1.2 The principle of fair taxation
In the most general sense, justice in relation to taxation is a form of behavior of the state, determined by an equal attitude to tax duties and rights of all citizens and organizations, and these duties (rights) are equally assigned to both their citizens and other people. Being inherently moral and legal, the principle of tax fairness in individual countries has been enshrined at the constitutional level. In Art. 31 of the Spanish Constitution states: "Everyone
participates in the financing of public expenditures in accordance with its economic capacity through a fair tax system based on the principles of equality and progressive taxation, which in no case should provide for confiscation.
This principle is basic in the system of principles of taxation. At the same time, some scientists, recognizing its primacy and importance, have attributed and continue to attribute the principle of fair taxation to conditional moments that change historically and do not have a strong core.
This judgment is only partly correct. It is much more correct to say that this principle contains fairly stable (if not eternal) elements that can serve as firm criteria for tax policy and which confirm the correctness of the position of the French philosopher A. Camus: "Everything flows, but nothing changes." An analysis of the principle of fair taxation allows us to distinguish three such elements in it.
The first element can be formulated as follows: every citizen is obliged to pay for the work of his state, since he and his property are under its protection. The understanding of tax in this sense arose in antiquity and underlay the economic activity of any state. But scientifically, the principle of fair taxation was first substantiated by A. Smith, who believed that subjects (citizens) are obliged to participate in supporting their state in accordance with their material resources, i.e. according to the income that everyone receives under the protection of the state. Essentially, a similar definition of this principle was formulated in the early twentieth century. Russian financier M.I. Friedman: since all members of society are under the protection of the state and enjoy personal and political freedom, then each of them must pay taxes in equal measure with others.
The essence of the second element: in the case of tax evasion by individuals, the state forces them to do so, withdrawing from the property of these individuals the part required by law. The obligation to pay taxes acts as an unconditional requirement of the state to each person (physical and legal) who has a certain income and property. By evading tax, a citizen not only violates the economic rights of the state, but also the interests of other citizens, since such evasion leads to the need to increase tax rates and impose additional obligations on conscientious payers.
The third element is expressed as follows: government taxes, by extending to citizens and organizations, impose a burden on some and provide tax benefits to others. Article 56 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation under tax benefits recognizes the benefits provided to certain categories of taxpayers and consisting in the possibility of not paying tax or paying it in a smaller amount. Thus, citizens are exempted from paying taxes, receiving state benefits for unemployment, pregnancy and childbirth. Without this element, the principle of fair taxation does not have complete content.
At the same time, the state, using the mechanisms of tax benefits, can fairly and wisely solve complex political problems, including the demographic problem that is relevant for our country. For example, two workers working in a factory in the same profession receive the same salary, and one of them has one child, and the other has five dependent children. Can we assume that the state treats them fairly by levying the same income tax?
The principle of justice is the most fundamental in the system of principles of taxation. It can be viewed from two sides. Firstly, this principle is not only independent and has a real content, but also daily dominates other principles, and the eternally dissatisfied taxpayer appeals primarily to it. Not only in Russia, but also in the countries of prosperous Europe and in the USA, an ordinary taxpayer, if he is dissatisfied with the tax system, then most often points to injustice as its main drawback. The significance of this principle is great and indisputable. A well-known financier of the early twentieth century. V.N. Tverdokhlebov reasonably wrote: “It is not for science to decide which principles are “more important”; but the “fairness” of taxes is beyond its competence, while other principles can serve as the subject of its objective analysis”
Secondly, the principle of fair taxation, being basic, is the starting point for most other principles, so that when analyzing it, an old Russian proverb involuntarily comes to mind: "Rye bread is the grandfather of all bread." Most of the principles of taxation logically and legally follow from the principle of justice, are to a certain extent its components.
In Russian legal science, this principle is often referred to as the principle of equal tax burden.
Tax law is closely related to the idea of the rule of law. The concept and content of tax law cannot be conceived in isolation from two main ideas: the idea of the inviolability of the individual and the idea of the inviolability of private property.
For example, Adam Smith believed that proportional taxation corresponds to the principle of justice, when people with different incomes contribute the same share of their income to the budget.
According to the economist N.I. Turgenev: "Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in equal proportion; each donation for the common good should correspond to his strength, i.e. his income." common people." He considers it extremely unfair when entire classes - such as the clergy and nobility, especially in France - were exempted from paying the tax. "Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in equal proportion, the donations of each for the common good should correspond to his income"
At present, the principle of justice has been significantly transformed under the influence of changed economic, political and social conditions. It acquired two aspects: "horizontal justice" and "vertical justice".
Based on the broader principle of equality, the same facts should receive a single assessment. Therefore, persons who are in an equal position and received the same taxable income must pay tax at uniform rates. This is the essence of "horizontal justice"
Those who have different material resources must alienate in the form of taxes different shares of their income. Therefore, higher incomes should be subject to higher tax rates. This is aimed at redistributing income. This is how “vertical justice” is understood
Well-known American political scientists G. Almond, J. Powell, K. Strom, R. Dalton note: “Tax policy is aimed at achieving a variety of goals that can sometimes conflict with each other. On the one hand, the state seeks to finance various needs collect the maximum amount of taxes from its citizens.On the other hand, it does not want to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.The higher the taxation, the less incentives for citizens to work, and if the tax burden becomes unbearable, they may be tempted to leave the country. tax policy should also strike a balance between efficiency and equity Efficiency means extracting the maximum possible tax profit at the lowest possible cost of production.
Fairness implies such an order of taxation, in which no one bears an excessive tax burden. In most countries, the tax system is designed to redistribute wealth in favor of the less wealthy. Therefore, income tax is calculated, as a rule, on a progressive scale, i.e. The percentage of taxation depends on the amount of income. Here, however, there is a danger that excessively high income tax rates will discourage people from working and earning and, having a detrimental effect on capital formation, will turn out to be ineffective.
The principle of justice will never lose its relevance and will not be fully explored, since it has an extremely mobile content that changes following the conditions of society. "It is difficult to find another such concept, which legislators have so often resorted to in words and which has so often been infringed upon in practice, as justice. Perhaps justice can be called the "blue bird" of jurisprudence: it is just as desirable and just as elusive. Justice has long been recognized as the basic principle of legislation, but now it is hardly possible to find a country where they can, without prejudice, admit that they have this principle nowhere left obscured. This fully applies to tax law. Not only in Russia, but even in In the countries of prosperous Europe, citizens are very rarely satisfied with their tax system, and its injustice is most often indicated as its main drawback"
Considering the problem of political and legal justice, it should be noted that modern tax legislation does not answer the question of the proportionality of taxes. In this regard, it seems no coincidence that in the conditions of such a legal vacuum, the Constitutional Court of Russia devoted its first tax case to the issue of fair taxation.
For the first time, this principle was formulated in paragraph 5 of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 4, 1996 N 9-P, and it sounds like this: "In order to ensure the regulation of taxation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the principle of equality requires the actual ability to pay tax based on from the legal principles of justice and proportionality.The principle of equality in a welfare state in relation to the obligation to pay legally established taxes and fees (part 2, article 6 and article 57 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) suggests that equality should be achieved through a fair redistribution of income and tax differentiation and fees"
Subsequently, this principle found its consolidation in paragraph 1 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, however, in a somewhat refracted form (without mentioning the fair distribution of collected taxes), namely: "...when taxes are established, the taxpayer's ability to pay tax is actually taken into account based on the principle of justice." At the same time, as we see, the fairness of taxes and taxation is understood through the prism of the dogma "from each taxpayer according to his capabilities."
In the doctrine of US tax law, the principle of fair taxation is understood somewhat differently - through the actual principle of uniformity of taxation or the principle of the unity of the tax space. It is enshrined in Art. 1 of Section 8 of the US Constitution: "... all duties, duties, and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States." At the same time, this principle means uniform legal conditions for tax collection, taking into account the real possibilities of the taxpayer (the same throughout the country) and uniform requirements for the tax law
The considered principle, of course, is enshrined in the legislation of most countries of the world. For example, in Art. 53 of the Italian Constitution says: "Everyone is obliged to participate in public expenditure in accordance with their ability to pay."
The principle of fair taxation is indicated, for example, in the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, in art. 58 of which states: "The tax system provided for by law must ensure a fair distribution of the tax burden"
The most remarkable from the point of view of the establishment of the most important foundations of taxation should be recognized as the Constitution of Brazil, which enshrined a number of relevant principles, both of a general and special nature. It specifies that taxes should be, as far as possible, personal in nature and distributed according to the economic ability of the taxpayer; in particular, in order to ensure the implementation of these principles, the tax administration, while respecting personal rights and in accordance with the provisions of the law, may ascertain the status, income and economic activity of the taxpayer (art. 145).
How are political guidelines implemented through the most important tax principle - tax fairness? As the practice of state building shows, in various ways, the main of which is the legislative activity of the state. For example, the President of the Russian Federation in his Message for 1998 writes: “Tax reform should include: expanding the tax base while ensuring a fair distribution of the tax burden among different categories of taxpayers; simplifying tax legislation, making tax laws more transparent; reducing the number of taxes, etc. d." Later, these political guidelines of the President of the Russian Federation were implemented in specific laws, for example, in Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which states: "... legislation on taxes and fees is based on the recognition of the universality and equality of taxation. When establishing taxes, the actual ability of the taxpayer to pay tax is taken into account.
Taxes and fees may not be discriminatory and may not be applied differently based on social, racial, national, religious or other similar criteria. It is not allowed to establish differentiated rates of taxes and fees, tax incentives depending on the form of ownership, citizenship of individuals or the place of origin of capital"
A fair taxation system is the ideal dream of any state and society, which has not yet been achieved by any country in the world. Human civilization has been moving towards this goal for centuries, and it seems that there is still a very long way ahead. The imperfection of the taxation system inevitably causes and will cause criticism of any fiscal institutions of society. However, regardless of this, the search for rational, efficient and fair taxation must continue.
The main feature of a fair tax system is the availability of benefits. Benefits, which are certain advantages (exemptions, discounts, exemptions, deferrals, etc.) in the calculation and payment of tax payments, are a necessary element of any tax system. In addition, through tax incentives, state regulation of the country's economy is carried out.
As the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation pointed out in its Decree No. 9-P of April 4, 1996, tax laws should provide for certain benefits, and without a direct link to income. In addition, when choosing a form of taxation, any legislator must proceed from the principle of goodness and justice.
Therefore, the consolidation of the principle of fair taxation in the tax legislation will ultimately not only make the domestic tax system more efficient, but will also help increase the authority of the authorities, political stability and the education of a civilized taxpayer.
Taxation in business is necessary to imagine what the company will do, with whom it will work (population, organizations), and provide for income. The use of special taxation regimes is designed to make life easier for small businesses, at least in terms of calculating and paying taxes. The mode of application of the simplified system of taxation, accounting and reporting was established by the Federal ...
