Home Perennial flowers Article 252 of the Code. How to account for expenses in foreign currency

Perennial flowers

Article 252 of the Code. How to account for expenses in foreign currency

Federal Law No. 58-FZ of June 6, 2005 amended Article 252 of this Code, which shall enter into force upon the expiration of one month from the date of the official publication of the said Federal Law and apply to legal relations arising from January 1, 2005.

See the text of the article in the previous edition

Section 252. Expenses. Grouping expenses
Source GARANT

See Encyclopedias and other comments on article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation

Federal Law No. 58-FZ of June 6, 2005 amended paragraph 1 of Article 252 of this Code, which shall enter into force on January 1, 2006.

1. For the purposes of this chapter, the taxpayer shall reduce the income received by the amount of the expenses incurred (except for the expenses specified in this Code).

Expenses are considered justified and documented costs (and in the cases provided for by this Code, losses) incurred (incurred) by the taxpayer.

Reasonable costs are understood to be economically justified costs, the assessment of which is expressed in monetary terms.

Documented expenses are understood as expenses confirmed by documents drawn up in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation, or by documents drawn up in accordance with the customs of business turnover used in a foreign country on the territory of which the corresponding expenses were incurred, and (or) documents indirectly confirming expenses incurred (including a customs declaration, a business trip order, travel documents, a report on the work performed in accordance with the contract). Any expenses are recognized as expenses provided that they are incurred for the implementation of activities aimed at generating income.

2. Expenses, depending on their nature, as well as the conditions of implementation and directions of the taxpayer's activities, are divided into expenses related to production and sale, and non-operating expenses.

The second paragraph is deleted.

See the text of the second paragraph of paragraph 2 of Article 252

Federal Law No. 224-FZ of November 26, 2008 amended paragraph 2.1 of Article 252 of this Code, which shall enter into force on January 1, 2009.

See the text of the paragraph in the previous edition

2.1. For the purposes of this chapter, expenses of newly created and reorganized organizations are recognized as the cost (residual value) of property, property and non-property rights that have a monetary value, and (or) obligations received by way of succession during the reorganization of legal entities that were acquired (created) by the reorganized organizations. before the completion date of the reorganization. The value of property, property and non-property rights that have a monetary value is determined according to the data and documents of tax accounting of the transferring party as of the date of transfer of ownership of the specified property, property and non-property rights.

The costs of newly created and reorganized organizations are also recognized as costs (and in the cases provided for by this Code, losses) provided for in this chapter, incurred (incurred) by the reorganized organizations in the part that was not taken into account by them when forming the tax base. For taxation purposes, these expenses are accounted for by the successor organizations in the manner and on the terms provided for in this chapter. The composition of such expenses and their assessment are determined according to the data and documents of tax accounting of the reorganized organizations as of the date of completion of the reorganization (the date of making an entry on the termination of the activities of each merged legal entity - in the case of reorganization in the form of merger).

Additional costs associated with the transfer (receipt) of property (property and non-property rights) during the reorganization of organizations for tax purposes are accounted for in the manner prescribed by this chapter.

3. The specifics of determining expenses recognized for tax purposes for certain categories of taxpayers or expenses incurred in connection with special circumstances are established by the provisions of this chapter.

4. If some costs with equal grounds can be attributed simultaneously to several groups of costs, the taxpayer has the right to independently determine to which group he will classify such costs.

5. Expenses incurred by the taxpayer, the value of which is expressed in foreign currency, are accounted for together with expenses, the value of which is expressed in rubles.

1. For the purposes of this chapter, the taxpayer shall reduce the income received by the amount of the expenses incurred (except for the expenses specified in Article 270 of this Code).

Expenses are deemed justified and documented costs (and in the cases provided for in Article 265 of this Code, losses) incurred (incurred) by the taxpayer.

The paragraph is excluded. - Federal Law of May 29, 2002 N 57-FZ.

The expenses of newly created and reorganized organizations are also recognized expenses (and in the cases provided for by this Code, losses) provided for by Articles 255, 260-268, 275, 275.1, 279, 280, 283, 304, 318-320 of this Chapter, incurred (incurred ) reorganized organizations in the part that was not taken into account by them in the formation of the tax base. For taxation purposes, these expenses are accounted for by the successor organizations in the manner and on the terms provided for in this chapter. The composition of such expenses and their assessment are determined according to the data and documents of tax accounting of the reorganized organizations as of the date of completion of the reorganization (the date of making an entry on the termination of the activities of each merged legal entity - in the case of reorganization in the form of merger).

