The Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine approved its resolution “On approval of the Procedure of issuance of operational permit, form of operational permit and recognition invalid of some resolutions of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine” of 1.11.15, № 930 (comes into force from the day of its official publication). According to the document the State Veterinary Phytosanitary Service issues operational permit based on results of verification of compliance of market operator capacities with requirements of sanitary measures (per each separate capacity). The permit enables market operator to do defined kinds of business activities of production and/or storage of food products of animal origin.
Now, market operator should submit together with the application a list of food products, which are planned to be produced or stored. It is specified that inspection should be conducted not later than 15 calendar days after receipt of the documents. The fee for a permit is 0.17 of minimum wages on 1 January of appropriate year. Currently, this amount is UAH 207.06 (previously – UAH 200).
In general, the procedure does not make revolutionary changes, but merely clarifies the current provisions of the legislation. The permit as before is to be issued within 30 calendar days from the day of receipt of the application and documents, but it is left with unlimited period.
The State Fiscal Service of Ukraine in its letter “On the procedure of imposition of VAT transactions on assignment of receivables according to the factoring contract” of 05.11.15, № 23655/6/99-99-19-03-02-15 reported that transactions on assignment of receivables by the taxpayer against the debtor in favor of another taxpayer (factor) according to a factoring contract to be not the subject to VAT.
This conclusion follows from the fact that according to the sub-sec.196.1.5 of TCU factoring transactions are not the subject to VAT, if their object is the foreign currency valuables, securities, including compensating papers (certificates), investment certificates, mortgage certificates with fixed income, transactions of assignment of receivables under provided credits (loans) with mortgage, housing checks land bonds and derivatives.
It should be reminded that according to factoring contract (financing for assignment of the receivables) one party (factor) transfers or undertakes to transfer the funds at the disposal of the other party (client) for payment (in any manner provided by the contract), and the client assents or undertakes its assignment of receivables in favor of the factor to a third party (the debtor).
The State Fiscal Service of Ukraine by its letter “On charging penalties on the amount of declared balance of the budgetary compensation of previous reporting periods before 1 February 2015” of 09.11.15, № 23832/6/ 99-99-19-03-02-15 clarified the issue of legality of charging penalties on the amount of “technical” tax debt of VAT that arose in the integrated card of taxpayer (hereinafter - ICT) due to improper filling of column 4 of Table 1 of Annex 2 to the VAT declaration. It should be reminded that Annex D2 to be filled for the reporting periods February - June 2015.
In this column there were recorded outstanding amounts of VAT which were declared to the budget compensation for the reporting periods before 1 February 2015 on account of reducing of tax liabilities with VAT of subsequent periods. These amounts were transferred to the accounts of ICT.
So, if this figure was filled in incorrectly (the VAT amounts, which were not taken into account in ICT, were indicated there), “technical” tax debt of VAT arose for the taxpayer. According to its economic content it does not meet the definition of tax debt within the meaning of the Tax Code of Ukraine (hereinafter - TCU).
The state financial control explained that such a penalty which was accrued for the amount of the tax debt arose due to incorrect filling in of Annex D2 to the VAT declaration by the taxpayer should be considered to be accrued illegally and to be subjected to reversal by the decision of the supervisory authority at the registration place of the taxpayer.
According to the sub-para.129.1.1 of TCU (which was in force before 01.09.15) the penalty was accrued on the amount of the tax debt after the expiry of maturity dates of agreed monetary liabilities determined by the TCU.
The tax debt is the sum of agreed monetary liabilities (including penalties, if available) but not paid by the taxpayer within the period prescribed by TCU and penalty accrued on the amount of such monetary liabilities (sub-para.14.1.175 of TCU).
The State Fiscal Service of Ukraine in its letter “On procedure of formation of VAT credit” of 06.11.15, № 23731/6/99-99-19-03-02-15 noted that tax invoice (hereinafter - TI) to be considered to be drawn up with violations of the procedure of filling in of TI, if the name of the person who drew it up and the digital signature (hereinafter - DS) of the person who registered this TI in the Unified Register of tax invoices (hereinafter - URTI) belong to different people.
The state financial control noted that TI drawn up with violations of the established procedure of TI did not entitle the buyer to a tax credit.
We believe that such an opinion is controversial, because according to para. 201.10 of the Tax Code of Ukraine (hereinafter - TCU) the following reasons do not entitle the buyer to a tax credit:
- the absence of the fact of registration of TI in URTI by the seller;
- and/or violation of the procedure of filling in of mandatory requisites of TI provided for by para. 201.1 TCU. There are no such deficiencies in the TI.
Taking fiscals’ opinion into account, in order to avoid claims against the credit of the buyer, the seller should provide TI drawing up and ES imposing on it during registration in URTI by one person.
The Ministry of Finance of Ukraine in its letter “On involvement of means of transport during mobilization” of 11.06.15, № 31-11420-07-10/19544 reported: during the annual inventory it is not allowed to forget about assets, including vehicles that were mobilized according to Art.6 of the Law of Ukraine “On mobilization preparation and mobilization” of 21.10.93, № 3543-XII.
Therefore, they are also to be inventoried. Since (due to understandable reasons) access to such facilities is limited, the Ministers of Finance recommends to take an inventory of mobilize transport under the rules prescribed for the inventory of property transferred under custody.
Also, the Ministry of Finance noted that reflections in inventory register of mobilized transport should be conducted on the basis of Delivery-Acceptance Act and information received from the custodian of transport.
The State Regulatory Service of Ukraine in its letter “On reissuance and issuance of license” of 26.10.15, № 8205 clarified the terms of reissuance of license. The Law of Ukraine “On licensing of economic activities” of 02.03.15, № 222-VIII did not establish the terms of reissuance of license.
The State Regulatory Service of Ukraine recommends using the terms provided for the decision to issue a license. That is ten working days of receipt day of the application for reissuance of the license by the licensing body.
The same situation is with the terms on taking decision on refusal to issue a license. It is advised to follow ten working days from the date of receipt the application for a license by the licensing body.
It should be reminded: information about the reissuance of the license to be recorded to the Unified State Register of Legal Entities and individuals-entrepreneurs not later than the working day following the day of the decision.
The Supreme Economic Court of Ukraine in its letter “On Certain Issues of practical application of the Law of Ukraine “On Court Fee” (with amendments and additions introduced according to the Law of Ukraine of 22.05.2015, № 484-VIII) of 12.11.15, № 01-06/2093/15 paid attention to problematic issues regarding the payment of court fees. Here are some of them:
- statements of claim on liabilities to transfer funds under the contract of bank account belong to material nature. So, the Court Fee should be paid in the amount established for mentioned applications;
- deferral or instalment plan of payment of court fee is possible for a period not longer than adoption of the judgment in the case;
- court fee of appeal and cassation complaints against decisions of the court should be calculated based on the rates payable in the case of a claim regardless of whether appealing all decision (resolution) of the court in whole or in part.
If the court fee was paid before 01.09.15 the calculation of the court fee for applying an appeal or cassation should be carried out in view of the amount of court fee paid when submission a claim. This amount is not the subject to recalculation under the new rates, valid of 01.09.15.
