The state is the largest shareholder of the Russian market. The share of state-owned companies that disclose their ownership structure in the Moscow Exchange index reaches at least 45%, and the Russian Federation owns a significant part of the shares in many of the largest and most liquid assets.

In this article, a state-owned company means an organization in which a block of shares is owned by the state directly or indirectly through dependent enterprises, institutions or constituent entities of the Russian Federation, which provides the right to receive part of the profit from the activities of a joint-stock company in the form of dividends, as well as to participate in management AO. To understand the degree of influence of state authorities on each individual organization, we will calculate the effective share of the state.

Effective share of the state is a part of the issuer's voting shares, which is directly or indirectly owned by state structures.

How the system works

The public asset management system is quite decentralized. The nominal owners of the property of the Russian Federation are the Federal Agency for State Property Management (Rosimushchestvo), subordinated to the Government of the Russian Federation, State Corporation Rostec and State Corporation Vnesheconombank, which are non-profit organizations, as well as the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Also included in the list of companies are the shares of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal authorities, although, of course, they cannot be called state-owned companies in their pure form.

The largest share of federal property falls on the Federal Property Management Agency. More than 30 public companies, including dependent companies, are under the control of this executive authority.

Companies whose shares are traded on the Moscow Exchange

ALROSA— The total share of state influence is 66%. Of these, 33% of PJSC shares are owned by the Federal Property Management Agency. 25% falls on the Ministry of Property and Land Relations of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) and 8% on the administrations of the districts of the same Republic.

ALROSA-Nyurba- 87.47% owned by the parent company ALROSA. 10% is owned by the regional level, the effective share of the state is 67.76%.

Aeroflot— Rosimuschestvo (54.7%) owns a controlling stake, and Rostec (3.5%) is also a shareholder.

Bashneft-AO- the largest stake is held by Rosneft 57.7% of the authorized capital or 69.3% of the voting shares, which belongs to the Federal Property Management Agency. The blocking stake belongs to the Republic of Bashkortostan (25.8%). The effective share of the state is 60.5%.

VTB- on the bank's website it is stated that the Federal Property Management Agency owns 60.93% of the share capital formed by ordinary shares, but in addition, 3.1% of the votes fall on FC Otkritie and 6% on Binbank, which are currently controlled by the Central Bank.

Gazprom- the controlling stake in the "national treasure" is in the hands of the Federal Property Management Agency through stakes owned by the Federal Property Management Agency (38.4%), and organizations controlled by it: Rosneftegaz (11%) and Rosgazifikatsiya (1%). The total package is just over 50%.

Gazprom Neft- 96% belongs to Gazprom, and therefore 47.8% to the state.

Inter RAO— 27.6% of the company is concentrated in Rosneftegaz, i.е. Federal Property Management Agency. 9.2% is on the balance sheet of FGC UES. Taking into account the quasi-treasury package, the effective share of the state is 44.3%.

Irkut- the aircraft manufacturing corporation has one of the highest effective shares of the state - 95.7%. 87% of the company's shares are on the balance sheet of the United Aircraft Building Company (UAC), another 8.7% is owned by PJSC Sukhoi Company, most of which is also controlled by UAC.

Kamaz— 49.9% is controlled by the state corporation Rostec. Taking into account the quasi-package, the effective state share is 51.8%.

VSMPO-AVISMA Corporation— 25% of the shares are owned by a 100% subsidiary of Rostec LLC RT-BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.

Moscow Exchange— The Moscow Exchange was established by the largest banks in 1992. Since then, about 25% of the shares of the exchange have been owned by the Central Bank, Vnesheconombank and Sberbank with shares of 11.8%, 10% and 8.4%, respectively.

Mosenergo- part of Gazprom Energoholding, owned by him by 53.5%. 26.5% are at the municipal level owned by the city of Moscow. The effective share of the state is 53.2%.

NCSP— Following the recent acquisition of Transneft, the state's total effective stake in NCSP was 80.6%, 20% of which is backed by the port's shares on the balance sheet of the Federal Property Management Agency.

United Aircraft Company- 96.8% of this company is controlled by the state. The Federal Property Management Agency has concentrated 92.3% of the company's securities, another 4.5% belongs to Vnesheconombank.

United Carriage Company- 24.3% belong to FC Otkritie, which completely came under the wing of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

OGK-2— the effective share of state structures is at the level of 38.5%. Such influence is ensured by 77% of the company's shares owned by Gazprom's subsidiaries.