And indirect ones are included in the price of goods and services. For an individual payer, their size does not directly depend on his income. The second component of the tax system is the system of indirect taxation. Two types of indirect taxes are applied in Ukraine: universal and specific excises, as well as duties. From the point of view of performing fiscal functions, they are more efficient than direct ones, since their base ...
They can be regular or irregular. 2. Principles of building the tax system The tax system can be understood as a set of taxes existing in a given state, established by law and collected by authorized executive bodies, built on the basis of clearly formulated principles of taxation. This definition can be seen as...
Encouragement and development of priority sectors of the national economy, through taxes, the state can pursue an energetic policy in the development of knowledge-intensive industries and the liquidation of unprofitable enterprises. In the formation of the tax system in Russia, 3 stages can be distinguished: Stage 1 (1991-1993) - the adoption of the law on the fundamentals of the tax system of the Russian Federation. The tax system in the Russian Federation was practically created ...
RUSSIAN STATE UNIVERSITY OF TRADE AND ECONOMICS
COURSE WORK
in the discipline "Taxes and taxation"
Theme "Taxation Fairness as an Economic Factor"
Executor:
____________________
Supervisor:
Ave. Lukashevich A.B.
Moscow 2009
Introduction
1. The concept of tax fairness
2. Income tax as a tool for implementing the principle of tax fairness
3. Single turnover tax as an instrument of tax fairness
Conclusion
List of used literature
Introduction
The formation of a new statehood and civil society in Russia largely depends on raising the level of social justice in economic relations. The reform methods used in the transition period in the form of "shock therapy", serious violations and mistakes in the privatization of state property have undermined the country's population's confidence in market institutions. Therefore, the solution of the problem of social justice in the economic sphere (including the issue of fair taxation) becomes a decisive condition for the success of the reforms being carried out in Russia, a condition for the very existence of Russia as an independent unified social state.
Since the emergence of taxes in the 17th century BC. Until now, the problem of justice has been one of the main problems in the practice and theory of taxation. An important contribution to the understanding and formulation of the principle of justice in taxation was made by such prominent economists and practitioners as J. Boden, T. Hobbes, J. Locke. A brilliant generalization of these works was the formulation of the principle of universality and justice in taxation, given by A. Smith in his work "A Study on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations". Further development of the content of this principle and ways of its practical implementation was reflected in the works of J.-J. Rousseau, A. Wagner, K. Marx, J. Keynes, A. Marshall.
A great contribution to identifying the content of the problem and finding ways to its practical solution was made by Russian economists and practitioners: I.T. Pososhkov, N.I. Turgenev, S.Yu. Witte, P.A. Stolypin, V.I. Lenin .
In recent years, in connection with the tax reform in Russia, many works have appeared that attempt to scientifically comprehend the ongoing reforms, including from the standpoint of implementing the basic principles of taxation and the functions of taxes. Such leading Russian economists and practitioners as Yu. G. Volkova, V. A. Kashin, V. M. Pushkareva, D. G. Chernik, Shatalov S.D. other.
Despite the large number of works on the general theoretical aspects of the problem of implementing the principle of justice, as well as the analysis of the problem in relation to individual taxes, many theoretical and practical issues remain relevant.
The relevance and significance of these problems is determined by the close relationship of the tax system of Russia with the economic and social development of the country, the evolution of views on the degree of importance and methods for solving emerging problems, the emergence of financial resources and political will to solve them.
All of the above served as the basis for choosing the topic of the study, its goals and objectives.
Purpose of the work: to identify the main characteristics of the fairness of taxation as an economic factor and possible ways to implement the principle of fairness in practice.
To achieve this goal, the following tasks were solved in the process of research:
To characterize the concept of "fairness of taxation";
To characterize the income tax as a tool for implementing the principle of tax fairness;
- to analyze the essence of the unified turnover tax as an instrument of tax fairness.
The object of the study is the tax system of the Russian Federation, its compliance with the principle of fairness in taxation.
The subject of research is a set of theoretical and practical problems of implementing the principle of fair taxation.
Research methods. The method of system analysis and synthesis of tasks determined by the purpose of the research was used. The comparison method was used in the work.
The theoretical basis of the research was the works of domestic and foreign economists devoted to the problems of determining the principles of formation of tax systems, the mechanisms of their practical implementation.
The work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion and a bibliography. The volume of work is 35 pages. The list of references consists of 25 titles.
The concept of tax fairness
Fairness is one of the most important principles of taxation1. There is also such a point of view, according to which the principle of fairness of taxation is generally recognized as the main one in a number of tax principles formulated by A. Smith2. In any case, the triumph of the principle of justice is one of the priority goals of building modern taxation. Of course, it is quite possible to agree with the opinion that a fair system of taxation is the ideal dream of any state and society, which has not yet been achieved by any state in the world. Human civilization has been moving towards this goal for centuries, and it still has a very long way ahead of it.
The imperfection of the taxation system invariably causes and will cause criticism of any fiscal institutions of society. However, regardless of this, the search for ways of rational, efficient and fair taxation must continue3.
This category is difficult to define. The content of the term "justice" can be disclosed from legal, economic, social, moral and other positions. For example, some authors attribute the fairness of taxation to the generally accepted principles of economic theory4. This is explained by the fact that the category of justice as a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, being universal, is in fact a universal criterion of values.
The task of categorization in this case is also complicated by the fact that the understanding of justice may differ, depending on the ideas about it that have developed in a particular historical period, which, in turn, are adjusted under the influence of various objective and subjective factors. In this regard, it is appropriate to cite the opinion of the well-known Russian scientist M.M. Alekseenko, who believed that the pursuit of justice should accompany the establishment of taxes, but "human justice" is relative and depends on the socio-political structure5. According to some modern authors, the problem of fairness in taxation is primarily a political problem6. The understanding of tax fairness may vary depending on the taxpayer's belonging to a particular social group. This circumstance was noticed by A.A. Sokolov, who wrote that “the concept of taxable justice is, as it were, a general form into which a special concrete content is poured by each class”7.
We believe that it is permissible to talk about the observance of the principle of fair taxation only if there are a number of conditions declared by other principles, which primarily include the universality of tax obligations, tax equality and proportionality of taxation. At least in theory, it is reasonably noted that these principles are a necessary condition for the existence of tax relations8.
It seems that the principle of interest to us is so general that its implementation depends entirely on the implementation of not only these, but also some other, less general in relation to it, principles of taxation. Nevertheless, it is universality, equality and proportionality that are the main components of fair taxation.
It seems that the principles of universality and tax equality are among the most important ideas that form a general idea of a proper, and therefore a fair system of taxes and fees. The significance of these principles is great, and in modern reality they are perceived as self-evident immutable truths. However, until relatively recently, their implementation was faced with numerous exceptions and exemptions regarding the tax structure, including those of an individual nature.
At present, there is no doubt about the need for the participation of all citizens of a particular state in the common cause of the formation of public finances. This is the essence of the principle of universality of taxation. The extension of this principle to every citizen, to every organization without any exceptions, of course, serves to establish a fair taxation. On the contrary, the existence of any exceptions to this rule is regarded in the public mind as an injustice. Despite all the evidence of this truth, there were numerous examples in the history of taxation when individuals, as well as entire classes and estates, got rid of the need to pay taxes.
So, in antiquity, Roman citizens were exempted from any duties in general, in the Middle Ages various tax privileges were granted to the clergy and feudal lords, and later in a number of countries persons of royal families enjoyed tax immunity. In his Fundamental Principles of Financial Science, F. Nitti wrote that in the old days, it was the rich and powerful of this world that were often exempt from tax. At the same time, the scientist referred to the well-known saying: “According to the old custom, the people pay taxes with their property, the nobility with their blood, and the clergy with their prayers”9. In this regard, it is appropriate to cite the remark of P.A. Holbach, who considered it necessary to make sure that “... the tax was universal, this burden must be borne by all subjects; tax exemption creates between citizens an inequality as unfair as it is insulting, which usually favors only those who are more than others in a position to help the country”10.
Of course, the principle of universality should not be absolutized, since, of course, they have the right to exist in a situation where the obligation to pay taxes and fees is imposed on low-income people in need of social support, which traditionally include the disabled, pensioners, the unemployed, large families, etc. . In this case, equality is not violated, since there is a redistribution of income and differentiation of taxes and fees, taking into account the property status of taxpayers.
It seems that in any case, such exemptions from the general tax regime fully meet the requirements of social justice. At least the modern concepts of taxation in countries with developed market economies, in order to comply with the principle of social justice, proceed from the need for full or partial tax exemption for low-income groups of the population11.
From the desire to achieve tax justice also, in turn, follows the principle of proportionality of taxation, which requires a certain limitation of the financial claims of the state. It seems that, in accordance with his main idea, actions to ensure the necessary financing of public authorities, including through the establishment of taxes and fees, should be consistent with the need to ensure the exercise by taxpayers of their most important rights and freedoms. In any case, taxes and fees should not interfere with the exercise of these rights and freedoms, acquire a prohibitive or confiscatory nature.
The theoretical basis for the proportionality of taxation is largely associated with the works of A. Laffer, who established the dependence of tax revenues of the budget on the equivalent rate of total tax deductions, defining it in the form of a curve (Laffer curve). The starting point of the theory developed by him in the most general form is that since the amount of tax revenues to the budget is the product of the tax rate and the value of the tax base, then at a zero rate, tax revenues are also equal to zero. As the tax rate increases, tax revenues of the budget also increase, however, the dynamics of this growth is gradually slowing down as a result of a reduction in the tax potential of taxpayers, due to the negative impact of a large volume of tax exemptions on the economy. Further, the rate of reduction of the tax base increases so much that the rate of its reduction begins to outstrip the ever-increasing taxation. After passing the maximum value, tax revenues of the budget begin to gradually decrease and eventually fall to zero12.
In economic terms, the principle of equity means that government taxes and spending should influence the distribution of income, placing a burden on some people and benefiting others. Moreover, in foreign economic science, two main aspects of this principle are distinguished: horizontal and vertical13.
The principle of horizontal fairness implies that payers who are in an equal economic position must also be in an equal tax position, i.e. everyone must pay the same amount of tax (the principle of ability to pay). This principle is based on the following idea that the amount of taxes levied should be determined depending on the amount of income of the payer. According to N. Turgenev: “Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in equal proportion; the donations of each for the benefit of the common must correspond to his strength, i.e. his income."
However, in this case, the ethical problem of determining equality arises, since equality cannot always be achieved by comparing current incomes. Take, for example, two people working in the same factory doing the same job and getting the same salary. One of them has one child and the other has five dependent children. Can they be considered equal? Apparently not.
According to the principle of vertical justice, persons who are in an unequal position should be in an unequal tax position, in other words, whoever receives more certain benefits from the state should pay more in taxes (principle of benefits). However, the extent to which the benefits principle is justified depends on how public funds received through taxes are spent. Thus, it is well known that older people, on the one hand, have lower incomes compared to the young able-bodied population, and on the other hand, they more often resort to public health services. The ability to pay principle says that older people should pay lower taxes.
