Reasonable optimization Also, sites lose customers due to poor texts and unprofessional layout. Naturally, in order for a site to be promoted in search engines, texts must be edited for promotion purposes in a certain way. But the best is always

In the context of reforming the tax system aimed at reducing the tax burden, the main factor in the organization and functioning of the activities of agricultural producers in terms of minimizing tax liabilities for a long period is tax planning.

Tax planning, being an integral part of financial planning, is the process of developing a system of tax plans and indicators to ensure the efficiency of an economic entity as a result of optimizing tax payments.

Since tax payments represent one of the expense items, tax planning is an integral part of the overall cost optimization strategy.

Currently, the identification of tax planning with budgeting and optimization of the overall level of costs, designed to reduce tax bases and, thus, minimize tax liabilities, is becoming a widespread phenomenon. In this regard, for agricultural enterprises, the determining criterion for optimizing tax payments should be the achievement of the maximum amount of resources remaining at their disposal, subject to further ensuring the growth of profits from economic activities.

At present, agricultural producers have the opportunity to plan their tax liabilities by choosing one of the taxation regimes: a general regime or a special tax regime in the form of a single agricultural tax (UAT).

To compare the unified agricultural tax with the general tax regime, it is necessary to determine the tax burden that the organization or individual entrepreneur will bear when choosing the optimal tax regime.

In practice, there is no single methodology for comparing the tax burden under different tax regimes.

In this regard, it is necessary to develop a methodology for calculating the tax burden in agriculture when choosing a tax regime.

When determining the tax burden, it is necessary to take into account not only savings on tax payments, but also the negative aspects of the unified agricultural tax, defined as lost or lost profit. Therefore, it is advisable to calculate the tax burden in the following stages:

1) determination of the expected tax expenses under general and special taxation regimes;

2) identification of the possibility of obtaining lost profits;

3) comparison of the tax burden under different taxation regimes and making a decision on the optimal taxation option.

In order for the calculation to be more accurate, one should take into account the status of the taxpayer - an organization or an individual entrepreneur.

The unified agricultural tax for organizations and individual enterprises implies the replacement of four taxes, therefore, for the analysis, it is necessary to take into account the tax burden only from these taxes.

Agricultural enterprises applying a special taxation regime are exempted from paying income tax, value added tax, corporate property tax and unified social tax. Therefore, for calculations it is necessary to estimate the estimated amounts of the above taxes in the year in which it is planned to switch to the Unified Agricultural Tax.

When determining the amount of a specific tax, it is necessary to take into account that the amounts paid by an economic entity as a tax agent should not be taken into account, that is, they should be deducted from the total amount of the tax.

In this regard, the estimated tax costs for agricultural enterprises under the general taxation regime can be determined by the formula

NR = Np + VAT + Nim + ESN, (1)

where НР - tax expenses;

Нп - the amount of income tax payable for the year;

VAT - the amount of value added tax payable per year;

Nim - the amount of property tax payable for the year;

Unified social tax is the amount of the unified social tax payable per year.

An individual entrepreneur can also calculate the expected tax payments when choosing a tax regime. To do this, in formula (1), instead of income tax and corporate property tax, it is necessary to take into account the tax on income of individuals and the tax on property of individuals used in entrepreneurial activity. However, when calculating, it is necessary to take into account the established benefits for peasant (farmer) households: exemption of income from the production, processing and sale of their own agricultural products from the payment of personal income tax and the unified social tax for 5 years. Therefore, during this period, a change in taxation regime for them is unlikely to reduce tax payments.

Under the special tax regime, the expected tax costs for agricultural enterprises will be equal to the amount of the unified agricultural tax.

The calculation of these tax liabilities can be carried out using the following formula:

NRESHN = (D - R) x 6%, (2)

where NRESKHN - tax expenditures for the unified agricultural tax;

D - incomes accepted for the purpose of calculating the unified agricultural tax;

Р - expenses taken into account when calculating the unified agricultural tax.

Consequently, at the first stage, in order to assess the effectiveness of one of the taxation options, it is necessary to compare the received tax expenses according to formulas (1) and (2).

The study of calculations of tax payments for two taxation systems allows us to conclude that the final result of calculated tax liabilities is greatly influenced by VAT payments. Therefore, when switching to a special taxation regime, agricultural producers should take this fact into account.

When calculating the tax burden, it is also advisable to take into account the following factors that influence the decision to change the tax regime:

1) the share of wages in the expenses of the enterprise;

2) buyers of products (VAT payers or not);

3) share of income from non-agricultural activities;

4) the applied taxation regime (general, simplified taxation system);

5) other factors.

Enterprises that have switched to a special tax regime feel some negative aspects of this system or lost profits. Therefore, at the second stage of calculating the tax burden, it is necessary to assess the possibility of a lost benefit, i.e. additional costs for the enterprise.

Let us consider various options for the emergence of lost profits in the transition to the Unified agricultural tax.

If a special taxation regime is selected, agricultural organizations are not exempt from the obligation to maintain full accounting records and must comply with industry accounting guidelines. Individual entrepreneurs also have a duty to keep accounting on an equal basis with organizations. This circumstance may affect the decision to switch to a special regime.

The choice of the taxation system is influenced by the financial result of the activities of economic entities. If for a long period the economy was unprofitable, then the transition to the unified agricultural tax will not allow receiving benefits in the form of savings in income tax. This regime is also ineffective for highly profitable enterprises that mainly produce agricultural products, since until 2006 the income tax rate is zero, and from 2006 to 2008 - 6%, i.e. is similar to the rate of unified agricultural tax.

When changing the tax regime, it is necessary to take into account the share of wages in the expenses of the enterprise, which affects the size of the unified social tax. The effectiveness of the use of a special taxation regime arises at a high level of wages. As a rule, in agriculture, the level of wages is low and the reduction in tax payments in the form of UST will be insignificant.

The structure of an organization's income also has a significant impact on the choice of tax regime. If the share of income from the sale of agricultural products of its own production, including those that have undergone primary processing, consistently exceeds 70%, the organization may switch to paying the unified agricultural tax, otherwise failure to comply with this requirement will lead to a recalculation of tax liabilities.

Another disadvantage of the unified agricultural tax is associated with value added tax. Agriculture is characterized by the excess of the amount of deductions for this tax over the amount of charges. Unified agricultural tax payers are not eligible for value added tax deduction.

When selling products, the company does not allocate VAT on the invoice, which means that the buyer cannot set off VAT when purchasing. In this case, the buyer purchases products at a higher price, but at the same time gets the opportunity to offset the amount of VAT. In this situation, the seller is forced to reduce the price of his product, which may affect the financial results of sales.

Therefore, when choosing taxation systems in agriculture, one should be guided not by a reduction in the amount of tax payments, but by their optimization and improvement of the financial results of enterprises.

Reducing tax payments does not always improve the financial condition of the company, and vice versa. Profit increases if the growth in sales volumes outstrips the rate of increase in tax payments. It is advisable to reduce taxes as long as it leads to an increase in net profit.

If organizations switched to paying the single agricultural tax, then they can return to the general taxation regime in a year. However, in this case, a number of points arise that must be taken into account by the taxpayer.

First, the depreciation of fixed assets applied during the period of payment of the unified agricultural tax under the general regime ceases to be "accelerated", as a result of which it becomes necessary to recalculate their residual value.

Secondly, if the expenses for the acquisition of fixed assets for the period of payment of the unified agricultural tax have exceeded the depreciation amounts, then in the transition to the general taxation system, the resulting difference will be recognized as the income of the organization.

These provisions restrict the rights of efficiently functioning farms when changing tax regimes of taxation.

Farms that use the taxation system in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities cannot go to pay unified agricultural tax. For some producers, this restriction is unprofitable, since retail trade contributes to the creation of a new value of an agricultural product, in some cases greater than the production process itself. The formation of its own trading network is the best way to sell agricultural products, it accelerates the turnover of funds, and the farm has the opportunity to become a reseller.

Another disadvantage of the special tax regime is the replacement of value added tax (VAT) with a single agricultural tax, since 46% of farms have VAT paid to suppliers higher than the amount of VAT received from buyers.

At the third stage of the calculation, in order to determine a more favorable tax regime, it is necessary to compare the indicators of the tax burden when applying general and special tax regimes.

To select the optimal tax regime, we propose to determine the size of the tax burden when applying the unified agricultural tax based on the amount of tax expenses and lost profits:

NNESHN = (NR + UV) / D x 100%, (3)

НР - tax expenses;

HC is an indicator of lost profits;

D - the amount of annual income.

The main disadvantage of the special tax regime is associated with a further increase in the disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products in the amount of VAT. In this connection, the transition to unified agricultural tax is ineffective for agricultural organizations and entrepreneurs, who have a high share of costs paid with VAT.

In addition, payers of unified agricultural tax in some cases must charge value added tax. When issuing an invoice to the buyer, the unified agricultural taxpaying organization is obliged to charge VAT payable to the budget and apply the appropriate tax deductions, subject to the submission of the VAT declaration to the tax authorities.

The transition to the payment of unified agricultural tax is unprofitable for agricultural producers:

1) having heavily worn out fixed assets, the residual value of which is small;

2) those who create fixed assets in an economic or contractual way, the residual value of which does not reduce the tax base for the unified agricultural tax.

Therefore, the decision on the advisability of switching to one or another taxation system must necessarily be preceded by calculations of the tax burden, i.e. economic benefits and losses.

For agricultural producers who have not transferred to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, the existing legislation provides for preferential tax rates on profits from activities related to the sale of their own agricultural products produced and processed. However, the size of preferential income tax rates for agricultural enterprises in subsequent tax periods will be distributed as follows:

in 2006 - 2008 - 6%;

in 2009 - 2011 -- 12%;

in 2012 - 2014 -- eighteen%;

since 2015 - 24%.

Obviously, in each subsequent period, the tax rate increases. Agricultural enterprises that have not transferred to the payment of the unified agricultural tax will be subject to income tax on a general basis. This fact will stimulate agribusiness enterprises to switch to a special tax regime.

Agricultural enterprises that do not meet the requirements of the special tax regime will find themselves in unfavorable conditions from 2015, and therefore they will strive to increase the share of agricultural products sold in order to reduce tax payments.

This once again proves the need for an agricultural organization to use tax planning and employ a specialist responsible for the company's tax policy and the effectiveness of tax solutions.

Thus, tax planning is an objective necessity and requirement of every agricultural organization that is interested in reducing the tax burden in a legal way.

The use of tax planning at the enterprise will allow specialists to analyze and assess the tax situation, form a system of optimal solutions that allow achieving the predicted value of production growth.

Tax planning takes into account to a greater extent the peculiarities of agricultural production (seasonality and a long period of capital turnover) and minimizes tax payments.