Rosneft- the largest Russian oil company is slightly more than 50% owned by the Rosneftegaz joint-stock company, which, in turn, is 100% owned by the Federal Property Management Agency.

Rosseti-AO- the largest energy holding in Russia, is in the hands of state bodies by 88.9%. It has many subsidiaries, which, due to the high state participation in the parent company, also have a high dependence on government agencies.

Rostelecom-AO— one of the largest telecom operators in the Russian Federation, the shareholders of which are the Federal Property Management Agency and Vnesheconombank. The presence of a quasi-stake on the balance sheet of Mobitel LLC provides an effective state share of 54.9%

RusHydro is a hydro-generating holding, in which the effective state share is 75.4%. Rosimuschestvo controls 60.6%, VTB holds 13.3%. Also in the structure of shareholders is a subsidiary of VSMPO-AVISMA, which controls a 6% stake.

Sberbank- the bank claims that 50% + 1 share belongs to the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, but this is taking into account preferred shares that do not have voting rights. At the same time, the Central Bank's share of voting papers is 52.3%, i.е. the influence of the mega-regulator is slightly stronger. The remaining shares of the largest Russian bank are in free float.

Tatneft-AO- this company cannot be fully called a joint-stock company with state participation. 34% of the authorized capital of the company belongs to the level of the subject of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Tatarstan, the issuer does not disclose the structure of owners of voting shares.

TGC-1 is another asset of Gazprom Energoholding. The share of shares in the generating company owned by Gazprom is 51.8%, respectively, the effective state share is 25.9%.

Transneft- a state-owned company in its purest form, 100% of the voting shares of this natural monopoly belongs to the Russian Federation through the Federal Property Management Agency. Only the issuer's preferred papers can be purchased on the Moscow Exchange.

The general picture of public state ownership looks something like this:

Separate index

The Moscow Exchange has allocated a separate index for a company with state participation - MOEX SCI. The index for 2018 is based on 16 stocks: ALROSA, Rostelecom, Gazprom, Rosseti, VTB, RusHydro, Rosneft, FGC UES, Tatneft, Transneft, Inter RAO, Bashneft, Aeroflot, Sberbank and NCSP.

It is noteworthy that from 2012 to 2017. the Moscow Exchange index rose by 43%, while the index of companies with state participation showed an increase of 72%. At the same time, relative to sectoral indices, MOEX SCI also looks good.

The chart shows a rather strong correlation between the MOEX SCI and MICEX O&G indices. Given that more than 50% of the SCI index is accounted for by mining companies, it cannot be unequivocally said that the leading dynamics of state-owned companies is due to their efficiency, and not to the overall growth in the oil and gas sector.

Losing trades for professional traders are no more and no less than the price they pay for doing business. Professional traders exit losing trades without any worries, fully focused on adhering to their risk management rules, their established trading systems and money management.

Learning how to exit losing trades is just as important a part of stock trading as the winning trades themselves. Losing trades can go from bad luck to disaster in an instant, so it's in your best interest to learn how to quickly and calmly get out of such situations, preventing serious damage to your trading account.

Below we present three powerful strategies for exiting losing trades. In most cases, these techniques will help you get by with minimal losses while saving your trading capital for the next trade.

Strategy #1: Exit a trade after closing outside of an established trendline

Rally bitcoin in October-December 2017, chart-savvy traders opened several safe breakout entry points at once. The chart below shows the last chance for traders to make good profits before the price tag went to the bottom until December 18, 2018.

Pay attention to the prerequisites of the setup before buying:

• An extended series of higher swing lows and highs (HH, HL) indicating an uptrend.
• The simple moving average (SMA) has gone up – a serious indicator of an uptrend.
• The price tag fell slightly, touching the dotted uptrend line (blue arrow), and then quickly rebounded, breaking even above the previous consolidation high.
• The day after the breakthrough bitcoin rose nearly $2,000 before quickly fizzling out and diving below the uptrend line until December 19, 2018

Anyone who took this breakout as a buy signal had to act as quickly and aggressively as possible to emerge victorious from the situation. However, even just exiting the trade immediately after the price tag fell below the trend line, one could manage with minimal losses.

Always remember that a close outside of a long trendline is one of the strongest indicators of a trend reversal. In such cases, the market tells you in no uncertain terms that your trading setup failed and you need to exit the trade as soon as possible.

Main conclusions

• Established trendlines, particularly those with an angle of attack of 45 degrees or more, often act as strong support (or resistance) lines.
• When the price tag reverses and closes beyond such a trend line, it most likely means a reversal of the previous trend and the beginning of a new one.
• If your long or short position fails to close on the other side of such a trend line, close the trade immediately so as not to risk more losses.