Whereas according to the benefit principle, older people should pay more taxes, as they benefit more from public funding of hospitals and clinics. Obviously, in this case, the application of the benefit principle to pensioners and the elderly will be unfair.
If we consider the issue of financing the construction and repair of highways, then many will agree that road users and vehicle owners should give more than others for the maintenance of roads. This is how it is done - a system of federal tax payments to road funds the tax on the sale of fuels and lubricants, the tax on vehicle owners, etc.) is the main source of financing for the country's road sector.
It should be noted that the separation of "vertical" and "horizontal" equity still does not solve one of the main problems that exist in the tax sphere today - how to determine the degree of taxation equity.
Important for this study is the fact that the proportionality of taxation is closely related to the implementation of the more specific principle of economic justification of taxation in relation to it. This is explained by the fact that taxation should be correlated not only with the need for taxpayers to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms, but should also take into account their economic situation. In particular, the principle of economic justification excludes the arbitrary establishment of taxes and fees and requires that the taxation of certain persons be carried out solely on the basis of their tax ability. Ignoring this principle can lead to taxation becoming an unbearable burden for taxpayers, an insurmountable obstacle to normal existence and development.
Considering the principle of economic justification of taxes and fees, some experts note as obvious that the totality of taxes and fees, which constitutes the tax burden of each individual taxpayer, should allow the latter to exercise his constitutional rights, including the right to private property. This implies the assumption that the statutory elements of taxation for each specific tax should have sufficient justification to clearly determine which specific part of the taxpayer's property is claimed by the state and why15.
The economic feasibility of taxes and fees is based on an assessment of the property status of taxpayers, since it proceeds from the need to take into account their tax capacity when determining the conditions of taxation. Such an assessment can be carried out using two main criteria, one of which includes an assessment of the benefits received by the taxpayer (the criterion of individual utility), and the second - its ability to pay (the criterion of public utility).
In the first case, we are talking about assessing the subjective willingness of a particular taxpayer to pay a particular tax, which, in turn, is directly dependent on the individual usefulness for this individual of state activities financed by collecting tax payments. This dependence actually means that the more benefits the taxpayer receives, the higher the level of his taxation can be, and, conversely, with a low quality of services provided by the state, taxation should tend to decrease.
As for the second criterion, based on an assessment of the taxpayer's solvency, it is based on the actual ability of individual taxpayers to fulfill their tax obligations, i.e. bear the tax burden. Data on the sources and amount of income of the taxpayer, on the property belonging to him, on the level and structure of consumption, and some other economic indicators can serve directly as indicators of solvency. On the basis of these data, in general, an economically justified determination of the conditions of taxation for certain groups of taxpayers is carried out.
The indicators that are relevant to the economic justification of a particular tax are primarily attributed to its object. This is explained by the fact that the very obligation to pay taxes is associated with certain objects, which include the taxpayer's income, real estate, transport and other property. At one time, M.N. Sobolev rightly noted that “binding the collection of a tax with any object is not a matter for the discretion of the state. It follows from the idea that the presence of this object gives the right to conclude that a person is a certain taxable person, which allows him to be taxed”17.
It seems that economically justified taxation in any case should proceed from the need to preserve for the taxpayer such a part of the object belonging to him, which would allow him to safely fulfill the corresponding tax obligation in the future, i.e. retain tax capacity, coupled with the least possible restriction of his property rights. For the same purposes, other economic indicators should be taken into account that characterize the solvency of the taxpayer, for example, the amount of expenses incurred by him in connection with the receipt of income.
Ultimately, all of the above leads to the conclusion that fair taxation should be based on a harmonious combination of the financial interests of the state, society and taxpayers. A necessary condition for this is the consistent implementation of the principles of universality of equality and proportionality of taxation.
Income tax as a tool for implementing the principle of tax fairness
The problem of using income tax as a tool for implementing the principle of justice and the social function of taxes is a key one for any modern tax system, including the Russian one.
In the dissertation work of Yu.D. Shmelev18 analyzed the possibilities of using personal income tax as a tool for the practical implementation of the principle of fairness in taxation and the social (distributive) function of taxes. Let us briefly characterize the results of the research of the scientist.
The study shows that during the years of reforms (2001-2006) associated with the introduction of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation19 and in particular Chapter 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the differentiation of incomes of the population increased by more than 3 times. The fund ratio, which characterizes the ratio of the incomes of the richest 10% to the poorest 10%, has increased from 3.3 in 1989 to to 15.1 in 2005 Taking into account hidden incomes, this differentiation is even more intensified and, according to experts, reaches 40:1 or more. The Gini coefficient during the reform period increased from 0.26 (in 1991) to 0.41 (in 2005), i.e. almost 1.6 times. Such differentiation creates serious social tension in society and requires appropriate action on the part of the state.
The most important goal of introducing the new Tax Code of the Russian Federation was to stimulate the legalization of shadow incomes by refusing progressive taxation of personal income, introducing a single social tax (UST), reducing its rates and using a regressive scale.
Such a radical change in the entire ideology of income taxation, the actual abandonment of the most important duties of the state to redistribute the income of the population, was argued by the need to sacrifice justice in taxation in favor of tax efficiency. It was assumed that as a result of the rejection of progressiveness and the transition to proportional taxation, incentives for entrepreneurial activity and higher incomes would increase, tax evasion would decrease, and the level of legally paid wages would increase.
In the dissertation, based on the data of the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation, the Federal Tax Service for Moscow and the data of Rosstat, the consequences of reforming income taxation in Moscow and the Russian Federation in terms of reducing shadow payments and implementing the social (distributive) function of taxes are analyzed. The paper shows that at the first stage, reforming the taxation of wages in 2001-2002. led to a slight decrease in the share of shadow wages in the total amount of wages from 32% in 2000 to up to 27% in 2002 The reduction in rates during this period served as a certain stimulus for accelerating the growth of legal wages and slowing down the growth of shadow payments. In subsequent years, the initial stimulus effect of the cuts diminished, while the general incentives for tax evasion (such as corruption, criminalization of the economy, general unfairness of the tax system) only increased. As a result, the growth rate of shadow wages exceeded the growth rate of legal wages in 2005. the level of shadow payments returned to the level of 2000. According to the author's estimate, it was about 32%. At the same time, the sharp decline in the UST in 2005 did not practically affect the growth of shadow wages. It should be noted that despite a slight decrease in shadow payments in 2001-2002, during the reform years of 2001-2005. the absolute values of shadow payments were constantly growing, which indicates the invariance of the behavior of employers in relation to shadow payments. At the same time, the share of income attributable to the richest strata of the population increased from 45.8% in 2000 to up to 46.7% in 2005, and taking into account hidden income up to 54%. According to official data, the coefficient of funds in the Russian Federation was 15.1 in 2005, and taking into account hidden income, almost 40, and increased in comparison with 1989. even according to official data, more than 4.5 times.
Thus, the dissertation shows that as a result of the reform of taxation of wages in 2001-2006. By reducing the rates of personal income tax and UST, it was not possible to achieve a reduction in tax evasion, the legalization of shadow wage payments and other incomes of the population. At the same time, the reform led to an increase in the level of taxation of the bulk of the population with low and medium incomes and a significant decrease in the taxation of the population with a high level of income. At the same time, the reform contributed to a further increase in the already high differentiation of incomes of the population, a decrease in the level of fairness in taxation, an increase in social tension in society, and a decrease in the level of law-abiding taxpayers belonging to the poorest and middle strata of the population. The paper shows that the state's rejection of the principle of justice in taxation in favor of the principle of efficiency did not give the desired result, did not lead to the legalization of shadow incomes, but only increased the already excessive social stratification.
The paper analyzes the role and place of the mechanism of tax benefits for personal income tax in the implementation of the principle of justice and the social function of taxes. The dissertation examines the practice of applying tax incentives in the developed countries of the world and compares the mechanism and capabilities of the system of tax incentives for income tax in the period 1991-2006. As the analysis of the practice of applying tax incentives in the Russian Federation, carried out on the basis of statistical data from the Federal Tax Service for Moscow and the Federal Tax Service of the Russian Federation for 2001-2004, shows, the existing system of tax incentives for personal income tax and the mechanism for their provision as a whole takes into account the experience of developed countries with market economies and gives opportunities for the implementation of the fiscal, regulatory and social functions of taxes. At the same time, in the practical application of the legislation in its current form, many problems, contradictions and deviations from the generally recognized principles of taxation arise.
The amounts and mechanism for granting standard tax deductions do not fully realize the social orientation of the tax benefit. The standard deductions for each taxpayer and minor children are well below even the official subsistence level and are in no way protected from inflation. Since their establishment in 2001. the real value of all standard tax deductions decreased by more than 2 times. With the introduction of Chapter 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a change in the mechanism and a decrease in the number of standard tax benefits, the situation of dependents, disabled people, war veterans, and a number of categories of low-paid segments of the population worsened. The standard deduction for minor children, due to its smallness, has practically no effect on the financial situation of low-paid families with children, does not solve the problem of their social protection. The current mechanism of tax benefits for children does not even include the goal of stimulating the birth rate and family development.
The most demanded of the non-standard tax deductions in the whole of the Russian Federation are the social deduction for education (about 40% of the number of applications submitted), the property deduction for the purchase of property (about 35%), the property deduction for the sale of property (about 10%), professional deductions ( about 6%). However, social deductions for charitable purposes account for less than 0.02% of the total number of applications.
For social deductions for education and treatment apply mainly to people with low and middle incomes, as evidenced by the use of the deduction amount on average by 60-65% in Moscow, and by 40-43% in Russia as a whole (according to the data for 2004). In general, there is a general trend towards an increase in the total percentage of the use of these deductions, however, even for the city of Moscow, the amount of deductions did not exceed in 2006. values of 70-75% of the maximum possible value.
For property deductions for the purchase of housing, mainly a fairly wealthy category of citizens apply. At the same time, the average amount of the declared deduction for the purchase of housing, although it has a general tendency to increase, was still in 2004. in Moscow, only about 21% of the maximum possible, and on average in the Russian Federation - about 17%. In 2005-2006 and with the general trend towards its increase, the amount of the deduction in 2006. even in Moscow it did not exceed 31% of the maximum possible. At the same time, the average value of the declared income of applicants for the deduction in Moscow in 2004 amounted to. 1031.5 thousand rubles, and in the Russian Federation - about 700 thousand rubles. Comparison of the real value of apartments, declared incomes and amounts of declared deductions, raises doubts about the reliability of the information in income declarations.
Income from the sale of personal property, primarily housing, has become the most important source of income for citizens. The total amount of the property deduction for the period 2002-2004. increased in Moscow by almost 2 times, in the Russian Federation as a whole – by 2.2 times. The average size of the property deduction for the sale in 2004. amounted to about 7 million rubles in Moscow, which is almost 35 times higher than the average property deduction when buying a home. On average in Russia, it was about 700 thousand rubles. and exceeded the amount of the deduction when buying a home only four times.