4. If some costs with equal grounds can be attributed simultaneously to several groups of costs, the taxpayer has the right to independently determine to which group he will classify such costs.

5. Expenses incurred by the taxpayer, the value of which is expressed in foreign currency, are accounted for together with expenses, the value of which is expressed in rubles.

The expenses incurred by the taxpayer, the value of which is expressed in conventional units, are accounted for together with the expenses, the value of which is expressed in rubles.

The recalculation of these expenses is made by the taxpayer depending on the method of recognition of such expenses chosen in the accounting policy for tax purposes in accordance with Articles 272 and 273 of this Code.

For the purposes of this chapter, the amounts reflected in the composition of the expenses of taxpayers shall not be subject to re-inclusion in the composition of his expenses.

Comments to Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation

With regard to tax accounting of any expenses, the taxpayer must adhere to the following rules.

First of all, we turn to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which establishes that in order to be recognized for profit tax purposes, expenses must meet the following criteria:

1) they must be justified;

2) documented;

3) are associated with activities aimed at generating income.

Failure to comply with any of the above criteria means the impossibility of accepting a particular category of costs as part of expenses that reduce taxable profit.

Next, we turn to the provisions of Articles 254 - 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as Article 270 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, and determine to which group of expenses certain costs belong. Taking into account the rules set out in these articles, accounting or non-accounting of the corresponding costs is carried out for the purpose of taxation of profits.

Methodological recommendations on the application of Chapter 25 "Profit Tax of Organizations" of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, approved by Order of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties of Russia dated 20.12.2002 N BG-3-02 / 729, it was established that economically justified costs were understood as costs (expenses) due to the purpose of generating income , satisfying the principle of rationality and conditioned by the customs of business turnover.

The Ministry of Finance of Russia, in a letter dated 09.11.2007 N 03-03-06 / 2/208, explained that the validity of the costs taken into account when calculating the tax base should be assessed taking into account the circumstances indicating the taxpayer's intentions to obtain an economic effect as a result of a real entrepreneurial or other economic activities.

Considering that tax legislation does not use the concept of economic expediency and does not regulate the procedure and conditions for conducting financial and economic activities, the validity of expenses that reduce the income received for tax purposes cannot be assessed in terms of their expediency, rationality, efficiency or the result obtained. By virtue of the principle of freedom of economic activity (part 1 of Article 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), the taxpayer carries out it independently at his own risk and has the right to independently and individually assess its effectiveness and expediency.

The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in Decision N 366-O-P "On refusal to accept for consideration a complaint of the non-state non-profit educational institution" Institute of Management "for violation of constitutional rights and freedoms by the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation" stressed that in paragraph 9 of Resolution N 53 speech it is about the intentions and goals (direction) of the real activity of the taxpayer, and not about its result. At the same time, the court indicated that tax legislation does not use the concept of economic expediency and does not regulate the procedure and conditions for conducting financial and economic activities, and therefore the justification of expenses that reduce income received for tax purposes cannot be assessed in terms of their expediency, rationality, efficiency or the result obtained. Similar conclusions are contained in the Definition of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated 04.06.2007 N 320-O-P "On refusal to accept for consideration a request from a group of State Duma deputies to verify the constitutionality of paragraphs 2 and 3 of paragraph 1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation", according to which the norms contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 of paragraph 1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, do not allow their arbitrary interpretation, since they require the establishment of an objective connection between the expenses incurred by the taxpayer and the focus of his activities on making a profit, and the burden of proving the unreasonableness of the taxpayer's expenses lies with the tax authorities.

The same conclusions are set out in the letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 09.11.2007 N 03-03-06 / 1/792 and dated 30.10.2007 N 03-03-06 / 2/199.

The Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation also proceeds from the same, which indicated in Resolution No. 53 of 10/12/2006 "On the Assessment of the Arbitration Courts of the Reasonableness of the Tax Benefit by a Taxpayer" that the validity of the costs taken into account when calculating the tax base should be assessed taking into account the circumstances indicating the intentions the taxpayer to obtain an economic effect as a result of real entrepreneurial or other economic activity. In this case, it is precisely about the intentions and goals (focus) of this activity, and not about its result. At the same time, the validity of obtaining tax benefits, as noted in the same Resolution, cannot be made dependent on the efficiency of capital use.