Strategy #2: Close the trade when the stop loss is hit

Trade against the trend- a fairly popular strategy for scalpers (lovers of quick money on cryptocurrencies that are slightly ahead of themselves). As a general rule, profits on winning trades are about the same (or slightly less) than losses on losing ones, so at least 70% of trades must be winning for such a strategy to be viable.

In the example below, BTC/USD has been falling for four consecutive sessions with a large spread between the high and low of each bar. These signs point to serious selling pressure. However, some countertrend traders see this as an ideal buying setup, especially when the 3rd Period Relative Strength Index, RSI(3), closes below 10.00 on the 4th down bar. In this case, the bar that caused the closure RSI below 10.00 is a setup bar and any rise above this bar is considered a signal for a long entry.

Trend reversal - a signal for action

In this case, the trade does not gain much momentum and instead turns into smaller losses. Please note that you need to exit the trade immediately upon reaching the stop loss level, and not the closing level. For a countertrend trader, it is critical to exit a losing trade immediately instead of waiting for the bar to close. This method insures you against cases when the price continues to move in the wrong direction, which can lead to even greater losses.

You should never hope that a losing trade will suddenly change course and become profitable again. Instead, accept your losses as soon as the trading rules hint at an undesirable outcome. Thus, you will save your personal trading capital and sanity.

Key Findings

• Trading against the trend is a good strategy, but it is important here not to allow large losses.
• Always keep your initial stop loss slightly outside the extreme trade setup
• In countertrend trading, it is important to exit the trade as soon as the stop loss is hit in real time, rather than waiting for the closing bar to be reached.
• Always follow the stop loss point if you don't want to turn modest losses into serious losses.

Strategy #3: Closing a trade after a certain number of bars

Sooner or later, every trader may find himself in a situation where the position on his favorite coin does not give any signals at all. The price tag is in a “sluggish” position, rising and falling in a small range and absolutely not making it clear about its future intentions. What to do in such a situation when neither is achieved mark of intended profit, nor stop loss mark?

One solution to this dilemma is using a time stop. After analyzing the historical behavior of the price tag of a given coin, you can understand how long you will have to wait until the next breakout after such a stagnation. For example, if low volatility consolidations typically resolve within 12 bars or less, you could schedule an exit from a dead trade at the close of the 13th bar after the initial trade entry. Thus, you will free up your trading capital to use it in another, more attractive setup.

In the example above, BTC/USD formed triple pattern(1B, 2B, 3B) showed a positive MACD momentum/price divergence and then quickly broke above the key trendline. All of these attributes indicate an ideal opportunity to enter a long position. However, the stock stopped its movement at this point, not reaching the target profit and at the same time not falling below the stop-loss point. Volatility continued to fall, and with the price range closing at bar ten, the ideal move would be to exit the trade with a time stop.

By closing the trade in this way, the trader could have saved himself from the fourth low (point 4B on the chart). Moreover, his capital would be free to use in more promising setups. As of this writing, BTC/USD is still in a lifeless state with extremely low volatility in a seven-week trading range, just starting to show some signs of life.

Key Findings

• Even the perfect setup may not lead to the desired results.
• If, after a significant period of time, the trade has not reached the target profit or stop loss level, close the trade.

Conclusion

Knowing how and when to close a losing trade separates consistently winning crypto traders from permanent losers. Your long-term success as a crypto trader will to a large extent be determined by your ability to manage minimal losses, regardless of the number of successful trades. The three simple techniques presented in this article will help you develop this important skill.

Disclaimer : Do not consider this article as an investment recommendation. Do a thorough analysis before investing in any cryptocurrency.

For trading in the cryptocurrency market Husky Cue Ball recommends the exchange!

In business practice, situations are possible when a company is forced to sell goods at a loss, below cost. A typical example is the sale of products that are not in demand.

Such operations traditionally attract increased attention of the fiscal authorities. As a result, a careful approach to the economic justification of prices for such transactions is necessary. In times of crisis and declining demand, when transactions at a loss are increasingly common, the problem of their justification becomes even more urgent.

Inspector's right

According to Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), tax authorities have the right, in certain situations, to control transaction prices and, if prices do not correspond to market prices, charge additional taxes based on market rates. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation we are talking about:

• transactions between related parties;
• commodity exchange (barter) operations;
• foreign trade transactions;
• transactions, the prices for which deviate by more than 20 percent upwards or downwards from the price level applied by the taxpayer for identical (homogeneous) goods - (works, services) within a short period of time.