Acquaintance with the indicators of economic activity of LLC "Zimnyatskoye". Analysis of taxation of an agricultural enterprise. Development of a program to optimize the tax burden of the company. Advantages and Disadvantages of the Unified Agricultural Tax.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

LLC "Elton-Agro" in the transition to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, is not exempt from the duties of tax agents, and also pays insurance premiums:

For compulsory pension insurance;

For compulsory insurance against industrial accidents.

The growth in insurance contributions for compulsory pension insurance and personal income tax in 2012 was due to an increase in the number of employees by 4.4 times and, accordingly, an increase in the wage bill.

Tax payments have a significant impact on the operation of the enterprise and, above all, on the final financial results.

Tax payments affect the competitiveness of products, selling prices and tariffs, production costs, sales volumes, and ultimately on financial results and net profit. Direct taxes have the greatest impact on financial results compared to indirect taxes. To determine the impact of taxes on the financial result of an organization, it is necessary to analyze the dynamics of tax payments. The growth rate of tax payments must be compared with the growth rate of the volume of sales of products

Table 5- Dynamics of tax payments and proceeds of Zimnyatskoye LLC for 2011-2012

The data in Table 5 show that the growth rate of tax payments is less than the growth rate of product sales (116.22%< 373,99%). Таким образом, в ООО "Зимняцкое" наблюдается тенденция снижения тяжести налогового бремени.

The indicator of the tax burden of an enterprise is of great practical importance and is necessary when carrying out measures to optimize taxation. At the microeconomic level, the tax burden indicator reflects the share of the taxpayer's total income that is withdrawn to the budget.

The indicator is calculated as the ratio of the sum of all accrued tax payments of the organization to the volume of sales of products (works, services). The amount of taxes does not include personal income tax, since it is paid by the employees of the organization, and the company only transfers payments.

The size of the tax burden was:

in 2011 111 / (1808 + 149) * 100% = 5.67%

in 2012 129 / (6489 + 830) * 100% = 1.76%

The analysis of the calculations shows that the tax burden when using the traditional taxation option was 5.67% versus 1.76% with the unified agricultural tax. The change in the tax regime led to a decrease in the tax burden by 3.91%, therefore, the transition to a single agricultural tax is economically justified.

The organization of accounting of calculations for the unified agricultural tax of LLC "Zimnyatskoye" can be presented in the form of a diagram (Figure 5).

The main primary document of tax accounting is an accounting statement, drawn up on the basis of primary accounting documents. The data of accounting certificates drawn up at each accounting area can be used to compile almost any tax calculation. On the basis of accounting certificates, data on sales accounts, as well as cash accounts, settlements, a consolidated tax register is formed for accounting for income and expenses used to calculate the unified agricultural tax.

During the formation of the tax accounting system at Elton-Agro LLC, a methodological and organizational basis has been developed that allows both accounting to be carried out in the most rational way, with the least expenditure of time and money. The instrument of convergence was the accounting policy, rational document flow, and the choice of tax registers.

Rice. 5. Organization of tax accounting at the Unified Agricultural Taxation at OOO "Zimnyatskoye" compiled by the author according to the source.

LLC "Zimnyatskoye" is engaged in the cultivation of grain and leguminous crops (code for the type of economic activity according to OKVED 01.11.1). Based on the results of work in 2012, income was received from the sale of crop and livestock products in the amount of 6,489,000 rubles, other income in the amount of 830,000 rubles. The amount of expenses for 2012 amounted to 7,164,000 rubles. The calculation of the unified agricultural tax is presented in table 6

Table 6- Calculation of the unified agricultural tax of LLC "Zimnyatskoe" for 2012

The object of taxation of the unified agricultural tax is recognized as income reduced by the amount of expenses. This unified agricultural tax has something in common with the simplified taxation system. The procedure for determining and recognizing income and expenses is determined by Art. 346.5 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

The tax base follows from the concept of the object of taxation. It means the monetary expression of income, reduced by the amount of expenses.

The tax rate of the unified agricultural tax is calculated as the percentage of the tax base corresponding to the tax rate. The tax rate is set at 6 percent.

The classification of income and expenses, as well as the procedure for their recognition, are established by Ch. 26.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. For the purpose of taxation of the unified agricultural tax and in accordance with paragraph 6 of Art. 346.5 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the only method of recognizing income and expenses is the cash method. That is, the date of receipt of income is the day of receipt of funds to bank accounts and (or) to the cashier's office, receipt of other property (work, services) and (or) property rights.

Article 346.5 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation obliges organizations to take into account:

Income from the sale of goods, works and services, as well as property and property rights;

Non-operating income.

Income received in kind should be recorded at prevailing market prices.

Income received by a taxpayer in foreign currency is recalculated into rubles at the exchange rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation established at the date of receipt of the income. The amount received is taken into account.

The unified agricultural tax is calculated by taxpayers independently as the percentage of the tax base corresponding to the tax rate and is paid based on the results of the tax period until March 31 of the year following the expired tax period.

The reporting period is a half-year, following which a single agricultural tax and an advance payment on it are paid, respectively.

The amount of the advance tax payment is paid to the budget no later than 25 calendar days from the end of the reporting period, that is, no later than July 25. Late payment of the advance payment entails the accrual of penalties by the tax authorities.

The tax amount payable at the end of the year is calculated by the taxpayer as the difference between the accrued tax and the amount of the advance tax payment. This difference is the uniform agricultural tax payable at the end of the tax period. It is paid by taxpayers no later than the deadline for filing a tax return for the relevant tax period, that is, no later than March 31 of the year following the expired tax period.

If the amount of the single tax (advance tax payment) calculated based on the results of the tax (reporting) period is less than the amount of the tax payment calculated based on the results of the previous reporting period, the taxpayer has no obligation to pay tax.

Organizations pay unified agricultural tax at their location, that is, where they passed state registration. And individual entrepreneurs - at their place of residence, where they permanently or predominantly reside.

The legislation of the Russian Federation establishes a fixed tax rate of 6 percent of the tax base, which is not subject to change during the tax period for the unified agricultural tax.

According to the results of the reporting period, taxpayers calculate the amount of the advance payment for the unified agricultural tax at the rate of 6 percent based on the income and expenses actually received when calculating the tax base on an accrual basis from the beginning of the year. Agricultural producers pay this tax in the form of a single payment, which is subsequently distributed between the budgets of various levels and state extra-budgetary funds.

The tax declaration for the UAT is filed by organizations at the place of their registration. Individual entrepreneurs submit a declaration at the place of residence.

Taxpayers submit tax returns based on the results of the reporting period - no later than 25 calendar days from the end of the reporting period, and based on the results of the tax period - no later than March 31 of the year following the expired tax period.

Organizations paying unified agricultural tax, from 2009, will submit a tax return only based on the results of the tax period, once a year, no later than March 31st.

Based on the research carried out, it can be concluded that LLC "Zimnyatskoye" is engaged in the cultivation of grain and leguminous crops, animal husbandry. Accounting and tax accounting at Zimnyatskoye LLC is carried out in accordance with the company's accounting policy. Summing up the overall results of the activity, it must be said that the highest indicators were recorded in 2008. This is due to an increase in the volume of production and sales of crop and livestock products. LLC "Zimnyatskoye" until January 1, 2012 was on the general tax regime, and from January 1, 2012 the organization switched to the payment of the unified agricultural tax.

CHAPTER 3. IMPROVEMENT OF THE TAX SYSTEM FOR AGRICULTURAL PRODUCERS

3.1 Optimization of the tax regimeOOO" Zimnyatskoe"

The problem of optimizing taxation is currently often considered in scientific literature, since it is of interest to enterprises of various organizational and legal forms, individual entrepreneurs and individuals.

Improving the tax system in modern conditions requires a careful and thorough study of the domestic experience of ongoing economic reforms, effective use of the theory and practice of tax science.

For business entities, effective tax optimization is just as important as production or marketing strategy, which is due not only to the possibility of saving costs through payments to the budget, but also to ensuring the overall security of both the organization itself and its officials.

One of the goals of organizations and individual entrepreneurs is to develop optimal solutions in production and economic activities, which allows them to carry out legal transactions with minimal tax losses.

Tax optimization is a system of various schemes and methods that allows you to choose the optimal solution for a specific case of an organization's economic activity.

Correct optimization of taxation (that is, optimization of taxation carried out by legal methods) and forecasting possible risks ensure a stable position of the organization in the market, since they allow avoiding large losses in the course of economic activity.

At the present stage, the problem of optimizing taxation is also topical for agricultural producers, for whom the determining criterion for optimizing tax payments should be the achievement of the maximum amount of resources remaining at their disposal, subject to further ensuring the growth of profits from economic activity.

Optimize taxation of Zimnyatskoye LLC, i.e. to determine the most profitable procedure for paying taxes and to reduce the risks associated with this, tax planning allows.

Tax planning, being an integral part of financial planning, is the process of developing a system of tax plans and indicators to ensure the efficiency of an economic entity as a result of optimizing tax payments.

Since tax payments represent one of the expense items, tax planning is an integral part of the overall cost optimization strategy.

For agricultural enterprises, the determining criterion for optimizing tax payments should be the achievement of the maximum amount of resources remaining at their disposal, subject to further ensuring the growth of profits from economic activities. Since tax payments represent one of the expense items, tax planning can be considered an integral element of budgeting. In the process of organizing the management accounting system, it is important to establish horizontal links with all areas of tax planning, which will reduce the risk of adverse tax consequences when making management decisions.

Professionals and practitioners define tax planning in different ways:

How the company uses techniques and methods, as well as all the benefits provided by law in order to minimize tax liabilities;

As planning the order, grounds and procedure for paying taxes;

As certain purposeful actions of the taxpayer, which allow the latter to avoid or to a certain extent reduce his compulsory payments to the budget, made by him in the form of taxes, fees, duties and other payments;

As a set of planned actions aimed at increasing the financial resources of the organization, regulating the size and structure of the tax base, affecting the effectiveness of management decisions and ensuring timely settlements with the budget in accordance with the current legislation;

As planning the financial and economic activities of the organization in order to minimize tax payments;

As an art to exempt capital from taxes.

It should be noted that all the previously indicated definitions do not disclose the essence of the tax planning process - the choice of the optimal combination (construction) of the forms of legal relations, as well as the possible options for their correlation within the framework of the current legislation on taxes and fees in order to directly influence the elements of taxation and determine the amount of tax liabilities ... Tax planning should be considered the process of forming the amount of tax liabilities of an economic entity, carried out by choosing the optimal combination of various options for carrying out entrepreneurial activities and placing assets, aimed at achieving a minimum level of tax liabilities.

Tax planning is a set of measures aimed at reducing the tax burden of Zimnyatskoye LLC. These measures are divided into long-term (long-term) and current.