The judicial practice formed by the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation is based on the presumption of economic justification for the transactions performed by the taxpayer and the costs incurred on these transactions. As indicated in paragraph 1 of the said Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation, the actions of taxpayers resulting in the receipt of tax benefits are assumed to be economically justified.

Clause 10 of Resolution No. 53 clarifies that the fact that a taxpayer's counterparty has violated its tax obligations does not in itself prove that the taxpayer has received an unjustified tax benefit. A tax benefit may be considered unreasonable if the tax authority proves that the taxpayer acted without due diligence and care and should have been aware of violations committed by the counterparty, in particular, due to the relationship of interdependence or affiliation of the taxpayer with the counterparty.

In the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 6-P of 04/21/2003, for the first time, such qualities of a participant in economic legal relations as goodwill, reasonable prudence and caution are mentioned.

According to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, the constitutional principles of freedom of economic activity and free movement of goods, services and financial resources presuppose the existence of appropriate guarantees of stability, predictability and reliability of civil circulation, which would not contradict the individual, collective and public rights and legitimate interests of its participants. Therefore, carrying out in accordance with Articles 71 (paragraphs "c" and "o") and 76 of the Constitution, the regulation of the grounds for the emergence and termination of ownership and other property rights, contractual and other obligations, the grounds and consequences of the invalidity of transactions, the federal legislator must provide for such methods and mechanisms for the implementation of property rights that would provide protection not only to owners, but also to bona fide purchasers as participants in civil transactions.

Based on the provisions of the above rules, due diligence and caution of the taxpayer as a participant in economic relations guarantees the implementation of legal protection in relation to it. Thus, these provisions once again emphasize the principle of the presumption of good faith of the taxpayer.

The jurisprudence helps to understand the criteria of "due diligence and care". Thus, the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation in its Ruling of 21.12.2007 N 17389/07 recognized as legitimate the conclusions of the courts of lower instances on the taxpayer's compliance with due diligence and caution in the course of his activities.

It would be useful to consider the specific circumstances that led the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation to the following conclusion:

When concluding transactions, the taxpayer showed due diligence: demanded that suppliers provide information on tax registration, systematic payment of value added tax to the budget from income received from the sale of goods (in this case, lumber);

The tax authority has not presented evidence confirming that the company has intent to create favorable tax consequences and any relationship of the taxpayer with suppliers or subsuppliers aimed at creating a chain of enterprises that evade taxes;

The taxpayer performed transactions with real goods of real value purchased on the domestic market and exported outside the Russian Federation. At the same time, the first-tier suppliers submitted to the tax authority documents confirming the receipt of proceeds from the company for the goods supplied and the payment of value added tax to the budget.

Since 01.01.2009, amendments have been made to paragraph 2.1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, in accordance with which the procedure outlined in it is extended to non-property rights.

However, the revaluation of non-property rights with a monetary value during the reorganization for the purpose of calculating income tax was not made both before 01.01.2009, and after that date.

As the practice of tax audits shows, tax authorities, as a rule, do not recognize the following types of expenses as economically justified:

Expenses for the purchase of overalls, safety footwear and protective equipment in the event that the mandatory use of overalls, safety footwear and protective equipment by workers of a particular profession is not provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation;

Costs for the purchase of fuel, water and energy of all types, if they are not justified by the technological process;

The costs of paying for the services of specialized recruiting organizations in the event that the organization has not actually recruited employees, including as a result of considering candidates submitted by specialized recruiting companies;

Travel expenses are taken into account only if there is evidence of the production nature of the trip (business trip);

The costs of paying for consulting, accounting, legal services, if the organization has similar staff units.

Reasonable costs are understood to be economically justified costs, the assessment of which is expressed in monetary terms.

According to the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 11 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the concept of "primary accounting documents" for the purpose of their use for taxation purposes should be defined in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation on accounting (see also the letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 24.04.2007 N 07-05-06 / 106).

Requirements for the execution of documents confirming the costs of taxpayers are established in Articles 313 - 333 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as in regulatory legal acts on accounting. In addition, the requirements for the execution of certain types of documents are established in other acts of the legislation of the Russian Federation and regulatory legal acts of state bodies.

The primary accounting documents of the organization, confirming tax benefits, must comply with the conditions imposed on them by Article 9 of the Federal Law of the Russian Federation of November 21, 1996 N 129-FZ "On Accounting" (hereinafter - Law N 129-FZ).

