The content of the application information disclosure is not clear.

On March 5th, 20 13, Citizen Wang applied to the Local Taxation Bureau of H City for the disclosure of government information, and requested to obtain the tax registration information of a chemical company (hereinafter referred to as "chemical company") in written form. After receiving Wang's written application, H Local Taxation Bureau did not find the relevant tax registration information in the tax collection and management system and files, but found that the chemical company had cancelled its tax in 2007 in the files that had been cancelled for filing. H the local taxation bureau issued the reply of government information disclosure application [20 10/3] No.24 to Wang on March 2 13, 20/0, informing him that the information applied for did not exist. Wang believes that the chemical company, as a unit engaged in business activities abroad, should have gone through the tax registration, but the reply of the local taxation bureau of H city is inconsistent with the facts, so he appealed for a judgment to cancel the specific administrative act of the local taxation bureau of H city in making this reply. The focus of the dispute in this case is: if the tax authorities accept an application for government information disclosure with unclear content and there is no evidence to prove that the applicant has been asked to make corrections, how should they reply? The Local Taxation Bureau of H City believes that the content of Wang's application to disclose the tax registration information of chemical companies is not clear, but it is accepted in the principle of convenience and care, and there is nothing wrong with it. Wang questioned that although H Local Taxation Bureau accepted the application, the reply result was suspected of abuse of power and hindered the applicant's right to know. The court of first instance held that Wang applied to the local taxation bureau of H City for the disclosure of government information and requested to obtain the tax registration information of the chemical company. After investigation, the chemical company cancelled its tax registration in 2007, and there is no tax registration information of the company in the current tax collection and management system and files. Accordingly, the H Local Taxation Bureau replied that the information requested by Wang did not exist, which was in line with the relevant provisions of China's Regulations on the Openness of Government Information and was not inappropriate. Therefore, according to the provisions of Item (1) of Article 54 of the Administrative Procedure Law, Wang refused to accept the judgment of the court of first instance and filed an appeal according to law. The court of second instance held that the specific administrative act of the court of first instance to maintain the reply given by H Local Taxation Bureau was improper and should be corrected. Wang's appeal for annulment should be supported. Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and at the same time, the specific administrative act made by H Local Taxation Bureau with the reply of [2012] No.24 is revoked. Comment on this case is a lawsuit about the tax authorities' handling of government information disclosure according to the application. Government information disclosure refers to the behavior of government departments to disclose government information to the public or citizens, legal persons or other organizations on their own initiative through legal forms and procedures in the process of exercising state administrative functions and powers. Its motivation and essence is to promote the openness and standardization of government information and protect citizens' right to know government information. Therefore, the State Council promulgated the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information, which came into effect on May 1 2008. In this administrative regulation and the relevant regulations formulated by the central and local governments in recent years, there is a basic spirit, that is, the legitimacy of government information disclosure. From the scope to the time limit of publicity, from the procedure to the form of publicity, the administrative organ must act in strict accordance with the law, otherwise it will easily lead to litigation risks and even damage the credibility of the government. Specific to this case, there are at least three interlocking legal "wounds" in the process of handling H Local Taxation Bureau: First, it accepted the application for government information disclosure with unclear content. According to Article 20 of the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information, when an applicant applies for the disclosure of government information, he shall specify the content and form of the government information he applies for disclosure. That is to say, when the government information is disclosed according to the application, the tax authorities must first make clear what information the applicant wants to obtain, and then see if the information exists and can be disclosed. Therefore, a clear application content is one of the basic prerequisites for the start of government information disclosure. In this case, Wang submitted an application in writing to H Local Taxation Bureau for obtaining tax registration information of chemical companies. "Tax registration information" is not a narrow concept, but actually covers a wide range, including registration of establishment, registration of change, registration of suspension and resumption of business, cancellation of registration, inspection and registration of going out for business and so on. When applying, Wang failed to provide the document name, document number or other characteristics that can point to specific government information. He only applied to disclose the "tax registration information" of chemical companies, and the content positioning was not clear. At this time, if the tax authorities directly accept Wang's application, it does not conform to legal procedures. Second, there is no evidence that the applicant has been asked to correct the specific content. Although laws and regulations restrict whether the content of government information disclosure application is clear and specific as the acceptance condition, in order to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the public, it also gives the applicant the opportunity to make corrections. Paragraph 4 of Article 21 of the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information stipulates: "If the application content is unclear, the applicant shall be informed to make changes and supplements." Therefore, when the tax authorities find that the application content is not specific, they should start the notification procedure according to law and inform the applicant to make corrections within a reasonable period of time; Only after the applicant makes corrections as required can his application for government information disclosure be accepted. Combined with the preliminary situation of this case, according to the defense of H Local Taxation Bureau in the trial, the staff of the bureau had verbally informed Wang that the content of the government information applied for disclosure was unclear, but did not ask Wang to make corrections in writing. The court held that the H Local Taxation Bureau could not provide sufficient and effective evidence to prove that it had fulfilled the notification procedure, so it was not adopted. It can be seen that the failure to fulfill the notification procedure in accordance with the requirements of the specification is also one of the important factors that lead to the revocation of specific administrative acts. Third, the answer is not appropriate. It is based on the above two points that the application for government information disclosure that does not meet the acceptance conditions is finally accepted. Now that it has been accepted, the tax authorities will reply to Wang about the establishment, change and cancellation of the chemical company, including the cancellation of the tax registration of the chemical company in 2007 recorded in the archives. However, it is puzzling that at this time, the local taxation bureau of H city replied that the government information that Wang applied for disclosure did not exist, which made the applicant strongly question his reply and resort to the law. To sum up, the local taxation bureau of H city mishandled the disclosure of government information proposed by Wang, which eventually led to the revocation of specific administrative actions. In practical work, due to the lack of practical experience in handling government information disclosure, it is not uncommon for local tax authorities to understand the relevant legal spirit in place, and the procedures are not standardized or not in place. According to the statistics of the relevant departments of the provincial local taxation bureau, in recent years, the cases of government information disclosure in the local taxation system in our province have shown a sharp growth trend, and a considerable number of cases are also caused by the failure to disclose the time limit and procedures as required. It is particularly important and urgent to strengthen the publicity and training of government information disclosure and enhance the sense of responsibility, procedure, risk prevention and working ability of cadres and workers at all levels and departments. In recent years, with the acceleration and continuous improvement of China's administrative legal system construction, most administrative procedures have implemented a one-time notification system. This system refers to the system that when the administrative counterpart handles matters or consults to handle matters, the administrative organ shall inform the administrative counterpart of the basis, time limit, conditions, quantity, procedures, required materials and reasons for not handling matters at one time, aiming at promoting the openness of government affairs and improving administrative efficiency and public service quality. In the work of government information disclosure, tax authorities should also follow this system. If the applicant is required to make corrections, it can only be limited to one time. It is abuse of power to ask the applicant to make corrections many times and should be avoided. In addition, according to the requirements of the Regulations on the Openness of Government Information, administrative organs should provide convenience for the public to apply for government information. The applicant is in a weak position in the possession of information resources. When the tax authorities think that the contents of the application are unclear, they should take the initiative to explain the reasons to the applicant and give patient guidance to make the applicant more clear about the contents to be changed and supplemented and the information provided. This is much simpler and more pragmatic than spending a lot of time, energy and resources to explain and defend the relevant reasons when causing disputes or even lawsuits. It is also a positive embodiment of improving the level of tax service, shaping the good image of tax authorities and building a harmonious relationship between tax collection and payment.