Changes in the list of privileged objects and the mechanism for granting a deduction for the purchase of housing, introduced by Chapter 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, led to a serious deterioration in the social orientation of this type of benefits, because. people of low and middle incomes were cut off from it, who could previously take advantage of such a benefit in the construction of a garden house, dacha, country house.
The analysis carried out shows that the system of tax benefits as a whole, as a result of the reform, has shifted in favor of the rich strata of the population. It does not fully realize the possibilities of social regulation and support for low- and middle-income strata of the population.
Based on the analysis, it was concluded that as a result of the introduction of Chapter 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the use of a proportional scale of taxation, the reform of tax benefits, the system of income taxation of individuals has become less fair, the redistributive mechanism does not actually work. All this ultimately led to an increase in the already high level of social differentiation of the population and poses a threat to the social stability of society.
The problem of implementing the social function of taxes through the system of social payments and their place in the system of measures to ensure the social policy of the state is one of the most important. During the economic and social reform in the Russian Federation in 1992. in accordance with the chosen liberal model of the market economy in the Russian Federation, the goal of the state social policy was to provide state guarantees of minimum social protection, which was later reflected and consolidated in the Budget Code of the Russian Federation in the form of the concept of minimum state standards for the provision of social services. All this required a radical revision of the entire social security system and its transfer to insurance principles, when the necessary financial resources are formed from the corresponding insurance premiums paid by insurers.
The analysis of the functioning of the system of social protection in the Russian Federation and the system of social payments at the first stage of the reform in 1992-2000. clearly indicates the inefficiency of the whole mechanism.
The introduction of a unified social tax (contribution) in 2001, and then a unified social tax and insurance contributions to pension funds, the transition to a solidarity-accumulative pension system was supposed to solve urgent social and financial problems. In addition to purely tax goals, when reforming the system of social payments, the state wanted to stimulate the legalization of payments to individuals by reducing the UST rates, introducing a regressive taxation scale, in conjunction with the rejection of progressive taxation on personal income tax.
At the first stage of reforming social payments in 2001-2002. despite the reduction in UST rates, revenues of the budget and off-budget funds increased in 2001. by an average of 24.3%, and in 2002. by 35.8%. For the share of legalization of shadow payments in 2001-2002. accounted for no more than 20% of the growth in real wages. At the same time, the decrease in shadow payments from 32% in 2000 to up to 27% in 2002 This is due mainly to higher growth rates of legal wages, and not to a change in the behavior of taxpayers-employers.
In 2003-2004 the growth rates of social funds receipts significantly decreased (from 135.8% in 2002 to 117.3% in 2003 and 112.6% in 2004), which is connected, among other things, with the growth of shadow payments. At the same time, the gap between the growth rates of nominal wages and social funds began to widen in 2003 as well. amounted to about 10%, and in 2004. - about 14%. In addition, in 2003-2004. the growth rates of receipts from social payments turned out to be less than the general growth rates of all tax receipts (by 2% in 2003 and by almost 35% in 2004). All this testifies to the inefficiency of the decisions made earlier. However, the Government, believing that such results are caused by insufficient reduction in tax rates, decides on a further sharp reduction in UST rates to 26% and other changes in the mechanism for calculating UST and insurance premiums for mandatory pension insurance. The purpose of these changes, as before with the introduction of the UST, was to reduce the tax burden on the wage fund, stimulate the legalization of paid wages and increase, due to this, revenues to social funds of payment.
The analysis of the consequences of such a reform of the social payment system, carried out in this work, shows that the result of this reform was a sharp reduction in the receipts of social payments. At the same time, as calculations show, the level of shadow payments in 2005 even increased compared to 2004. and reached the value of 2000. (about 32%).
Thus, the author claims that conducted in 20005. changes in the mechanism for calculating and paying UST and contributions to the Pension Fund did not achieve their goals. Losses of revenues of the budget and off-budget funds are estimated in 2005. in 220-230 million rubles, which has already led to a deficit in the PF budget in 2006. 100 billion rubles
Strategic positions of tax policy. Management in the field of taxes and fees. Creation of a perfect system of taxation. The Federal Tax Service. Application of tax laws. An increase in the level of taxation.
The tax period when calculating personal income tax. Standard, professional (author's fees), social and property deductions. Calculation of value added tax (VAT). Determination of the taxable base, taking into account deductions.
Economic nature and functions of income tax as the main tool for the implementation of state priorities. Basic principles of taxation. Comparative assessment of domestic and foreign practice of forming an independent duty system.
Development of taxation in Russia. Principles of construction of the tax system. Participants of tax legal relations. Dual taxation. The study of the tax code of the Russian Federation as a single and complex document that takes into account the system of tax relations.
The concept of taxes and fees. The main functions of taxation. Types of taxes and fees in the Russian Federation. Tax incentives: concept, procedure for establishing and canceling. Tax deductions for individuals. Analysis of the use of tax incentives for individuals.
Value Added Tax. Definition of personal income tax. Calculation of the amount of penalties. Types of regional taxes. Simplified tax system. The system of taxation in the form of a single tax on income for certain types of activities.
The concept and essence of taxes as a source of state budget revenues. Basic principles and methods of taxation: equal, proportional, progressive. Features of regressive taxation with a negative progression coefficient.
Formation of financial resources of the health care system in the process of production and distribution of the gross domestic product. Types of distribution of health resources. Contradiction between fairness and efficiency of resource allocation.
The need to improve the system of state regulation of the market economy. Structure and mechanism of organization of the public sector. Federal, state and local types of taxes. The place of taxation in the economy of the public sector.
Essence of taxes, classification and functions. Tax theories of the 17th-19th centuries. classical theory. Scientific concepts of taxation of the XX century. Keynesianism and neoclassicism. Comparative analysis of the principles of taxation of Russian and Western entrepreneurs.
Essence of tax optimization. Analysis of standard, social and property tax deductions. Methods for minimizing duties on the amount of insurance contributions to the Pension Fund of Russia. Ways to improve the taxation of personal income.
Classical principles of taxation, their characteristics. The main directions of modern principles of the structure of taxation systems: economic, organizational, legal. Objects of VAT taxation, taking into account changes and additions to the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
General characteristics of the tax and features of tax calculation in individual cases. Income not subject to taxation. Tax deductions and rates. Features of tax calculation by individual entrepreneurs and persons engaged in private practice.
Essence of tax relations, principles and methods of taxation in Russia at the present stage. Principles: justice, certainty, universality, equality, proportionality, legality. Methods of taxation: equal, regressive and progressive.
The concept and main elements of the Russian tax system. Legal basis of the tax system. The structure of the Russian tax system. Fundamental principles of taxation. Legislative activity in taxation.
The tax system is one of the main elements of a market economy, an instrument of state influence on the development of the economy, determining the priorities of economic and social development. Adaptation of the tax system to new social relations.
Use of financial resources of the state - the budget and off-budget funds. The economic content and essence of the tax as a mandatory, individual gratuitous payment collected from organizations and individuals. Principles of taxation.
Studying the international experience of reforms in the field of income taxation in the leading countries of the world - the countries of the OECD, the EU and the Eastern European region. Analysis of the subjective prerequisites for the implementation of such reforms and different types of taxation.
Principles of taxation: fairness, efficiency, proportionality, consideration of interests, multiplicity, neutrality, non-retroactivity, priority of tax legislation. Methods of taxation, income tax, taxpayers.
Fairness as a basic principle of taxation
Justice as basic principle of the taxation
Shaikhutdinova Dilara Radikovna post-graduate student of the department "Finance, monetary circulation and credit" SBEI HPE "Surgut State University", Scientific specialty: 08.00.10 - Finance, monetary circulation and credit
Shaixytdinova Dilara Radikovna graduate student of chair "Finance, monetary circulation and credit"
GBOU VPO "The Surgut state university", Scientific specialty: 08.00.10-Finance, monetary circulation and credit
annotation
At present, there is no consensus in economic science regarding the content and essence of justice as a basic principle, taxation. The result of the analysis of the theoretical views of classical and modern researchers regarding this problem is the identification of the main stages in the formation and development of the content of the principle of justice in taxation. The article presents the author's interpretation of the principle of fairness of taxation, which reflects the versatility and complexity of this concept.
Now in the economics there is no consensus on the content and essence of justice as the base principle of taxation. As a result of analysis of the theoretical views of classical and modern researchers about this issue is allocation of the main stages
of formation and development of the principle of justice in the taxation. The article highlights the author's interpretation of the principle of justice taxation which reflects the diversity and complexity of the concept.
Keywords
Tax, justice, the principle of fairness of taxation, tax burden, tax burden.
Tax, justice, principle of justice of the taxation, tax burden.
The problem of fair taxation is one of the most significant and debatable issues in the field of taxation.
The importance of fair taxation is determined by the fact that "improving the efficiency and competitiveness of the national economy largely depends on increasing the level of fairness in economic relations" . As D. Petrosyan notes, justice “acts in the economy as an economic benefit that allows economic entities to function and develop sustainably. It means, first of all, the protection of the vital interests of the individual, society, and the state from economic and social crises. Fair taxation can significantly increase the welfare of the population by providing balance sheet conditions by optimizing the ratio of "surplus income" and the absence of income at all.
The ambiguity of the interpretation of the concept of taxation justice is due to the variability of different approaches to its essence and content. The study of the definition of "justice" in modern science is presented from legal, economic, philosophical, political, social, moral and other positions. This, according to I.I.
Justice in the sphere of the implementation of law, according to I.S. Ivanova, first of all - "impartiality in resolving disputes about law, the validity of conclusions by the actual circumstances of the case, the equality of all before the law, the proportionality of the crime and punishment, the correspondence between the goals of the legislator and the means chosen to achieve them" .
From the position of V.D. Filimonova legal content justice "gets, first of all, in the constitutional principle of equality of all citizens before the law and the court, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official status, place of residence, attitude to religion, beliefs, membership in public associations, as well as other circumstances (Article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation).
“A measure of justice as a legal phenomenon,” notes V.D. Filimonov. - this is the equality of rights and obligations of subjects of public relations in terms of their content or social value, which ensures the unity of personal and public interests in the process of legal regulation of their behavior.
Thus, the content of justice as a legal phenomenon lies in the absence of discrimination of citizens before the law and the correspondence of personal interests to civil ones.
"Justice" from the point of view of economic science has the main characteristics of this general concept. The classic of political economy A. Smith paid serious attention to the concept of "justice" when considering the general problems of the market economy. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, he outlined his view on the moral aspects of human life and society. Smith, in particular, believed that
it is impossible to explain poverty without considering the problem of inequality. In his writings, "fairness" and impartiality appear as fundamental concepts, without which, in fact, the normal functioning of the market is impossible. According to A. Sen, the desire for economic "justice" means first
the unconscious, and then the conscious craving of a person for equal opportunities to engage in economic activity and for such appropriation of its results that would not lead to the consolidation of temporary property inequality arising from various
abilities of people and the imperfection of the environment of their life.
From our point of view, justice in the economic aspect means an equal distribution of limited resources among economic entities, which determines the satisfaction of personal needs to ensure the conditions for reproduction and expanded reproduction.