Accordingly, if the transaction price deviates upwards or downwards by more than 20 percent relative to the market price of identical (homogeneous) goods (works or services), the tax authority has the right to charge additional taxes based on the market price (clause 3 of article 40 of the Tax Code RF).

In paragraph 2 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation there is no direct indication that the fact of sale at a price below cost is the basis for verification. However, such sales cannot be considered ordinary, as they contradict the basics of entrepreneurial activity. And the lack of economic feasibility is one of 109 signs of bad faith of the taxpayer, developed by the Federal Tax Service. Thus, even if the price of a losing transaction does not deviate by more than 20% from the usual prices applied by the company, problems in relations with the tax authorities are still possible.

Reference

The criteria for bad faith of a taxpayer were developed by the Federal Tax Service in early 2007. The order under the heading "For official use" contains 109 signs, according to which - inspectors are ordered to identify tax violations. Here are some of them:

1. Company registration address is "bulk" registration address (that is, 10 or more firms are registered on it). At the same time, there is a statement from the owner of the premises that the space was not provided for rent to anyone ...

4. The application for registration indicates invalid identity document applicant, founder or manager…

14. An individual is the founder of 10 or more companies ("mass" founder) …

38. Company presents "zero" tax or accounting statements during one or more tax periods.

All information about taxpayers available to the tax authorities is entered into a special federal electronic database "Legal entities controlled in the first place", abbreviated as LE-KPO.

Obviously, almost any company can find 30-40 "dangerous" signs in itself. The inspectors are well aware of this, so the criteria have different weights. The position of a particular company in the list of LE-KPO depends on a set of its criteria - the more there are and the more significant they are, the higher the place in the rating.

Anticipate a loss

What reasons can force a company to start trading at a loss. Here are just the most common:

• low demand for the product
• general decline in market prices,
• miscalculations in determining the purchase price, which led to the impossibility of making a profit during the subsequent sale of the goods.

These circumstances are intended to confirm the existence of conditions under which a sale at a loss is justified. Each of these factors can be considered as an independent basis, but their joint probative force increases significantly. Documentary evidence can be a market analysis carried out in-house or ordered on the side. The results of the study must be drawn up in the form of a report, on the basis of which a memo is drawn up (see Example 1), which explains the need to sell at a loss. In the memo itself or in an annex to it, it is advisable to provide calculations showing that such a sale will avoid further losses. The decision to reduce the price is approved by the order of the head (Example 2).

Example 1

Example 2

In addition to cases where a low selling price is due to market conditions, there may be situations where sales create a loss in the current period, but ultimately lead to a positive financial result in the future. For example, if a company expects a counter purchase from the buyer, due to the current supply. However, it should be borne in mind that such a scheme may be regarded by the tax authorities as a conspiracy aimed at reducing tax liabilities.

However, as the courts point out, tax legislation does not provide for the determination of the financial result of individual transactions for tax purposes, and if a profit is received at the end of the reporting (tax) period, then there is no reason to talk about the existence of a “scheme” (see Example 3).

Example 3

According to the Decree of the FAS MO dated June 29, 2007 No. KA-A40 / 5388-07-A, B, the tax inspectorate is not entitled to draw conclusions about the intentional reduction of the tax base based on the financial result of a particular transaction. In addition, if the inspectors made a decision to charge additional taxes, since, in their opinion, the transaction amount did not correspond to the real one, they must provide the court with evidence of the study of market prices and their inconsistency with the price of a particular transaction.

Nevertheless, the given position of the court does not mean that one can neglect the documentary justification of the price for such transactions. At a minimum, it will reduce the risk of tax disputes. The justification must confirm that the future economic benefit cannot be achieved by means other than selling at a reduced price. As in the previous case, it is advisable to issue the justification in the form of a memo and the corresponding calculations.

There are additional mechanisms that traditionally make it easier to justify low prices - these are discounts and premiums. But in relation to unprofitable transactions, the use of discounts and premiums has its own characteristics.

Discounts and premiums

In its economic meaning, a discount is the amount by which the previously declared price is reduced. Arbitration courts adhere to a similar position.

Example 4

As the FAS ZSO pointed out in its resolution No. F04-3446 / 2006 (25284-A27-33) dated August 21, 2006, the current tax legislation does not contain the concept of "discount". At the same time, in contractual relations, a discount means the amount by which the price of goods is reduced when the buyer meets certain conditions.

