Summary of the gist of the judgment of the first batch of people's courts' case database on the crime of "false issuance of special VAT invoices".

Source: People's Court Case Database

I. Case of Zhao XX et al. False Issuance of Special VAT Invoices - The connotation of "false issuance" in the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices and the criteria for determining the amount of the crime

Warehousing number: 2023-05-1-146-001

Trial courts: Feicheng People's Court of Shandong Province and Intermediate People's Court of Tai'an City, Shandong Province

Case No.: (2022) Lu 0983 Xingchu No. 32, (2022) Lu 09 Xingzhong No. 125

Keywords: criminal crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices false issuance of behavior definition criminal amount

Basic facts of the case

Between November 2011 and January 2013, in the process of purchasing the goods of the defendant Feicheng Tai Industrial Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Tai Company) in the process of purchasing goods from Wang Hardware Wire Mesh Factory in Anping County, Hebei Province (hereinafter referred to as Wang Hardware, which is an individual industrial and commercial household and has no qualifications to issue special VAT invoices), Zhao Moumou, the former legal representative and general manager of Tai Company, arranged for Zhao, the former head of the company's business department, to After Guo Moumou, the former accountant in charge, calculated the amount of special VAT invoices that needed to be falsely issued, Zhao Moumou and others contacted the operator of Wang Moumou Hardware, and the latter contacted the defendant Dong Moumou and agreed to let Dong Moumou issue false VAT special invoices for Tai's company by paying the invoicing fee. In the absence of real goods transactions, Dong provided fictitious invoicing information to the two companies in Tianjin where he sold the goods, and successively issued a total of 59 false VAT special invoices to a Thai company, with a total price and tax of 6,046,308.32 yuan. In this process, Tai's company paid an invoicing fee of 203,400 yuan to the defendant Dong through Wang's hardware operator, and Tai's company actually deducted 781,251.7 yuan in taxes.

On June 2, 2022, the Feicheng Municipal People's Court of Shandong Province rendered the (2022) Lu 0983 Xingchu No. 32 Criminal Judgment: 1. The defendant Tai Company committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to a fine of 50,000 yuan. Defendant Zhao XX committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to three years imprisonment with a three-year probation. Defendant Zhao committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to two years imprisonment with a two-year probation. Defendant Guo XX committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to six months of short-term detention with a six-month suspended sentence. Defendant Dong X committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, and was sentenced to two years and six months imprisonment, suspended for two years and six months, and fined 50,000 yuan. 2. The 203,400 yuan of illegal gains seized from the Tai'an City Public Security Bureau are to be confiscated in accordance with law, and the seizing organ is to hand them over to the state treasury. During the trial, the illegal gains of 781,251.7 yuan returned by Feichengtai Industrial Co., Ltd. were confiscated in accordance with the law and handed over to the state treasury. After the verdict was announced, the defendant Zhao XX was not satisfied and appealed. On July 5, 2022, the Intermediate People's Court of Tai'an City, Shandong Province, rendered the (2022) Lu 09 Xingzhong No. 125 Criminal Ruling, rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that: although there were some real transactions between Tai and Wang Hardware, in addition to paying the above-mentioned payment payable, Tai paid 5%-6% of the "invoicing fee" to Wang Hardware, and required Wang Hardware to find someone to issue a special VAT invoice with a tax rate of 17% for a transaction amount of more than 5 million yuan for deducting the tax payable, and subjectively there was an intention to let others falsely issue a special VAT invoice for themselves. According to the facts ascertained in this case, the payment paid by Tai in the process of purchasing products from Wang Hardware did not include taxes, and the "invoicing fee" paid to Wang Hardware in addition to the real payment was not the tax paid to Wang Hardware, but the cost of "purchasing" the false VAT special invoice involved in the case, which did not enter the state treasury as state tax, so the money should not be deducted from the criminal amount, and it also belonged to the loss of state taxes.

Summary of the trial

The definition of the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices should be determined in light of the defendant's subjective purpose. Using the core function of special VAT invoices to deduct taxes, the false issuance of tax deception from the state is essentially no different from the crime of fraud and is very harmful, so the Criminal Law stipulates severe statutory penalties for the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices. The premise of the tax deduction is that the input tax has been paid. For a business that has actual transactions but has not paid taxes, it is not entitled to deduct taxes because it has not paid taxes at the purchase stage, and if the defendant purchases invoices from a third party for deduction, it is essentially a fraudulent act of issuing tax deductions. The seller of the invoices will not pay the "invoicing fee" and other expenses of the defendant to the state as taxes, and what the state loses is all the taxes deducted by the defendant, so the "invoicing fee" cannot be deducted from the amount of the crime.