Long-term (long-term) tax planning is the use by a taxpayer of such techniques and methods that reduce his tax liabilities for a long time or in the course of the entire activity of the taxpayer, and includes:

Selection of the most profitable from the point of view of taxation of the location of the organization, its structural divisions and governing bodies;

The choice of the organizational and legal form of the organization and its organizational and economic structure (division of production and economic processes up to the creation for these purposes of a group of interconnected independent organizations), allowing to minimize tax payments;

The choice of taxation regime, including the possibility of applying special tax regimes provided for in Art. 18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, and special taxation systems (for example, a simplified taxation system for small businesses, a single agricultural tax, a single tax on imputed income).

Current tax planning is understood as a set of methods that allow a taxpayer to reduce the tax burden within a limited period of time and / or in each specific economic situation. At the same time, the elements of current tax planning are not only proactive, but also mandatory. The latter include, for example:

The organization's adoption of accounting policies;

Selecting a tax accounting option.

Planning of tax liabilities for Zimnyatskoye LLC is carried out by influencing the elements of tax: subject of taxation, tax base, tax incentives, tax payment deadline (Figure 6).

Rice. 6. Planning of individual elements of the tax for LLC "Zimnyatskoye"

Properly organized tax optimization at Zimnyatskoye LLC provides for the study of all business contracts proposed for signing for their tax consequences.

An effective impact on the maximum number of tax elements is achieved through the development of a contractual policy system at Elton-Agro LLC. Pursuing a contractual policy, it is necessary to evaluate in a complex all the tax consequences of a concluded or amended business contract.

The instruments of the organization's contractual policy include:

1) the choice of the type of contract for the implementation of contractual relations;

2) selection of a partner in the transaction;

3) the choice of individual terms of the contract.

An important component of the contractual work at Zimnyatskoye LLC is the choice of the counterparty for the transaction, since much depends on who is the partner.

When planning the activities of an agricultural enterprise, it is necessary to consider the issue of attracting peasant (farmer) farms, personal subsidiary plots and other agricultural commodity producers as partners, and the form of implementation of interaction with them.

Tax planning of tax elements must be carried out taking into account various branches of law, each of which has its own legal framework that allows an enterprise to maneuver in choosing the form and strategy of activity in order to optimize tax payments.

The results of tax optimization must be assessed not only by the amounts of reduced taxes and the benefits brought, but also from the point of view of reducing the possible damage and costs that would be inevitable when conducting business without taking into account the existing features of taxation.

In case of tax optimization, it is essential to pay only the due amount of the established taxes and no later than the deadline set for this.

Overpayment of taxes from the point of view of tax optimization is no less a mistake than underpayment. In the event of an overpayment, the organization voluntarily loses some amount of money. Tax optimization at Zimnyatskoye LLC should be aimed not only at finding all possible options for reducing taxes, but also at justifying the correct calculation of tax amounts, especially in disputable situations.

Based on the research carried out, we offer the following elements of tax optimization for Zimnyatskoye LLC:

A tax calendar designed to predict and control the correctness of the calculation and compliance with the deadlines for paying the required taxes to the budget;

The accountants and financial service of Zimnyatskoye LLC cannot do without a tax calendar. It will allow you to optimally distribute tax payments over time and control the correctness of their calculation. In addition, it will help you keep track of the timing of tax payments and reporting. As a result, the accrual of penalties for late fulfillment of the obligation to pay tax will be prevented, as well as the risk of being held liable for violations of tax legislation will be significantly reduced.

A strategy for optimizing tax liabilities with a clear plan for the implementation of this strategy;

Accurate fulfillment of tax and other obligations, prevention of receivables under business contracts for shipped products for periods exceeding the limitation period;

An effective accounting system that allows you to receive prompt and objective information about economic activities for tax planning purposes.

Thus, the complex application of strategic and operational methods in planning the taxation of the agricultural enterprise "Zimnyatskoye" LLC will optimize its tax burden and financial results.

3.2 Ways to improve the taxation system for agricultural producers

In order to finally resolve the issue of the expediency of switching to the unified agricultural taxation, let us analyze the advantages and disadvantages, which are presented in Table 11.

Table 11

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Unified Agricultural Tax

The data in Table 11 show that the benefits of the UAT are not as significant as they seem at first glance. Therefore, the decision on the expediency of switching to one or another taxation system must necessarily be preceded by calculations of the tax burden, that is, economic benefits and losses.

As noted in Chapter 1, provided that the company operated under the general taxation regime, the tax burden would be the following taxes: income tax, unified social tax, value added tax and property tax. And when applying a special regime, the tax burden of an organization is calculated according to one single tax - the unified agricultural tax. Moreover, for a correct comparison of the load indicator, the amount of insurance premiums for compulsory pension insurance is excluded from its calculation.

Let us compare the tax burden when applying the Unified Agricultural Tax and the general taxation regime for Zimnyatskoye LLC in comparable conditions in 2012 (Table 7).

Table 7- Calculation of the expected tax costs of LLC "Zimnyatskoye", thousand rubles.

According to the calculations, tax liabilities under the unified agricultural tax in the case of applying a special taxation regime at an agricultural enterprise will amount to 9 thousand rubles. The amount of taxes replaced by the unified agricultural tax, under the general taxation regime, is set at 451 thousand rubles.

The tax rate on profit from the sale of own agricultural products in 2012 is 0%, therefore the profit tax is equal to 0 rubles.

However, there is no single methodology for comparing the tax burden under different tax regimes. So, when switching from the general taxation regime to the payment of unified agricultural tax, an agricultural organization can only approximately calculate the economic effect (potential savings on taxes) from the use of the special regime. To do this, you need to use the following formula:

E = (NP + VAT + NI + insurance premiums) - Unified agricultural tax, (2)

where E - savings on taxes in the transition to the payment of unified agricultural tax;

NP - the amount of corporate income tax paid to the budget for the tax period;

VAT is the amount of value added tax paid to the budget for the tax period;

NI - the amount of tax on property of organizations, paid to the budget for the tax period;

insurance contributions - the amount of insurance contributions accrued for the tax period, minus the amount of insurance contributions for compulsory pension insurance;

Unified agricultural tax is the amount of the uniform agricultural tax payable under comparable conditions.

Let's substitute the obtained values ​​into the formula given earlier, and determine the tax savings when applying the unified taxation tax in comparison with the general taxation regime in 2012:

E = (0 + 209 + 130 + 112) -9 = 442 thousand rubles.

Consequently, the resulting savings in the amount of 442 thousand rubles. shows the advantage of a special tax regime for agricultural producers.

The study of calculations of tax payments for two taxation systems allows us to conclude that the final result of calculated tax liabilities is greatly influenced by VAT payments. Therefore, when switching to a special taxation regime, agricultural producers should take this fact into account.

When calculating the tax burden, it is also advisable to take into account the following factors that influence the decision to change the tax regime:

1) the share of wages in the expenses of the enterprise;

The share of material costs of Zimnyatskoye LLC is 66%, and the share of labor costs is 22%. Consequently, Zimnyatskoye LLC is a material-intensive enterprise.

When switching to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, a salary-intensive enterprise (the share of labor costs is 60%) gains advantages over a material-intensive one (material costs make up 70% of their total amount) due to significant savings on insurance premiums and a less significant increase in costs in terms of VAT on acquired values.

2) buyers of products (VAT payers or not); 3) share of income from non-agricultural activities; 4) the applied taxation regime (general, simplified taxation system); 5) other factors.

Enterprises that have switched to a special tax regime feel some negative aspects of this system or lost profits. Therefore, at the second stage of calculating the tax burden, it is necessary to assess the possibility of a lost benefit, i.e. additional costs for the enterprise.

Let us consider various options for the emergence of lost profits in the transition to the Unified agricultural tax.

The choice of a special tax regime in the form of unified agricultural tax is greatly influenced by the fact that the preparation of tax reports and their submission to the tax inspectorate according to the latest changes in the tax code is carried out once upon the submission of the annual declaration. As a result, the work of an accountant is reduced to the standard maintenance of accounting activities and the timely calculation and payment of single and other taxes during the tax period. However, agricultural organizations are not exempt from the obligation to maintain accounting records in full and must comply with industry accounting guidelines.

Individual entrepreneurs also have a duty to keep accounting on an equal basis with organizations. Individual entrepreneurs keep records of income and expenses for the purpose of calculating the tax base for the unified agricultural tax in the book for recording the income and expenses of individual entrepreneurs applying the taxation system for agricultural producers (unified agricultural tax), the form and procedure for filling out which are approved by the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation.

The choice of the taxation system is influenced by the financial result of the activities of economic entities.

When changing the tax regime, it is necessary to take into account the share of wages in the expenses of the enterprise, which affects the size of the unified social tax. The effectiveness of the use of a special taxation regime arises at a high level of wages. As a rule, wages in agriculture are low and the reduction in tax payments in the form of insurance premiums will be negligible.

The structure of an organization's income also has a significant impact on the choice of tax regime. If the share of income from the sale of agricultural products of its own production, including those that have undergone primary processing, consistently exceeds 70%, the organization may switch to paying the unified agricultural tax, otherwise failure to comply with this requirement will lead to a recalculation of tax liabilities.

Another disadvantage of the unified agricultural tax is associated with value added tax. Agriculture is characterized by the excess of the amount of deductions for this tax over the amount of charges. Unified agricultural tax payers are not eligible for value added tax deduction.

When selling products, the company does not allocate VAT on the invoice, which means that the buyer cannot set off VAT when purchasing. In this case, the buyer purchases products at a higher price, but at the same time gets the opportunity to offset the amount of VAT. In this situation, the seller is forced to reduce the price of his product, which may affect the financial results of sales.

Therefore, when choosing taxation systems in agriculture, one should be guided not by a reduction in the amount of tax payments, but by their optimization and improvement of the financial results of enterprises.

Reducing tax payments does not always improve the financial condition of the company, and vice versa. Profit increases if the growth in sales volumes outstrips the rate of increase in tax payments. It is advisable to reduce taxes as long as it leads to an increase in net profit.

If organizations switched to paying the single agricultural tax, then they can return to the general taxation regime in a year. However, in this case, a number of points arise that must be taken into account by the taxpayer.

First, the depreciation of fixed assets applied during the period of payment of the unified agricultural tax in the general regime ceases to be "accelerated", as a result of which it becomes necessary to recalculate their residual value.

Secondly, if the expenses for the acquisition of fixed assets for the period of payment of the unified agricultural tax have exceeded the depreciation amounts, then when switching to the general system, the resulting difference will be recognized as the income of the organization.

These provisions restrict the rights of efficiently functioning farms when changing tax regimes of taxation.

