Policy on liability for tax crimes in the Russian Federation and abroad (comparative aspect)
( Pp. 91-98)

The publication analyzes the policy in the field of legal liability for tax crimes in the Russian Federation and the States with which the Russian Federation has stable economic ties - Germany, Spain, France, China, the States of the Eurasian economic Union and the Commonwealth of independent States. The study suggests that the policy of States that are economic partners of the Russian Federation demonstrates a more severe approach to non-fulfillment of tax obligations. As a result of the study of foreign legislation, no States have been identified that have more lenient sanctions for tax crimes. Legal regulation of legal liability for violation of tax legislation in comparison with Russian legislation is characterized by long periods of limitation for criminal liability. Criminal law prohibitions do not contain an imperative requirement to exempt a defaulter from criminal prosecution in the event of payment of arrears and other compensation accruals (with the exception of the republics of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan). In contrast to the Russian Federation, most countries criminalize actions related to ignoring the obligation to maintain accounting records, hiding or destroying accounting documents (China, France, Spain, etc.). It is concluded that the Russian Federation is a less protected tax jurisdiction in comparison with the States with which it has economic ties. The existing imbalance of liability for violations of tax and fee legislation creates prerequisites for the use of Russian tax jurisdiction in unfair tax strategies. When determining the vector of Russian state policy in the sphere of liability for non-fulfillment of tax obligations, it is not advisable to ignore this significant circumstance.

Nikolaeva Z.A., (2020), POLICY ON LIABILITY FOR TAX CRIMES IN THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION AND ABROAD (COMPARATIVE ASPECT). Sociopolitical Sciences, 4 => 91-98.

Vasil ev V.V. Otvetstvennost za nalogovye prestupleniya v skandinavskikh stranakh: Dis. kand. yurid. nauk. N. Novgorod, 2007. 194 s.
Elinskiy I.V. Ugolovno-pravovye sredstva bor by s ukloneniem ot uplaty nalogov: po zakonodatel stvu zarubezhnykh stran: Dis. kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2008. 190 s.
Kilinkarova E.V. Nalogovoe pravo zarubezhnykh stran: uchebnik dlya bakalavriata i magistratury. M.: YUrayt, 2015. S. 200-201.
Kuznetsov A.P. Gosudarstvennaya politika protivodeystviya nalogovym prestupleniyam v Rossiyskoy Federatsii: Problemy formirovaniya, zakonodatel noy reglamentatsii i prakticheskogo osushchestvleniya: Dis. dok. yurid. nauk. M., 2000. 513 s.
Kucherov I.I. Nalogovoe pravo zarubezhnykh stran. Kurs lektsiy: ucheb. posobie. M.: AO TSentrYUrInfoR , 2003. 374 s.
Luchinin A.V., Vivcharuk K.G. YUridicheskaya otvetstvennost za nalogovye pravonarusheniya v razlichnykh stranakh: zarubezhnyy i rossiyskiy opyt // Aktual nye problemy prava. 2013. S. 79-83;
Pepelyaev S.G. Nalogovoe pravo: uchebnik. M.: YUrist, 2003. S. 476.
Ruzina A.S. Prestupleniya v sfere nalogooblozheniya: sravnitel nyy analiz ugolovnogo zakonodatel stva Germanii i Rossii: Avtoref. dis.. kand. yurid. nauk, M.: 2009. 25 s.
Salkazanov A.E. Prestupnoe uklonenie ot uplaty platezhey v byudzhety Rossii: Avtoref. dis.. kand. yurid. nauk, M.: 2017. 32 s.
Sereda I.M. Analiz zarubezhnogo zakonodatel stva ob otvetstvennosti za prestupleniya protiv nalogovoy sistemy // Prolog. 2013. № 1. S. 41-48.
Solov ev I.N. Realizatsiya ugolovnoy politiki Rossii v sfere nalogovykh prestupleniy: problemy i perspektivy: Dis. d-ra yurid. nauk. M., 2004. 547 s.
Tolstopyatenko G.P. Evropeyskoe nalogovoe pravo: problemy teorii i praktiki: diss d-ra yurid. nauk. 12.00.14. M., 2001. 317 s.
Tupancheski N.R. Uklonenie ot uplaty nalogov: komparativnyy analiz: Dis. d-ra yurid. nauk. M., 2002. 287 s.
SHukshina T.A. Institut deyatel nogo raskayaniya pri sovershenii nalogovykh prestupleniy v Rossii i Germanii: problemy i diskussii pravoprimeneniya // Probely v rossiyskom zakonodatel stve. 2018. № 3. S. 396-399.

tax evasion, policy on liability for tax crimes.