The taxpayer should pay attention to the fact that in order to document the expenses, it is necessary to document the documents in accordance with the corresponding unified form of primary accounting documentation. In the letter of the Administration of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties of Russia in Moscow dated 11.07.2003 N 26-08 / 38889 with reference to the letter of the Ministry of Taxes and Levies of Russia dated 15.05.2003 N 02-4-08 / 184-С827 in part of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation it is indicated that if from The organization removed essential details of the unified forms approved by the State Statistics Committee of Russia for unified forms of primary accounting documentation, then the expenses incurred and indicated by the organization in the primary documents that do not meet the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation cannot be recognized as documented and, therefore, taken into account for profit tax purposes.

Thus, the taxpayer must draw up all business transactions on standardized forms corresponding to these business forms. However, there are cases when a unified form has not been approved for the corresponding operation.

In this case, it appears that the taxpayer, in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 2 of Article 9 of Law N 129-FZ, can develop such a form independently, while it must contain the following mandatory details:

a) the name of the document;

b) date of preparation of the document;

c) the name of the organization on behalf of which the document was drawn up;

e) measuring instruments of a business transaction in physical and monetary terms;

f) the names of the positions of the persons responsible for the performance of the business transaction and the correctness of its registration;

g) personal signatures of these persons.

If the taxpayer uses the forms of primary documents for which standard forms of primary accounting documents are not provided, he must approve the corresponding forms in the order on accounting policy. Such a requirement is contained in clause 5 of PBU 1/98 "Accounting policy of the organization", approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 09.12.1998 N 60n.

Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federationis part of Ch. 25 "Income tax". The provisions of this chapter are a reference book for accountants of commercial organizations with a general tax regime. Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation defines costs and suggests their grouping.

What is recognized as an expense in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation?

Expenses are recognized as costs or losses incurred by the company in the course of its activities.

It should be noted that not all types of expenses can be deducted when calculating income tax. First, they must comply with the conditions specified in paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation: this is expediency and documentary justification. Secondly, Art. 270 contains a list of costs that are not taken into account when reducing the tax base for income tax. For example, fines, penalties, contributions to the authorized capital of organizations, amounts of other taxes, expenses for the reconstruction of fixed assets (except for clause 9 of article 258 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), etc.

How does Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation group expenses?

There are many groupings of expenses: by direction, nature, type, calculation items, accounting purposes (for example, for management or accounting).

For tax accounting, Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the following grouping of costs is established:

Production costs and costs associated with the process of selling (selling) products.
Expenses that are not included in the first paragraph are non-operating expenses.

What costs are economically viable?

Costs that reduce taxable profit must be economically justified. This is stated in paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. What do tax specialists understand by the economic feasibility of expenses?

There is a legislative gap in this issue today. Previously, the answer to it was contained in the Guidelines for Ch. 25 (order of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties of Russia dated 20.12.2002 No. BG-3-02 / 729, currently inactive). Reasonable and reasonable costs from an economic point of view, according to these guidelines, are costs that are aimed at generating income.

But since the above document has been canceled, it would be reasonable for the company to fix the criteria for justifying expenses on its own in its internal documents. Justification of expenses is one of the conditions for their recognition by the tax inspectorate.

How to document expenses?

Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation establishes another of the conditions for the recognition of expenses by tax inspectorates - this is their documentary justification.

Each expense transaction must be documented. At the same time, the paperwork should not contradict the requirements of the legislative acts of the Russian Federation. If an enterprise develops forms of forms independently, then the documents should be drawn up in accordance with the provisions of its accounting policy.

Primary accounting documents are usually used as a documentary justification of costs:

waybills;
acts of acceptance of work performed;
acts of acceptance and transfer of goods and materials;
payroll payroll for employees;
money orders;
contracts, etc.

A specific list of documents has not been established. However, they must confirm the costs incurred and comply with the legal requirements of our country.

For information on how to take into account the costs of services rendered in special situations, see the material .

What is related to production and distribution costs?

Production and sales costs are costs directly related to the process of manufacturing a product and its further sale.

This group of costs includes costs aimed at:

for the production, storage, delivery and sale of products, for example, the purchase of raw materials, inventories and necessary component parts;
acquisition of fixed assets and maintenance of their condition in proper form;
development of natural resources;
R&D expenses, property insurance, etc.

