I. Relevant tax laws and regulations
(1) VAT
1. Notice on Several Issues Concerning Strengthening the Administration of VAT Collection (Guo Shui Fa [1995] 192)
When a taxpayer purchases goods or taxable services and pays transportation expenses, the payment unit must be consistent with the sales unit that issued the deduction certificate and the unit that provided the services, so as to declare the deduction of the input tax, otherwise it will not be deducted.
2. Notice on Issues Related to Adjusting the Deduction Period of VAT Deduction Vouchers (Guoshuihan [2009] No.617)
20 10, 1, and the deduction period of VAT input invoice certification was changed from 90 days to 180 days (6 months). If the special VAT invoice issued by the general VAT taxpayer is lost, it shall be handled in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China City, People's Republic of China (PRC) on Amending the Provisions on the Use of Special VAT Invoice (Guo Shui Fa [2006]156) within the time limit specified in this notice.
3. Announcement on the deduction of overdue VAT tax deduction vouchers (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement [20 1 1] No.50)
"If there is a real transaction with the general VAT taxpayer, but the VAT deduction voucher is overdue due to objective reasons (Article 2, Category 5 and a half), it will be audited by the competent tax authorities, reported step by step, and certified by People's Republic of China (PRC) State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, and compared with the matching VAT deduction voucher, allowing taxpayers to continue to deduct their input tax (the operation is carried out in accordance with the Administrative Measures for Overdue Deduction of VAT Deduction Vouchers attached to the announcement)."
(2) Business tax
Notice of the Ministry of Finance of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Business Tax on Equity Transfer (Caishui [2002] 19 1No.)
Invest in intangible assets and real estate, participate in the profit distribution of investors, bear joint investment risks, and do not levy business tax. No business tax is levied on equity transfer. The provisions in Articles 8 and 9 of Notes on Business Tax Items (Trial Draft) (Guo Shui Fa [1993] 149) which are inconsistent with the contents of this notice shall be abolished.
(3) Enterprise income tax
1. Notice on Several Issues Concerning the Confirmation of Enterprise Income Tax (No.875, 2008)
If the goods are sold by after-sale repurchase, the income of the sold goods shall be confirmed according to the sales price, and the repurchased goods shall be treated as purchased goods. If there is evidence that it does not meet the conditions for the recognition of sales revenue, if financing is carried out by selling goods, the money received will be recognized as a liability. If the repurchase price is higher than the original selling price, the difference shall be recognized as the interest expense during the repurchase period.
Although the enterprise does not own the assets leased through financial leasing in legal form, the lease term stipulated in the lease contract is quite long, which is close to the service life of the assets; At the end of the lease term, the leased enterprise has the option to purchase assets first; During the lease term, the leasing enterprise has the right to control the assets and benefit from them. Therefore, from its economic essence, enterprises can control the future economic benefits they create. Therefore, in tax treatment, the assets leased by financial leasing are regarded as the assets of enterprises, and enterprises are allowed to accrue depreciation and deduct it before tax.
2. Notice on Strengthening Enterprise Income Tax Management of Non-resident Enterprises' Equity Transfer (Guoshuihan [2009] No.698)
If an overseas investor (actual controlling party) indirectly transfers the equity of a China resident enterprise by abusing organizational forms and other arrangements, and has no reasonable business purpose, and evades the enterprise income tax obligation, the competent tax authorities may, after reporting to the State Administration of Taxation for examination and approval, re-characterize the equity transfer transaction according to the economic essence and deny the existence of an overseas holding company as a tax arrangement.
3. Interim Provisions on Income Tax Treatment of Restructuring Business of Enterprises with Foreign Investment (Guo Shui Fa [1997]7 1No.)
Equity transfer price refers to the amount collected by the equity transferor in the form of cash, non-monetary assets or equity; If the controlled enterprise has retained earnings of shareholders, such as undistributed profits or after-tax profits, the transferor of equity shall transfer the amount of shareholders' retained earnings right together with the equity transfer (no more than the amount actually owned by the controlled enterprise), and the investment income belonging to the transferor of equity shall not be included in the equity transfer price.
Article 28 of the Enterprise Income Tax Law of People's Republic of China (PRC) (Paragraph 2)
High-tech enterprises that need special support from the state shall be subject to enterprise income tax at a reduced rate of 15%.
