-2635.
[34] Zherebtsova, E.E. 2009. Formation and development of judicial constitutional control in the USA. Bulletin of the Saratov State Law Academy 6: 45-48.
[35] Zhidkov, O.A. 1985. Supreme Court of the United States: Law and Politics. Nauka.
The Copyright Transfer Form to ASERS Publishing (The Publisher)
This form refers to the manuscript, which an author(s) was accepted for publication and was signed by all the authors.
The undersigned Author(s) of the above-mentioned Paper here transfer any and all copyright-rights in and to The Paper to The Publisher. The Author(s) warrants that The Paper is based on their original work and that the undersigned has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment. It is the author's responsibility to obtain written permission to quote material that has been previously published in any form. The Publisher recognizes the retained rights noted below and grants to the above authors and employers for whom the work performed royalty-free permission to reuse their materials below. Authors may reuse all or portions of the above Paper in other works, excepting the publication of the paper in the same form. Authors may reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the above Paper for the Author's personal use or for internal company use, provided that the source and The Publisher copyright notice are mentioned, that the copies are not used in any way that implies The Publisher endorsement of a product or service of an employer, and that the copies are not offered for sale as such. Authors are permitted to grant third party requests for reprinting, republishing or other types of reuse. The Authors may make limited distribution of all or portions of the above Paper prior to publication if they inform The Publisher of the nature and extent of such limited distribution prior there to. Authors retain all proprietary rights in any process, procedure, or article of manufacture described in The Paper. This agreement becomes null and void if and only if the above paper is not accepted and published by The Publisher, or is with drawn by the author(s) before acceptance by the Publisher.