Editor's note: Most of the tax violations in the financial industry are manifested in two types: false invoicing and tax evasion. Through observing these cases, it was found that financial enterprises involved large amounts of false invoicing or tax evasion, involving various financial sub-industries such as trusts, funds, and financing leasing. Based on this, this paper intends to analyze the causes of tax violations in financial enterprises, and propose corresponding strategies for resolving tax administrative and criminal responsibilities.

Editor's Note: A Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier (NVOCC) is a carrier that, without owning its own transport vessels, accepts cargo from shippers, signs contracts of carriage with shipping companies in its own name, and then issues bills of lading or other transport documents to the shippers. NVOCCs originated in international shipping and later expanded to domestic water transport. After February 27, 2019, the administrative approval for NVOCC business was replaced with a filing system, further enhancing market competitiveness. However, compared to the development of digital freight platforms, NVOCC progress has been relatively slow, with an incomplete regulatory system. Particularly, the lack of clear guidance at the tax level has led to questions about some NVOCC practices and repeated involvement in risks related to falsely issued invoices. This article provides a brief analysis.

Editor's Note: Value-added tax is based on the added value of each link in commodity production and circulation, and the buyer obtains the deduction rights based on the purchase price including tax and deducts the tax amount indicated on the invoice according to law. This taxation mechanism not only realizes the tax collection of each link, but also avoids repeated taxation. In the current practice of tax collection and management, "deduction by ticket" is the core to realize VAT collection. In order to crack down on the behaviors of "fake enterprises" that defraud special VAT invoices and run away quickly after committing illegal and false acts, the Announcement on the Management of Abnormal VAT Tax Deduction Certificates (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement No.38, 2019) and other policies stipulate a variety of abnormal VAT tax deduction certificates (hereinafter referred to as abnormal tax deduction certificates) and clarify the recipients. The abnormal tax deduction voucher system avoids the risk of further expansion of national tax losses caused by abnormal upstream enterprises by supervising the invoice deduction of the drawee enterprises. In the process of implementing the abnormal tax deduction voucher system, there are many disputes about the identification situation and consequences in practice. This paper analyzes the common problems for readers' reference.
I. Scope: Under what circumstances will the invoice obtained by the drawee enterprise be recognized as an abnormal tax deduction certificate?
According to Announcement on Issues Concerning the Recognition and Handling of Special VAT Invoices Issued by Escaped (Lost) Enterprises (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement No.76 (2016)) and Announcement No.38, abnormal tax deduction vouchers include the following six situations.
For "obtaining special VAT invoices issued by abnormal households", it is necessary to grasp whether the relevant invoices constitute abnormal tax deduction certificates from the following two aspects: on the one hand, it is necessary to judge whether there are abnormal households in the upstream, and the Announcement of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Several Matters of Tax Collection and Management (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement No.48, 2019) stipulates that "taxpayers have the obligation to declare taxes, but all taxes have not been declared for three consecutive months. The tax collection and management system automatically identifies it as an abnormal household ".According to the Announcement of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Further Improving Tax Registration Management (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement No.21, 2011), the tax authorities should announce the taxpayer identification number, enterprise name and business address of the abnormal household in the month following the identification of the abnormal household, so that the enterprise can judge whether the upstream is an abnormal household by searching the announcement when receiving the notice of the abnormal tax deduction certificate. On the other hand, as for how to divide the abnormal range of invoices obtained from abnormal households, Announcement No.38 clearly states that the abnormal range is limited to the special VAT invoices of upstream enterprises that "have not reported to the tax authorities or paid taxes according to regulations". In practice, some tax authorities uniformly identify all invoices obtained from abnormal households by downstream drawee enterprises as abnormal vouchers, requiring downstream enterprises to make input transfer, which actually expands the provisions on the scope of abnormal vouchers in this situation and harms the legitimate rights and interests of downstream drawee enterprises.
It is controversial whether "the special VAT invoice issued by the taxpayer is suspected of being falsely issued and the consumption tax is not paid as required". At present, in practice, the upstream enterprises fail to pay the enterprise income tax in full, and the tax authorities treat the invoices issued by the upstream enterprises as abnormal tax deduction certificates according to the provisions of this situation, which leads to the risk of the invoices obtained by the downstream enterprises being transferred out of the input. We believe that the unpaid enterprise income tax does not belong to the case of being listed as an abnormal voucher as stipulated in Announcement No.38, and the invoices issued to downstream enterprises should not be regarded as abnormal tax deduction vouchers. In the interpretation of Announcement No.38, the State Administration of Taxation pointed out that the background of the announcement was to crack down on the behavior of "registering a' fake enterprise' that has no actual business and only falsely invoicing, and quickly escaping (losing contact) and maliciously evading tax supervision after implementing illegal and false invoicing", that is, to realize the tax collection and management of value-added tax (and consumption tax in some cases) through invoices, and to prevent "fake enterprises" from falsely invoicing. Therefore, in the case of real transactions, if the upstream enterprise issues invoices to the downstream enterprises and has truthfully declared and paid the value-added tax, the downstream enterprises will deduct the value-added tax input according to the obtained invoices, which will not cause tax losses. The problems of non-payment or underpayment of income tax caused by the upstream enterprises due to their own problems should be collected and managed in accordance with the provisions of the tax law, and should not be used to identify abnormal tax deduction vouchers and implicate the legitimate rights and interests of the downstream enterprises.