2. The case of Wang Moumou's false issuance of special VAT invoices - subjectively it does not have the purpose of illegal possession, and objectively it does not cause a loss of state taxes, so it is not appropriate to convict and punish it for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices

Warehousing number: 2023-16-1-146-001

Trial courts: Intermediate People's Court of Jinan City, Shandong Province (first instance), Shandong Provincial High People's Court (second instance), Hebei Provincial High People's Court (retrial)

Case No.: (2015) Ji Xing Er Chu Zi No. 23, (2016) Lu Xing Zhong No. 84, (2021) Ji Xing Zai No. 7

Keywords: criminal crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices Ring opening and ring deduction Illegal possession purpose State tax loss

Basic facts of the case

A coal trading company, an energy company in Jinan, and a metallurgical technology company in Shandong are all limited liability companies, the defendant Wang XX is the legal representative and general manager of a coal trading company, responsible for the overall work of the company, and Li Moukun is the actual person in charge of an energy company in Jinan. In December 2010, Wang Moumou and Li Moukun respectively signed a coal supply and marketing cooperation agreement on behalf of a coal trading company and an energy company in Jinan, which read: from December 5, 2010 to December 4, 2012, an energy company in Jinan supplied 250,000 tons of coal to a coal trading company every month, and a coal trading company ensured the supply of funds with advance payment every month, and a science and technology development company in Shandong provided a guarantee for the safety of the funds. In order to control an energy company in Jinan, Wang Moumou negotiated with Li Moukun to arrange for his former business partners Wang Mouwei and Xuan Mouping to jointly hold 90% of the company's equity, and designated Wang Mouwei as the general manager of the company, specifically responsible for the company's coal business business, and then due to business management and other reasons, by the end of 2011, a coal trading company paid an energy company in Jinan more than 250 million yuan to purchase coal in advance, and an energy company in Jinan did not perform the supply contract as agreed. In order to cope with the annual audit of a coal trading company by a superior unit, Wang Moumou was introduced to a metallurgical technology company in Shandong and asked the company to assist a coal trading company and an energy company in Jinan to falsely increase the transaction volume. From December 21 to December 25, 2012, in the absence of real trade, Wang arranged for a coal trading company, an energy company in Jinan to sign a coal purchase and sales contract with a metallurgical technology company in Shandong, and made bank transfers between the three companies, forming a bank account of 108.88 million yuan, and required an energy company in Jinan to be a coal trading company, a coal trading company to be a metallurgical technology company in Shandong, A metallurgical technology company in Shandong issued false VAT invoices for an energy company in Jinan, among which, a metallurgical technology company in Shandong issued 11 false VAT invoices for an energy company in Jinan, with a tax of 15,820,635,860 yuan, and all of them were deducted by the tax authorities.

　　On December 4, 2015, the Intermediate People's Court of Jinan City, Shandong Province, rendered the (2015) Ji Xing Er Chu Zi No. 23 Criminal Judgment, in which the defendant Wang XX committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. After the first-instance verdict, the defendant Wang XX appealed on the grounds that he was not guilty. On June 2, 2016, the Shandong Provincial High People's Court rendered the (2016) Lu Xingzhong No. 84 Criminal Ruling, rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

　　After the original judgment took legal effect, Wang Mouqi, the son of Wang, filed a complaint with the Shandong Provincial High People's Court, which issued a notice of rejection of the appeal (2017) Lu Xingshen No. 240 on December 12, 2017.

　　Wang Mouqi was dissatisfied and appealed to the Supreme People's Court. On June 22, 2021, the Supreme People's Court issued the (2020) Zui Gao Fa Xing Shen No. 237 Retrial Decision, ordering the Hebei Provincial High People's Court to conduct a retrial of the case.

