Beginning of the Law on tax reform as a characteristic sign
It is well known, that the first impression is the most lasting. It establishes perception largely and, as practice shows, this impression is quite accurate.
From this perspective it is interesting to take a view of the Law on “tax reform” – the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to the Tax Code of Ukraine and some legislative acts of Ukraine” as of 28.12.2014 # 71-VIII, which begins with:
“I. To amend the Tax Code of Ukraine (Record of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2011, NN 13-17, Article 112) with the following:
1) to restate para. 8.3 of Article 8 in the following version:
“8.3. Local taxes and fees, which are set in compliance with the list and within the limit rates as specified by this Code, rural and municipal councils according to their authorities, are mandatory for payment on the territories of respective communities”;
And what was the version before para 8.3.“has been reformed”?
It was the following:
“8.3. Local taxes and fees, which are set in compliance with the list and within the limit rates as specified by this Code, rural and municipal councils according to their authorities, are mandatory for payment on the territories of respective communities”.
Find the difference!
You will never make it, because they are the same.
And indeed you will never find proper tax reform as it is in this Law.
The above commentary presents the general statement for information purposes only and as such may not be practically used in specific cases without professional advice.
Penalties for violation in cash circulation sphere. Is everything so bad?
Is ATO over?
Or “I’ve brought you a package… But I will not give it to you”
YOU ARE BIRDS OF A FEATHER
Every one is free
The right for renewal of terms for appeal vs. res judicata principle
The Supreme Court ordered the first «exemplary» decision in the taxes cases
Updating! The case for “forming a single law enforcement practice” regarding the assessment of the verdict under Art. 205 of the Criminal Code in relation to the director of the counteragent was transferred for consideration of the Grand Chamber of the Supreme Court