In political life, society's idea of justice is understood "as an equal opportunity for all citizens to realize their human potential, their knowledge and entrepreneurial abilities, as the right to a decent life, should be taken into account in the ideology of economic reforms, during which it is necessary to prevent further stratification of society and impoverishment population, to reduce this stratification, to overcome poverty. In fact, the justice of political life in this interpretation means
legitimacy of political decisions and actions, ensuring equality
opportunities to realize their own ambitions and desires, as well as the lack of division into social classes.
At one time, justice was determined by the outstanding Russian jurist S.A. Muromtsev as "a set of subjective ideas about the most perfect legal order inherent in this social environment at a given time" . To paraphrase this definition, in relation to tax fairness, one can define it as
a set of ideas rooted in society about the perfect order of taxation, which, taking into account the interests of the population, fully satisfies the needs of the state.
In addition to the variety of existing approaches, the definition of "justice" is complicated by the fact that the interpretation of justice may differ, depending on the ideas about it that have developed in a particular historical period, which, in turn, are formed under the influence of various objective and subjective factors, such as as the economic and political structure of the state, the social status of the individual, his political, religious, ideological positions and others.
Difficulties in trying to define clear criteria for a fair tax and a fair tax system are associated precisely with the relative and subjective nature of the concept of justice.
At each historical stage, their own ideas about fair taxation are formed.
A.A. Isaev, considering the concept of justice as a relative concept that changes with the growth of culture, noted: “The social life, based on slave labor, has a different idea of justice than a society based on the freedom of all citizens and their equality before the law.”
According to V. Pushkareva, the historical dispute about priority in the principles of taxation made a kind of spiral movement: from justice according to A. Smith, sufficiency according to A. Wagner, again to the principles of justice in the tax systems of industrialized countries of the late 20th century.
The idea of fairness in the tax system was born from the moment of its inception. And yet, even at the beginning of the 20th century. Russian economist G.I. Boldyrev in his work “Income Tax in the West and in Russia” (1924) noted that “the concept of tax justice belongs to
number of the least established concepts. The debatability of the problems of tax justice, according to the author, is due to “the subjectivity of the idea of justice in general, firstly, and secondly, the different understanding of it by the wealthy and the poor. The political nature of the tax, including the principle of fairness in taxation, divided financial science into two camps, which interpreted fairness in taxation from opposite positions. But all financial schools were unanimous in that "justice in taxation is not something absolute, that the concept of it varies depending on the place and historical era."
MM. Alekseenko, making an attempt to clarify the nature of justice in taxation, wrote that "justice, like everything moral, is a relative concept and depends on the place, time and culture of the people." From these positions, M.M. Alekseenko gives a theoretical interpretation of justice in taxation: “When forming taxes, people strive for “justice”, but “human justice” is relative. In a society characterized by the division of classes into the privileged and the taxable, the generality of taxation is offensive to the privileged. In a society in which equality before the law, court, service and tax is recognized as the fundamental principle of social life, the generality of taxation is so commonplace that it is strange to talk about it as a question.
A. Wanger singled out the financial and social aspect of taxation justice “The meaning of taxation justice seems to be different, depending on whether we look at it from a financial or social point of view. But both points of view lead, although different, but to a logical and fair system of taxes. The existing systems in practice are mainly based on the financial point of view. But A. Vanger already saw in them some concessions to the social point of view (for example, in attention to inequality
taxability, in the progression and degression of salaries under income tax and in the taxation of inheritances), which gives him reason to conclude that a purely financial point of view is no longer considered sufficient ”
A. Isaev in his work "Essay on the theory and policy of taxes" considers fairness in taxation from the point of view of financial policy. The doctrine of justice in the policy of taxes, in his opinion, contains answers to two questions: 1) who should pay taxes? and 2) how to achieve equality in the distribution of taxes between payers, using what principle of proportional or progressive? This question is still relevant today.
The main dispositions within the framework of this discussion have become the subject of analysis by many modern researchers.
B.G. Panskov considers the principle of equality and justice as an economic principle and as a legal principle of taxation. According to the economic principle of equality and justice, “the distribution of the tax burden should be equal, and each taxpayer should contribute a fair share to the state treasury. All legal entities and individuals must take a material part in financing the needs of the state, commensurate with the income they receive under the auspices and support of the state. The legal principle of equality and justice, according to the scientist, is “to ensure fair administration of taxes, equality of the state and taxpayers. Tax laws must clearly spell out the rights, duties and responsibilities of both parties, without discriminating against either."
In confirmation of the position of V.G. Panskov, it can be noted that the textbook “Tax Policy. Theory and Practice” edited by I.A. Mayburov, the concept of "fair tax policy" is also considered in the legal and economic aspect. From legal
point of view “Fair is the tax policy that ensures the universal nature of taxation and the equality of all taxpayers before the law, i.e. equalization of their rights, obligations and liability for violation of tax laws. In fact, this requirement means a ban on discrimination against the taxation of citizens on racial, national, political, property and other grounds. In the economic interpretation, “Fair is the tax policy that ensures the implementation of the principle of justice in taxation or ensures a fair distribution of taxes (tax burden) between individuals” . This situation necessitates the formulation and resolution of the question “Should an individual bear the same (equal) or different tax burden?”.
As Ya.Yu. Glukhovsky, “taxpayers often and in very different situations refer to tax fairness. However, they mainly associate it with a reduction in the tax burden or with a complete exemption from taxes. In this case, there is subjective justice due to the defensive reaction of the taxpayer to the loss of part of his material assets as a result of taxation. Such justice gives rise to the taxpayer's desire to reduce their own taxes, in combination with the presentation of requirements for public authorities to fulfill various obligations. However, there is another, objective understanding of tax justice, which is of practical importance, since it is an understanding of the authorities that impose taxes. It boils down to the fact that covering public expenditures is connected with the need to select sources of income and equitably distribute the tax burden among economic entities.
Thus, justice in taxation is associated with the principle of generality and uniformity of taxation (proportionality), which is implemented throughout the entire tax system through the prism of taxation elements.
The tax rate refers to the main elements of the legal structure of the tax and, as an element of taxation, is a kind of reflection of the implementation of the principle of proportionality and generality of taxation.
In the Russian legal system, the principle of proportionality is associated with Part 3 of Art. 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. It is enshrined in paragraph 1 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation; this principle reflects the impossibility of establishing "excessive" taxes without taking into account the actual ability of the taxpayer to pay taxes and fees.
Proportionality of taxation, according to A.V. Demin, consists of three components - proportionality, validity and admissibility of tax exemptions:
1. The requirement of proportionality. When establishing taxes, the actual ability of the taxpayer to pay tax is taken into account (clause 1, article 3 of the Tax Code).
2. The requirement of validity. Taxes and fees must have an economic basis and cannot be arbitrary (clause 3, article 3 of the Tax Code).
3. The admissibility requirement. Taxes and fees that prevent citizens from exercising their constitutional rights are unacceptable (clause 3, article 3 of the Tax Code).
Violation of the principle of justice, as a result of burdensome taxes, slows down investment processes, leads to a serious stratification of society.
Failure to comply with this principle can lead to the fact that taxation can actually create unbearable living conditions, "break" the single economic space, hinder free
movement of goods, works, services and financial resources, reduce the economic activity of individual entrepreneurs and organizations, etc. In this regard, it is noted that violation of this principle is fraught with social conflicts and causing irreparable damage to the state economy in the form of a drop in production levels, a decrease in demand for products , bankruptcy of business entities. This principle proceeds from the impossibility of introducing "extraordinary" taxes, restricting entrepreneurial activity
taxpayers, allowing such restrictions only in the event of a military, climatic, energy, social threat. In a democratic rule of law, this principle is of particular importance for the tax system. The formation of the tax system in proportion to the constitutional goals and objectives consolidates the existence of a tax policy in the state, which should be focused on a person, protecting his rights and freedoms.
The justice of taxation is closely related to the implementation of the more specific principles of economic
justification and proportionality of taxation. This is explained by the fact that taxation should be correlated not only with the need for taxpayers to exercise their fundamental rights and freedoms, but should also take into account their economic situation. In particular, the principle of economic justification excludes the arbitrary establishment
taxes and fees and requires that the taxation of certain persons be carried out solely on the basis of their tax ability.
Failure to follow this principle may result in
taxation will become an unbearable burden for taxpayers, an insurmountable obstacle to normal existence and development.
I.I. Kucherov confirms that fair taxation should be based on a harmonious combination of the financial interests of the state, society and taxpayers. A necessary condition for this
is the consistent implementation of the principles of universality of equality and proportionality of taxation.
Based on the analysis of theoretical approaches to the fairness of taxation, we conclude that in science there are various aspects of "the expression of fairness in taxation, and its achievement is associated with the fulfillment of various requirements, for example, proportionality, universality, equality and legality, sufficiency, convenience of taxation" .
Modifying the chronology of the stages of formation and development of tax analysis E.V. Chipurenko and systematizing information about the formation and development of the principle of justice in taxation, we can present the path of its transformation and its stages in the following chronological order, indicated in Table 1.
Table 1
Chronological overview of the evolution of the content of the principle of justice in
taxation
Stage name and time period Stage characteristics
Identification of justice in taxation (XVIII century) Identification of the need for justice in taxation. Theoretical development of "favorable" conditions and procedures for taxation from the point of view of the taxpayer. Justification of the need for universal taxation of citizens and the correspondence of their material capabilities to the interests of the state, the certainty of the conditions and procedure for taxation.
Justification of the norm of tax fairness, taking into account the conditions of a particular country The need for a quantitative assessment of the fairness of taxation and accounting is determined and justified
(XIX century) the specifics of the economic conditions of a particular country to assess the results of taxation.
Substantiation of the need to assess the conformity of the taxation and taxation system in order to implement the principle of justice (the first half of the 20th century) Interest in determining the results of the impact of taxation on the economy after the First World War and is associated in Europe with: the strengthening of the tax process as a result of post-war reforms; with a reparation problem for the implementation of the "principle of a minimum tax burden." In the United States, interest in analyzing the impact of taxation on the balance sheet in the private sector reemerged after the Great Depression of 1929-1923. in connection with the introduction of Keynesian methods of economic regulation. Calculation of the tax burden for the post-war post-crisis regulation of the economy.
Formation of a methodology for quantifying tax fairness (second half of the 20th century - 21st century) The introduction of planning into the economic activities of commercial organizations led to the emergence of tax planning as a process of optimizing tax payments, which required the development of methods for quantifying the impact of taxation on performance. The economic and financial crises of the beginning of the century required close attention to the problems of management and assessment of the impact of the taxation system on results.
economic activity. Theoretical and
methodological development of indicators of tax fairness (tax burden,
tax potential). Analysis, monitoring and optimization
effectiveness of tax incentives.
Summing up the analysis of the theoretical views of classical and modern researchers regarding the essence of the concept of "fairness" in taxation, we will designate our point of view, formulating its interpretation.