5. Notice of the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Ministry of Finance and State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Printing and Distributing the Administrative Measures for the Identification of High-tech Enterprises (Guo Ke Fa [2008]172)
(1) High-tech enterprises enjoying tax reduction or exemption shall report to the competent tax authorities within 15 days from the date of change if the conditions for tax reduction or exemption change; Those who no longer meet the conditions for tax reduction or exemption shall fulfill their tax obligations according to law; Those who fail to pay taxes according to law shall be recovered by the competent tax authorities. At the same time, the competent tax authorities in the process of implementing preferential tax policies, found that enterprises do not have the qualification of high-tech enterprises, should be submitted to the accreditation body for review. During the review period, the enterprise may be suspended from enjoying the preferential tax reduction and exemption.
(2) You can apply for preferential enterprise income tax from the effective year of approval (audit). After an enterprise obtains the certificate of high-tech enterprise issued by the high-tech enterprise identification management institution of a province, autonomous region, municipality directly under the Central Government or a city with separate state planning, it may apply to the competent tax authorities for tax reduction or exemption with the certificate of high-tech enterprise and its photocopy and relevant materials. After the formalities are completed, high-tech enterprises can enjoy the transitional tax preference for declare in advance income tax or at the rate of 15%.
(three) enterprises that have not obtained the qualification of high-tech enterprises, or enterprises that have obtained the qualification of high-tech enterprises but do not meet the relevant provisions of the enterprise income tax law, the implementation regulations and this notice, shall not enjoy the preferential treatment of high-tech enterprises; Those who have enjoyed preferential treatment shall recover the enterprise income tax that has been reduced or exempted.
6. Notice of the Ministry of Finance of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Several Issues Concerning the Treatment of Enterprise Income Tax in Enterprise Restructuring Business (No.59 [2009] of Caishui)
When an enterprise is transformed from a legal person into an unincorporated organization such as a sole proprietorship enterprise or partnership enterprise, or its registered place is transferred to People's Republic of China (PRC) and overseas (including Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan), it shall be regarded as liquidation and distribution of the enterprise, and shareholders will reinvest in the establishment of a new enterprise.
7. Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, Ministry of Finance, on the Criteria for Determining the Preferential Policies for Newly Established Enterprises to Enjoy Enterprise Income Tax (Cai Shui [2006] 1No.)+Supplementary Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on the Implementation Criteria for Paying Enterprise Income Tax for Newly Established Enterprises (Guo Shui Fa [2006] 103No.).
Newly-established enterprises with 30% cash+asset re-transfer years+related transfer profits do not enjoy preferential policies for newly-established enterprise income tax.
8. Reply of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on the Income Tax Treatment of Sale and Leaseback Business of Foreign-invested Enterprises Engaged in Real Estate Development (Guoshuihan [2007] No.603)
If an enterprise transfers one or more of the following asset rights or risks through the sale and leaseback business, regardless of whether the legal ownership of the real estate has changed (such as property registration or transfer), it is deemed that the enterprise has transferred all or part of the ownership of the real estate: (1) The right to obtain asset appreciation income. (two) to bear all kinds of damage (including physical damage and depreciation) and losses. (3) Possession of assets rights and interests. (4) Use the rights and interests of assets during their future existence. (5) Disposing of the rights and interests of assets.
9. Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, Ministry of Finance on Tax Policy Issues Concerning Pre-tax Deduction Standard for Interest Expenses of Related Parties of Enterprises (Cai Shui [2008] 12 1No.)
2: 1 is not required for those who can prove that they meet the principle of independent transaction or that the actual tax burden of the enterprise is not higher than that of domestic related parties.
(4) Personal income tax
Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China of the Ministry of Finance on Regulating the Administration of Individual Income Tax Collection of Individual Investors (Caishui [2003] 158)
Consumption and property expenses of family members and their related personnel, long-term non-repayment of corporate loans invested by individual investors, undistributed after-tax surplus profits, non-investment for 65,438+0 years and suspension are taxable.
(5) Land value-added tax
Reply on Land Value-added Tax on Real Estate Transfer in the Name of Equity Transfer (Guoshuihan [2000] No.687)
In view of the fact that Shenzhen Energy Group Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Energy Investment Co., Ltd. have transferred 0/00% equity of Shenzhen Energy (Qinzhou) Industrial Co., Ltd./KLOC-at one time, and the assets in the form of these equity are mainly land use rights, above-ground buildings and attachments, they should be taxed according to the provisions of land value-added tax.
