Tax administrative penalties, processing and other administrative actions have an extremely significant adverse impact on taxpayers, and in the administrative procedures, although taxpayers can make representations and defense, but after all, it is only the submission of written materials, and the hearing department lacks a direct channel of communication with taxpayers. However, once a tax decision is made, it is bound to have a serious impact on taxpayers. At present, according to the "Implementation Measures for Hearing Procedures for Tax Administrative Penalties (for Trial Implementation)", only larger tax penalties can apply for a hearing, in addition to other penalties such as confiscation of unlawful income, cessation of the right to export tax refunds and other penalties, as well as major tax processing decisions, there is no provision for a hearing. After the promulgation of the newly revised Administrative Penalty Law, there has been an increasing number of disputes related to hearings. This article combines two cases in which the court supported the taxpayer's application for a hearing as an example, analyzes the problems of tax hearings, and puts forward three suggestions for the reader's reference.

Fraudulent export tax rebate refers to the administrative offenses stipulated in Article 66 of the Tax Collection and Administration Law. Unlike the determination of tax fraud, which is subject to the constraints of modesty of criminal law, there is a hidden tendency to expand the determination of tax fraud due to the broad discretion of administrative authorities to determine the offense and the low standard of proof. According to the author's observation in practice, the common dispute lies in the fact that although the tax authorities do not have a preponderance of evidence to prove that the goods are falsely exported, they still qualify the tax fraud by the inconsistency of the filing documents, customs declaration and other documents. In view of this, this paper combines the filing of documents, customs declarations, tax fraud results in three issues to be studied in order to clarify the controversy over the elements of tax fraud for the general reader's reference.

This year, there has been a resurgence in foreign trade, but at the same time, a large number of enterprises have been included in the major tax violation and dishonesty list for fraudulent export tax rebates. They not only face the recovery of taxes and administrative penalties but also risk being referred to judicial authorities. In a certain region, the tax authorities have issued a notice requiring foreign trade enterprises to conduct self-inspections and self-rectification. Otherwise, discovered tax evasion clues will be referred to judicial authorities, causing anxiety among local foreign trade enterprises. In light of this, this article will analyze the causes of the risk of fraudulent export tax rebates from both internal and external perspectives. It will also provide suggestions for foreign trade enterprises to self-inspect and self-correct, aiming to mitigate administrative and criminal risks associated with fraudulent export tax rebates and support the long-term development of foreign trade enterprises.