They can be grouped into 4 main subgroups:

Material support of the production process.
Payroll expenses, including insurance premiums.
Depreciation (amortization) of fixed assets.
Other costs.

Depreciation of fixed assets is charged in accordance with the procedure specified in Art. 256-259 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. For tax accounting, in contrast to accounting, only 2 types of depreciation of fixed assets are used: linear and non-linear.

What is recognized as non-operating costs?

Non-operating costs are costs that are not directly related to the process of manufacturing products and selling them. They must also be substantiated and have documentary evidence.

Such costs should, for example, include:

maintenance of leased property, including leasing;
issue of securities;
negative exchange rate differences;
write-off of failed fixed assets, intangible assets, etc. (Article 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation);
losses of previous periods, doubtful debts not covered by the reserve.

For the recognition of bad loans as non-operating expenses, see the material .

What if expenses are related to several groups at the same time?

In practice, situations often arise when the same cost item can be included in several groups at the same time. In this case, the Tax Code provides the taxpayer with the opportunity to independently make a decision (clause 4 of article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). The enterprise has the right to classify such "controversial" types of expenses in those groups that it considers a more correct option.

In order to avoid controversial situations with tax inspectorates, articles, types of costs, their grouping must be fixed in the accounting policy for tax accounting. Depending on the type of activity, each company may have its own cost items. But their definition and grouping should not contradict the current tax legislation.

How to account for expenses in foreign currency?

Costs incurred in foreign currency (conventional monetary units) are included in the total cost, expressed in rubles. Such expenses must be recalculated into rubles at the official exchange rate of foreign currency on the day when they were recognized and accepted for tax accounting (clause 10 of article 272 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

Tax court practice under Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation

After evaluating the evidence presented in the case file, guided by Articles 40, 143, 169, 171, 172, 246, 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the court of appeal recognized the inspectorate's findings as legitimate and refused to satisfy the society's demands.

The reason for the contested decision was the conclusion of the inspection that, in violation of paragraphs 1, 3, 9 of Article 258, paragraph 2 of Article 259.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the taxpayer unreasonably overestimated expenses that reduce the amount of income from the sale of goods by 233,303,819 rubles. as a result of unlawful inclusion in the composition of expenses of the tax period of expenses for capital investments in the amount of 30 percent and overstatement of depreciation charges for fixed assets.

In addition, having established all the factual circumstances, the courts concluded that the company, in violation of Articles 252, 265, 270 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, costs a total of 12 422 754 RUB. 97 kopecks associated with the construction of the disputed house in 2012 were unreasonably included by the company in the cost of apartments sold to individuals and in the income tax expense for 2012.

In this case, the taxpayer has the right, taking into account the requirements of Article 301 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, to independently qualify a transaction, the terms of which provide for the supply of the underlying asset, recognizing it as an operation with a financial instrument of forward transactions or a transaction for the delivery of the subject of the transaction with a deferred execution.

Transportation costs incurred by the company are direct costs associated with purchased goods, they are not included in the price of goods, therefore, they are subject to accounting in accordance with the procedure specified in Article 320 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which provides for accounting for the remainder of the unsold goods when forming costs for profit tax purposes.

The applicant's argument about the application of the provisions of Article 214.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation to transactions with bills of exchange was considered by the courts and was declared unfounded.

Taking into account the established circumstances, the courts, guided by the provisions of Articles 169, 171, 172, 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, concluded that the inspectorate had legal grounds for making the contested decision.

Consequently, this circumstance excludes the possibility of accounting for these costs on the basis of subparagraph 2 of paragraph 1 of Article 263 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation as costs for voluntary cargo insurance.

There is no violation of uniformity in the interpretation and application of the provisions of Article 252, paragraph 2 of Article 279 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation by the arbitration courts.

Taking into account the provisions of clause 2 of Article 283 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the tax authority cannot arbitrarily choose the period in which the taxpayer's loss will be taken into account.

Refusing to satisfy the enterprise's claims for the episode under consideration, the courts of first and appeal instances, evaluating the evidence presented, guided by the provisions of Articles 333.9, 333.10, 333.13 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, concluded that the inspectorate correctly determined the amount of water tax, based on the water consumption rate specified in the water use license , recognizing as justified the additional assessment of the water tax for the 2nd quarter of 2007, the accrual of penalties.