Second, the tax practice case summary
(a) Return on investment-this should be "real"
Description: A invested 800,000 yuan to set up enterprise A, with 65,438+000% equity. A After a period of operation, the owner's equity is 900,000 yuan, including paid-in capital of 800,000 yuan, surplus reserve of 50,000 yuan and undistributed profit of 50,000 yuan. Then, A transferred all the shares of enterprise A to B at a price of 6,543,800 yuan, and B immediately transferred the shares to C at a price of 6,543,800 yuan.
Tax interpretation: Based on common sense, the transfer made by Party A and Party B is a different transaction. B 1 10,000 yuan after resale 1 1 10,000 yuan, and income from disposal of equity 1 10,000 yuan. As the income from property transfer, it should be fully included in the taxable income of B. On the contrary, if A transfers the equity as the original shareholder, the transfer price difference of 200,000 yuan (100-80) is not all the equity transfer income, but part of the investment income, so relevant tax rules should be applied respectively. According to the relevant provisions of the Interim Provisions on Income Tax Treatment of Restructuring Business of Enterprises with Foreign Investment (Guo Shui Fa [1997] No.71,hereinafter referred to as "Document No.71"), the two equity transfer transactions are handled in the same way: from the respective equity transfer prices of A and B, B has equity transfer income of 65,438. According to the results of document 7 1, there is irreconcilable conflict with the behavior of equity transfer based on common sense judgment B. Is it a misunderstanding of file 7 1, or is there something wrong with file 7 1? This implies a very important premise-substance is more important than form, that is, the deducted equity investment income should be "real", not just "nominal" or "formal" equity investment income, and there is indeed the possibility of "double taxation" in this income, otherwise the provisions will lose their meaning and may become an excuse for abuse and tax evasion. When applying document 7 1, we should pay attention to the form and essence of specific equity transfer transactions at the same time, and we should not simply label it as "equity transfer".
(B) equity transfer-to "have laws to follow."
Statement of case: Company A holds 0% equity of A 1 Company100, and more than 90% assets of A 1 Company are composed of real estate. A company transfers its 100% equity to B company at the price of 1 100 million yuan. The local tax authorities have determined that the transfer of company A's equity by company A is actually the transfer of the real estate of company A/KLOC-0. Therefore, it is required to determine that business tax and land value-added tax should be levied on the transfer of A company's 100% equity ... From the analysis, it can be seen that the essence of A company's equity transfer is indeed the transfer of real estate, but its external legal form is the transfer of equity. Then, do local tax authorities have the right to levy business tax and enterprise income tax on Company A according to the principle of "substance is more important than form"?
Interpretation of taxation: According to the document No.687 of Guoshuihan [2000], the tax authorities can ask Company A to pay the land value-added tax, but the reason for enforcing the law is not "substance is more important than form", but there are laws to follow. Guoshuihan [2000] No.687 is a case reply from the State Taxation Bureau of People's Republic of China (PRC) to the Local Taxation Bureau of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. It can be seen from this document that the State Administration of Taxation has clarified this issue in the form of tax legislation according to the actual situation that the nominal transfer of 65,438+000% equity of an enterprise is essentially the transfer of land and real estate, and the tax authorities can levy taxes on Company A according to the documents of the State Administration. If the State Administration of Taxation has no clear documentary basis, local tax authorities have no right to levy taxes only on the basis of principles. The tax authorities have no right to levy business tax on Company A only on the principle that substance is more important than form. Business tax is different from land value-added tax under the same operating substance. In the Shenneng case, the Local Taxation Bureau of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region also specifically asked State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China for instructions on the issue of business tax collection. The State Administration of Taxation gave a reply in the form of document 10. [2000]96 1, and clearly no business tax. People's Republic of China (PRC)'s Ministry of Finance and State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China further clarified in documentNo.. [2002] 19 1 thinks that equity transfer is not within the scope of business tax collection and should not be levied. For the determination of taxable income in different equity transfer transactions, the results are different. Local tax authorities should not only judge the essence of economic business on their own according to the principle of "substance is more important than form", but should levy taxes in strict accordance with the current national tax law. "substance is more important than form" is mainly a legislative principle, which cannot be abused to infringe the rights and interests of taxpayers in the process of law enforcement. The essence in "substance is more important than form" refers to economic essence, and form refers to legal form. The principle of "substance is more important than form" means that problems should be dealt with according to the economic essence of business rather than legal form. This principle is very suitable for dealing with accounting problems and reflecting economic achievements more fairly. However, when it is used in the field of administrative law enforcement, it collides with the rules of "no taxation is allowed without explicit provisions in the law" and "laws must be followed".