Farms that use the taxation system in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities cannot go to pay unified agricultural tax. For some producers, this restriction is unprofitable, since retail trade contributes to the creation of a new value of an agricultural product, in some cases greater than the production process itself. The formation of its own trading network is the best way to sell agricultural products, it accelerates the turnover of funds, and the farm has the opportunity to become a reseller.

Another disadvantage of the special tax regime is the replacement of value added tax (VAT) with a single agricultural tax, since 46% of farms have VAT paid to suppliers higher than the amount of VAT received from buyers.

Let us trace the influence of this tax on the feasibility of transferring to the Unified agricultural tax of OOO Zimnyatskoye. The calculation of the efficiency of various taxation systems for Zimnyatskoye LLC is presented in Table 8.

Table 8- Efficiency of various taxation regimes of Zimnyatskoye LLC

As a result of the data obtained, it was revealed that LLC "Zimnyatskoye" is expediently under a special taxation regime, since this allows reducing tax liabilities by 193 thousand rubles, as well as improving its financial result from economic activities.

At the third stage of the calculation, in order to determine a more favorable tax regime, it is necessary to compare the indicators of the tax burden when applying general and special tax regimes.

To select the optimal tax regime, we propose to determine the size of the tax burden when applying the unified agricultural tax based on the amount of tax expenses and lost profits:

NN ESHN= (NR + UV) / D x 100%, (3)

where НН ESHN- tax burden for unified agricultural tax; НР - tax expenses; HC is an indicator of lost profits; D - the amount of annual income.

Let's calculate the tax burden in relation to LLC "Zimnyatskoye" according to the formula (3) (table 9).

Table 9- Calculation of the tax burden of LLC "Zimnyatskoye"

Thus, it is expedient for OOO Zimnyatskoye to switch to a special taxation regime (the tax burden is reduced by 2.97%).

The main disadvantage of the special tax regime is associated with a further increase in the disparity in prices for agricultural and industrial products in the amount of VAT. In this connection, the transition to unified agricultural tax is ineffective for agricultural organizations and entrepreneurs, who have a high share of costs paid with VAT.

In addition, payers of unified agricultural tax in some cases must charge value added tax. When issuing an invoice to the buyer, the unified agricultural taxpaying organization is obliged to charge VAT payable to the budget and apply the appropriate tax deductions, subject to the submission of the VAT declaration to the tax authorities.

The transition to the payment of unified agricultural tax is unprofitable for agricultural producers:

1) having heavily worn out fixed assets, the residual value of which is small;

2) those who create fixed assets in an economic or contractual way, the residual value of which does not reduce the tax base for the unified agricultural tax.

For agricultural producers who have not transferred to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, the existing legislation provides for preferential tax rates on profits from activities related to the sale of their own agricultural products produced and processed. However, the size of preferential income tax rates for agricultural enterprises in subsequent tax periods will be redistributed. Obviously, in each subsequent period, the tax rate increases. Agricultural enterprises that have not transferred to the payment of the unified agricultural tax will be subject to income tax on a general basis. This fact will stimulate agribusiness enterprises to switch to a special tax regime.

Agricultural enterprises that do not meet the requirements of the special tax regime will find themselves in unfavorable conditions starting from 2015, in connection with which they will strive to increase the share of agricultural products sold in order to reduce tax payments.

One of the areas of improvement is proposed in the agricultural organization LLC "Zimnyatskoye" for the use of tax planning and the introduction of a specialist in the staff of the enterprise, who is responsible for the tax policy of the enterprise and the effectiveness of decisions in the field of taxation. Tax planning is an objective necessity and requirement of every agricultural organization that is interested in reducing the tax burden in a legal way. The use of tax planning at Zimnyatskoye LLC will allow specialists to analyze and assess the tax situation, form a system of optimal solutions that allow achieving the predicted value of production growth.

Tax planning takes into account to a greater extent the peculiarities of agricultural production (seasonality and a long period of capital turnover) and minimizes tax payments.

Thus, agricultural producers wishing to reduce the tax burden must take into account many factors, including those that have long-term consequences for them. Zimnyatskoye LLC proposes the use of such tactical methods of tax planning as optimization of contractual relations, rational allocation of assets and profits, use of tax incentives, and preparation of a tax calendar. The complex application of strategic and operational methods in planning the taxation of an agricultural enterprise will optimize its tax burden and financial results.

In conclusion, we note that in order to overcome the crisis and intensify investment in agriculture, it is necessary not only to further improve the taxation of agricultural producers, aimed at reducing the tax burden, but also to provide tax preferences and the extension of preferential tax regimes to enterprises from other sectors of the economy investing in agriculture. economy or promoting the development of investment processes in the agricultural sector.

CONCLUSION

The final qualifying work was carried out on the materials of Zimnyatskoye LLC. Based on the studies carried out, it can be concluded that agricultural producers operating under special taxation regimes can pay a single agricultural tax, a single tax on imputed income, or use a simplified taxation system.

The unified agricultural tax replaces the payment of four taxes: income tax, property tax, unified social tax, VAT. An exception is VAT, which must be paid by firms when importing goods across the customs border of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and the Customs Code of the Russian Federation.

Tax payments to varying degrees affect the operation of an agricultural enterprise, and above all on the final financial results. Therefore, to ensure effective financial and economic activity, tax analysis is required, determination of the level of load and, if necessary, to carry out its optimization.

Zimnyatskoye LLC has been operating since June 2006. The main activities of Zimnyatskoye, OOO: production and sale of agricultural products, grain production; animal husbandry and hay making.

The company is developing quite dynamically, as evidenced by the growth of indicators. In 2010 - 2012, LLC "Zimnyatskoye" has a profit. In 2010 - 15 thousand rubles, in 2011 - 496 thousand rubles, in 2012 - 146 thousand rubles. In 2010-2012, the number of employees at Zimnyatskoye LLC increased from 10 to 69 people. Due to this, the wage fund grew and, accordingly, the cost price increased from 1391 thousand rubles. in 2007 up to 5738 thousand rubles. in 2008.

Summing up the overall results of the activity, it must be said that the highest indicators were recorded in 2008. This is due to an increase in the volume of production and sales of crop and livestock products.

LLC "Zimnyatskoye" until January 1, 2012 was on the general tax regime, in accordance with which it paid the following taxes: income tax; VAT; ESN; corporate property tax; insurance contributions for compulsory pension insurance; Personal income tax.

The organization was not a payer of transport tax, since the balance did not include vehicles registered in accordance with the current legislation.

The general taxation regime is a heavy burden for the majority of agricultural producers in the region, which results in a difficult financial situation and the inability to increase investment in fixed and working capital.

Starting from January 1, 2012, Zimnyatskoye LLC, in order to improve the efficiency of its activities, switched to a special taxation regime - a unified agricultural tax.

Tax payments in 2012 increased by 93.99%. This happened due to an increase in agricultural production. The largest share in the total aggregate of taxes levied on the enterprise is occupied by: in 2011, insurance premiums and property tax. For income tax, a preferential tax rate for 2010-2012 is set at 0%.

At the present stage, the problem of optimizing taxation is topical for agricultural producers, for whom the determining criterion for optimizing tax payments should be the achievement of the maximum amount of resources remaining at their disposal, subject to further ensuring the growth of profits from economic activities.

Tax planning allows to optimize the taxation of Zimnyatskoye LLC, that is, to determine the most advantageous procedure for paying taxes and to reduce the risks associated with this. Planning of tax liabilities for LLC "Zimnyatskoye" is carried out by influencing the elements of the tax: subject of taxation, tax base, tax incentives, tax payment deadline.

Properly organized tax optimization at Zimnyatskoye LLC provides for the study of all business contracts proposed for signing for their tax consequences. The effective impact on the maximum number of tax elements is achieved through the development of a contractual policy system. Pursuing a contractual policy, it is necessary to evaluate in a complex all the tax consequences of a concluded or amended business contract.

In addition to the contractual policy, accounting policy acts as one of the effective tools of tax planning at Zimnyatskoye LLC. According to the current legislation, the taxpayer has the right to choose the methods of accounting and tax accounting. A well-designed accounting policy will allow an economic entity to obtain savings when paying certain types of taxes (corporate property tax, profit tax).

The complex application of strategic and operational methods in planning the taxation of the agricultural enterprise "Zimnyatskoye" LLC will optimize its tax burden and financial results.

Therefore, the decision on the expediency of switching to one or another taxation system must necessarily be preceded by calculations of the tax burden, that is, economic benefits and losses.

A study of the calculations of tax payments under two taxation systems when applying the Unified Agricultural Tax and the general taxation regime for Zimnyatskoye LLC in comparable conditions in 2012 allows us to conclude that the final result of calculated tax liabilities is greatly influenced by VAT payments. Therefore, when switching to a special taxation regime, agricultural producers should take this fact into account.

Enterprises that have switched to a special tax regime feel some negative aspects of this system or lost profits. The calculation of the efficiency of various taxation systems showed that LLC "Zimnyatskoye" is expediently under a special taxation regime, as this allows to reduce tax liabilities, as well as improve its financial results from economic activities.

Tax planning is an objective necessity and a requirement of every agricultural organization that is interested in reducing the tax burden in a legal way. The use of tax planning at Zimnyatskoye LLC will allow specialists to analyze and assess the tax situation, form a system of optimal solutions that allow achieving the predicted value of production growth.

Thus, agricultural producers wishing to reduce the tax burden must take into account many factors, including those that have long-term consequences for them.

LIST OF USED SOURCES

Legal and regulatory framework

1. Civil Code of the Russian Federation (parts one, second, third and fourth) (as amended on 26.06.2007). // Consultant Plus [Electronic resource]: SPS. Electron, dan. and prog. - M., 2013.

2. Tax Code of the Russian Federation - part one of July 31, 1998 N 146-FZ and part two of August 5, 2000 N 117-FZ (as amended on 06.12.2007). // Consultant Plus [Electronic resource]: SPS. Electron, dan. and prog. - M., 2013.

3. Federal Law "On Accounting" dated 21.11.96. No. 129-FZ. (as amended on 26.06.2007) // Consultant Plus [Electronic resource]: SPS. Electron, dan. and prog. - M., 2013.

4. Federal Law "On Agricultural Cooperation" dated 08.12.1995 No. 193-FZ. (as amended on 06/26/2007) (with amendments and additions, effective from 01/01/2008) // Consultant Plus [Electronic resource]: ATP. Electron, dan. and prog. - M., 2013.

5. Federal Law "On the Financial Recovery of Agricultural Producers" dated 09.07.2002 No. 83-FZ (as amended on 13.05.2008) // Consultant Plus [Electronic resource]: ATP. Electron, dan. and prog. - M., 2013.

