Want the truth? The combination of the words “tax” and “lawyer” is nothing more than a syntactic combination and marketing ploy for those who do not want to delve into the seemingly upheaval provisions of tax legislation.
Well then: he is dedicated to all those suffering and in search of at least some kind of tax lawyer. Now the moment has come when you need a tax lawyer or consultant or something like that. Stop-stop-stop: but let's ask a question: is it necessary? No, seriously: where did this mantra, the tax lawyer, come from? To be honest, the prices for the services of lawyers in Moscow are, as they say, “not too shabby”.
Their cost varies here and there, but the prefix "tax" in some inexplicable way adds to the price tag at least a zero. What do these tax lawyers offer in return? And the heavenly manna is promised: you will have tax schemes, tax optimization, savings, minimization (aren't they the same?), and you will have to refund VAT and refute refunds, and they will easily “knock over” the decision based on the results of the tax revision, the fact that they will even help to avoid tax revisions (although this is just what tax lawyers, if you think about it, is unprofitable: there are no inspections - there are no clients ...).
And what they just do not promise and it is so tempting that even real “specialists” in tax matters are even lost: what are they, far from being “optimizers” and not “deliverers” from tax audits, then they are doing it? What is behind - the valiant image of tax lawyers is usually silent. This marketing move - they say we know better how to read the Tax Code than the tax inspectors themselves, and those who came up with this code - easily turns into a fiasco for those who believe in it. In general, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was also fond of tax schemes at one time, will be able (if he wants) to tell you a lot of interesting things about his successes in tax optimization.
Let's get it right. Here it is, not a very pleasant truth: to be a specialist in tax matters is this nonsense. But why? And here is why.
All tax disputes can be reduced to the following scheme: 1) the Tax Code of the Russian Federation prescribes one thing, and the taxpayer believes that the other, 2) you need to prove one or the other. That's the whole scheme. As a rule, the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not propose to do anything supernatural of, but at times he proposes this very vaguely, incomprehensibly. Sold out? - Pay the tax. Sold sophisticatedly, not like everyone else? - Pay the tax anyway. Gifted it? - Well, pay too, there are no exceptions! Or is there?
So doubts creep in, and there tax disputes arise. Well, how are you arguing? If we speak in relation to the law, its interpretation, and to the law as such, then there is no need to think, interpret, compare exactly the provisions of tax legislation. Just stand your ground, to victory. There is no right. Where there is a fiscal element, law rarely exists.
There is no any sane analysis, but only an everyday vision of the issue, sometimes requiring arithmetic skills. Accordingly, the one who is sufficiently eloquent and convincing, well, knows how to count, will be right. Well, it’s called a tax lawyer.
Oh, how many unflattering reviews and complaints about hordes of such lawyers - tax and not.
Personally, I know a few who position themselves as tax. Some of them do not have a law degree. Some have accounting. You know, they very well and very successfully appear in courts, and arbitration courts, and win the so-called tax disputes with the tax authorities ... They perfectly juggle with concepts, turn upside down what is written in the Tax Code, distort facts or adjust them to necessary articles and vice versa.
And they are familiar with the “nature of the tax”, taxation and its subject entities and other tax pseudo-terminology insofar as. Moreover, interestingly, on the sidelines, after the process, they themselves are surprised at how they managed to “steal” such “game” to the court as the meaning of certain norms of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. But all their arguments are very similar to the truth. There you go. Not lawyers, but just good sophists. Well, dialectics in addition.
But it’s not a matter of whom I know and what is my subjective opinion about their professionalism. In the end, my own professionalism, and, therefore, the conclusions made on this basis, can always be called into question.
Therefore, the dilemma must be disassembled appropriately and ... impartially.
The fact is that the Tax Code does not constitute a logically closed legal instrument, completed both externally and within chapters and sections. Well, it doesn’t represent everything. Misunderstandings and confusions really arise with him (they arose ten years ago at least). Let's go further and make it clear that taxation itself is a rather indistinct, from a conceptual point of view, phenomenon.
In essence, the withdrawal of funds, in practice, should be formalized at least somehow, and it is desirable that it is beautifully and clearly and somehow connected with economic necessity as one of the components of the normal functioning of any state. The tax code is in fact a set of vagueness and ambiguities, essentially a set of instructions: when, to whom, how and how much to pay. No, this is not a stone at all in the garden of lawmakers, for I clearly imagine myself in their place: to come up with and put on paper what is difficult to define is not an easy task, as I could.
No, where they could, of course, deduced definitions: what is what. But for the most part, the terms and definitions of the Tax Code are formulated as follows for the species, and they have to be thought out, displayed independently, since they are not directly derived. And this gave in due time scope for launching and flying beautiful phrases, such as the legal and economic nature of VAT, the subject and object of taxation, and so on, and about honesty / dishonesty is a completely separate topic.
These phrases, by the way, are also used by the judges, they do not disdain. However, in fact, those who use them are confused in these terms. The subject and object of taxation merge, it turns out that VAT does not have any legal nature and did not exist and it becomes generally incomprehensible that there is nature in general and not what is legal ... Indeed, what is taxation? What is taxation and what is taxed? I would not be in a hurry with answers, because you can get lost.
But tax specialists here and there flaunt this terminology, and the more incomprehensible the more effective this bravado lies in the ears of gullible entrepreneurs. Nevertheless, knowledgeable people have long recognized that the Tax Code is a cumbersome, constantly supplemented and changing accounting script: on the principle of "we put it there, and it’s here." Is there anything to explain here?
By and large, to use this script you do not need to have any advanced intelligence, but rather know the rules of accounting and be aware of the company's business operations. Nothing complicated in reading the Tax Code has long been gone. However, it wasn’t. It was new, but difficult - hardly. But what is needed so as not to get into trouble? You need to be aware of the clarification letters from the Federal Tax Service and read Consultant + and its “judicial practice” section, always looking for tax disputes.
The funny thing is that if you need advice in the field of taxation, for example, in connection with any business transaction from the activities of your company, then it will often be optimal to contact ... your accountant. Yes, it’s precisely to Maryivanna, which, knowing the numbers and, more importantly, the white, gray and sometimes black places of registration in the company, as a rule, knows the main and particular provisions of the Tax Code and will explain to you what is possible and what is not and what will happen if you do not pay the tax, better than any venerable tax lawyer.
Unfortunately, all the “taxation” of boys and girls, and uncles and aunts in suits (often not bad such expensive suits) is exhausted by the pompous quoting of the Tax Code with lyrical digressions, and the demand comes from those who can quote interestingly and readily, and fame crowns those desperate ones who take the liberty of asserting, in fact, veiled (and sometimes openly) to guarantee that this will be so, and not otherwise.
What can you, for example, do like this, don’t pay here, and you won’t get anything for it. And if it does, then we will explain your innocence in court and we will win back everything. They are exported due to the fact that the tax authorities in our state do not always and do not reach everything. Something really worth checking is left "for later", after they forget, miss deadlines and so on.
But why all of the above? By and large, a lawyer who positions himself as “taxable” is no different from his non-tax counterparts. The experience of participating in cases arising from tax legal relations in no way “specializes” such a lawyer, nor does he allow him to put himself in the order of more competent colleagues who do not deal with such matters. Everything is simple here: tax legal relations do not differ from any other, moreover, the property of tax ones is the absence of any sane legal component.
To justify tax evasion is more sophistry (why shouldn’t I pay tax, if I have to pay it?) And mathematics: added, subtracted - this is the result. All this suggests that when hiring a tax lawyer, you are not hiring a tax specialist, which, as indicated, is nonsense in itself, but a person who, potentially, has the ability to present one as the other, black as white and so further.
I repeat: you can’t be an expert in such a field as tax legislation: you should not be confused with a simple knowledge of the norms of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (which is stupid in itself) with an understanding of their meaning, which, in fact, is not there (except for the purpose of replenishing the budget). Knowing how these norms can or will be applied, is regarded as a kind of nonsense, since the views of fiscal authorities tend to change.
Laws in the form of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation are subordinated to one goal: to have the most convenient, flexible tool for collecting payments to the budget and this internal task is not burdened and should not be burdened: everything is done based on the realities and needs of the current situation.
In general, save your money, gentlemen.