In a narrow sense, the implementation of the principle of justice in taxation, in our understanding, implies the formation of centralized funds of funds in order to perform the functions and tasks of the state and ensure conditions for expanded reproduction, commensurate with the material capabilities of taxpayers.
In a broad interpretation, we believe that the essence of the principle of fairness of taxation can be most fully reflected from the standpoint of a systematic approach, which is based on the consideration of an object as an integral set of elements in the totality of relations and connections between them, that is, consideration of an object as a system. Thus, the principle of tax fairness can be defined as a system of interrelated elements that reflect its essence (Fig. 1):
1) the legitimacy of the taxation system;
2) balancing the nominal tax burden with the material possibilities of taxpayers;
3) non-discrimination of citizens in tax law, duties and responsibilities to comply with the conditions and procedure for taxation.
Rice. 1. Interpretation of the content of the principle of fairness in taxation through a system of interrelated elements
Thus, it can be concluded that the principle of justice has a complex content and is the main principle, which is characterized by the absence of discrimination of citizens in tax law, duties and responsibilities to comply with the conditions and procedures for taxation, the legitimacy of the taxation system and the compliance of taxpayers' financial capabilities with their nominal tax burden.
Bibliographic list
1. Golovanov, G. R. On justice in establishing the object of taxation [Text] / G. R. Golovanov // Laws of Russia: experience, analysis, practice. - 2011. - No. 6. - S. 81-87.
2. Demin, A.V. On the proportionality of taxation [Text] / A.V. Demin // Finance. - 2002. - No. 6. - S. 38-39.
3. Ivanova, S.A. The principle of social justice in law enforcement (theoretical aspects of implementation) [Text] / S.A. Ivanova // State and Law. - 2006. - No. 1. - S. 19-26.
4. Isaev, A.A. Essay on the theory and policy of taxes [Text] / A.A. Isaev. -M.: YurInfoR-Press LLC, 2004. - 270 p.
5. Knyazev, Y. Justice and Economics [Text] / Y. Knyazev // Society and Economics. - 2012. - No. 1. - S. 33-62.
6. Kucherov, I.I. Fairness of taxation and its components (legal aspect) [Text] / I.I. Kucherov // Financial law. - 2009. - No. 4.
7. Taxes and taxation [Text]: textbook. manual for university students studying economic specialties / [D.G. Chernik and others]; ed. D.G. Blueberry. - 2nd ed., revised. and additional - M.: UNITI-DANA, 2010. -367 p.
8. Tax policy. Theory and practice: [Text]: textbook for
undergraduates studying in the specialties "Finance and Credit", "Accounting, Analysis and Audit", "World Economy" / [I.A. Mayburov and others]; ed. I.A. Maiburova. - M.: UNITI-DANA, 2010. - 519 p.
9. Panskov, V.G. Taxes and taxation: theory and practice: [Text]: textbook for bachelors / V.G. Panskov. - 2nd ed., revised. And extra. - M.: Yurayt Publishing House; ID Yurayt, 2012. - 680 p.
10. Petrosyan, D.S. On social justice in economic relations [Text] / D.S. Petrosyan //Society and Economics. - 2005. - No. 9. -
11. Pushkareva, V. M. History of world and Russian financial science and politics [Text]: Proc. allowance / V.M. Pushkarev. - M.: Finance and statistics, 2003. - 272 p.
12. Pushkareva, V. M. History of financial thought and tax policy [Text]: Proc. allowance / V.M. Pushkarev. - M.: INFRA-M, 1996. - 192 p.
13. Smith, A. Research on the nature and causes of wealth / Entry. Art. B.
V. Meerovsky; Prep. text, comments A. F. Gryaznova. - M.: Respublika, 1997. - 351 p.
14. Sokolov, D.V. Principles of taxation, ensuring the implementation of constitutional principles in the tax system of the Russian Federation and informing the participants of tax relations about their rights and obligations [Text] / D.V. Sokolov // Taxes. - 2006. - No. 1. - S. 15-21.
15. Sorokina Yu.V. Justice and law in modern philosophical and legal discourse [Text] / Sorokina Yu.V., Malinovskaya N.V. // Legislation and economics. - 2011. - No. 5. - ATP "Consultant Plus".
16. Urubkova, I.A. The principle of justice in tax law: historical and theoretical aspect [Text] / I.A. Urubkova // Taxes and taxation.
2011. - No. 6. - ATP "Consultant Plus".
17. Filimonov, V.D. Justice as a principle of law [Text] / V.D. Filimonov // State and Law. - 2009. - No. 9. - S. 5-13.
18. Chipurenko, E.V. Methodology of tax analysis and assessment of the impact of the system [Text]: Abstract of the thesis. dis. doc. economy Sciences: 08.00.12 / E.V. Chipurenko; FGBOU VPO "Russian State University of Trade and Economics". - M., 2011. - 49 p.
1. Golovanov. About justice at establishment of object of the taxation / G. R. Golovanov//Laws of Russia: experience, analysis, practice. - 2011. - No. 6.-Page 81-87.
2. Dyomin, A.V. About harmony of the taxation of / A.V. Dyomin//Finance.
2002. - no. 6. - Page 38-39.
3. Ivanov, S.A. Printsip sotsialnoy spravedlivosti in law-enforcement activity (theoretical aspects of realization) / Page. A.Ivanov//State and right. - 2006.
no. 1. - Page 19-26.
4. Isayev, A.A. Sketch of the theory and politicians of taxes / A.A. Isaiyev. -M: JSC Yurinfor-Press, 2004. - 270 pages.
5. Knyazev, Y.Spravedlivost and economy / Y.Knyazev//Society and economy. - 2012. - No. 1. - Page 33-62.
6. Drivers, I.I.Justice of the taxation and its components (legal aspect) / I.I. Drivers//Financial right. - 2009. - No. 4. - Page 24-28.
7. Taxes and taxation: studies. a grant for students of the higher education institutions which are training on economic specialties / ; under the editorship of D.G.Chernika. - 2nd prod., reslave. and additional - M: YuNITI-DANA, 2010. - 367 pages.
8. Tax policy. Theory and practice: : the textbook for the undergraduates who are training on specialties "Finance and the credit", "Accounting, the analysis and audit", "World economy" / ; under the editorship of I.A.Mayburova. - M: YuNITI-DANA, 2010. - 519 pages.
9. Panskov, V.G. Nalogi and taxation: theory and practice: : the textbook for bachelors / Century G. Panskov. - 2nd prod., reslave. And additional - M: Publishing house of Yurayt; IDES of Yurayt, 2012. - 680 pages.
10. Petrosyan, Page. About social justice in the economic relations of / S. Petrosyan//Society and economy. - 2005. - No.9. - Page 135-154.
11. Pushkarev, V.M. History of a world and Russian financial science and policy: Studies. grant / Century of M. Pushkarev. - M: Finance and statistics, 2003.
12. Pushkarev, V.M. History of financial thought and policy of taxes : Studies. grant / Century of M. Pushkarev. - M: INFRA-M, 1996. - 192 pages.
13. Smith, A. Research about the nature and the reasons wealth / Vstup.
B.V. Meerovskogo "s Art.; Prepared by text, comment. A.F. Gryaznova. - M: Republic, 1997. - 351 pages.
14. Falcons, D.V.Printsipy of the taxation providing realization of the constitutional in tax system Russian Federation and informing of participants principles of the tax relations about their rights and duties of / V. Sokolov//Taxes. - 2006. - No. 1. - Page 15-21.
15. Sorokin, Yu.V.Justice and the right in / Sorokin Yu.V. modern philosophical and legal discourse., Malinovsky N of Century//Legislation and economy. - 2011. - No. 5. - Union of Right Forces "Adviser Plus".
16. Urubkova, I.A.Principle of justice in the tax right: historical and theoretical aspect of / I.A. Urubkova//Taxes and taxation. - 2011. - No. 6. - Union of Right Forces "Adviser Plus".
17. Filimonov, V.D. Justice as principle of the right of / EL Filimonov//State and right. - 2009. - No. 9. - Page 5-13.
- Tax as the most complex economic and legal category
- Socio-economic essence of taxes in modern society
- The concepts of "tax" and "collection", their distinction
- Tax functions
- Principles of taxation
- Legal and organizational principles of taxation
- Tax classification
- Mandatory and optional elements of the tax
- The essence and classification of tax benefits
- Tax system and tax policy of the state
- The concept and theoretical characteristics of the tax system
- Tax policy of the state: essence, goals and forms
- Essence and main aspects of tax reforms
- Tax administration as an integral attribute of the tax system
- The concept and essence of tax administration
- Tax administration functions
- Tax authorities as the central link of tax administrations
- Functions of tax authorities
- Modernization of tax authorities - a strategic direction for improving tax administration
- Interaction between customs and tax authorities
- Interaction between internal affairs bodies and tax authorities
- The concept and essence of tax administration
- Implementation by the tax authorities of the main powers of tax control
- Forms of tax control
- Registration of taxpayers (payers of fees) and tax agents
- Organization of cameral tax audits
- Organization of field tax audits
- Actions for the implementation of tax control, carried out in the process of an on-site tax audit
- Completion of the on-site inspection and implementation of its results
- Collection of arrears on taxes and fees
- Implementation of the rights and obligations of taxpayers, payers of fees and tax agents
- The concepts of "taxpayer", "payer of the fee" and "tax agent"
- Characteristics and ensuring the rights of taxpayers
- Postponement or installment payment of tax
- Obligations of taxpayers and tax agents
- Ways to ensure the fulfillment of obligations to pay taxes and fees
- Responsibility for violation of legislation on taxes and fees
- General characteristics of ways to reduce tax liabilities
- Responsibility for violations of tax laws
- Tax offenses and liability for their commission
- Administrative responsibility in the field of taxation
- Tax crimes and liability for their commission
- Characteristics of taxes, fees and insurance premiums of the Russian Federation
- Types of taxes and fees in modern Russia
- The procedure for establishing, changing and canceling federal, regional and local taxes and fees
- Federal taxes and fees
- value added tax
- VAT payers
- Object of VAT taxation
- Operations not subject to VAT
- Tax base for VAT
- VAT tax agents
- VAT tax rates
- VAT calculation procedure
- excises
- Personal Income Tax
- Income not subject to taxation
- tax deductions
- tax rates
- The procedure for calculating and paying personal income tax
- Unified social tax
- Corporate income tax
- Mining tax
- Tax base for MET
- water tax
- Fees for the use of objects of the animal world and objects of aquatic biological resources
- National tax
- Procedure and terms for payment of state duty
- value added tax
- Regional taxes
- Transport tax
- Gambling business tax
- Corporate property tax
- Local taxes
- Land tax
- The procedure for calculating land tax
- Personal property tax
- Land tax
- Special tax regimes
- Simplified taxation system
- Objects of taxation under the simplified tax system
- Tax period under the simplified tax system
- Features of the application of the simplified tax system by individual entrepreneurs based on a patent
- The system of taxation in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities
- UTII taxpayers
- Taxation system for agricultural producers (single agricultural tax)
- The object of taxation according to the Unified Agricultural Tax
- The system of taxation in the implementation of production sharing agreements
- Methods of production sharing in the implementation of production sharing agreements
- Simplified taxation system
- Mandatory insurance premiums
- Conceptual foundations of compulsory social insurance
- Insurance premiums for mandatory pension, social and medical insurance
- Insurance premiums for compulsory social insurance against accidents at work and occupational diseases
- Tax law of foreign countries
- General characteristics of the tax law of foreign countries
- Tax policy and tax law of foreign countries
- System of sources of tax law of foreign countries
- Principles of tax law of foreign countries
- Practice of local taxation abroad
- Sanctions for tax offenses in foreign countries
Principles of taxation
The implementation of the social purpose of taxes is embodied in the tax system of any country, developed taking into account the basic rules and provisions of the theory of taxation. These rules and regulations form a set of taxation principles that determine the direction of tax policy and form the foundation for building the tax system. Thus, the principles of taxation are the basic ideas, rules and regulations applied in the field of taxation. Therefore, it can be argued that the principles of taxation are the principles of building a tax system.