(c) Internal and external joint ventures-more emphasis on "reality"
Statement of the case: A company in Yangzhou is a joint venture between mainland private enterprises and Hong Kong capital, with Hong Kong capital accounting for 49% of the shares, and Hong Kong capital holding 65,438+000% by an overseas investment group. On June 65438+1October 65438+April 2009, the overseas investment group transferred its 0/00% equity of Hong Kong enterprise/KLOC-0, thus indirectly transferring 49% equity of Yangzhou Company. According to Article 6 of the Notice on Strengthening the Enterprise Income Tax Management of Non-resident Enterprises' Equity Transfer (Guo [2009] No.698), Yangzhou tax authorities said: "If an overseas investor (actual controlling party) abuses the organizational form and other arrangements to indirectly transfer the equity of a China resident enterprise without reasonable commercial purpose and evades the obligation to pay enterprise income tax, the competent tax authorities may, after reporting it to State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China for review, re-characterize the equity transfer transaction according to the economic essence and reject it as a tax arrangement. Therefore, it is judged that the transfer of the overseas investment group named Hong Kong subsidiary is actually the transfer of the equity of Yangzhou joint venture company. According to document No.698, the enterprise has to pay withholding income tax of 654.38+73 billion yuan, which has been put into storage.
Tax Interpretation: The principle of "substance is more important than form" was fully considered in the legislative process of Guoshuihan [2009] No.698. Legally speaking, the transfer of Hong Kong equity by overseas investment enterprises is not domestic income, and China has no right to tax this income. Although according to the principle of "substance is more important than form", the overseas investment group is nominally a transfer of shares of Hong Kong companies, but in fact it is a transfer of shares of China resident enterprises, but there is no clear legal basis, so it cannot directly tax enterprises according to the general tax law principle. In the process of legislation, the principle of "substance is more important than form" was fully considered, so Yangzhou tax authorities instructed enterprises to pay withholding income tax not on the basis of general tax principles, but on the basis of clear document No.698, which is the embodiment of "abiding by the law". Before June 5438+1 October1in 2008, due to the lack of a clear legal basis for the same act, "no taxation is allowed without express legal provisions". The implementation time of document No.698 in Guoshuihan [2009] is 2008 1, which means that the economic activities before this date cannot be handled according to this document. Then, what happened before 2008 is taxed according to the principle of "substance is more important than form"? The answer is no, because it violates the basic rule of "no taxation without explicit laws". From the above cases, it can be seen that in the field of law enforcement, "no tax can be levied without explicit laws" is not indifferent to the obvious tax avoidance problem, but actively reflects to the legislature that when this problem becomes a trend, it needs to be contained through legislation so that there are laws to follow. China's tax system is progressing in such tax avoidance and anti-tax avoidance. If we blindly levy taxes according to the principle of "substance is more important than form", the tax law will lack predictability and certainty. 100 audience has 100 Hamlet, and everyone has a different understanding of the nature of economy, which leads to corruption and rent-seeking.
(D) Input deduction-don't be too "casual"
Statement of case: Company A should pay Company B 1 1.7 million yuan to buy coal and obtain a special VAT invoice. Company B motioned Company A to pay the money to Company C to offset the payment owed by Company B to Company C, and Company A paid it to Company C by telegraphic transfer. The tax authorities believe that according to the third paragraph of Article 1 of the Notice on Strengthening the Administration of Value-added Tax Collection (Guo Shui Fa [1995] 192), the unit where the taxpayer purchases goods or taxable services and pays the transportation expenses must be consistent with the sales unit and the service provider who issued the deduction certificate before declaring the deduction of the input tax, otherwise it will not be deducted. Therefore, it is determined that the input tax of 6.5438+0.7 million yuan is not allowed to be deducted.
