As an important financial and tax policy to encourage technological innovation and implement the innovation-driven development strategy, the Enterprise Income Tax Law has clarified this policy in the form of law since 2008, and its scope of application has been broadened and the deduction ratio has been improved, which has become a preferential policy widely applied by enterprises. At the same time, the R&D activity itself is characterized by strong professionalism and high barriers, and there are many risks in the process of industry-finance convergence in the application of deduction for R&D expenses. In this paper, we will analyze the common tax-related risks in practice from the audit cases related to deduction for R&D expenses for the enterprises to check themselves and prevent risks.

Recently, a case involving a medical enterprise was reported by Xinhua News Agency, where the company engaged in issuing false invoices and deducted a tax amount as high as 2.9 million yuan. The case attracted attention as the actual controller of the enterprise obtained a suspended sentence through compliance rectification. This indicates that, through the division of cases between the entity and its responsible person, the conditions for criminal compliance rectification in the case of false invoicing are not necessarily constrained by the 2.5 million yuan tax amount. With both law enforcement and judicial efforts, enterprises are being assisted in reforming themselves. In light of this, this article will start from recent criminal compliance rectification cases, analyze the tax-related criminal compliance policy trends and practices of procuratorates and courts, and provide a brief introduction to the procedures of criminal compliance.

Recently, the person in charge of a state-owned enterprise was sentenced to 15 years in prison for environmental invoicing, and the case of the retrial was finally changed to not guilty entered the public eye, causing widespread discussion. The composition of the crime of false issuance of special VAT invoices must comply with the principle of subjective and objective consistency, that is, objectively there must be an act of false invoicing, and subjectively there must also be an intention to defraud the tax deduction, and the loss of national value-added tax has actually been caused. Where it does not have the subjective purpose of defrauding tax and does not cause the objective result of tax loss, it does not constitute the crime of false billing. However, over the years, there have been controversies over the fact that the crime of false opening is committed by acts, by purpose, and by result, resulting in the phenomenon of different judgments in the same case.

Editor's note: Recently, another transportation company has been dealt with and punished for falsely accepting refined oil invoices and issuing false transportation invoices, and the flow of oil stamps into the transportation field has a high tax risk. Based on this case, this article intends to summarize the common problems of the frequent occurrence of false opening risks of transportation enterprises in recent years, and explain the tax-related risks and defense space of the enterprises involved in the case and their upstream and downstream.