II. Clear procedures: how to verify the abnormal tax deduction certificate and strive for normal deduction?
As mentioned earlier, taxpayers who have obtained abnormal vouchers cannot deduct the input tax for the time being. Announcement No.38 and the Operating Rules for Handling Abnormal VAT Deduction Vouchers (No.46 [2017] of the Ministry of Taxation) further stipulate the relief channels for verifying the application. If taxpayers have objections to the abnormal vouchers identified by the tax authorities, they should pay attention to the following two verification points:
On the one hand, we should pay attention to the deadline requirements for verifying applications. The drawee enterprise shall submit an application for verification to the competent tax authorities within 20 working days from the date of receiving the Notice of Tax Matters that identifies the abnormal tax deduction certificate; For the drawee with a tax credit rating of A, after receiving the notice of abnormal vouchers, the drawee can temporarily not handle the input transfer-out, and can apply for verification of abnormal vouchers within 10 days.
On the other hand, it is necessary to submit information to confirm the authenticity of the business. Announcement No.46 stipulates that after receiving the taxpayer's application for verification of abnormal vouchers, the tax authorities mainly carry out the review work from four aspects: first, whether the tax declaration is consistent with the deduction, and second, whether the contract, transportation and warehousing, funds and invoices are consistent; The third is to verify the authenticity of the transaction through upstream and downstream off-site investigation; The fourth is to go to the taxpayer's production and business premises to conduct on-the-spot investigations on its operating conditions and production capacity. Judging from the above provisions, the contents verified by the tax authorities mainly focus on the key issue of business authenticity, and take the consistency of the four streams as the benchmark for judgment. Therefore, the drawee enterprise shall submit business contracts, bank vouchers, transportation and storage certificates and other relevant materials to prove the authenticity of the business around the above-mentioned review points.
III. Know the result: Will the bill be suspended if the abnormal tax deduction certificate is obtained? Can the related costs be deducted before tax?
As mentioned above, the tax authorities should complete the verification work within 90 days after receiving the verification application. If no abnormal situation is found after verification, and the relevant provisions of the current VAT input deduction are met, the drawee enterprise should be allowed to declare the deduction normally. If it does not meet the relevant provisions, the VAT deduction is still not allowed. However, in practice, for those who have obtained abnormal tax deduction certificates, some local tax authorities not only do not allow the invoice-receiving enterprises to deduct the value-added tax input on the corresponding invoices, but also take measures such as stopping invoicing and not allowing pre-tax deduction of enterprise income tax. In our opinion, there are legal circumstances in both the suspension of tickets and the pre-tax deduction of corporate income tax, and the above results are not necessarily caused by obtaining abnormal tax deduction certificates, as follows:
With regard to the problem of being stopped from issuing invoices when obtaining abnormal tax deduction certificates, according to the provisions of Article 72 of the Law on the Administration of Tax Collection, there are legal circumstances to stop issuing invoices. "If a taxpayer or withholding agent engaged in production or business operations commits tax violations as stipulated in this Law and refuses to accept the tax authorities' handling, the tax authorities may collect their invoices or stop selling invoices to them." Among them, the illegal acts include "failing to apply for tax registration, change or cancellation of registration within the prescribed time limit", "failing to set up and keep account books or keep accounting vouchers and related materials in accordance with regulations", tax evasion, fabricating false tax basis, failing to file tax returns, evading the recovery of tax arrears and so on. Moreover, the Notice of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Further Improving the Work of Taxpayer's VAT Invoice Collection (No.64 [2019] of the General Administration of Taxation) also clarifies that "the taxpayer's abnormal VAT deduction certificate should be identified and handled according to the law, and taxpayers should not be restricted from issuing invoices except for serious deviation in purchase and sale, false tax declaration, and two unreasonable tax interviews." Therefore, it is necessary to have a legal basis and circumstances for taxpayers to stop issuing invoices. If there are no such problems as serious deviation of purchase and sale and false tax declaration, they should not stop issuing invoices just because of abnormal invoices.
Regarding whether the abnormal tax deduction certificate can be deducted before enterprise income tax, in practice, some local tax authorities think that the abnormal tax deduction certificate should not be used as the pre-tax deduction certificate of enterprise income tax. We believe that obtaining abnormal tax deduction depends on whether pre-tax deduction of enterprise income tax can be made in combination with the Enterprise Income Tax Law and its implementing regulations. If the invoice obtained by an enterprise is recognized as an abnormal tax deduction certificate, but the expenses incurred meet the provisions of the Enterprise Income Tax Law on the authenticity, rationality and relevance of cost deduction, it should be allowed to be deducted before income tax. In addition, according to Article 14 of the Measures for the Administration of Pre-tax Deduction Vouchers for Enterprise Income Tax (State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China Announcement No.28, 2018), if an invoice issued by an abnormal household is obtained, the receiving enterprise can provide necessary information such as certification materials for inclusion in the abnormal household, relevant business contracts or agreements, payment vouchers paid in a non-cash way and so on to confirm the authenticity of the expenditure, and strive to allocate relevant costs before enterprise income tax.
IV. Summary
If the invoices obtained by downstream drawee enterprises are identified as abnormal tax deduction vouchers, they should pay attention to whether they conform to the scope of abnormal tax deduction vouchers, and apply for verification in time to provide relevant data support for business authenticity and transaction rationality. For disputes such as stopping invoicing and not allowing pre-tax payment of enterprise income tax, statements and defenses can be made around the circumstances stipulated by laws and regulations to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests and reduce economic losses.