Taking into account the established circumstances, the courts, guided by the provisions of Article 166 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, concluded that the inspectorate had legal grounds to additionally charge the company with profit tax and value added tax.

After evaluating the evidence presented, guided by Articles 143, 169, 171, 172, 173, 247, 248, 249, 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the courts recognized that the company actually supplied the goods directly to the end buyer, bypassing intermediaries whose settlement accounts were used to transfer money funds from the real buyer to the seller, in order to hide part of the proceeds from taxation.

According to the applicant, the courts, when passing the contested judicial acts, misinterpreted the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 252, Article 260 and paragraph 2 of Article 324 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

15 339 966 rubles of income tax for the episode associated with the application by the taxpayer of the provisions of Article 275.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as in terms of additional accrual of income tax, excluding the sums of property tax and severance tax additionally accrued during the on-site tax audit, corresponding penalties and fine.

As follows from the judicial acts, the present dispute arose over the validity of the reduction by the bank of the tax base for profit tax for 2008-2009, due to the application of the provisions of the second paragraph of clause 5 of Article 304 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Refusing to satisfy the claims, the courts of three instances proceeded from the fact that interest expenses could not have arisen from the company earlier than the deadline established by the issued promissory notes and loan agreements and additional agreements to them, therefore, a decrease in the taxable base for income tax for 2011 by the amount of interest on them does not comply with the provisions of Articles 252, 265, 269, 272, 328 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

However, this circumstance, taking into account the provisions of Article 90 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, does not in itself indicate the inadmissibility of these testimonies as evidence in a case subject to assessment in conjunction with other evidence in the case.

The tax base is defined as the monetary value of such taxable income, reduced by the amount of tax deductions provided for in Articles 218-221 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

After examining the evidence presented in the case materials, the courts found that the disputed payments do not meet the requirements of Article 255 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, since they are not related to the performance of their labor duties by employees and have no production focus.

This provision applies to taxpayers who have entered into contracts for the acquisition of land plots specified in Article 264.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, in the period from 01.01.2007 to 31.12.2011.

According to subparagraph 3 of paragraph 2 of Article 294 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the expenses of insurance organizations include the amount of insurance premiums for risks transferred to reinsurance incurred in the implementation of insurance activities.

Refusing to satisfy the stated requirements, the courts recognized as legitimate the conclusion of the inspection about the violation by society of the provisions of Articles 39, 271, 316 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, expressed in the non-reflection of income from sales for 2010 in the amount of 199,720,490 rubles for the actually completed volumes of construction and installation work within the framework of subcontracting agreements.

In accordance with article 346.4 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, income reduced by the amount of expenses that, by virtue of paragraph 2 of Article 346.5 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, are accepted as the object of taxation under the Unified Agricultural Tax, are accepted provided they meet the criteria specified in paragraph 1 of Article 252 of this Code.

Clause 1 of Article 171 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation provides that the taxpayer has the right to reduce the total amount of VAT calculated in accordance with Article 166 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation by the tax deductions established by this article.

The basis for the additional accrual of income tax was the conclusion of the inspectorate that, in accordance with paragraph 8 of Article 250 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, to the non-operating income of the company, amounts in the form of goods received free of charge worth 11,619,103 rubles 79 kopecks, as well as premiums received by the company from suppliers in the total amount of 11,200 160 rubles.

The Inspectorate considered that, in violation of Article 262 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which defines the specifics of tax accounting for research and development expenditures, the company incorrectly qualified the costs of these works, due to its technical specifications, as expenditures for the development of natural resources.

According to paragraph 2 of Article 277 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, upon liquidation of an organization and distribution of property of a liquidated organization, the income of taxpayers-shareholders of the liquidated organization is determined based on the market price of the property they receive at the time of receipt of this property, minus the value of shares actually paid by the relevant shareholders of this organization.

In addition, the inspection concluded that the company, in violation of paragraph 4 of Article 269, Articles 309, 310 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, did not calculate, did not withhold and did not transfer to the budget income tax in the form of interest paid to a foreign company.

It has not been established that the courts have applied incorrectly the norms of substantive law, including Article 333.12 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, the courts established that the information contained in the materials and documents provided to the taxpayer under the license agreement on the use of know-how dated 01.01.2006 does not represent know-how and is generally known, according to the results of an examination carried out in accordance with Article 95 of the Tax Code Russian Federation.

Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Grouping expenses