　　The Hebei Provincial High People's Court found after re-examination that the defendant in the original trial, Wang XX, was the legal representative and general manager of a coal trading company and the actual controller of an energy company in Jinan. In order to cope with the annual audit of the superior unit of a coal trading company, Wang Moumou was introduced to contact a metallurgical technology company in Shandong, and arranged for an energy company, a coal trading company, and a metallurgical technology company in Shandong to conduct a meeting on December 19, 2012. On the 20th, 15 million yuan of funds were used to circulate in the account, and finally formed a bank flow of 108.8832 million yuan paid by an energy company in Jinan to a metallurgical technology company in Shandong, 108.8832 million yuan by a metallurgical technology company in Shandong to a coal trading company, and 108.71307 million yuan by a coal trading company paid by a coal trading company to an energy company in Jinan. On December 21 and 24, an energy company in Jinan issued 93 special VAT invoices to a coal trading company, with a total price and tax of 108.71307 million yuan and a tax amount of 15.79591601 million yuan; On the 24th, 95 special VAT invoices were issued to a metallurgical technology company in Shandong, with a total price and tax of 108.88322 million yuan and a tax amount of 15.82063586 million yuan, and a metallurgical technology company in Shandong issued 11 special VAT invoices to an energy company in Jinan on December 21 and 25, with a total price and tax of 108.88832 million yuan and a tax amount of 15.82063586 million yuan. All the taxes of the above three companies are certified and deducted.

　　On September 8, 2023, the Hebei Provincial High People's Court rendered the (2021) Ji Xing Zai No. 7 Criminal Judgment, revoking the Shandong Provincial High People's Court's (2016) Lu Xingzhong No. 84 Criminal Ruling and the (2015) Ji Xing Er Chu Zi No. 23 Criminal Judgment of the Jinan Intermediate People's Court of Shandong Province;

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that the VAT invoice has the function of deducting tax with the invoice, and the input tax recorded on the invoice can be deducted from the output tax. The essence of the harm of the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices lies in the fraudulent deduction of taxes through false issuance, and this crime is one of the most common and frequent crimes that endanger the tax collection and management system in practice. In recent years, the false issuance of special VAT invoices has been repeatedly prohibited, and the number of criminal cases has continued to increase. However, with the complication of economic transactions, The diversification of the purpose of economic activities, a considerable part of the purpose of false issuance is no longer to defraud the state of taxes, and some of the false issuance has not caused losses to the state taxes, which is significantly different from the false issuance of VAT tax for the purpose of defrauding and deducting VAT taxes in terms of social harm, beyond the legislative purpose of the crime of false issuance of VAT special invoices, such as the output tax and input tax between the invoicing companies are equal, there is no situation that leads to the loss of state tax revenue, and therefore will not infringe on the corresponding social relations protected by the criminal law, the act is not socially harmful, and should not be regulated by criminal means。 Therefore, according to the spirit of the Supreme Court's reply, the minutes of the symposium, the guiding cases, the reply, etc., the perpetrator's conduct that subjectively did not aim to defraud taxes and objectively did not actually cause the loss of state tax revenue is not convicted and punished for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, which is also more in line with the principle of consistency of criminal responsibility and punishment.

　　In this case, the testimony of multiple witnesses, the defendant's confession, and relevant documentary evidence can all prove that although the defendant Wang Moumou arranged and planned the bank fund flow of an energy company in Jinan, a coal trading company, and a metallurgical technology company in Shandong without real transactions, and issued special VAT invoices in a circular manner, he, as the legal representative and general manager of a coal trading company, was in order to convert the old account into a new account. Objectively, in view of the fact that the three companies did not have a real transaction of purchase and sale of goods, although they had already deducted the output tax and input tax, the transactions of the three companies had a complete flow of funds, and the VAT input and output declarations were made to the competent tax authorities in accordance with the regulations. Therefore, Wang's conduct does not meet the constitutive elements of the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, and it is not appropriate to convict and punish him for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices.

Summary of the trial

In the absence of real goods purchase and sale transactions, the special VAT invoices are issued in a circular manner and the input tax deduction has been carried out, and the tax declaration has been made to the competent tax authorities in accordance with the regulations, and the whole process has been opened and deducted in a closed loop, without causing the loss of national taxes. The perpetrator did not have the purpose of fraudulently obtaining state taxes, did not have the conduct or subjective intent to collect state taxes, and did not meet the constitutive elements of the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, so it is not appropriate to convict and sentence the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices.