Interpretation of taxation: tax enforcement must be "law-abiding". Taxpayers don't understand this treatment and think that the coal purchase business is true, but the payment direction is inconsistent. According to the principle of "substance is more important than form", it should be deducted before tax. However, the document Guo Shui Fa [1995] 192 clearly stipulates that the payment direction is inconsistent and the input tax cannot be deducted. Tax authorities do not allow taxpayers to deduct input tax, which is precisely the embodiment of "obeying the law", and "substance is more important than form" is not mainly used in the field of law enforcement. "substance is more important than form" should be considered in the process of legislation: safeguarding the national tax interests and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of taxpayers. The general administration only stipulates that the input tax payment direction is inconsistent and cannot be deducted, mainly for anti-tax avoidance considerations. Inconsistency in ticket prices may include the problem of accepting fake invoices. In order to prevent this from happening in the system, it is stipulated that the payment for ticket purchase must be consistent before the input tax can be deducted. In the field of legislation, "substance is more important than form" has two considerations. One is to combat tax avoidance and safeguard the national tax interests, such as Guoshuihan [2009] No.698 and Guoshuifa [1995] 192, and the other is to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of taxpayers, such as People's Republic of China (PRC) State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China 20100 652. In the field of law enforcement, it is emphasized that "taxation is not allowed without explicit provisions of the law", and the legitimate rights and interests of taxpayers cannot be infringed on the grounds that "substance is more important than form" without clear legal basis. In the field of law enforcement, it also emphasizes that "there are laws that must be followed". In the process of formulating the tax law, the state has fully considered all kinds of transactions. In the process of law enforcement, it is not allowed to ignore the existing effective tax law on the grounds that "substance is more important than form".
(e) Cost overruns-"random planning" is unwise.
Statement of case: The business department of China Industrial and Commercial Bank, a central state-owned financial enterprise in a city, spends far more on business entertainment expenses than the standard of pre-tax deduction every year, so its financial director charged 890,000 yuan for business entertainment expenses as a "conference fee" when invoicing the hotel. In June of that year, the local national tax inspection bureau conducted a special inspection on the annual enterprise income tax of this business department, and soon found its illegal behavior, and finally had to pay back the tax and accept the fine.
Tax interpretation: the so-called "form is more important than substance" is not feasible. Usually, the essence of economic business will be expressed by leaving invoices, contracts, self-made vouchers and external vouchers, so the so-called forms are invoices, contracts, self-made vouchers and external vouchers, and the essence is the corresponding real economic business. Many people think that form is an important basis for determining tax obligation, and tax inspection generally relies on these external forms as evidence. Due to the limitation of manpower, material resources or personnel level, it is impossible for tax inspectors to identify every piece of evidence. Therefore, the best tax planning is aimed at external forms, regardless of the real economy business. The most typical example is the planning of "false invoicing". Form is more important than substance, not tax planning. Tax planning is carried out under the premise of legality, and form is more important than substance is carried out under the premise of illegality. Although this kind of behavior is covered with a seemingly legal coat, it still cannot change its illegal nature. In addition, invoices are one of the evidences of the authenticity and legality of economic business, and without invoices, it is impossible to prove the authenticity and legality of economic business. Although the invoice in the fake invoice is true, its economic business is false, which fundamentally loses its authenticity and cannot be deducted before tax. However, at present, tax planning with more forms than substance is very popular. This is because: in addition to reporting, the tax authorities are not easy to find.
(6) Fake high technology-concessions are afraid of "failure"
Case description: Aokang was recognized as a high-tech enterprise in 20 10, enjoying preferential tax rate of 15% with a preferential period of 3 years. Doubt 1: The data shows that only 12 of the 36 listed companies in clothing, shoes and hats can enjoy the tax rate of 20 10/5%. Considering that there are many new material enterprises such as Yike Technology among these enterprises, if these enterprises are excluded, there will be few traditional high-tech enterprises such as clothing, shoes and hats. Saturdays with high profitability are not high-tech enterprises, and their corporate income tax rate is 25%. Belle International, Daphne International and other shoe enterprises listed in mainland China and Hongkong do not enjoy the preferential income tax rate of high-tech enterprises 15%. Doubt 2: Aokang's prospectus shows that as of June 30th, 20 1 1 year, the number of R&D personnel or technicians was 242, accounting for 3.21%of the total number of the company; In terms of academic qualifications, there are only 250 Aokang undergraduates or above, accounting for 3.32%. It is worth noting that the company did not disclose the number of people with "college education or above", but disclosed the number of people with "college education or below". Doubt 3: According to the prospectus of Aokang, in the first half of 2008 ~ 201/kloc-0, R&D expenses accounted for 0. 16%, 0.79%, 1.05% and 0.88% of the operating income respectively. Since 2008, the operating income of Aokang shares has exceeded 654.38 billion yuan.
Tax explanation: "The products (services) of high-tech enterprises belong to the scope stipulated by the state-supported high-tech fields". The high-tech fields supported by the state are divided into eight categories, which are "electronic information technology, biology and new medicine technology, aerospace technology, new material technology, high-tech service industry, new energy and energy-saving technology, resources and environmental technology, and high-tech transformation of traditional industries" in turn. After checking eight categories, none of them can be linked to the production of leather shoes and leather goods engaged by Aokang. This is seriously inconsistent with the economic essence, and the qualifications of high-tech enterprises lack substantial support.