According to paragraph 3 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, when determining the market price, discounts are taken into account caused by:

• seasonal or other fluctuations in consumer demand,
• loss of goods quality or other consumer properties,
• expiration (approaching the expiration date) of the shelf life or sale of goods,
• marketing policy, including when promoting new products that have no analogues to the markets, as well as when promoting goods, works, services to new markets,
• implementation of experimental models and samples of goods in order to familiarize consumers with them.

In principle, each of these conditions, to one degree or another, may be the basis for the sale of goods at a price below cost.

However, not all cases of sale at a loss are covered by the circumstances specified in paragraph 3 of Art. 40. They concern only the following cases:

a) selling at a loss will lead to income in the future - (promotion of goods, sale of prototypes and samples),

b) selling at a low price is of a short-term nature - (fluctuations in demand, loss of quality, expiration of the goods).

It is unlikely that the drop in demand during the crisis can be unequivocally qualified as seasonal or other fluctuations in consumer demand. Such a position is, to say the least, highly questionable and therefore involves significant tax risks.

In this regard, it is impossible to recommend the use of discounts as the main mechanism for setting a low, unprofitable price in a crisis and falling demand. It should be confirmed primarily by a market research report and other documents mentioned above. Discounts only help to make it easier to justify a low price.

Discounts that do not reduce the price are included, according to sub. 19.1 p. 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as a part of non-operating expenses that are taken into account for the purposes of taxation of profits as discounts for the fulfillment of certain conditions of the contract. They are not part of the price, in their respect the rules of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not apply. At the same time, they are checked by the tax authorities for the validity of inclusion in the composition of expenses - according to the rules provided for in paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

To avoid contradictions, it is advisable for the company to use the term “discount” in its documents only in relation to the reduction in the price of the goods, and the amounts that are paid to the buyer for the fulfillment of certain conditions of the contract or reduce his debt, called the premium. Thus, the norms of legislation will be observed and, at the same time, the economic meaning of the discount will be preserved.

The contract (or supplementary agreement to it) must set out the conditions, the fulfillment of which gives the buyer the right to receive a premium, for example, the volume of purchases, early payment, etc.

It is advisable to record the fulfillment of these conditions in a bilateral act, which should not only state the fact that the conditions have been met, but indicate when and what conditions are met, by what primary documents (invoices, etc.) this is confirmed, when and in what amount the premium will be provided . The Act allows, in the event of a tax audit, to more clearly and more clearly justify the economic feasibility of providing specific amounts of bonuses.

The premium can be both paid and provided without payment, by reducing the buyer's debt on payment. In the latter case, instead of a bilateral act, you can limit yourself to a credit note from the supplier. This is indicated in the letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated March 21, 2007 No. 19-11 / 25335.

Unlike discounts, there is no mention of a marketing policy in respect of premiums in the Tax Code. However, fixing the bonus method in it should be recognized as appropriate. This is also indicated by the tax authorities (letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated July 3, 2006 No. 19-11 / 58863).

With regard to the applicability of the premium as the main tool for setting a low, unprofitable price, the following should be taken into account. The purpose of entrepreneurial activity is to make a profit. The provision of bonuses is carried out within the framework of this activity, therefore, should not contradict this goal. It is doubtful that a premium covering the economic benefits from the sale of goods is consistent with the goal of making a profit. The only exception can be the relationship between the provision of the premium and the planned income from relationships with this buyer, for example, the conditionality of the premium by counter-purchases at a low price. But for other situations, the premium as a mechanism for establishing a loss-making price is hardly acceptable. Moreover, the method of providing the premium - payment or reduction of debt - does not fit well with the unprofitability of the transaction.

O.V. Kulagina, certified tax consultant

The price of the goods is below cost, or Tax risks of the sale

It often happens that a new line of products is launched for sale even before the products of the old one are completely sold. Or maybe it's just that the demand for the product has decreased significantly, or maybe the company is exploring a new market segment. And then the goods are sold at heavily discounted prices. But many accountants are afraid to reduce the sale price below the purchase price, since this is allegedly prohibited by law and is fraught with additional taxes. Let's see if this is actually the case.

WARNING 1. Selling below cost is prohibited by law

In the general case, the contracting parties determine the price of the goods themselves. The exception is prices that are regulated by the state, for example, in the field of electricity, gas supply, communications and paragraph 1 of Art. 424 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation; paragraph 1 of Art. 4, art. 6 of the Law of 17.08.95 No. 147-FZ; sub. 4 p. 2, p. 4 art. 8 of the Law of December 28, 2009 No. 381-FZ. So for a regular contract, there is no lower price limit on the part of the Civil Code. The main thing is that this price suits both parties.

