Assisting the client in preparing a legal position on the "splitting" of the business
Mikhail Begunov, Nikita Zharov, Ivan Tsvetkov
The tax authority, as part of its pre-inspection analysis, concluded that the taxpayer used a "split" business scheme. In particular, the tax authority believed that: (1) the inclusion of a retailer who applied the simplified taxation system ("Counterparty") in the chain "producer - end buyer" is due solely to tax motives; (2) the taxpayer and the counterparty are interdependent business entities. In view of the above, the taxpayer was requested to adjust its tax liabilities and submit revised tax returns. The Tax Compliance team helped the client to elaborate a legal position confirming that (1) business transactions with the Counterparty are real; (2) business transactions with the Counterparty have a business purpose; (3) no interdependence exists between the taxpayer and the Counterparty.
The tax authority accepted the arguments of the taxpayer.
Analysis of the possibility of redomiciliation of a business entity in the ATS
The team was tasked with selecting the best jurisdiction for the holding company within the Group. The team analyzed various jurisdictions for opportunities to create / relocate a holding company within the Group. As part of this analysis, including the possibility of redomiciliation of the business in the ATS was considered.
As a result of the analysis, the client was offered various jurisdictional options for the holding company within the Group.
Support of the client in the framework of the appeal of the client on the issue of the legality of accounting exchange rate differences
Mikhail Begunov, Nikita Zharov
The Company was accounting for profit taxation purposes for income/expenses in the form of exchange rate differences. Based on the results of the on-site tax audit, the tax authority concluded that the Company's expenses in the form of exchange rate differences do not meet the criterion of documentary support and should not be taken into account for profit taxation purposes
The Tax Compliance team has prepared an appeal to the superior tax authority (Department of the Federal Tax Service of the subject), in which it: (1) presented evidence of sufficient documentary support of the respective expenses; (2) pointed out the methodological errors committed by the auditors in calculating the additional tax charges. Upon consideration of the appeal, the superior tax authority upheld the Company's position in full.