3. Xing's case of false issuance of special VAT invoices - the consideration of enterprise compliance rectification in the second-instance trial procedure

Warehousing number: 2024-18-1-146-002

Trial court: Wanlan District People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province, Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province

Case No.: (2022) Anhui 0210 Xingchu No. 106, (2022) Anhui 02 Xingzhong No. 186

Keywords: criminal offense of false issuance of special VAT invoices second-instance procedure corporate compliance leading authority criminal discretion

Basic facts of the case

Defendant Xing XX is the actual controller of an engineering limited company in Wuhu City, Anhui Province. From May 2018 to November 2019, in order to obtain sufficient special VAT invoices to be certified by the tax authorities for tax deduction, Xing Moumou used an engineering company in Wuhu under his actual control to pay 6% to 7% of the face value without real transactions with others In the form of invoicing fees, 13 false VAT special invoices were issued in conjunction with others for the above-mentioned companies actually controlled by themselves, and all of them were declared to deduct the input VAT tax, involving an amount of more than 1.23 million yuan, a tax amount of more than 170,000 yuan, and a total price of more than 1.4 million yuan. Defendant Xing XX was notified by the public security organ to appear in the case by telephone, truthfully confessed the facts of the crime, and paid all taxes in the back. On September 29, 2022, the People's Court of Wanlan District, Wuhu City, Anhui Province, rendered the (2022) Anhui 0210 Xingchu No. 106 Criminal Judgment: Defendant Xing XX committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to one month of criminal detention and a fine of RMB 20,000. After the verdict was announced, defendant Xing XX appealed.

In the second-instance trial procedure, the defendant Xing XX submitted an application for corporate compliance rectification. After listening to the opinions and suggestions of the procuratorate, the Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province, held that Xing Moumou, as the actual controller of a small private enterprise involved in the case, falsely issued a special VAT invoice in order to solve the problem of insufficient input invoices of the enterprise, and had paid all the taxes after the case, and the enterprise involved in the case met the conditions for compliance rectification, and agreed to carry out criminal compliance rectification of the enterprise against an engineering limited company in Wuhu, which was actually controlled by Xing. Under the leadership of the Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province, an inspection of the compliance supervision of the enterprises involved in the case was initiated. During the inspection period, the enterprises involved in the case actively implemented rectifications, clarified compliance responsibilities, strengthened management and prevention, and after assessment by a third-party regulatory organization, found that compliance rectifications had been completed, and passed the acceptance inspection.

On April 27, 2023, the Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province, rendered the (2022) Anhui 02 Xingzhong No. 186 Criminal Judgment: The defendant Xing XX committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was exempted from criminal punishment.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that Xing Moumou and others falsely issued special VAT invoices for themselves, constituting the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices. After the first-instance judgment was pronounced, Xing Moumou, as the actual controller of an engineering company in Wuhu, applied for and completed the company's compliance rectification work in the second-instance stage. The enterprises involved in the case completed compliance rectification and passed the assessment and acceptance of a third-party regulatory organization. Criminal punishment may be waived upon comprehensive consideration of circumstances such as Xing's voluntary surrender, voluntary admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment, and the payment of all taxes. Therefore, the court of second instance rendered the above judgment in accordance with law.

Summary of the trial

1. Enterprise compliance rectification may be applied to criminal cases of crimes closely related to production and operation committed by companies, actual controllers, business managers, and so forth. For those who have completed effective compliance rectifications, they may be given a lenient disposition in accordance with law.

2. Where an application is made to carry out compliance corrections during the trial phase, the people's courts may directly organize and carry out them in light of the circumstances. Where enterprises involved in the case that meet the relevant requirements do not carry out compliance corrections in the first-instance trial procedures, they may be carried out in the second-instance trial procedures.

IV. Case of false issuance of special VAT invoices by a supply chain management company in Guangxi -- exploration of compliance reform of the enterprises involved in the case during the trial stage

Warehousing number: 2023-05-1-146-003

Trial court: People's Court of Lichuan County, Jiangxi Province

Case No.: (2023) Gan 1022 Xingchu No. 6

Keywords: criminal offense of false issuance of special VAT invoices, compliance rectification, plea of guilt and acceptance of punishment, lenient punishment

Basic facts of the case

Defendant Lu is the legal representative of the defendant Guangxi Supply Chain Management Co., Ltd., defendant Wu is a shareholder of the defendant unit, and defendant Teng Mouqiong is the salesman of the defendant unit. In 2021, after the defendant purchased refined oil from other companies, the remaining invoices of more than 1,900 yuan were not issued because some buyers were individuals or companies that did not need to issue invoices. In June 2021, Lin Moumou contacted the defendant Wu Moutian and asked him to falsely issue special VAT invoices for others. After discussion between Wu and Lu, it was decided that in the absence of real transactions, three false oil purchase and sales contracts were signed with the three companies, and a total of 175 special VAT invoices were falsely issued, with a total amount of 17,334,126.16 yuan and a total tax amount of 2,253,436.4 yuan. Teng Mouqiong docked with the other party for invoicing and fund transfer return as required. The defendant unit charged a billing fee of 100,000 yuan. After the case was discovered, the defendant's family refunded 2.25 million yuan in taxes on their behalf. During the trial of this case, the defendant unit returned 100,000 yuan of illegal gains and paid a fine of 200,000 yuan in advance. After investigation and assessment by the judicial-administrative bodies, it is found that defendants Lu X and Wu X Tian are suitable for community corrections.

During the trial of the case, upon the application of the defendant, the court agreed to carry out corporate compliance rectification against a supply chain company in Guangxi. The defendant unit carried out rectification by signing a letter of commitment for compliance rectification, formulating a compliance rectification plan, establishing a compliance rectification leading group, revising and improving the management system in sales, finance, administration, etc., and organizing on-site training for lawyers, and the accounting firm inspected and accepted the compliance rectification of the defendant unit, and issued a rectification assessment opinion. The court submitted the defendant's rectification results to the Management Committee of the Third-Party Supervision and Assessment Mechanism for Compliance Rectification for review. After review, it was found that the defendant unit had basically completed the compliance rectification and achieved certain results. The Management Committee of the Third-Party Supervision and Assessment Mechanism approved the defendant's compliance rectification report and the accounting firm's assessment opinion.

On May 25, 2023, the People's Court of Lichuan County, Jiangxi Province, rendered the (2023) Gan 1022 Xingchu No. 6 Criminal Judgment: 1. The defendant unit, a supply chain management company in Guangxi, committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to a fine of RMB 200,000. 2. Defendant Lu X committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to three years imprisonment with a four-year probation. 3. Defendant Wu X Tian committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to three years imprisonment with a four-year probation. 4. Defendant Teng Mouqiong committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to one year and six months imprisonment with a two-year probation. 5. The 100,000 yuan of unlawful gains returned by the defendant unit, a supply chain management company in Guangxi, are to be confiscated and turned over to the state treasury. 6. The defendant unit, a supply chain management company in Guangxi, refunded 2.25 million yuan in taxes, which was handed over to the state treasury by the public security organs. After the judgment was announced, the defendant unit and the defendant did not file an appeal, and the judgment has taken legal effect.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that the defendant unit falsely issued 175 special VAT invoices for others without real transactions, with a false tax amount of 2,253,436.4 yuan, and all the taxes were deducted, and the defendants Lu and Wu were directly responsible for the supervisors, and the defendant Teng Mouqiong was the directly responsible personnel, all of which constituted the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices. All three defendants have voluntarily surrendered and may be given a mitigated or commuted punishment in accordance with law. The defendant unit and the three defendants all voluntarily pleaded guilty and accepted punishment, and may be given a lenient disposition in accordance with law. The defendant unit refunded 2.25 million yuan in taxes involved in the case to recover the loss of state tax revenue, and may be given a lighter punishment as appropriate. In view of the fact that the defendant Guangxi Supply Chain Management Co., Ltd., its legal representative Lu and shareholder Wu Moutian have actively carried out corporate compliance rectification, achieved good results, and have passed the review of the management committee of the third-party supervision and assessment mechanism for enterprise compliance, and have returned their illegal gains, and have shown obvious remorse, after investigation and assessment by the judicial-administrative organs, it is found that the application of community corrections to defendants Lu and Wu has no major adverse impact on the community in which they live, and a suspended sentence may be applied; Suspended sentences may be applied in mitigating circumstances such as admitting guilt and accepting punishment, where remorse is obvious.

Summary of the trial

　　Enterprises involved in cases falsely issue special VAT invoices for others, and on the basis of admitting guilt and accepting punishment, make a commitment to make compliance rectifications, and carry out compliance rectification of enterprises for a certain period of time through lawyers, accounting firms, and other professionals and institutions, to help enterprises complete management rules and regulations, improve corporate governance structures, and establish and improve internal control mechanisms for preventing, discovering, and stopping illegal and criminal conduct. After the review by the third-party assessment management committee for compliance rectification, the court will combine the results of the rectification with the plea leniency system, and may impose lenient punishments on the directly responsible personnel or managers of the enterprise involved in the case, organically combining "punishment" and "governance".

V. Xu's case of false issuance of special VAT invoices - the principle of concurrent punishment for crimes committed by units and crimes committed by natural persons in the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices

Warehousing number: 2023-05-1-146-002

Trial court: Jiangyin Municipal People's Court of Jiangsu Province

Case No.: (2022) Su 0281 Xingchu No. 664

Keywords: criminal crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices unit crime natural person crime amount calculation and punishment for several crimes

Basic facts of the case

During the period from 2016 to 2018, when the defendant Xu served as the legal representative, the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. repeatedly issued 46 false VAT invoices from an international trade company in Shanghai and a metal material company in Jiangyin to the defendant a machinery manufacturing company in Jiangyin City by paying invoicing fees without real goods transactions, with a total price and tax of RMB 4,961,148.68 and a total tax of RMB 709,137.05. The above-mentioned special VAT invoices have been declared and deducted by the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd., resulting in the deception of RMB 709,137.05 in national taxes.

From 2014 to 2017, during the period of actually operating an automobile tooling and equipment factory in Jiangyin City (an individual industrial and commercial household, which has been cancelled), the defendant Xu repeatedly issued 48 false VAT special invoices from an international trading company in Shanghai and a trading company in Jiangyin to an automobile tooling equipment factory in Jiangyin City by paying invoicing fees without real goods transactions, with a total price and tax of RMB 6,961,221.68 and a total tax of RMB 1,011,460.11. The above-mentioned special VAT invoices have been declared and deducted by an automobile tooling equipment factory in Jiangyin City, resulting in the national tax being defrauded of RMB 1,011,460.11.

On January 5, 2021, after receiving a phone call from the police, defendant Xu voluntarily surrendered to the public security organs, and truthfully confessed the facts of the crime described above.

After the case occurred, the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and the defendant Xu had returned the tax deduction and paid the late fee.

On June 30, 2022, the Jiangyin Municipal People's Court of Jiangsu Province rendered the (2022) Su 0281 Xingchu No. 664 Criminal Judgment: 1. The defendant unit, a machinery manufacturing company in Jiangyin City, committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to a fine of RMB 300,000. 2. Defendant Xu X was sentenced to one year and six months imprisonment for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices (units), sentenced to two years imprisonment and fined RMB 200,000 for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, and sentenced to two years and nine months imprisonment with a three-year suspended sentence and a fine of RMB 200,000. After the judgment was pronounced, there was no appeal or counter-appeal, and the judgment has taken legal effect.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. violated the regulations on the management of special VAT invoices during the operation of the defendant Xu, and asked others to falsely issue special VAT invoices for themselves, and the amount of false taxes was relatively large, and the defendant Xu was the person in charge directly responsible for the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd., and the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. During the period of operating an automobile tooling and equipment factory in Jiangyin City, defendant Xu violated the regulations on the administration of special VAT invoices by allowing others to issue false VAT invoices for himself, and the amount of false tax was relatively large, and his personal conduct also constituted the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices. At the same time that the defendant Xu, as the person in charge directly responsible for the defendant Jiangyin Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd., committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, he also committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, and should be punished for several crimes. The circumstances of defendant Xu's arrival in the case are in line with the legal provisions on voluntary surrender, and the defendant unit Jiangyin City Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. and the defendant Xu can be found to have surrendered voluntarily, voluntarily pleaded guilty and accepted punishment, and the tax losses involved in the case have been recovered, and the defendant Jiangyin City Machinery Manufacturing Co., Ltd. is to be given a lighter punishment, and the defendant Xu is to be given a reduced punishment.

Summary of the trial

Where an individual is directly responsible for the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices committed by a unit, and shall bear the responsibility of the unit for the crime in accordance with law;

6. Case of false issuance of special VAT invoices by an Information Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. et al. - whether the tax losses caused by the deregistered company in the crime of the unit can be recovered from the actual controller and shareholders of the company

Warehousing number: 2023-05-1-167-004

Trial court: Beijing No. 3 Intermediate People's Court

Case No.: (2021) Jing 03 Xingchu No. 23

Key words: criminal crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices, actual controller, cancellation, recovery

Basic facts of the case

From November 2012 to August 2017, defendant Xu, as the actual controller of 12 defendant units (details) including the defendant unit Information Technology (Beijing) Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as an information company) and a Beijing technology company (hereinafter referred to as a technology company, which was cancelled in January 2019), together with the defendant Zhang X A, the financial person in charge of the defendant unit, and the cashier defendant Zhang X B, without real transactions, by making false contracts, By means of creating false capital flows, a trading company and other units issued 4,517 false VAT invoices for 13 companies controlled by themselves, with a total tax of more than 8,260 yuan (hereinafter referred to as RMB), of which 4,296 special VAT invoices were certified and deducted, with a total tax of more than 7,940 yuan, resulting in an actual loss of more than 7,640 yuan in national taxes. Among them, a technology company certified 71 special invoices for VAT deduction, with a total tax of more than 2.35 million yuan. From October 2013 to August 2017, defendant Zhang Mouyi participated in the false issuance of 3,635 special VAT invoices, with a total tax of more than 6,880 yuan, of which 3,452 special VAT invoices were certified and deducted, with a total tax of more than 6,620 yuan.

On January 8, 2020, the defendant Zhang Moujia was arrested by the public security organs, and the defendant Zhang Mouyi was summoned to the case by the public security organs by telephone. On January 15 of the same year, defendant Xu was summoned by the public security organs by telephone.

Defendant Xu X returned 1 million yuan in the name of a medical company after arriving at the case, and Zhang X A returned 300,000 yuan after arriving at the case, and after soliciting Zhang X A's opinion, it was refunded as the tax payable by a medical company. During the court trial, the defendant unit returned a total of 15.46 million yuan.

On September 30, 2021, the Beijing No. 3 Intermediate People's Court rendered the (2021) Jing 03 Xingchu No. 23 Criminal Judgment: 12 defendant units, including the defendant unit, an information company, committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and were sentenced to fines ranging from 50,000 yuan to 200,000 yuan; 。 After the judgment was pronounced, there was no appeal or counter-appeal, and the judgment had taken legal effect.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that the defendant unit, an information company, and 12 other companies, allowed others to issue false VAT invoices for themselves without actual purchase and sale of goods or without providing or accepting taxable services, and their actions constituted the crime of falsely issuing VAT invoices, and the amount was huge, and should be punished in accordance with law. Defendant Xu, as the actual controller of the defendant unit, is the directly responsible person in charge, and the defendant Zhang X A is the financial person in charge of the defendant unit, and the defendant Zhang X B is the cashier of the defendant unit, and they are all other directly responsible personnel. With regard to the recovery of taxes involved in a technology company, because a technology company had been deregistered before the case was filed and investigated, according to the "Reply of the Supreme People's Procuratorate on the Issue of How to Prosecute a Suspected Criminal Unit Cancelled, Cancelled, Revocation of Business License or Declaration of Bankruptcy", "the unit suspected of committing a crime has been revoked, deregistered, If the business license is revoked or bankruptcy is declared, the person in charge and other persons directly responsible for the unit that committed the criminal act shall be investigated for criminal responsibility in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Criminal Law on crimes committed by the unit, and the unit shall not be prosecuted". This case is a unit crime, a technology company no longer has the status of a defendant unit in the trial stage, does not have the relevant ability to bear criminal responsibility, and its tax losses caused by the false issuance of special VAT invoices cannot be recovered from it through criminal procedures. At the same time, the evidence provided by the public prosecution could not prove that there was a mixture of property between a technology company and the actual controller Xu or the company's shareholders, or that the stolen money involved in the case actually flowed to the actual controller Xu, so it was not possible to directly recover from the defendant Xu through criminal proceedings.

Summary of the trial

In the case where the defendant unit does not have the relevant capacity to bear criminal liability, and the evidence in the case is insufficient to prove that the company's property is mixed with personal property or the stolen money flows to the actual controller, it is not appropriate to directly recover the tax involved in a technology company from the actual controller and shareholders of the company in the criminal judgment.

7. Case of Xia's false issuance of special VAT invoices - the distinction between the act of issuing on behalf of real transactions and the act of false issuance without real transactions

Warehousing number: 2024-03-1-146-001

Trial court: Bincheng District People's Court of Binzhou City, Shandong Province, Intermediate People's Court of Binzhou City, Shandong Province

Case No.: (2022) Lu 1602 Xingchu No. 241, (2023) Lu 16 Xingzhong No. 5

Keywords: criminal crime of false issuance of VAT special invoices, false issuance of invoices, invoicing on behalf of others

Basic facts of the case

From February 2012 to April 2013, defendant Xia, as the actual operator of a building materials company, agreed with Wang and Song, who actually wanted to purchase oil from a petrochemical company, in order to deduct taxes, and in the absence of a real goods transaction with a petrochemical company, that Wang and Song would purchase fuel oil from a petrochemical company in the name of a building materials company. In order to reflect the business-to-business transfer, Wang and Song transferred the oil purchase money to the public account of a building materials company, and a building materials company transferred the oil purchase money to a petrochemical company. Later, a petrochemical company issued a special VAT invoice to a building materials company, and Wang and Song handed over the VAT invoice to Xia, who used it to deduct taxes from the company, and paid a total of 3% of the price and tax to Wang and Song, and Wang and Song sold the fuel oil after transporting it from a petrochemical company. Xia used the above means to allow others to falsely issue 13 special VAT invoices for himself, and the total amount of false invoices was 316,281.78 yuan, which has been certified for deduction. In April 2019, the registration of a building materials company was cancelled.

On November 22, 2022, the Bincheng District People's Court of Binzhou City, Shandong Province, rendered the (2022) Lu 1602 Xingchu No. 241 Criminal Judgment: Defendant Xia X committed the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices and was sentenced to one year and six months imprisonment. After the verdict was announced, defendant Xia appealed. On March 29, 2023, the Intermediate People's Court of Binzhou City, Shandong Province, rendered the (2023) Lu 16 Xingzhong No. 5 Criminal Ruling: rejecting the appeal and upholding the original judgment.

Grounds for the Trial

The effective judgment of the court held that a building materials company did not actually purchase diesel, but borrowed the opportunity of others to purchase diesel, and Wang and Song transferred the oil purchase money to the oil sales company through a building materials company, and the oil sales company issued a special VAT invoice to a building materials company, and a building materials company paid Wang and Song invoicing fees. In the above process, the oil sales company actually sells diesel fuel and has real goods transactions, but the building materials company has no actual goods transactions with Wang, Song or the oil sales company. Defendant Xia, as the legal representative of the building materials company, directly contacted Wang and others to carry out false invoices and deduct the company's taxes, and his conduct constituted the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices. Therefore, the court made the above judgment in accordance with the law.

Summary of the trial

1. Companies with actual business activities engage in false invoicing, which is often intertwined with actual transactions, and it is necessary to make a substantive judgment on the social harm, adhere to the principle of consistency between subjectivity and objectivity, judge whether it subjectively has the purpose of defrauding and deducting state taxes, and objectively cause national tax losses, and accurately distinguish different false invoicing behaviors.

2. There are actual production and business activities, not a special invoicing company, but in order to reduce costs, it purchases goods from others at a price without invoices, that is, it does not pay VAT to the state in the process of purchasing, and only obtains input invoices from a third party with which it has no real transaction by paying invoicing fees, which is used to offset the output tax paid for the actual sales of goods. Only when the VAT is paid in the real transaction link can it have the right to apply to the state tax authorities for tax deduction, although there is an actual operation, there is no corresponding real transaction in the invoicing link of others, and the input VAT is not paid, but it is allowed to issue false invoices for themselves to offset the output tax, which has the purpose of defrauding the state tax and causing the loss of state tax, which belongs to the "false opening" provided for in Article 205 of the Criminal Law.

Shanxi Taiyuan Chang Lawyer Key words:

Legal Advice, Professional Lawyer, Writing Complaints, Lawyer Consultation, Loan Disputes, Criminal Defense, Criminal Interviews, Release on Bail, Case Entrustment, Housing Leasing, Private Lending, Tort Disputes, Damages, Creditor's Rights and Debts, Legal Knowledge, Legal Knowledge, Legal Risks, Traffic Accidents, Contract Invalidation, Contract Termination, Third Party Revocation, Right of Revocation, Enforcement Objection, Enforcement, Judgment Debtor, Blacklist, Dishonest Person, Restricted Consumption, Equity Transfer, Company Business, Articles of Association, Partnership Disputes, Legal Counsel, Inheritance, Real Estate Inheritance, Testamentary Succession, Property Agreement, Joint Property, Property Division, Contract Law, Marriage Law, Divorce Disputes Divorce Agreement Divorce Case Litigation Representation Civil Dispute Hiring a Lawyer Contract Dispute Contract Review Contract Formation ......