The Federal Antimonopoly Service also monitors prices in order to prevent the abuse of “big players” in the field of pricing. However, companies that are not able to influence the price situation in the market by their actions alone or with a group of other companies have nothing to fear. Part 1 Art. 5, part 1, art. 7, paragraph 1, part 1, art. 10 of the Law of July 26, 2006 No. 135-FZ.

In 2013, the FAS prepared amendments to the Law on Trading Activities, advocating a ban on sales at a price below cost, but the project did not find support in the government, was sent for revision, and has not even reached the State Duma yet.

Conclusion

If your company does not have a decisive influence on the pricing in the market and does not sell goods, the prices of which are regulated by the state, then the price floor is not limited.

FEAR 2. Loss on sale at a price below cost is not taken into account for tax purposes

Let's just say that this is not the case. The tax base for income is calculated in aggregate for all transactions paragraph 1 of Art. 274 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. And only if a special procedure for calculating the tax base is established, income and expenses from these operations are considered separately. For example, a special procedure is provided for transactions with securities and paragraph 2 of Art. 274, art. 280 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In addition, there is a direct prohibition on recognizing in expenses the price difference between the market price and the sale price of the goods to the employee. If you sold a product to an employee at a non-market price, which is even lower than the purchase price, then it is obvious that such a price difference is formed and, in fact, it represents a loss when selling below cost and paragraph 27 of Art. 270 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

But with regard to other transactions of sale and purchase at a loss, there are no special rules. Therefore, schematically, it looks like this: income from all transactions is summed up and all expenses from the sale recognized in the reporting period are deducted from the amount received. paragraph 1 of Art. 247, sub. 3 p. 1, p. 3 Art. 268 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. It is obvious that the loss-making transaction revenue will be recognized in income from sales along with the revenue from other sales, and the expenses on it will be recognized together with the expenses on other transactions. If you are not systematically working in the red, then it is generally unrealistic to detect losing trades. They will simply drown in the total mass, and they will not be visible in the income tax return. paragraph 2 of Art. 268 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation; Letter of the Ministry of Finance dated September 18, 2009 No. 03-03-06/1/590.

With a “profitable” simplification, a sale at a loss does not affect the amount of tax in any way: how much money was received for the goods - from that amount the tax was calculated paragraph 1 of Art. 346.15, paragraph 1 of Art. 346.17, paragraph 1 of Art. 346.18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. If the simplification is “income-expenditure”, then in this case it is not so easy to track a losing transaction, income and expenses on it can generally fall into different reporting and even tax periods. After all, expenses are recognized as payment for the goods to the supplier and its sale, and income - upon receipt of money from the buyer. paragraph 1 of Art. 346.15, sub. 23 paragraph 1 of Art. 346.16, paragraph 1, sub. 2 p. 2 art. 346.17 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation; Letter of the Ministry of Finance of October 29, 2010 No. 03-11-09/95. When selling goods to employees, the price difference between the retail price and the sale price is also not taken into account in expenses.

CONCLUSION

Tracking a losing trade is unlikely unless you are working negatively systematically. It is unlikely that the tax authorities will do this, because the loss from sales, if the goods are sold to non-employees, is still taken into account for tax purposes.

FEAR 3. If the sale price is lower than the purchase price, the tax authorities charge additional taxes based on the market price

There is some truth in this judgment. It all depends on whether such a transaction is controlled. Let's say you sold apples at a price lower than the purchasing third-party Russian company. Then you can safely look into the eyes of the inspector, since the price of the transaction between parties that are not dependent on each other is initially considered to be the market price. paragraph 1 of Art. 105.3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. That is, the tax authorities will not check your prices for compliance with their market prices. Simply because this type of verification is provided only for controlled transactions, and transactions between independent Russian organizations are not classified as controlled paragraph 1 of Art. 105.17, paragraph 1 of Art. 105.14 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

“But what about Art. 40 NK? - you ask. Despite the fact that the notorious Art. 40 of the Tax Code on market prices has not yet been canceled, its effect has been significantly narrowed: it applies only to those transactions for which income and expenses are recognized before 01/01/2012. That is, at the moment, the tax authorities can only try to recalculate taxes based on market prices if the “sale” took place in 2011, since 2010 and earlier periods can no longer be covered by the on-site audit scheduled in 2014. paragraph 4 of Art. 89 Tax Code of the Russian Federation