Despite the diversity of the superstructural (practical) part of the tax systems of different countries, the theoretical platform for their construction is largely similar. For different countries there is a certain set of universal principles. They are based on principles developed by A. Smith and A. Wagner. But it cannot be said that these principles remain unchanged. Social progress determines the evolution of principles: they are supplemented and refined in accordance with the objective needs of socio-economic development. The set of principles that have become classical, and modern principles formulated by the theory and practice of taxation in the 20th century, is now a certain system of principles, although its interpretation by different researchers is somewhat different.
Let us first consider the economic principles of taxation.
The principle of justice involves the establishment of an obligation for each legal entity and individual to participate in the financing of state expenditures in proportion to their income and capabilities. Often, this principle is also characterized as the principle of justice and equality (the distribution of the tax burden should be equal) or as the principle of justice and universality (taxation should be universal and evenly distributed among taxpayers). It seems that with the same essence, due to the versatility of this feature, the specification of its universal name is quite acceptable, but not fully correct, primarily in relation to equality, as will be shown below. Traditionally, there are two main aspects of this principle: horizontal and vertical.
The principle of horizontal justice(also called the solvency principle) implies that taxpayers who are in an equal economic position must also be in an equal tax position, i.e. equal income should be taxed at the same tax rate.
The principle of vertical justice(also characterized as the principle of benefits) suggests that taxpayers who are in an unequal economic position should be in an unequal tax position, i.e. who receives more from the state of certain benefits, he must pay more taxes.
At first glance, the provision of horizontal and vertical justice is not contradictory, and the implementation of both approaches in practice is absolutely not mutually exclusive. However, it is not. To a certain extent, the establishment of taxes on the basis of solvency and the size of benefits is an alternative in the practical construction of the tax system.
What is the problem of using these approaches? It is largely due to the conditionality of the very concept of equality (inequality) of the economic status of taxpayers. Ensuring this equality (inequality) will be different when considering it from the standpoint of income (solvency) or from the standpoint of benefits received from the state.
Consider, using a simple example, what problems will arise in determining the economic equality of taxpayers from the standpoint of their income. A medical student studies at a university and works part-time as a nurse in a hospital. At the same time, he receives exactly as much as the nurse of the same hospital, who has a dependent child. Are their incomes the same? Yes, but the economic situation is different: the student is richer than the nurse, because his vital expenses are less. In addition, after graduation, a student will become a doctor and will receive a significantly higher salary, i.e. will have a higher amount of total income received during the period of their economic activity (from 18 to 60 years).
Thus, not always the economic equality of taxpayers can be assessed by comparing: 1) their current income; 2) income excluding objectively necessary expenses. The latter provision is clearly manifested in the inequality of taxation of the same income of individuals and legal entities. Continuing the same example, let's imagine that a student, after graduation, organizes a private clinic. Assume that at the current moment in time, the income of a nurse working for hire is equal to the income of a doctor from his own business.
Based on the principle of horizontal equity, these incomes should be taxed at the same tax rates, but the income of a nurse is taxed at a rate of 13%, and the income (profit) of a business doctor is 24%. However, this doctor is allowed by law to deduct economically justified expenses from the tax base, but the nurse is not allowed: she must pay tax on gross income, although it remains to be seen whether she will have a kind of profit (labor income minus essential expenses). There is a violation of the objectivity and universality of the principle of horizontal justice (solvency).
If, when establishing economic equality (inequality), we use the principle of benefits received by the taxpayer from the state in the form of public goods characterized by the joint nature of consumption, the indivisibility and non-selectivity of their consumption (health care, social protection, education, law enforcement, etc.), then there will be no less, and perhaps even greater problems.
Let's continue the same example with a student and a nurse. As we remember, their current incomes are equal, but the amounts of benefits are not equal. A student studies at a university on a paid basis, is healthy enough, does not enjoy social protection, while a nurse, having a dependent child who is not quite healthy, receives a much larger amount of benefits from the state. Following the principle of vertical equity, the nurse is in a better economic position and will have to pay more taxes. In general, the poorer segments of the population always consume more purely public goods, and it turns out that they should be subject to an increased tax burden. Such an approach, of course, will be contrary to the principle of solvency and the social policy of the state, and therefore is hardly applicable when building a tax system.
However, this principle is quite applicable when comparing the benefits of public services characterized by individual consumption patterns, divisibility and selectivity. For example, not all citizens enjoy judicial protection, so when applying for this service, you must pay a state fee. Highways are used by car owners, so they have to pay more taxes, which is realized through the transport tax, excise taxes on cars, gasoline, and oils.
Thus, the validity of the application of the benefit principle depends on the direction of spending public funds: it is absolutely inapplicable to purely public goods and quite applicable to mixed and private public goods.
It should be noted that in the world practice of taxation, the principles of solvency and benefits, as a rule, are used together, but with a certain dominance of solvency, which ultimately provides a more significant effect than their separate or parity application for the implementation of the basic principle of fairness when building tax systems.
However, even their joint use does not solve the problem: to what extent should the unequal economic position of taxpayers correspond to their unequal tax position? How should tax rates change as inequality increases? Each country solves this problem by forming a progressive, regressive or neutral tax system.
The tax system is:
- progressive if, after paying taxes, the economic inequality of taxpayers, as measured by their income, is reduced;
- regressive, if after taxes the economic inequality of taxpayers, estimated by their income, increases;
- neutral if, after taxes, the economic inequality of taxpayers, as measured by their income, remains unchanged.
In other words, in a progressive tax system, the rich pay a larger share of their income in taxes than the poor do. In a regressive tax system, on the contrary, the rich pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than the poor, while in a neutral system these shares are the same.
It is possible to estimate income inequality using Lorentz curves, which are the cumulative distribution of the share of income before and after tax in various tax systems by households.
So, with an absolutely uniform distribution, 50% of households have 50% of their total income before or after taxation, and the distribution line looks like a straight line - this is the bisector of ABC. The Lorenz curves of the actual distribution of income are further away from this straight line, the greater the inequality. The AGC curve shows the distribution of income before and after tax in a neutral tax system (these curves are the same), and accordingly, inequality remains unchanged. The AFC curve shows the distribution of after-tax income in a regressive tax system, and inequality increases accordingly. And only a progressive tax system reduces after-tax income inequality (ADC curve) and is therefore more fair.
World practice is currently gravitating toward building moderately progressive tax systems, because too high a progression often leads to the transfer of income to the shadow sector. Neutrality, or regressivity, is used in exceptional cases, when the stratification of the population by income is insignificant or when it is necessary to stimulate the payment of taxes by more affluent categories of citizens. The Russian tax system can now be fully characterized as neutral, largely ignoring the principle of fairness in order to legalize wage payments (reducing the so-called “envelope payments”) and simplify the administration of relevant taxes.
The Principle of Efficiency(principle of economy) implies the need to establish such taxes so that the revenues from each tax significantly cover the costs of the state for its administration. For the vast majority of Russian, primarily federal, taxes, this principle is implemented. However, for some taxes - regional (transport) and local (on the property of individuals) - this principle is far from being fully implemented. The efforts of the tax authorities to identify objects of taxation, send out notices, and control the payment barely cover the proceeds from them, and it is generally difficult to assess the economic feasibility of labor-intensive efforts to recover insignificant amounts in court.
Principle of proportionality is based on the interdependence of the processes of filling budgets and discouragement as a result of taxation of the economic activity of taxpayers. It is often characterized as the principle of economic balance between the interests of taxpayers and the state treasury, i.е. when establishing taxes and determining their elements, it is necessary to measure the consequences in terms of both benefits for the budget and damage to the economy. Moreover, these benefits and losses should be compared not only at the current moment of time, but also in the future, so as not to receive a further decrease in the tax base and, accordingly, a decrease in tax revenues. Theoretically, this principle is well illustrated by the Laffer curve.
A. Laffer demonstrated the relationship between the value of tax rates and the volume of tax revenues, showing that lower rates carry the ability not so much to reduce current revenues as the potential for their future increase. On the abscissa axis in the graph of the figure, the value of the tax rate is plotted, but the value of the effective aggregate tax rate or the value of the tax burden on the economy can be given - the general form of the dependence will not change from this.
According to this dependence, an increase in the tax rate to the level r max will ensure an increase, albeit at an increasingly slowing pace, of tax revenues up to the maximum possible value of their H max . In the range r fact.
If the upper limit of this rate is exceeded - r max , i.e. when finding the tax rate in the range r fact. > r max , which is called the forbidden zone of the scale, economic agents have less incentives for legal activity. Production is reduced, and the tax base and the volume of tax revenues are accordingly reduced. There is a shift in GDP production to the shadow sector of the economy, free from tax obligations. Finding a tax rate in a restricted area is a "tax trap".
Thus, the same volume of tax revenues (H 2 = H 1) is provided at different tax rates. But at the same time, lower tax rates are preferable. They are oriented to the future, since they do not suppress the entrepreneurial activity of economic agents, they allow them to invest and expand production. Over time, additional output will increase the tax base, which will increase tax revenue.
The principle of consideration of interests is based on the certainty of the tax payment, i.e. all elements of the tax, as well as the convenience of calculating and paying the tax, primarily for the taxpayer. One of the obligatory attributes of this principle is the preliminary awareness of the taxpayer not only about the exhaustive list of taxes that he should pay, but also about all the changes introduced into the tax legislation. Another attribute is to ensure the simplicity of calculating the tax liability and the convenience of the time of payment, which should be combined with the fact of receiving income (for taxes on labor and income) or with the moment of the act of consumption (for taxes on consumption).
One of the clear examples of the implementation of this principle in Russian practice is a certain variability in the choice by the taxpayer of one or another method of calculating and paying for individual taxes, as well as the possibility of small businesses using various taxation systems.
Multiplicity principle taxes synthesizes two aspects.