In August 2025, the Fushun Intermediate People's Court made a judgment on whether the container bag factory constituted a case of obtaining false VAT special invoices in good faith. This judgment has prompted many tax professionals to think about obtaining false VAT special invoices in good faith. This article intends to explore the historical origin of the false VAT special invoice obtained in good faith, and believes that under the current era background, the constituent elements of the false VAT special invoice obtained in good faith should be revised for readers' reference.

On June 20th, the "Regulations on the Reporting of Tax-Related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (State Decree No. 810) was officially released. [It stipulates the first centralized reporting of identity and income information of operators and practitioners within platforms from October 1st to 31st.]{.mark} This regulation will have profound impacts on internet platforms, their operators, and practitioners. Subsequently, on June 26th, the State Taxation Administration (STA) successively issued the "Announcement on Matters Concerning the Reporting of Tax-Related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (STA Announcement [2025] No. 15, hereinafter referred to as "Announcement 15") and the "Announcement on Various Matters Concerning Withholding Reporting and Agency Reporting for Practitioners within Platforms by Internet Platform Enterprises" (STA Announcement [2025] No. 16, hereinafter referred to as "Announcement 16"). This article will systematically analyze the impacts on platform enterprises and related practitioners based on the specific content of the aforementioned new regulations.

Since the implementation of the judicial interpretations on tax-related crimes issued by the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as "the two Supreme Judicial Organs"), the applicable boundaries between the Crime of Falsely Issuing Special VAT Invoices, the Crime of Illegally Selling Special VAT Invoices, and the Crime of Tax Evasion have been subject to ongoing disputes, often leading to confusion in practical determination of charges. The key to clarifying the application of these charges lies in identifying which function of the invoice the perpetrator actually exploited. In accordance with the spirit of the judicial interpretations of the two Supreme Judicial Organs, the Crime of Falsely Issuing Special VAT Invoices applies only when the VAT deduction function of the invoice is utilized; if other record-keeping functions of the invoice are exploited, this crime is not constituted. This article takes a case of a petrochemical enterprise evading taxes by reselling refined oil inventory data as an example, and analyzes the differences and application rules among the three crimes from the perspectives of legislative intent, protection of legal interests, and constitutive elements, aiming to provide useful references for tax-related criminal defense.

Preferential tax and fee policies play an important role in encouraging enterprise innovation, promoting regional coordinated development and releasing the vitality of economic development. Whether it is tax rate preference, tax base preference or tax amount preference, there are strict application scope and conditions. At present, in practice, some enterprises cheat to enjoy tax benefits by means of fictitious business, split income, false reporting materials, etc., which leads to the risk of tax evasion and false opening. In tax collection and management, in recent years, tax authorities in many places have strictly investigated the illegal acts of defrauding and enjoying tax concessions. According to the data of State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, during the "14th Five-Year Plan" period, the national tax authorities have investigated and dealt with 21,800 cases of defrauding and illegally enjoying tax concessions, and collected 26.9 billion yuan in taxes. Based on the case disclosed by State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China, this paper analyzes the compliance points that enterprises should pay attention to when applying preferential tax and fee policies under the current collection and management situation.

Recently, the State Council issued and implemented the "Regulations on the Submission of Tax-related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulations"), and the State Administration of Taxation also issued corresponding supporting announcements. The new regulations require internet platform companies to submit tax-related information of platform operators to the tax authorities within the prescribed time limit and content. On the one hand, the implementation of the new regulations enhances the ability of tax authorities to investigate and deal with tax evasion by e-commerce companies. On the other hand, against the backdrop of "tax governance with data" becoming the core trend of tax governance, the implementation of the new regulations also means that e-commerce companies are facing new tax compliance challenges. Based on this, this article will discuss the impact of the new regulations on tax authorities and e-commerce enterprises in conjunction with the "Regulations on the Submission of Tax-related Information by Internet Platform Enterprises" and its supporting announcements.