TELLING THE MANAGER

If a the seller independently calculates and pays taxes at the market price from income from a controlled transaction, then the buyer will not be able to recalculate the tax base downward. After all, he will have such a right only if, after checking prices and paying the arrears by the seller, the buyer receives a notification from the tax authority to carry out symmetrical adjustments to paragraph 1 of Art. 105.3, paragraphs. 1, 2 art. 105.18 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

But if you sold goods at a non-market price and such a transaction is controlled for you, for example, you sold apples for mere pennies to your subsidiary on OSNO, the amount of income from transactions with which exceeded the uncontrolled threshold (in 2013 - 2 billion rubles, in 2014 - 1 billion rubles) sub. 1 p. 2 art. 105.14 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, then in this case I have to paragraph 4 of Art. 105.3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation:

• <или>voluntarily calculate income tax and VAT based on the market price (immediately or at the end of the tax period) pp. 3, 6 art. 105.3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation;
• <или>at the “price” check to prove to the tax authorities that the apples were impossibly sour and the transaction price is well within the range of prices at which such goods are sold by independent persons and sub. 1 p. 1, p. 3 Art. 105.7, paras. 1, 7 art. 105.9 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. If the tax authorities nevertheless consider that the prices were incomparable with the market ones, then after the “price” check they will go to court in order to recover the arrears and interest on income tax and VAT paragraph 5 of Art. 105.3, sub. 4 p. 2 art. 45 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. And if the income from the transaction relates to 2014, then the tax authorities can also impose a fine in the amount of 20% of the amount of unpaid taxes in paragraph 1 of Art. 129.3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation; paragraph 9 of Art. 4 Law of July 18, 2011 No. 227-FZ.

But sellers’ transactions on the simplified taxation system do not fall under price control, since such organizations do not pay either income tax or VAT, for which additional charges are possible during “price” checks. sub. 1, 4 p. 4 art. 105.3, paragraph 2 of Art. 346.11 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Conclusion

The statement that taxes will be recalculated based on market prices is only partly true. It all depends on whether the transaction is recognized as controlled. If so, then you will have to prove to the tax authorities that the transaction price is comparable to the market price. If not, then there is no need to worry about additional charges.

FEAR 4. The costs of purchasing goods sold at a loss are not economically justified, and therefore they cannot be taken into account when calculating income tax

Every business organization, by definition, seeks profit and paragraph 1 of Art. 50 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. However, one-time losing trades also fit into this concept, because the desire to systematically make a profit is fraught with risk and does not exclude a loss. In addition, by selling today at a low price, the company insures itself against increasing losses in the future, therefore, the management assesses the profitability of the transaction precisely at the current moment.

The Tax Code does not give tax authorities the right to assess how efficiently a taxpayer manages capital, and therefore the concept of “economic feasibility of expenses” must be considered through the focus of expenses on generating income in Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation; Definitions of the COP dated 12/16/2008 No. 1072-O-O (clause 2 of the motivational part), dated 06/04/2007 No. 366-O-P (clause 3 of the motivational part), dated 06/04/2007 No. 320-O-P (p. .3 motivational part). And in the example with apples, the expenses for the purchase of goods were economically justified, because, firstly, they were not purchased for a charity event, but were going to be successfully sold at a profit. Another thing is that the circumstances have changed somewhat and now it is much more important to release the working capital frozen in an unsuccessful batch of apples. And secondly, they still received income, because there is some kind of revenue Letter of the Federal Tax Service for the city of Moscow dated 02.08.2012 No. 16-15 / [email protected] . And no one is safe from losses. Decrees of the FAS MO dated July 18, 2013 No. A40-86022 / 12-20-468; FAS SZO dated 16.06.2011 No. А56-60826/2010.

You can do the following to confirm that your expenses are reasonable. First, the manager must issue an order to mark down the goods. Secondly, the markdown must be justified. For example, you can attach to the order the conclusion of a merchandiser or sales manager, that de apples of last year's harvest, it is impossible to store them for more than 1 month in the conditions of your warehouse, and in case of loss of the presentation, the losses from write-offs will be much higher, etc. In any In this case, the justification should state for what purpose and why you decided on a losing trade. All this will help you strengthen your position in the event of a dispute with the tax authorities.

CONCLUSION

Expenses will be economically justified if they were aimed at making a profit. The end result is not decisive.

FEAR 5. If the goods are sold at a loss, then VAT cannot be deducted on them.