6.FZ RF of 27.07.2006 N 137-FZ<О внесении изменений в часть первую и часть вторую Налогового Кодекса РФ и в отдельные законодательные акты РФ в связи с осуществлением мер по совершенствованию налогового администрирования >(as amended by Federal Laws of 30.12.2006 N 268-FZ, of 22.07.2008 N 155-FZ, of 24.07.2009 N 213-FZ, of 27.07.2010 N 229-FZ, of 27.11.2010 N 306-FZ , from 29.11.2010 N 326-FZ) [Electronic resource] - Access mode: Consultant plus. -2012.

Textbooks and educational literature

7. Alexandrov I.M. Taxes and taxation. M .: Dashkov i K, 2006. - 296 p.

8. Vrublevskaya O.V., Romanovsky M.V. Taxes and taxation: Textbook for universities. 6th ed., Add. / Ed. M.V. Romanovsky. - SPb .: Peter, 2010 .-- 528 p.

9. Tax Law. Lecture notes. Kvasha Yu.F., Zrelov A.P., Kharlamov M.F. 3rd edition.-M .: Higher education - 2009. - 74 p.

Periodical literature, resources of legal reference systems and electronic databases

10. Abramova, E.V. Taxation system for agricultural producers [Text] / E.V. Abramova // Taxes (newspaper). - 2007. - No. 5. - P. 3-4.

11. Alekhin, S.N. Reducing Tax Rates: Utopia or Effective Solution [Text] / S.N. Alekhin // Russian tax courier. - 2006. - No. 18. - P.2-3.

12. Aliev, B.Kh. Development of special tax regimes in the region's economy [Text] / B.Kh. Aliyev // Taxes (newspaper). - 2008. - No. 18. - P.1-2.

13. Andreev, I.M. Features of the application of chapter 26.1 "Taxation system for agricultural producers (unified agricultural tax)" of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation [Text] / I.М. Andreev // All about taxes. - 2007. - No. 2, No. 3. - P. 1-2.

14. Andreev, I.M. Commentary on the Procedure for Completing a Tax Declaration on the Unified Agricultural Tax [Text] / I.М. Andreev // All about taxes. - 2007. - No. 7. - P. 3-4.

15. Anisina A.P. Suspension and extension of a field tax audit // Tax audit. - 2011. - No. 5. - S. 38-45.

16. Artamonova L.G. Principles of tax control and control work of tax authorities: current trends // Taxes and Taxation. - 2011. - No. 8. - S. 5-11.

17. Artelnykh, I.V. ESKhN [Text]: the declaration has changed / I.V. Artelnykh // "Russian tax courier". - 2007. - No. 13-14.

18. Blinova, S. Special regime employees will "redo" the rules [Text] / S. Blinova // Moscow accountant. - 2007. - No. 13. - S. 1-2.

19. Golovanov, G.R. New in the legislation on special regimes [Text]: practical consequences (on some provisions of the Federal Law of 22.07.2008 N 155-FZ) / G.R. Golovanov // Tax policy and practice. - 2008. - No. 11. - P.2-3.

20. Dirkova, E. On the agenda of the outgoing year [Text] / E. Dirkova // Practical accounting. - 2008. - No. 11. - S. 1-2.

21. Denisova, M.O. How to become an agricultural producer and save on income tax? [Text] / М.О. Denisova // Food industry: accounting and taxation. - 2008. - No. 5. - S. 2-3.

Similar documents

General conditions for the application of the unified agricultural tax, its taxpayers. Analysis of taxation of agricultural producers in the Russian Federation, proposals for improving the system of taxation of agriculture.

term paper, added 11/29/2009


Legal basis for the activities of agricultural producers. The main stages of the evolution of the system of taxation of agricultural producers in Russia. Features of the unified agricultural tax, the current system of its calculation and payment.

abstract added on 12/24/2011


The procedure for the transition to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, a list of expenses accepted for tax purposes. Documentary confirmation of the fact of submission of documents for registration of property rights. The procedure for calculating and paying the single tax.

test, added 11/18/2010


Features of the system of taxation of organizations and individuals in rural areas. Advantages and disadvantages of applying the unified agricultural tax. Analysis of the taxation system at agricultural enterprises in the Astrakhan region.

term paper, added 12/14/2011


Definition of the concept, essence, as well as categories of payers of corporate income tax, a single imputed income and a single agricultural tax for agricultural producers. Study of a simplified taxation system.

abstract, added 06/01/2015


Simplified taxation system: payment and settlement. Patent taxation system. Taxation in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities. Taxation system for agricultural producers.

term paper added 06/09/2015


Study of the scope of application of the unified agricultural tax. The procedure for determining and recognizing income and expenses. Revealing the peculiarities of the transition from the single agricultural tax regime to the simplified taxation system and to the general regime.

term paper, added 01/10/2011


General conditions for the application of the taxation system for agricultural producers. Conditions for the transition to the unified agricultural tax, the definition of the object of taxation and the tax base. The procedure and criteria for calculating the single tax. Tax accounting of losses.

term paper added on 08/21/2010


Taxation system for agricultural producers. Basic concepts of the unified agricultural tax. The procedure for its application, calculation and payment. Simplified taxation system for organizations and individual entrepreneurs.

test, added 01/23/2010


Individual entrepreneur taxation systems. The practice of applying a simplified taxation system, a system of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities. Analysis of the tax burden of an individual entrepreneur.

On the simplified tax system with the object "income minus expenses", a rate of 15% is applied, unless, of course, we are talking about a number of special benefits. Only “income” will be taxed with a 6% rate on “simplified taxation” - if an appropriate taxation object is selected. Of course, the amount of the accounted expenses for the unified agricultural tax and the simplified taxation system may differ slightly. But, despite this, all other things being equal, the payer will pay less tax to the budget for the unified agricultural tax than for the simplified tax system.

Another plus of the Unified Agricultural Tax in comparison with the simplified taxation system is the need to settle with the budget only once every six months - before July 25 and until March 31 of the year following the reporting year. On the simplified tax system, we recall that advance payments and tax are paid on a quarterly basis.

At the same time, the restrictions imposed by the use of a simplified form of activity do not cause problems for firms and individual entrepreneurs engaged in agriculture. It is unlikely that some of these entities also conduct, say, gambling business or trade in shares.

But the unified agricultural tax presupposes the fulfillment of a strict condition - the share of income from the production and sale of agricultural products must be at least 70% of the total sales. In other words, a taxpayer on a single agricultural tax, if he also carries out additional activities, must monitor compliance with this parameter. Otherwise, he will lose the right to use the Unified Agricultural Taxation. This situation can be attributed to a kind of disadvantages of the agricultural special regime.

The work with VAT is worth mentioning separately. As mentioned above, organizations and entrepreneurs who have switched to the Unified agricultural tax are no longer considered value added tax payers. On the one hand, this is a plus, since it saves on the total amount of tax, allows in some way to reduce the cost of its own products, thereby increasing its competitiveness. On the other hand, when purchasing goods or services from third-party sellers applying the general taxation system, the unified taxation tax payer loses the ability to deduct VAT paid to such a supplier. If the volume of such purchases is large, then this can be a tangible disadvantage of VAT exemption.

Optimization of ESHN

If we talk about the optimization of the tax base for the unified agricultural tax, then we cannot fail to mention that income and expenses under this special regime are determined on a cash basis, that is, they are taken into account in calculating the tax at the time of transfer of payment. Real deliveries of goods or services, both incoming and outgoing, do not matter.

This moment is key in planning income and expenses of agricultural producers. With the proper approach to accounting and building relationships with counterparties, the tax base within a specific reporting period can be minimized by making payments by simply tracking their dates in advance.

True, when determining the amount of costs, one should remember that only a strictly defined list of costs prescribed in paragraph 2 of Article 346.5 of the Tax Code is taken into account in the Unified Agricultural Tax.

However, this is not surprising. The expenses listed in this list either directly relate to agricultural (for example, payment for the purchase of seeds, seedlings, feed, etc.), or are related to the normal activities of the company (salaries of employees, contributions, purchase of OS, maintenance of official vehicles, etc.). Of course, all expenses included in the calculation of tax must be documented. In this case, there will be no problems with the reduction of the tax base due to them and, as a consequence, the optimization of the Unified Agricultural Tax.

Today in Russia there are two regimes of taxation of business entities:

1. Generally accepted system (general regime) of taxation, under which taxpayers are obliged to pay all taxes and fees established by the Tax Code and other norms of tax legislation, according to which the taxpayer has an object of taxation.

2. The system of special tax regimes, which is represented by four regimes: a simplified taxation system, directly provided for small businesses (they pay a single tax on total income or on gross proceeds); taxation system in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities; taxation system for agricultural producers (unified agricultural tax); system of taxation in the implementation of production sharing agreements.

7.1. It is pertinent to note that tax optimization during the transition to a simplified taxation system

On January 1, 2003, a special tax regime was introduced, provided for by Ch. 26.2 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation - "Simplified taxation system" (STS) It was based on the Federal Law of December 29, 1995 No. 222-FZ "On the Simplified System of Taxation, Accounting and Reporting for Small Businesses", on the basis of a special tax regime has long been known to taxpayers and tested in practice.

First of all, the transition to the simplified system (return to the general regime) is voluntary, and secondly, not everyone can switch to the simplified system, there are a number of conditions. This further increases the importance of tax optimization in the framework of tax management.

A list of organizations and entrepreneurs is legally established, which under no circumstances are entitled to switch to a simplified system. For example, organizations and entrepreneurs producing and (or) selling excisable products, engaged in gambling business, organizations with branches and (or) representative offices, banks, insurers, etc.

All other organizations and entrepreneurs must comply with the requirements (Article 346.12 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation):

• the amount of income from sales (excluding VAT) for the previous 9 months should not exceed 15 million rubles. (20 million rubles for the tax period);
• the average number of employees for the tax (reporting) period should not exceed 100 people;
• the residual value of fixed assets and intangible assets according to accounting data should not exceed 100 million rubles.
  It is worth noting that the residual value at m is determined as of the 1st day of the month in which the application for the transition to the "simplified system" was submitted.

If these requirements are violated, the taxpayer is considered to have switched to the general taxation regime from the beginning of the quarter in which the excess was committed. Consequently, it will be extremely important to restore all taxes and submit reports according to the generally established system, as well as restore tax and accounting reports ("retroactively" ϶ᴛᴏ is almost impossible to do)

In general, the essence and main advantage of the simplified taxation system will be single tax, paid in return for a number of taxes: for organizations - income tax, corporate property tax, unified social tax and VAT (except for VAT paid when importing goods into the customs territory of the Russian Federation); for entrepreneurs - personal income tax (on income received from entrepreneurial activity), property tax (on property used in entrepreneurial activity), unified social tax, VAT (except for VAT paid when importing goods into the customs territory)

First step tax optimization for taxpayers who have the right to switch to a simplified system, choose a more favorable regime: general or simplified.

