The Business Ombudsman Council provides recommendations to state bodies on the basis of individual cases and in accordance with published systemic reports. Here we have collected information on the implementation status of systemic recommendations only.
|
Report name
|
Issued recommendations
|
Execution status
|
|---|---|---|
Systemic report "Problems with administering business taxes in Ukraine" |
To ensure stability of respective laws and regulations, once the deficiencies in the VAT electronic administration functioning are eliminated, so that they will remain unchanged (or significantly unchanged) for a significant time. If the sense of predictability is achieved, it would enable the taxpayers to plan their activities accordingly and significantly decrease administrative expenses covering the cost of adjustment to the new rules and regulations. Ministry of Finance |
Implemented
|
|
The State Budget of Ukraine shall reflect consolidated VAT amount (i.e., the difference between the income from VAT and expenses for VAT refund). For this purpose the Budget Code of Ukraine shall be respectively amended. In our view, if implemented, such an approach would allow overthrowing traditional argumentation of the tax authorities that VAT refund is effectively limited by the limits foreseen in the State Budget. Ministry of Finance |
Implemented
— comments:
In the state budget, starting from 2016, planned VAT receipts from goods (works, services) produced in Ukraine are reflected as a balance between tax collection and reimbursement. The same principle is envisaged in the approved budget for 2019.
|
|
|
To revise the Procedure of Taxpayers’ Record Keeping to significantly narrow down the scope of discretionary power currently vested with the tax authorities. In particular, the following amendments are worth being considered:
the grounds for launching verification of the tax payers’ location by the tax authorities shall be limited to include only limited and specific number of instances to be directly envisaged in the legislation (for instance, during a tax audit of a taxpayer deemed to be in violation of its duties);
if the information on the taxpayer’s location is properly confirmed through the State Registrar, this should be regarded as the sufficient proof for tax authorities; moreover, in this case tax authorities shall not be entitled to carry out such verification for certain reasonable period of time (for instance, one year).
Ministry of Finance |
Implemented
— comments:
Commencing March 2016, the fiscal authorities are no longer entitled to issue the form 18-OPP (notice on the absence of legal entity at its location).Respective provisions have been excluded from the Procedure for Taxpayer Registration pursuant to the Order of the Ministry of Finance No.375 dated 18 March 2016.
|