Firstly, this principle provides for the expediency of building a tax system on a set of differentiated taxes and differing objects of taxation. The plurality of taxes creates the prerequisites for increasing the targeting of taxation, which to a greater extent captures the solvency of taxpayers and the presence of various objects of taxation, makes it possible to more effectively distribute the tax burden among various categories of payers, makes it more invisible to them, thereby forming a more tolerant attitude towards it. Moreover, it is more difficult to avoid various objects of taxation and the payment of many taxes than one object and a single tax.
Secondly, this principle provides for the expediency of forming a plurality of sources of budgets at each level, the inadmissibility of the situation of a “budget of one tax”, since with a plurality of sources, its filling is relatively guaranteed, regardless of possible failures in the receipt of a particular tax. Plurality of budget sources is economically more expedient, especially in times of crisis. In this case, many taxes with low rates and broad tax bases will fill the budget more effectively than a limited number of taxes with high rates.
Photo by Vsevolod Alshansky, Kublog
The economic principles of taxation include the principle of justice, the principle of proportionality of taxation, the principle of maximum consideration of the interests and capabilities of taxpayers, the principle of economic efficiency of taxation, the principle of profitability of tax measures. The second level is the legal principles of taxation. Consider the principles of taxation that are currently being singled out.
The principles of taxation were first formulated in the 18th century. by the great Scottish researcher of economics and natural law, Adam Smith (1725-1793) in his famous work "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" (1776). Today, these postulates are called the classical principles of taxation. Let's name the most important of them.
1. World history
1. The principle of justice. Taxes are a legal form of withdrawal of a part of the taxpayer's property for its use in the general interest (the interests of society, the state). Any seizure of property has always been fair for the one who takes it, and vice versa - it is not fair for the one from whom it is taken away.It is known that justice is an extremely subtle category, difficult to define. It is not for nothing that this concept, which is common in everyday rhetoric, has not been legally defined. From the point of view of law, "justice" is a pure abstraction; it has no measure, definition, standard. What is true is true in each particular case. Therefore, the understanding of justice depends on the historical stage of development, the economic structure of society, the social and legal status of a person, his political views and passions.
Smith argued for the universality of taxation and the uniform distribution of taxes among citizens "... according to their income, which they enjoy under the patronage and protection of the state." Thus, according to Smith, the fairness of taxation is the equal duty of all to pay taxes, but based on the real solvency of fiscally liable persons.
At the same time, the problem of tax fairness was directly linked to the issues of equality of the tax burden (equality in the withdrawal of part of the income) and the shifting of tax burdens. Indeed, in practice, absolute equality is impossible primarily due to differences in income and property status of taxpayers.
At the same time, the fairness of taxation in practice acquires one of two extremes. In tax systems with poorly developed tax administration mechanisms (for example, in Russia), taxes are paid mainly by economically weak economic entities. In states with strong tax administration, taxation "punishes" economically efficient enterprises.
2. The principle of certainty of taxation. Smith formulates the content of this principle as follows: “The tax that each individual is obliged to pay must be precisely determined, and not arbitrary. The term of payment, the method of payment, the amount of payment - all this must be clear and definite for the payer and for every other person, "for the uncertainty of taxation is a greater evil than the unevenness of taxation.
3. The principle of convenience of taxation. The meaning of this principle lies in the fact that taxation should be carried out then and in such a way (in that way), when and how it is most convenient for the payer to pay it.
4. The principle of economy. Today, this principle is regarded as a purely technical principle of tax construction. It is usually interpreted as follows: the cost of collecting a tax should be minimal compared to the income that this tax brings.
The above classical principles were supplemented by the German economist Adolf Wagner (1835-1917):
1. Financial principles of the organization of taxation:
- the sufficiency of taxation;
- elasticity (mobility) of taxation.
- proper choice of source of taxation, i.e. deciding whether the tax should fall only on the income or capital of an individual or of the population as a whole;
- the right combination of various taxes into a system that would take into account the consequences and conditions of their proposal.
- universality of taxation;
- uniformity of taxation.
- certainty of taxation;
- convenience of tax payment;
- maximum cost reduction.
2. Russian modernity
The main principles of taxation are:- The principle of legality of taxation;
- The principle of universality and equality of taxation;
- The principle of fair taxation;
- The principle of publicity of taxation;
- The principle of establishing taxes and fees in due process of law;
- The principle of economic justification of taxation;
- The principle of presumption of interpretation in favor of the taxpayer (payer of fees) of all irremovable doubts, contradictions and ambiguities of legislative acts on taxes and fees;
- The principle of certainty of tax liability;
- The principle of the unity of the economic space of the Russian Federation and the unity of tax policy;
- The principle of unity of the system of taxes and fees.
- First, the principles of tax legal relations must have a socio-economic basis (ie, be economically justified for the purposes of developing the country's tax system).
- Secondly, this principle should be implemented in the process of functioning and development of the tax system of the Russian Federation (ie, it should be enshrined in Russian tax legislation).
- Thirdly, it seems that due to the cross-border nature of tax science, additional confirmation of the validity of including any principle in the above system may be the fact that this principle is not alien to tax legal relations in states that, like the Russian Federation, strive for a democratic political regime. and building the rule of law.
1. The principle of legality of taxation. This principle is general legal and is based on the constitutional prohibition of restricting the rights and freedoms of man and citizen otherwise than by federal law (part 3 of article 55 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). Taxation is a restriction of property rights, enshrined in Art. 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, but the restriction is legal, i.e. based on the law, in a broad sense, aimed at the implementation of the law (through financing state needs for the implementation by the state and its bodies of the rule of law). The Tax Code of the Russian Federation also indicates that each person must pay only legally established taxes and fees (clause 1, article 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).
2. The principle of universality and equality of taxation. The principle of universality of taxation is constitutional and enshrined in Art. 57 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, according to the novel of this article, "everyone is obliged to pay legally established taxes and fees." In addition, Part 2 of Art. 6 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes that every citizen bears equal duties stipulated by the Constitution of the Russian Federation. These provisions of the Constitution are being developed in the tax legislation (clauses 1 and 5 of article 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).
In accordance with this principle, each member of society is obliged to participate in the financing of public expenditures of the state and society on an equal basis with others. The universality of taxation lies in the fact that certain tax obligations are established, as a general rule, for the entire circle of persons that meet specific generic requirements (for example, land tax, as a general rule, is paid by all land owners), while taxation is based on uniform principles.
Equality of taxation follows from the constitutional principle of the equality of all citizens before the law (Part 1, Article 19 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation). The constitutional provisions of the principle under consideration are developed in par. 1 p. 2 art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation: taxes or fees cannot not only be established, but actually be levied differently, based on social (belonging or not belonging to a particular class, social group), racial or national (belonging or not belonging to a particular race, nation , nationality, ethnic group), religious and other differences between taxpayers.
In the development of these provisions in par. 2 p. 2 art. 3 of the Tax Code, it is prohibited to establish differentiated rates of taxes and fees, as well as tax incentives depending on the form of ownership (state - federal and subjects of the Russian Federation, municipal, private), citizenship of individuals (citizens of the Russian Federation, citizens of foreign states, stateless persons, persons with double nationality) or the place of origin of capital.
3. The principle of fair taxation. In the Russian Federation, before the adoption of the first part of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, this principle was originally formulated in clause 5 of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated April 4, 1996 No. 9-P: “In order to ensure the regulation of taxation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the principle of equality requires the actual ability to tax on the basis of the legal principles of fairness and proportionality. The principle of equality in a welfare state in relation to the obligation to pay legally established taxes and fees (Part 2 of Article 6 and Article 57 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) suggests that equality should be achieved through a fair redistribution of income and differentiation of taxes and fees.”
Subsequently, this principle was enshrined in paragraph 1 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, however, in a slightly different form (without mentioning the fair distribution of collected taxes): “... When establishing taxes, the ability of the taxpayer to pay tax on the basis of the principle of justice is actually taken into account”, i.e. taxes must be fair. At the same time, as we see, the fairness of taxes and taxation is understood through the prism of the dogma "from each taxpayer according to his capabilities."
4. The principle of publicity of taxation. The publicity of the purpose of levying taxes is justified by the doctrine of financial (Japan, Korea, Burma), tax (USA) and (or) economic (France) law of many foreign countries, directly or indirectly enshrined in the constitutions of many countries of the world. The principle of a public purpose involves the search for a balance of interests of individuals - taxpayers and society as a whole. “Therefore, the state has the right and is obliged to take measures to regulate tax legal relations in order to protect the rights and legitimate interests of not only taxpayers, but also other members of society” (Clause 3 of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of December 17, 1996 No. 20-P “On the case of checking constitutionality of paragraphs 2 and 3 of the first part of article 11 of the Law of the Russian Federation of June 24, 1993 "On the federal bodies of the tax police" // Collected Legislation of the Russian Federation. 1997. Art. 197.).
5. The principle of establishing taxes and fees in due process. This principle is enshrined and implemented, in particular, through a constitutional ban on establishing taxes otherwise than by law (establishing it in a different manner contradicts Article 57, Part 3, Article 75 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation), and in a number of states - special (more stringent) the procedure for introducing tax bills to Parliament. In Russia, such a rule is contained in Part 3 of Art. 104 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
6. The principle of economic justification of taxation. Not only should taxes and fees not be unduly burdensome for taxpayers, but they must also have an economic basis (in other words, they must not be arbitrary). In accordance with paragraph 3 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation "Taxes and fees must have an economic basis and cannot be arbitrary."
7. The principle of presumption of interpretation in favor of the taxpayer (payer of fees) of all irremovable doubts, contradictions and ambiguities of legislative acts on taxes and fees. This principle is enshrined in paragraph 7 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with this rule, all irremovable doubts, contradictions and ambiguities in acts of legislation on taxes and fees must be interpreted in favor of the taxpayer.
8. The principle of certainty of tax liability. It is enshrined in paragraph 6 of article 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with this principle, acts of legislation on taxes and fees should be formulated in such a way that everyone knows exactly what taxes (fees), when and in what order he must pay.
9. The principle of the unity of the economic space of the Russian Federation and the unity of tax policy. This principle is constitutional, enshrined in Part 1 of Art. 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, paragraph 3 of Art. 1 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and paragraph 4 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In accordance with the principle under consideration, it is not allowed to establish taxes and fees that violate the common economic space of the Russian Federation, in particular, directly or indirectly restricting the free movement of goods (works, services) or financial resources within the territory of the Russian Federation.
10. The principle of the unity of the system of taxes and fees. The legal significance of the need for the existence of the considered principle of tax law is dictated by the task of unifying tax seizures of property. As stated in par. 4 paragraph 4 of the resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of March 21, 1997 No. 5-P, such unification is necessary to achieve a balance between the right of the subjects of the Federation to establish taxes, on the one hand, and the observance of the fundamental rights of man and citizen, enshrined in Art. 34 and 35 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, ensuring the principle of the unity of the economic space, on the other. Therefore, the list of regional and local taxes enshrined in the tax legislation of the Russian Federation is closed, and therefore exhaustive.
Vera Parygina, PhD in Law, Leading Researcher at VNIIFEK, Head of the Department of Tax Consulting and Protection of Taxpayers' Rights, JSB Yustina-South
