Новости судебных дел
Судебное дело "Обжалование 30-ти процентного налога (дело в ЕСПЧ № 4985/12), которым облагаются нерезиденты-граждане Российской Федерации (вместо общеустановленного 13-ти процентного налога) "
Права ребенка при разводе родителей
Права ребенка при разводе родителей
НОВОГОДНИЙ СЮРПРИЗ ОТ ДЕПУТАТА
АДМИНИСТРАЦИЯ ЕКАТЕРИНБУРГА ПРОТИВ УЛИЦЫ ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА
Стартует проект "Правовая помощь людям с проблемами психического здоровья в Свердловской области: британский опыт"
ПОРА Улица ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА
ПОРА Улица ПРАВ ЧЕЛОВЕКА
ПРАВА ЧЕЛОВЕКА на УЛИЦУ
Могут ли акты правосудия быть источниками административного права?
НОВОГОДНИЙ СЮРПРИЗ ОТ ДЕПУТАТА (1)
DECISION Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation Dismissing the complaint of Mr. ____________________ claiming violation of his constitutional rights under article 224, section 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Saint Petersburg 14 July 2011 The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, consisting of Chairman V. D. Zorkin, Justices K. V. Aranovsky, A. I. Boitsov, N. S. Bondar, G. A. Gadzhiyev, Yu. M. Danilov, L. M. Zharkova, G. A. Zhilin, S. M. Kazantsev, M. I. Kleandrov, S. D. Knyazev, A. N. Kokotov, L. O. Krasavchikova, S. P. Mavrin, N. V. Melnikov, Yu. D. Rudkin, O. S. Khokhryakova, V. G. Yaroslavtsev, Having considered, by demand of Mr. ____________________, the issue of the possibility of considering his claim in a proceeding of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, Has established as follows: 1. In his complaint to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, Mr. ____________________ disputes the constitutionality of the words "at a rate of 30 percent" in section 3 of article 224, Tax Rates, chapter 23, Tax on the Income of Natural Persons, of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. According to the complainant, the imposition of a personal income tax at the rate of 30 percent to citizens of the Russian Federation who are not tax residents of the Russian Federation amounts to discrimination on the basis of place of residence, and causes an incommensurate restriction on property rights, and therefore violates articles 8 (part 2), 15 (part 1), 19, 35 (part 2), and 55 (parts 2 and 3) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, as well as article 14 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and article 1 of Protocol 1 to said Convention. 2. The Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, having studied the materials presented by Mr. ____________________, finds no grounds for accepting his complaint for trial. According to the interconnected provisions of articles 8 (part 2), 19 (parts 1 and 2), and 57 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the regulation of tax relations must comply with the requirements of the constitutional principle of equality. This means that the law must provide legal guarantees that equal persons subject to taxation be taxed at equal rates. The Tax Code of the Russian Federation also follows these requirements, providing that taxes and duties cannot be discriminatory in character, and may not be applied variously with reference to social, racial, national, religious, or other similar criteria, and prohibiting the establishment of differentiated tax and duty rates and tax exemptions depending on forms of ownership, citizenship of natural persons, or place of origination of capital (article 3, section 1 and paragraphs 1 and 2 of section 2). At the same time, due to the legal position of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, as expressed in a number of its decisions, including Resolution 7-P, dated 27 April 2001, the principle of equality does not exclude the possibility that various legal conditions may be established for various categories of rights bearers. Applying this legal position, which bears general significance for all areas of legal regulation, to the field of tax relations leads to the conclusion that the constitutional principle of equality does not prevent the legislature from using a differentiated approach to establishing various systems of taxation for different categories of taxpayers, as long as the differentiation is based on objective factors such as economic characteristics of the tax base and the peculiarities of the taxpayers qua taxpayers. The legislature, in setting personal income tax rates in article 224 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, varied them according to the source of income and category of taxpayer: whether the taxpayer qualifies as a tax resident of the Russian Federation. According to article 207 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which defines payers of the personal income tax, a natural person's qualification as a tax resident of the Russian Federation does not depend on his or her citizenship: natural persons who are actually present in the Russian Federation for at least 183 calendar days during a continuous twelve-month period qualify as tax residents. Furthermore, persons who are not tax residents of the Russian Federation qualify as payers of the tax only for income from sources within the Russian Federation, while tax residents of the Russian Federation are required to pay the tax on income from sources both within the Russian Federation and from sources outside the Russian Federation (article 207, section 1 and article 209 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). Thus, in this case the setting of differentiated personal income tax rates is based on an objective criterion characterizing a natural person's connection with the tax jurisdiction of the Russian Federation, and may not be considered discriminatory toward citizens of the Russian Federation on the basis of their place of residence. Therefore, we cannot agree with the complainant's assertion that the disputed legal provision violates his constitutional rights. On the basis of the foregoing and pursuant to article 40, part 2; article 43, part 1, section 2; article 79, part 1; article 96; and article 97 of the Federal Constitutional Law, "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation," the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation hereby: Decides: 1. To dismiss the complaint of Mr. ___________________ on the grounds that it does not comply with the requirements of the Federal Constitutional Law, "On the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation," under which a complaint to the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation may be considered acceptable. 2. The decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation on this complaint is final, and is not subject to appeal. Chairman Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation V. D. Zorkin No. 949-O-O
Поделиться в социальных сетях: