Recently, in practice, the author found that some enterprises are confused about the aggregation and calculation of construction and installation project fees. In fact, the land value-added tax policy is strong, the liquidation rules are complex, involving a wide range of laws and regulations, and it is quite difficult in actual operation, especially the cost collection problem such as construction and installation costs, which has always been a difficult point in the practice of enterprises. Starting from the principle of aggregation of construction and security expenses, the author believes that an innovative allocation method can be explored to help enterprises efficiently and accurately collect construction security expenses.
It is difficult to collect construction and security expenses
Construction and installation project fee (hereinafter referred to as construction and installation fee) refers to the construction and installation fee paid to the contracting unit in the form of a contract and the construction and security fee incurred in the form of self-operation. Among them, the construction and security costs incurred in the form of self-operation are all the costs incurred by the enterprise in carrying out construction and installation projects, mainly including direct costs such as labor costs, material costs, construction machinery use fees, management fees and other indirect costs and related taxes. The aggregation of construction and security fees has always been a key point and difficulty for enterprises to handle land value-added tax liquidation.
According to the current policy, the liquidation of land value-added tax should be calculated according to different types of real estate, the value-added amount and appreciation rate should be calculated separately, and the land value-added tax should be paid separately. This requires enterprises to collect and distribute real estate development and construction costs according to the three types of real estate, namely ordinary standard residences, non-ordinary standard residences and other types of real estate when handling land value-added tax liquidation. That is to say, ordinary standard residential, non-ordinary standard residential and other types of real estate, these three types of real estate, are the most basic taxable units and the most basic cost bearing items of land value-added tax.
Paragraph 5 of Article 21 of the Regulations on the Administration of Land Value-added Tax Liquidation stipulates that where a taxpayer develops a project in phases or develops multiple projects at the same time, or constructs different types of real estate in the same project, he shall adopt a reasonable distribution method according to the beneficiaries and share the common costs. Accordingly, when collecting construction and security expenses, enterprises should collect them according to the beneficiaries.
The actual operation is confusing
In actual work, it is necessary to collect construction and security expenses according to the beneficiaries, and it is quite difficult for enterprises to operate.
For enterprises, voucher management is a major "difficulty" in the liquidation of their land value-added tax. In practice, the liquidation of land value-added tax is generally based on the amount of deduction items specified in legal and valid invoices and other documents, and is actually collected or apportioned to the cost object of land value-added tax. Since it is difficult to determine the correspondence between the actual costs incurred by each cost object and the amount contained in the invoice, enterprises will collect the amount contained in each invoice according to the cost object in practice, which increases the difficulty of work.
For the amount of materials not included in the project contract price, the warranty amount that has not been invoiced, the amount of illegal invoices that are not deducted, etc., the enterprise should collect and apportion according to the cost objects, and the calculation is very complicated, which will affect the accuracy of cost allocation. Especially for buildings below plus or minus zero, the unit construction cost is much higher than the unit construction cost of above-ground buildings. Which costs should be ascribed as direct costs of the basement non-titled garage (bit), or as a common cost of the overall project, is difficult to operate, and the tax law is not clear. Therefore, under normal circumstances, taxpayers will merge the construction and security costs below plus or minus zero with the above-ground construction security expenses into common cost expenses, and use the floor area method for apportionment.
After the investigation, the author found that for the financial personnel of real estate development enterprises, it is very challenging to collect construction and security fees according to cost objects. This is because the construction and safety fee involves the problem of project valuation, and the project bill of quantities valuation of construction projects is a very professional work, involving complex rules and professional calculations, if the project does not carry out project budget and final accounting according to the cost object, the financial personnel of the enterprise will not be able to collect according to the cost object. For the construction unit, because it often involves a change in the way the project is valued, it generally does not agree to calculate the project payment according to the cost object. One spear and one shield, the problem is difficult to solve.
Innovative approaches can be explored
At present, when calculating the value-added amount of each cost object, the common practice is to first allocate the cost and expenses collected by each cost item to each cost object step by step, and then calculate the value-added amount and appreciation rate of each cost object separately. However, the construction and security fee sharing business is more complicated, and the land value-added tax liquidation involves the whole body, resulting in many corporate finance and taxation personnel "falling into the fog". Therefore, in terms of cost-sharing, innovative calculation methods are needed.
The author believes that the deduction amount of each cost object can be calculated first, and then the common cost expense can be multiplied by the apportionment ratio. This approach can effectively simplify the cost accounting process, without the need to use the public supporting facility as a transitional cost object and make multiple apportionment calculations of the public supporting facility fee. By extrapolation, the calculation formula of the apportionment rate is: apportionment rate = ∑ (the ratio of the saleable area of a single building to the total saleable area of the liquidation project× the ratio of the saleable area of each type of real estate calculated by the building using the floor height factor to the weighted total saleable area of the building).
Specifically, the ratio of the saleable area of a single building to the total saleable area of the liquidation project refers to the allocation of construction and security costs to each building according to the building area method. The ratio of the saleable area of each type of real estate calculated by the floor height factor to the total saleable area of the building after weighting is adjusted by the floor height factor method to adjust the construction cost of the commercial and residential complex. The product of the two is the apportionment ratio of the construction costs of each cost object of each building.
It is worth noting that in the collection of construction and security fees, there are certain differences in the implementation caliber of various places, and the method provided by the author is mainly applicable to the situation of collecting construction and security expenses according to common costs. According to this logic, it can also be deduced that the calculation formula for the same liquidation unit land cost sharing rate is: the apportionment rate = ∑ (the ratio of the saleable land use right area of a single building to the total saleable land use right area of the liquidation project× the ratio of the saleable floor area of each type of real estate of the building to the total saleable floor area of the building)
(Author: Cao Yue, School of Business Administration, Hunan University, Song Dehui, Liuyang Municipal Taxation Bureau, State Administration of Taxation)