Chernik Dmitry Georgievich Biography

Chernik, the village of Shapovalova, V. Eremchenko, “In the Code of Legal Affairs”, N 12, June G. Share the document “Reincarnation of investment benefits is necessary“ Interviews with D. Hasantly adopted anti -crisis amendments to the tax legislation. How effective were they? What other steps to modernize the legislation should be taken? With these questions, we turned to blueberries Dmitry Georgievich, it arises periodically.

For example, the first economic crisis was in England in the year. The crisis of the years is known as the Great Depression. He led to a complete collapse of the entire US banking and credit system. So, having stood on the rails of a market economy, Russia condemned itself to economic crises.

The cycle of a crisis of years. Remember the crisis of the Russian economy of the year? 11 years have passed - and again the crisis. As you can see, a market economy gives not only pluses. The crisis cannot be avoided. You can soften and speed up the way out of it. But our country entered into an unprepared crisis. As you remember, they were dubbed anti -crisis. Was these measures enough?

These are administrative measures, taxes, the impact of the banking system on financial and economic life, the participation of the state in the economy. We - the only ones in the world - abandoned them. In fact, our first and main tools are taxes, the second is the active impact of the banking system on financial and economic life. And the participation of the state in the economy is reduced to a minimum.

A decrease in tax burden led to budget loss. What to do? For example, value added tax. However, the hope that as a result of the release of export manufacturers from VAT, we will receive a kind of priority, as this happened in France 55 years ago, did not materialize. Even in the successful years, VAT was not a stimulator of promoting the products of Russian manufacturers abroad.

Was the products uncompetitive? I mean the terms of reimbursement from the budget of value added tax. As a matter of fact, the situation that took shape with VAT compensation in export led to the fact that enterprises sold on the domestic market what could be supplied for export. And only now the government drew attention to this problem. It instructed to sharply reduce the terms of VAT compensation and ordered the tax service to work more quickly in this direction.

Of all anti -crisis measures, this, in my opinion, is one of the most useful. But the Federal Tax Service on April 1 of the year published its proposals to get out of the crisis and proposed the exact opposite way - not to introduce an accelerated procedure for compensation. I hope that the paramount problem of VAT will still be solved as the government proposed, and not the way the tax service would like.

But the conversations remained conversations. Do you think this issue is removed from the agenda to better times - before the exit of the crisis? The question of how to reduce tax rate is periodically raised in the Duma and the government. Unfortunately, the most unsuccessful proposals are discussed. There are five of them for today. Option No. 1. It is quite obvious that this could not be done in favorable years, especially in crisis.

This option is populist, which has no practical significance. Option No. 2. At first glance, it is reasonable. But it is absolutely unacceptable for practical life for the simple reason that a flat VAT scale will lead to the elimination of a preferential tax rate and to untwist the inflationary spiral. Option No. 3. Replacing VAT tax on sales. Maybe not the worst, but absolutely raw, not worked out, not worked out from the point of view of the external relations of our country with the countries surrounding us that have VAT at home.

That is, to level the conditions of international trade, you still need to have indirect tax, the same with European countries. This option is violently discussed, but no one has seriously worked it, including in conjunction with sales tax. There is an absolutely exotic version N 4 - cancel VAT for the development of entrepreneurship. In fact, this is a worsened version of the first option, only even more radical, even more revolutionary, even more unacceptable during the crisis.

And finally, option N 5 is to do nothing. He appeared after the discussion of the four above. Of course, nothing is a convenient position. By the way, we recently conducted an international scientific symposium, and one of the participants dropped such a phrase: "Do not repair what has not broken." It exactly reflects the essence of the fifth option. But the crisis struck, and doing something is just necessary.

It seems to me that now a small but directed reduction in VAT within two points should be carried out, without moving to a flat scale and without promoting the products and goods of the inflationary spiral. This will not do any harm. Partial budget losses compensate for income tax. Of course, this small outlet will not improve the financial situation of organizations immediately, but it will play psychologically well.Entrepreneurs will feel that the government and the Duma care about them and fulfill their promises to help the business to survive in the crisis.

Insurance premiums will be replaced. An increase in the tax burden on the wage fund is hardly called an anti -crisis measure. Or are there other reasons? How advisable is it to increase it by 8 percentage points? When the UST was reduced, it is not the whole salary, but some part "came out of the shadow." After a decrease in tax burden, many organizations gathered their employees and said: "From now on the whole salary is honest.

We stop all games with personal income tax and completely pay a single social tax." This is a great success of modern tax policy - policies of the 21st century. And now start increasing social tax again. What this will lead to is not difficult to guess. Those accountants who have so skillfully hid wages work in enterprises. In the case of increasing insurance premiums by 8 points, their experience will be immediately demanded.

So from the part of the financial services of enterprises there will be an adequate answer. Therefore, the rate of insurance premiums cannot be increased. This is the first. Which is better: a single social tax or insurance payments? It is appropriate to give a Russian saying: "At least call a pot, just don’t put it in the oven." Therefore, the name itself does not play. But the transfer of the collection of insurance premiums to the Pension Fund will have negative consequences - in the shortest possible time, the debugged collection system will be confused for years.

Indeed, over many years, specialists who were once collecting contributions have left the pension fund. And the fund must start from scratch. Again, create a service, hire people, train them, conduct an inventory of enterprises, convince the enterprises that you need to pay, etc. Not to mention the fact that enterprises will receive another regulatory authority from which they will begin to hide the money.

In your opinion, amendments to Chapter 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation motivate the taxpayer to further develop the business? Let's see what we did in favorable years, what we began to do during the crisis and what needs to be done during the crisis. So, the chapter 25 of the Tax Code was introduced. Eliminated all benefits, including investment tax benefit.

Small business, agricultural producers, enterprises that change the work of the disabled, lost their support of the state. But the worst and most importantly, the chapter 25 of the Tax Code works in favor of those organizations that do not want to do anything, live one day. Happing income tax in the form of chapter 25 is a wonderful gift from the state to those taxpayers who did not invest in the development of production, but pulled it for their own construction of yachts, the purchase of various sports teams.

But what about those organizations that develop production, invest in new technologies, modernize equipment?