Let us study by example the possibility of using a simplified system as a method of tax optimization.

Example. The organization is engaged in the provision of services (not to the population) Sales proceeds (receipts including all taxes) - 1,525,000 rubles, including VAT of 230,000 rubles, proceeds from the sale of services to the population 525,000 rubles. Costs: material - 825,000 (including VAT 125,847 rubles, cost without VAT 699,153 rubles); for wages - 250,000 rubles; Unified social tax - 65,000 (250,000 x 26%), including insurance contributions for pension insurance - 35,000 (250,000 x 14%), insurance against accidents is not taken into account; others - 100,000 rubles. The average annual value of the property is 200,000 rubles. Accordingly, the amount of corporate property tax is RUB 4,400. (200,000 x 2.2%) In February 2006, it is planned to purchase 3 computers worth 30,000 rubles. each (total RUB 90,000, including VAT RUB 13,729) The estimated useful life of computers is 4 years, thus depreciation under the general tax regime would have amounted to RUB 15,890. (the depreciation method is linear - 76,271 x 1/48 x 10), and in case of exemption from VAT - 18,750 rubles. (90,000 x 1/48 x 10 months) Calculations are presented in Table. 7.

Table 7
Comparative analysis of the general taxation regime and the simplified taxation system

Based on the above, we come to the conclusion that for a given structure of income and expenses, the simplified taxation system is more beneficial than the general taxation regime.

Second phase optimization for taxpayers who have the right to switch to a simplified system, choose one of two tax payment options:

• at the rate of 15% from income reduced by the amount of expenses (object “income minus expenses”);
• at a rate of 6% from income (object "income")

For the first object of taxation, there is a minimum single tax calculated at a rate of 1% to income. Moreover, it is impossible to change the object of taxation during the period of application of the simplified taxation system (clause 2 of article 346.14 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation)

It is possible to determine which of the options for paying the single tax is more profitable in each specific case in different ways. It is important to note that one of the possible ways is to calculate the share of the single tax in income for each of the options. Do not forget that the option in which it will be less (that is, a smaller part of the income is withdrawn in the form of tax), and will be preferable.

The share of the single tax for the object "income minus expenses" is determined based on the expected level of profitability.
The share of the single tax for the object "income" by definition is 6%. It should be borne in mind that companies that have chosen the object of "income" reduce the single tax by the amount of contributions to compulsory pension insurance. The maximum amount of such deductions is 50% of the tax amount (clause 3 of Art. 346.21 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). As a result, the actual share of the single tax in income will be less than 6%. Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the profitability of using one or another option is also influenced by the alleged wage fund (payroll), because the amount of insurance contributions to the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation depends on it.

Excluding the above, taxpayers who have chosen the object of "income" have the right to reduce the single tax by the amount of temporary disability benefits paid at the expense of the enterprise (and not at the expense of the FSS of the Russian Federation). Such a right is granted to them by the Federal Law of December 31, 2002 No. 190-FZ ... Therefore, the estimated amount of sick leave payments also affects the profitability of applying one or another option.

Based on the foregoing, we come to the conclusion that the choice of one or another object of taxation implies three stages of calculations:

1. determination of the impact on the value of the single tax of the expected level of profitability;
2. determining the impact of the proposed wage bill (payroll);
3. determining the impact of the estimated amount of temporary disability benefits paid at the expense of the enterprise.

Figure № 13. Algorithm for choosing a more profitable object of taxation in the transition to a simplified taxation system

If the taxpayer does not intend to pay the sick leave from the ϲʙᴏ bill, the third stage is unnecessary. The estimated profitability is calculated as the sum of the planned profit divided by the amount of the planned income. The estimated amount of income and expenses is determined in accordance with Articles 346.15 and 346.16 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (i.e., only those taken into account for tax purposes are taken into account)

Having determined the expected level of profitability, you should calculate the share of the single tax in income for the object "income minus expenses":

De = R X Se / 100%,

where: De - the share of the single tax in income, Р - profitability (%), Се - the single tax rate (15%)

Table 8 shows specific ratios between different levels of profitability and shares of the single tax in income when choosing the object "income minus expenses".

Table 8
Profitability and the share of the single tax in income with the object of taxation "income minus expenses"

It must be remembered that for those who have chosen this object, the amount of the minimum tax is set at 1% of income. It is worth noting that it is paid if the share of the single tax on the object "income minus expenses" is less than 1% in income (excluding expenses) (clause 6 of article 346.18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation)

If the profitability is above 40%, it is more profitable to choose the “income” object. Moreover, regardless of the size of the payroll and the payment of benefits for temporary disability, since when choosing this option, the share of the single tax in income will not exceed 6%.

With a profitability of 6.7% to 40%, it is impossible to draw a final conclusion without information about the expected level of payroll and the amount of sick leave payments at the expense of the enterprise. Only in the presence of ϶ᴛᴏth information, it is possible to determine the actual (taking into account both deductions) share of the single tax in income when choosing the object "income".

Further, it is important to determine how the estimated size of the payroll will affect the size of the single tax. First of all, you need to predict the amount of payroll, that is, payments for which insurance contributions for compulsory pension insurance are calculated. It is worth saying that for calculations, you can use the indicator of the estimated share of payroll in income, as well as the share of insurance premiums in income. The deduction for insurance premiums cannot exceed 50% of the value of the single tax, that is, 3% of income. Table 9 calculated the values ​​of the deduction for insurance premiums depending on the share of payroll in the income of the enterprise.

The calculation is based on the fact that the amount of insurance premiums is 14% of the payroll, that is, the regressive scale is not applied. As a result, the deduction for insurance premiums reaches its maximum value (3% of income) when the share of payroll in income exceeds 21.4% ((3%: 14%) X 100%).

Table 9
Dependence of the deduction for insurance premiums on the share of payroll in income with the object of taxation "income"

Example. Organization from January 1, 2004 passes to the simplified tax system. The expected level of profitability is 30%, the share of payroll in income is 16%. Let's say that the payment of benefits for temporary disability at the expense of the enterprise is not planned. In this case, when choosing the object “income minus expenses”, the share of the single tax in income will be 4.5%. When choosing the object "income" - 3.76%. Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that it is more profitable to establish income as the object of taxation.

Further, it is extremely important to determine the impact of the payment of disability benefits. If the company intends to pay benefits for temporary incapacity for work at the ϲʙᴏ account, ϶ᴛᴏ the circumstance must also be taken into account in a comparative analysis of two options for paying a single tax. Unlike the deduction for insurance contributions for compulsory pension insurance, the amount of the deduction for benefits is not limited, that is, the taxpayer has the right to reduce the single tax on the entire amount of benefits paid for ϲʙᴏ account. It is worth saying that for the calculations, an indicator of the share of payments of temporary disability benefits in income is required. When choosing the object "income" for this share, the share of the single tax in income will decrease.

Example. The organization from January 1, 2006 switches to the USN. The expected level of profitability is 20%, the share of payroll in income is 35%. It is assumed that the share of sick leave paid by the enterprise for the ϲʙᴏth bill will be 0.5% of the income. When choosing the object “income minus expenses”, the share of the single tax in income will be 3%. Since the share of payroll in income exceeds 21.43% (35% »21.43%), the deduction for insurance premiums for compulsory insurance will be maximum - 3% of income. As a result, when choosing the object "income", the share of the single tax in income will be 2.5% (6% - 3% - 0.5%) Based on the above, we come to the conclusion that it is more profitable to establish income as an object of taxation.

If the share of payments of temporary disability benefits in income exceeds 2%, it is possible that the total amount of the deduction (taking into account the maximum deduction for insurance premiums) will be more than 5% of the amount of income. Then the share of the single tax in the income for the “income” object will be less than 1%, that is, it will not exceed the minimum tax for the “income minus expenses” object. As a result, the option with the object "income" will be profitable regardless of the level of the expected profitability (even at a level lower than 6.7%)

Despite the fact that the simplified system is aimed specifically at reducing the tax burden, in some cases the tax liabilities of taxpayers may increase:

• economic activity is unprofitable or profitability is very low (in this case, a situation is possible when the amount of the minimum tax will exceed the total amount of taxes paid when using the general tax regime);
• in the composition of costs, a significant share is made up of costs that are not taken into account when calculating the single tax (consulting and information services, R&D costs, court and arbitration costs, etc.), while the profitability is low;
• The taxpayer carries out transactions with securities (in particular, settlements on a bill of exchange), transactions under cession agreements, assignment of claims and other similar transactions.

A significant advantage of the simplified system will be a significant simplification of tax and accounting. At the same time, despite the obvious advantages of this taxation system, it causes a number of problems and difficulties in application, which is extremely important to take into account in tax management when choosing this system.

It is important to note that one of the reasons that keeps organizations and entrepreneurs from switching to a simplified taxation system is ϶ᴛᴏ VAT. Payers of the single tax are not recognized as payers for value added tax, because they do not include VAT in the price, and, therefore, the buyer cannot accept this amount of tax for deduction. Due to the fact that they do not set the amount of VAT, it becomes unprofitable for some buyers to work with them. It is more profitable for buyers who are VAT payers to work with those sellers who apply the general taxation regime, or negotiate with sellers who apply the “simplified taxation” on the sale of goods at a lower price. Except for the above, organizations and entrepreneurs working on a simplified system do not accept input VAT for deduction, since the latter are provided only to VAT payers. This is another reason why the named special tax regime is losing its attractiveness.

Another reason why not all enterprises can use the simplified taxation system for tax optimization purposes is the need to pay additional amounts of the single tax and penalties when selling fixed assets. In particular, ϶ᴛᴏ concerns organizations that use income reduced by the amount of expenses as an object of taxation. For items of fixed assets acquired during the period of application of the simplified system, their cost immediately (as of the date of commissioning) and is fully included in the composition of expenses. At the same time, if such fixed assets are sold (transferred) before the expiration of three years from the date of their acquisition (in relation to fixed assets with a useful life of more than 15 years - before the expiration of 10 years from the date of their acquisition), the tax base for the entire period of operation of the fixed asset is subject to recalculation taking into account the provisions of Chapter 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation with payment of a penalty.

When tax optimization using a simplified taxation system, one more difficulty should be kept in mind - the inclusion of advances received from buyers and customers in the tax base. Advances received are included in income, while advances issued are not included in expenses, since expenses of taxpayers are recognized as expenses after their actual payment. At the same time, when applying the simplified system, 15 or 6% is paid to the budget from the received advance (depending on the selected object of taxation), while in the general taxation regime, advances are subject to VAT at the estimated rate (18/180 or 10/110) , which exceeds the amount of a single tax at a rate of 6%.

