If the email is not displayed correctly, please click here

Dear Readers, in the new edition of our newsletters, we have compiled an overview of recent changes in the field of labor, administrative and tax law.
If you have more questions don't hesitate to contact the experts of our company.

The employee agreed that the employment would terminate in a shorter time-scale after notification than the period provided by law. The latter is two to three months in duration. The employee received both the mandatory and the contractual compensation for the agreed period.

Afterwards the employee claimed the compensation for the second and third months, in deviation from the wording of the agreement, grounding upon the provision of law. The employer`s opinion was that it had already paid in full all which the employee was entitled to and declined the claim.

The Moscower city court held that the conduct of the employer was not lawful. The compensation for a pre-term rescission of the employment relations, on the one hand, and the compensation for the termination of the employment relation, on the other hand, are not the same. The employee may not be deprived of its title to the average monthly remuneration for the period of job search (up to three months after termination).

To note, the court has given such a decision not fort he judgement.

In accordance with an internal regulation, if an employee comes from another city, the company shall provide him/her with a lodging, or compensate the renting costs. Such compensation was paid to the general director of company. The payment was considered by the courts a social payment and, as a consequence, not subject to social insurance contributions.

Despite the official standpoint of the ministry of finance and of federal tax authority, the employers have already prevailed in such cases before. This particular case is interesting because the decision was taken by the court on the ground of the new legislation (provisions of Tax Code of Russia). This means that the courts do not change the approach which was in use during the period the Statute on social insurance contributions remaining in force.

The commercial court of the west-sybirish region has to decide on a complicated case with a plenty of separate issues. The taxpayer has, inter alia, omitted to file the demanded documents with the tax inspectorate in time. The company invoked in particular the circumstance that it only stored the documents/data in electronic form. The data was namely the tax registers, main book and the accounting policy. As a consequence of the sudden error of the program the data were not legible for a time period. This was the cause why the enterprise failed to file the demanded documents with the tax inspectorate.

The court pointed out that the taxpayer is obliged to keep the document in both electornic and paper form. In case the documents are lost, then the enterprise has to restore them. The taxpayer did not comply with this obligation. No legal grounds were found by the court in the case for the exculpation from the fine.

Subscribe to DVP's weekly newsmail announcing events on DVP events and the current legislative changes in accounting, taxation and general business law

© Copyright 2016-2018 DVP Audit. All Rights reserved.

Tel.: +7 495 690 92 62
Duchovskoj Str. 17/10, Moskau Russland, 115191

Tel.: +49 89 20 500 8545
Maximilianstraße 2, 80539, München, Deutschland

info@partnery-audit.com