The General Administration Of Taxation Changed The Caliber Of Sales.

Apple store owner: "four yuan a Jin, not sweet, no money!"

Blue teacher: "OK, I'll call it a kilo of not sweet apples".

This is a joke, but it leads to a more joke like thinking.

If you buy ten unsweetened ones directly, do not give money to leave?

Yes, it should be ten, because this is a gratuitous gift.

It should be regarded as sales.

If you buy ten, five bites are found on the spot, and only five. What is the boss paying several VAT?

It is obvious that the five is due, because this is a "discount".

But also afraid that tax officials believe that the boss sold five, and sent five to be regarded as sales, so ten tax payable.

If the Inland Revenue Department has issued a document, it should not be considered as a sale because it is not sweet.

What do you think?

Tax general No. 86 Announcements: rent free period does not belong to sales.

The original is: "the taxpayer rents the real estate, and the lease contract stipulate that the rent free period shall not be".

The implementation of the pilot scheme for the implementation of the value-added tax "(fiscal and taxation [2016] No. 36] was issued and fourteenth stipulated in the sales service.

"

This rule raises a small discussion in circles: does the General Administration of Taxation change the caliber of sales? Does it mean that if there is a commercial purpose for free, it should not be regarded as sales?

Several friends have discussed many screens for this purpose, but I think they are too worried.

There are only two logical explanations for the small stipulation of the 86 announcement. First, the tax administration considers that the rent free period itself is not a free gift.

Two, the rent free period is a free gift, but the specific provision is not regarded as sales.

One can see that the second interpretation is wrong.

Because under the premise of a free gift, the SAT does not have the right to stipulate that it can not be regarded as sales.

Since the "implementation of the pilot scheme" is defined as sales, there are no such provisions as "except for otherwise stipulated by the competent department of Finance and taxation of the State Council."

So, if it constitutes a gratuitous gift,

There is no way to avoid paying taxes.

It seems that the correct interpretation of Article 86 is that rent free period is not a gratuitous gift.

What is the reason for the tax administration's understanding?

First of all, from the business perspective, the rent free period is obviously a promotional discount price behavior, no one will think that it is really a gift.

Secondly, the rent free period and the future tenancy are a whole contract. From the whole, it is a paid lease behavior. It can not be separated from some of its tenancy periods as a separate leasing business.

For example, there will never be such a situation: customers only rent rent free period, just like before the text "only buy not sweet apple".

Of course, if such a wonderful thing happens, it must be regarded as sales.

The above analysis seems reasonable, but in fact it is also wrong.

The Announcement No. 86 of the General Administration of taxation is actually trying to "

What is the rule? That is, whether the rent free period is a promotional price reduction or a gift.

Nor does it have the power.

The General Administration of Taxation has the right to stipulate how to pay taxes within the scope authorized by law, but it has no right to stipulate what a behavior is actually.

Is the rent free period a gift or a price reduction? Or is it an independent tenancy? This is a fact. It is not a document that can be defined. It can only be proved by business, contract and evidence.

Therefore, the requirement of Announcement No. 86 should be confirmed by tax inspectors and taxpayers, combined with evidence.

Should I really sign a one year lease with the tenant, it is agreed that the rent free period will be one year. If the document does not pay tax, will the inspection be approved?

That is to say, the rule No. 86 is closely related to the law.

But it is good for taxpayers to grasp and facilitate tax inspection qualitative, so such documents are very popular.

If we are pragmatic, we should treat it as a "tool" attitude, and we need not analyze the principles behind it.

For more information, please pay attention to the world clothing shoes and hats and Internet cafes.