Article 3 of the Administrative Measures for the Identification of High-tech Enterprises stipulates that high-tech enterprises must have "scientific and technical personnel with college education or above accounting for more than 30% of the total employees of the enterprise in that year, in which R&D personnel account for more than 10% of the total employees of the enterprise in that year, while Aokang R&D personnel, that is, technical personnel, account for 3.2 1% of the total employees of the enterprise, and 65438+. Since 2008, the operating income of Aokang Co., Ltd. has exceeded 654.38 billion yuan, and the proportion of R&D expenses in operating income in the last three years is far below 3%, which is seriously inconsistent with the regulations. To apply for a high-tech enterprise, six conditions stipulated in the Administrative Measures for the Identification of High-tech Enterprises must be met at the same time. However, Aokang shares have at least three serious discrepancies. State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China issued the "Notice on Issues Concerning the Implementation of Income Tax Preferences for High-tech Enterprises", stating: "Enterprises that have not obtained the qualification of high-tech enterprises, or have obtained the qualification of high-tech enterprises but do not conform to the enterprise income tax law and its implementing regulations and the relevant provisions of this notice, shall not enjoy the preferential treatment for high-tech enterprises; Those who have enjoyed preferential treatment shall recover the enterprise income tax that has been reduced or exempted. "Aokang shoes will face a tax rebate crisis. In the first half of 20 1 1 and 20 10, the corporate income tax of aokang shares was 64.562 million yuan and1/0004700 yuan, respectively. According to the tax rate of 25%, it should be 107603300 yuan and 18334 1200 yuan respectively. Based on this calculation, Aokang Co., Ltd. won the qualification of high-tech enterprise, which helped the company to pay less income tax of 4,3041300 yuan and 7,336,500 yuan. According to the notification requirements of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, if it is determined that it is not qualified for preferential treatment, the enterprise shall pay back the reduced enterprise income tax at 10% of the total profit of the current year. Based on this calculation, if Aokang shares are recovered, 201and 20 10 need to pay 28.347 million yuan and 371550,000 yuan in the first half of the year, which are 13. 14% of the current net profit respectively.
(7) disqualification-both tax payment and frustration.
Statement of case: Beinmei (listed on April 22, 2065438+0165438+September 29) disclosed that the company recently received a notice from the State Taxation Bureau of Binjiang District, Hangzhou, and needed to pay back the tax of 58.927 million yuan in 2008 and 2009 because it did not meet the qualification conditions of high-tech enterprises. The event will reduce the company's net assets and capital by 58.927 million yuan, and affect the net profit in 2008 and 2009 by 10822 million yuan and 481050 million yuan respectively. This not only means that the issue price at that time is likely to be overestimated, but also relates to whether the company meets the listing conditions. Some market participants believe that the company is suspected of deliberately pretending to be a high-tech enterprise and deceiving investors. On that day, Beingmate's share price jumped 1.49% and fluctuated all the way down, hitting a record low of 29.00 yuan, and finally closed at 29.30 yuan, down 5. 12%. The closing price has been "broken" by more than 30% compared with its IPO issue price of 42.00 yuan.
Tax Interpretation: According to the audit decision of tax collection and management of Zhejiang State Taxation Bureau in 2009-2065 438+00, the Audit Office determined that when Beinmei applied for the qualification of high-tech enterprise in 2008, the actual R&D expenditure in the first three years only accounted for 0.65% of the sales revenue; And the declared invention patent is not directly related to the core technology of its main products. The financial report shows that the net profit of Beinmei in 2008 and 2009 was109345400 yuan and 37578130000 yuan respectively. Without high-tech enterprise qualification, its net profit in 2008 and 2009 will be reduced by 108222 yuan and 48 105000 yuan respectively, accounting for a high proportion. Whether there is fraud is controversial. "This not only affects the valuation at the time of listing, but also relates to whether the company meets the listing conditions." Beinmei only pays the tax according to the accounting error, and does not mention whether the relevant regulatory authorities will punish, whether the company's high-tech qualification will be cancelled, and whether it will affect the 20 1 1 annual review. Because high-tech qualifications can bring 10% income tax relief to enterprises, once lost, it will greatly affect the profit level of Beinmei in the next three years. (Zhejiang Tax Network)