Taking into account the advantages and disadvantages listed above, we can conclude that the transition to a simplified system is beneficial for trade organizations, public catering organizations and organizations providing various services to the population, since buyers will mainly be individuals who are not VAT payers, and the moment of implementation traditionally coincides with the moment of payment. At the same time, the named categories of taxpayers traditionally fall under the mandatory effect of another special tax regime - the unified tax on imputed income for activities that provide paid services for cash.

Excluding the above, the use of the simplified system as one of the methods of tax management is advisable in the case when the bulk of buyers are organizations and individual entrepreneurs who also apply the simplified system or apply the general taxation regime, but are exempted from paying VAT.

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that when planning a single tax under a simplified taxation system, organizations should analyze the feasibility of switching to it, choose an object of taxation and plan taxes paid under this special tax regime.

7.2. Management of a unified tax on imputed income for certain types of activities

A feature of the special tax regime in the form of a single tax on imputed income for certain types of activities (UTII) will be an object of taxation, which is imputed income, taking into account the basic profitability of a unit of a natural base indicator (1 sq. M. Of production area, number of employees, number of production units, etc.) Therefore, tax optimization is possible in two main areas:

• an increase in the output of products (goods, works, services) and an increase in its actual profitability;
• minimization of other (additional to the single) taxes by increasing taxable items related to the main activity and reducing taxable items for other types of activities not related to the special regime. Material published on http: // site

UTII is primarily convenient for individual entrepreneurs, who find it difficult to hide the amount of revenue and officially spend all expenses. Although the Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not provide taxpayers with the opportunity to choose whether to switch to paying a single tax on imputed income or not to switch, there is an opportunity to optimize the tax on imputed income.

The amount of tax on imputed income does not depend on either the amount of revenue or the amount of profit, but only on the so-called physical indicators - the area of ​​occupied premises, the number of employees, etc. Therefore, the methods of optimizing UTII are based on these indicators.

For example, when paying UTII, depending on the retail area of ​​the store, you can divide the premises, calling most of the store a showroom, since only the area used for trade is taxed (Article 346.27 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). , and UTII is not charged from the exhibition area, it is possible to significantly reduce its size (resolution of the FAS SKO dated May 14, 2002 No. F08-1543 / 2002-5720A) It should be said that for a clear delineation of premises it is important to separate the demonstration room from where the goods are sold , for example, by placing a sign of the relevant content at the conditional border, as well as by a written order of the head (director) to record the fact of the division of the store into two premises: for trade and for demonstration, as well as storage of goods. Except for the above, such an order should be accompanied by a plan indicating the specific areas, and a copy of it on an enlarged scale should be posted in the store itself. Based on the foregoing, we come to the conclusion that, in essence and in a specific form, a "title document" will be created, which stipulates the definition of the retail space (Article 346.27 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) The documents must indicate that the showroom is simultaneously used for storing goods - therefore, it cannot be considered commercial.

A similar method of reducing UTII is also applicable to catering establishments, since they pay UTII from the area of ​​the hall to serve visitors. Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that part of the common room, for example with billiard tables, can be allocated and not charged with UTII. Excluding the above, since the services for organizing leisure activities are classified as public catering, which is according to the Classifier of services to the population OK 002-93, approved by the Resolution of the State Standard of the Russian Federation of June 28, 1993 No. 163, then if part of the premises occupied by billiards is rented, it will be disposed of by the tenant who does not provide catering services. The tenant's activity has nothing to do with public catering, and he does not have to pay UTII. This means that before dividing the area, it is extremely important to calculate in which case there are fewer payments - with UTII or when calculating ordinary taxes in a general manner. Moreover, at the same time, it is extremely important to take into account tax payments, which the tenant is obliged to charge from the rent, even if it is very small.

The restrictions on the area of ​​the trading floor established in relation to UTII must be observed even if the taxpayer rents it, for example, in a large shopping center or in a store. If all conditions are met, then the established limit for the area of ​​the trading floor is valid, i.e. if it is more than 150 sq. meters, the tenant does not have to pay UTII.

Since many taxpayers carry out their activities in several regions, it should be borne in mind that the established restrictions must be observed for each object, even if they are located in different regions. This means that if at least one object has exceeded the limit, UTII is not paid as a whole for the organization (for all facilities of an individual entrepreneur) Catering organizations are not transferred to the payment of UTII if the area of ​​the visitor service hall exceeds 150 sq. meters. Moreover, ϶ᴛᴏ the rule (as in the case of trade organizations) must be observed in relation to each of the existing objects. Based on the above, we come to the conclusion that if the taxpayer has several public catering points, then it is enough if at least one of them has a hall with an area of ​​over 150 sq. meters, and in ϶ᴛᴏm case there will be a choice between the general and simplified taxation systems.

If UTII depends on the number of personnel, persons providing household or veterinary services, repairing and washing vehicles, organizing retail trade, can reduce the number of employees, thereby reducing the tax. The collective of workers can be divided into two parts, and one part can be left to work as before on the basis of labor contracts, and the second part can be turned into individual entrepreneurs who carry out their activities without forming a legal entity (unincorporated legal entity) The latter continue to perform ϲʙᴏand their previous duties, but with them contracts have been concluded for the provision of various services - for example, for accounting, ensuring the security of an enterprise, etc., since such activities are not subject to UTII. In this way, with a formal reduction in the number of employees, it is possible to increase the real personnel, regardless of any established restrictions. Excluding the above, it is possible with a part of the organization's employees to conclude civil law contracts for the provision of services in their specialty. Material published on http: // site

7.3. It is pertinent to note that tax optimization by agricultural producers

Throughout the period of economic reform, the state tried to create a taxation mechanism for agricultural producers that would take into account the specifics of their production as much as possible.

The unified agricultural tax (UAT) is intended to solve several problems: first, to reduce the tax burden on the sector; secondly, simplification of the procedure for calculating and paying tax. The advantage of a taxation system for agricultural producers is that it forces them to use the land efficiently. Only under the condition of full and high-quality use of the land is the single tax beneficial to the agricultural producer, because the tax amount is based not on income, but on the area of ​​land.

As a result, it was decided to transfer them to a unified agricultural tax, embodied in Chapter 26.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, adopted by Federal Law No. 187-FZ of December 29, 2001. At the same time, the introduction of such a regime was provided for by legislative acts of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, due to the complexity of the application of the new taxation mechanism, only a few regions have introduced a single agricultural tax. This was due to the fact that it was proposed to calculate the tax on the cadastral value of 1 hectare of agricultural land, which in many regions had not been developed.

The idea of ​​a single agricultural tax in Russia goes back to the new economic policy, with its replacement of the surplus tax with the tax in kind. In those years, the introduction of the tax in kind gave a high positive result. At the same time, such a tax was introduced, firstly, in a small-peasant country, where a ramified form of the tax system was fundamentally impossible. Excluding the above, the tax in kind had an effect against the background of the abolition of the surplus appropriation system that was killing the village.

The second surge in interest in the tax in kind emerged in the late 1980s. during the period of active reform of the Soviet agricultural system, which was also partly inspired by the search for solutions in the NEP system. Then, to increase incentives for agricultural producers, state supplies were split into state orders and taxes in kind. Unlike the 1920s. this system had absolutely no effect other than disrupting statistical dynamics.

For the first time in modern Russia, in August 1996, a unified food tax was introduced on agricultural producers in the Belgorod Region. The base tax rate was calculated in milling wheat per hectare of arable land.
It should be noted that the rest of the products were recalculated according to the established coefficients. The rates varied by district depending on the quality of the land. The Food Corporation was engaged in the collection and sale of the tax in kind. It should be said that for agricultural enterprises, joining the tax in kind was not obligatory - they could keep their previous payments. In 2000, the agricultural tax system in the region was abolished as contrary to federal legislation. In 1999, in a number of regions of the country, experiments with a single agricultural tax also began: in the Tyumen region, in the Lysogorsky district of the Saratov region.

The essence of the Saratov experience was that the majority of taxes paid by agricultural producers, namely: VAT, sales tax, income tax, property tax, land tax, resource payments, for environmental pollution, payments to state non-budgetary funds, local taxes, even personal income tax was replaced by the payment of a single tax. The tax rate was calculated per hectare of agricultural land, subject to adjustments depending on the quality of the land. The rate was calculated on the basis of the amount of taxes and other obligatory payments on average for three years preceding the introduction of the single tax, separately for each category of agricultural producers. The tax was paid quarterly, but taking into account the seasonality. In the first and second quarters, producers paid 10% of the annual tax, and in the third and fourth quarters - 40% each. In case of early payment of the annual amount of tax, a benefit from 5 to 20% was provided in full. For 4 years of the experiment, the tax has shown ϲʙᴏyu efficiency. Payers were satisfied with the simplicity of tax calculation, a sharp reduction and simplification of reporting, and the absence of fiscal audits. During the experiment, the tax paid annually was three times the original baseline. There were no arrears in payments to the budget and extra-budgetary funds. After the experiment was terminated, the amount of taxes paid began to decrease significantly.

The practice of applying a single agricultural tax shows that a good idea does not always lead to an increase in budget revenues. For example, the unified tax rate (20.53 rubles) established in the Bryansk region contributed to the redistribution of the tax burden from advanced farms to backward ones. It is worth noting that it was defined as the ratio of 1/4 of the amount of taxes and fees payable by agricultural producers to the budgets of all levels in ϲᴏᴏᴛʙᴇᴛϲᴛʙii with a general taxation regime for the previous calendar year, with the exception of taxes and fees, the obligation to pay which remains in the transition to the payment of a single tax, to a comparable cadastral value of agricultural land. The cadastral valuation of land in the region differed at times - from 3927 rubles. up to RUB 17 622 per hectare. The calculation of the tax rate for each farm showed that for strong farms it will exceed 583 rubles, and for others it will be no more than 60 kopecks. This put agricultural producers in an unequal playing field.

An important role is played by the amount of land assigned to the manufacturer. With the transition to a unified agricultural tax, it is unprofitable to have uncultivated land. Many agricultural producers began to abandon such land, and a fund of unclaimed land was formed in the region. As a result, the transition to the payment of a single agricultural tax was a blessing for strong farms, and an unbearable burden for the weak. This could not but affect the collection of the tax. For the 1st half of 2003 from 49.4 million rubles. the calculated tax was received by the budget only 10.3 million rubles. (20.8%)

Federal Law No. 147-FZ of November 11, 2003 adopted a new version of Chapter 26.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which is fundamentally different from the previous one. When developing it, the provisions of Chapter 26.2 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation on the simplified taxation system were largely taken into account.

The primary innovations and advantages offered by the new edition of Chapter 26.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation include the following:

• the provisions of the chapter are of the nature of direct action (there is no need for the adoption of existing legislative acts in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation);
• the transition to a special taxation regime in the form of unified agricultural tax is carried out by taxpayers on a voluntary basis in January of the year in which such a transition is carried out.
• organizations, peasant (farmer) enterprises and individual entrepreneurs engaged in the production of excisable products, who are payers of UTII, as well as organizations with branches and representative offices, are not entitled to transfer to a special taxation regime;
• payment of the unified agricultural tax replaces the payment of income tax (for individual entrepreneurs - personal income tax), property tax, unified social tax and VAT (except for VAT paid when goods are imported into the customs territory of the Russian Federation);
• the criterion for classifying an organization or individual entrepreneur as an agricultural producer will be income from the sale of their agricultural products and fish grown by them, including products of its primary processing, which cannot be less than 70% of the total volume of sales income;
• the object of taxation by the unified agricultural tax will be income reduced by the amount of expenses (income is determined in accordance with Articles 249 and 250 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, and expenses - in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 346.5 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), the so-called "net income" with a rate tax 6%;
• annual tax period and semi-annual reporting period: tax is paid only twice a year, before July 25 of the reporting year and until March 31 of the following year.

All ϶ᴛᴏ gives grounds to dwell in more detail on tax optimization within the framework of the latter, as the most mobile and variant special tax regime.

According to the tax authorities in Russia, 50.2 thousand taxpayers pay the unified agricultural tax, including 18.4 thousand organizations, 11.6 thousand entrepreneurs and 20.2 thousand peasant (farmer) households. According to the estimates of the specialists of the Ministry of Agriculture of Russia, in the farms that have switched over to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, the amount of tax payments may be reduced by about one third.

The economic effect (potential savings on taxes) from the use of the special regime during the transition from the general tax regime to the payment of unified agricultural tax can be calculated using the following formula:

E = (NP + VAT + NI + ESN) - ESHN,

where E - savings on taxes in the transition to the payment of unified agricultural tax; NP - the amount of corporate income tax paid to the budget for the tax period; VAT is the amount of value added tax paid to the budget for the tax period; NI - the amount of tax on property of organizations, paid to the budget for the tax period; USN - the amount of the unified social tax charged for the tax period; Unified agricultural tax is the amount of the unified agricultural tax.

For individual entrepreneurs, including heads of peasant (farmer) households, in the formula, the profit tax is replaced by the tax on income of individuals, and the tax on the property of organizations is replaced by the tax on property of individuals paid in relation to property that is used in commercial activities. Material published on http: // site
Except for the above, income tax of individuals and UST is not taxed on the income of members of a peasant (farm) farm from the production, processing and sale of their own agricultural products for 5 years, starting from the year of registration of the farm (clause 14 of article 217 and subparagraph 5 of p. . 1 article 238 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) For a peasant (farm) enterprise engaged in agricultural activities for less than 5 years, only three indicators will actually participate in the calculation of tax savings: the amount of VAT, the amount of property tax of individuals (in terms of property, used in commercial activities) and the amount of the unified agricultural tax.

Excluding the above, the calculation should take into account:

• taxpayer status (organization or entrepreneur);
• what regime the taxpayer is currently applying (general or simplified taxation system);
• the economy will be planned unprofitable or profitable;
• what fixed assets (buildings, agricultural machinery, etc.) the taxpayer has, what is the degree of their wear and whether they are planned to be renewed in the near future;
• are there regional property tax benefits in the constituent entity of the Russian Federation;
• how significant is the share of wages (and certainly the share of UST) in the expenses of the enterprise;
• who will be the consumer of the manufactured products - VAT payers or not;
• what is the share of income from non-core activities. Material published on http: // site

The ways to optimize the tax burden under the UAT are to maneuver the advantages of agricultural producers who have switched to paying the UAT for a number of Russian taxes: profit tax, value added tax, unified social tax, corporate property tax. Let's compare the taxes paid under the general taxation system and under the special regime.

For agricultural producers who have not switched to the payment of unified agricultural tax, preferential rates have been established for the coming years income tax for activities related to the sale of their agricultural products, as well as the sale of their own agricultural products produced and processed by these organizations:

• in 2004-2007 - 0%;
• in 2008-2009 - 6%;
• in 2010–2011 - 12%;
• in 2012–2014 - 18%;
• since 2015 - 24%.

Reduced income tax rates cannot be applied to those farms whose status does not meet the criteria of Chapter 26.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (for example, the share of income is below 70%)

Since most farms will be unprofitable and do not pay corporate income tax, the benefits of switching to the unified agricultural tax in the form of income tax savings are not significant.

The sale of most food products (for example, meat, milk and grain) is taxed at the rate VAT ten %. With all this, agricultural enterprises purchase many goods (agricultural machinery, fuels and lubricants), which are taxed at a rate of 18%. Therefore, the amount of deductions for this tax from agricultural enterprises traditionally exceeds the amount of charges. It should be said that it turns out that the budget often has to return part of the "input" VAT to the agricultural enterprise. Unified agricultural tax payers have no obligation to calculate and pay VAT, but they also have no right to deduct the "input" tax. It should be said that for some agricultural enterprises ϶ᴛᴏ can be a significant disadvantage. With the transition to the payment of unified agricultural tax, agricultural producers face the problem of pricing policy. Consumers of agricultural products can be both individuals and entrepreneurs who are not VAT payers, as well as organizations and entrepreneurs who are tax payers. Unified agricultural tax payers will not be VAT payers and are not entitled to present tax to buyers. Therefore, buyers applying the general tax regime are deprived of the right to deduct input VAT. It should be said that for many buyers ϶ᴛᴏ may be unprofitable. In this case, in order to maintain the competitiveness of the products, the agro-industrial complex enterprise can reduce the price.

Since 2005, agricultural producers have been paying UST at a maximum rate of 20% (clause 1 of article 241 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, the status of an agricultural producer for the purpose of paying the unified social tax is determined in accordance with Law No. 193-FZ. In the agricultural sector, the level of wages is traditionally low, and the savings on the UST during the transition to the Unified agricultural tax may turn out to be insignificant.

The corporate property tax, amended since 2004, does not provide federal property tax benefits for organizations for the production, processing and storage of agricultural products. Moreover, such benefits can be provided at the regional level. Therefore, the solution to the issue of saving on property tax depends on the specific norms of the laws of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

As for the simplification of reporting for enterprises applying the UAT, in this case the organizations do not excuse themselves from the obligation to keep accounting records in full, as it is established, for example, for enterprises applying the “simplified tax system”. Moreover, in addition to the general requirements, organizations are also required to comply with industry accounting guidelines.

Let us compare, using the example of a conditional organization, the tax burden when applying the unified agricultural tax and the general taxation regime.

Example. LLC "Voskhod" is registered and operates on the territory of the Saratov region.
It should be noted that the main activity is the production of agricultural products and their primary processing. The organization implements repair and construction work for other agricultural enterprises.

Indicators of activity of LLC "Voskhod" for 2005

The share of Voskhod LLC income from the sale of products made from its own agricultural products is 73% ((RUB 500,000 - RUB 45,455): (RUB 700,000 - RUB 75,963) x 100%). This indicator allows the organization to switch to the payment of unified agricultural tax. The share of income from the implementation of repair and construction works - 27% (100% - 73%)

The tax burden under the general tax regime is.

Income excluding VAT is 624,037 rubles. ((RUB 500,000 - RUB 45,455) + (RUB 200,000 - RUB 30,508)). Material costs net of VAT - 448,074 rubles. ((400,000 rubles - 61,017 rubles) + (120,000 rubles - 10,909 rubles)).

The amount of VAT payable to the budget is 4037 rubles. ((RUB 45 455 + RUB 30 508) - (RUB 10 909 + RUB 61 017))

Payroll taxes will be 26,000 rubles. (RUB 130,000 X 20%) - UST accrued; 13 390 RUB (130,000 rubles. X 10.3%) - contributions for compulsory pension insurance. Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the amount of the UST paid to the budget will amount to 12,610 rubles. (RUB 26,000 - RUB 13,390)

The total amount of expenses - 604,074 rubles, of which: 404,838 rubles. - material costs; 130,000 rubles. - wage; 12 610 RUB - ESN; 13 390 RUB - contributions to compulsory pension insurance.

In ϲᴏᴏᴛʙᴇᴛϲᴛʙii with paragraph 9 of Art. 274 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, an organization that receives a profit (loss) from agricultural activities is obliged to keep separate accounting of costs for such activities. Material published on http: // site
Since it is impossible to split the costs in this case, the organization distributes them by type of activity in proportion to the share of income from agricultural activities in the total income of the organization for all types of activities. Material published on http: // site

Expenses for the sale of own agricultural products are equal to 453,055 rubles. (RUB 604,074 X 75%)

The tax base for income tax from the sale of own agricultural products is 1490 rubles. (RUB 454,545 - RUB 453,055)

The tax rate on profit from the sale of own agricultural products in 2005 was 0%, therefore the profit tax is equal to 0 rubles.

Expenses for the implementation of repair and construction work - 151018 rubles. (RUB 604,074 X 25%)

The tax base for income tax on repair and construction work of agricultural machinery - 18,474 rubles. (169,492 rubles - 151,018 rubles)

The income tax rate for other (non-agricultural) types of activity is 24%, whereas the income tax is equal to 4433 rubles. (18474 rubles X 24%)

The tax burden when applying the Unified Agricultural Taxation is the following values.

If the organization does not intend to reduce the price when switching to the unified agricultural tax, the income from sales taken into account when forming the tax base for the unified agricultural tax is equal to 700,000 rubles.

The costs of the organization taken into account in the formation of the tax base will amount to 663,390 rubles: 448,074 rubles. - material costs; RUB 71926 (RUB 10,909 + RUB 61,017) - VAT; 130,000 rubles. - wage; 13 390 RUB (130,000 rubles. X 10.3%) - contributions for compulsory pension insurance.

The taxable base for the unified agricultural tax is 36,610 rubles. (700,000 rubles - 663,390 rubles)

Based on all of the above, we come to the conclusion that the amount of the unified agricultural tax paid to the budget will amount to 2,196 rubles. (36 610 rubles X 6%)

Savings on taxes when applying the unified agricultural tax in comparison with the general taxation regime in 2005 will amount to: (4433 rubles + 4037 rubles + 12610 rubles) - 2196 rubles. = RUB 18 884

For newly created organizations (newly registered individual entrepreneurs) and for taxpayers who are already registered with the tax authorities, the procedure for transferring to the payment of unified agricultural tax is different. Newly created organizations and newly registered individual entrepreneurs have the right to switch to the payment of unified agricultural tax from the moment of registration with the tax inspectorate, for which they must apply for the transition to a special regime simultaneously with the application for state registration.

Enterprises and individual entrepreneurs already operating in the field of agribusiness, if they intend to switch to the payment of the unified agricultural tax, are required to submit an application between October 20 and December 20 of the current year. Organizations submit an application to the tax office at their location, and individual entrepreneurs - at their place of residence.