The tax authorities are inclined to see in a loss-making transaction an unreasonable tax benefit, because the deduction on the acquisition was greater than the amount of tax accrued on the sale of the goods. And all because the reasonable economic goal of concluding a loss-making transaction for the tax authority is not at all obvious. And as we remember, its absence is one of the signs of receiving unreasonable tax benefits. pp. 1 , , 9 Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court dated 12.10.2006 No. 53.

Therefore, just as to justify expenses, you need to stock up on arguments in your favor in advance. The same documents will do: the order of the head, the conclusion of commodity experts, financiers, etc.

In litigation, the case is resolved in favor of the taxpayer if he provides the court with evidence of a reasonable economic goal that was pursued when concluding a loss-making transaction and Decrees of the FAS MO dated May 30, 2013 No. A40-40420 / 12-91-224, dated May 5, 2012 No. A40-43413 / 11-90-184; 15 ААС dated 02.04.2013 No. 15AP-2735/2013. But if there was no such goal, and by all indications, the organization is a participant in the tax scheme, then do not expect mercy from the tax authorities. In addition to the non-obvious economic goal, controllers will also identify other signs of obtaining an unjustified tax benefit, for example, the inability to fulfill the contract. For example, an organization purchased a batch of goods, and it is not clear where it was stored for a whole month, since the organization does not own or lease storage facilities, and although the contract for safekeeping was concluded, it was not executed. Decree of the FAS SKO dated January 24, 2013 No. A32-3122 / 2012.

CONCLUSION

A tax benefit in the form of a VAT deduction on goods sold at a loss can be justified if the entity proves that it pursued a reasonable economic goal in entering into a loss-making transaction, such as avoiding even greater losses from a complete write-off of goods. But if the goods were sold only on paper and there were no real transactions, then the tax authorities will remove such deductions.

So, of all the fears considered, the most real is the removal of expenses and deductions. To prevent this from happening, prepare a cost justification in advance. And if you, God forbid, are a participant in the tax scheme, then only fake documents without real operations are unlikely to help you.

In business practice, situations are possible when a company is forced to sell goods at a loss, below cost. A typical example is the sale of products that are not in demand. Such operations traditionally attract increased attention of the fiscal authorities. As a result, a careful approach to the economic justification of prices for such transactions is necessary. In times of crisis and declining demand, when transactions at a loss are increasingly common, the problem of their justification becomes even more urgent.

Inspector's right

With according to Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), tax authorities have the right, in certain situations, to control transaction prices and, if prices do not correspond to market prices, charge additional taxes based on market rates. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation we are talking about:

• transactions between related parties;
• commodity exchange (barter) operations;
• foreign trade transactions;
• transactions, the prices for which deviate by more than 20 percent upwards or downwards from the level of prices applied by the taxpayer for identical (homogeneous) goods (works, services) within a short period of time.

Accordingly, if the transaction price deviates upwards or downwards by more than 20 percent relative to the market price of identical (homogeneous) goods (works or services), the tax authority has the right to charge additional taxes based on the market price (clause 3, article 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation ).

In paragraph 2 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation there is no direct indication that the fact of sale at a price below cost is the basis for verification. However, such sales cannot be considered ordinary, as they contradict the basics of entrepreneurial activity. And the lack of economic feasibility is one of 109 signs of bad faith of the taxpayer, developed by the Federal Tax Service. Thus, even if the price of a losing transaction does not deviate by more than 20% from the usual prices applied by the company, problems in relations with the tax authorities are still possible.

Collapse Show

The criteria for bad faith of a taxpayer were developed by the Federal Tax Service in early 2007. The order under the heading "For official use" contains 109 signs, according to which inspectors are ordered to identify tax violations. Here are some of them:

1. Company registration address is "bulk" registration address (that is, 10 or more firms are registered on it). At the same time, there is a statement from the owner of the premises that the space was not provided for rent to anyone ...

4. The application for registration indicates invalid identity document applicant, founder or manager…

14. An individual is the founder of 10 or more companies ("mass" founder) …

38. Company presents "zero" tax or accounting statements during one or more tax periods.

All information about taxpayers available to the tax authorities is entered into a special federal electronic database "Legal entities controlled in the first place", abbreviated as LE-KPO.

Obviously, almost any company can find 30-40 "dangerous" signs in itself. The inspectors are well aware of this, so the criteria have different weights. The position of a particular company in the list of LE-KPO depends on a set of its criteria - the more there are and the more significant they are, the higher the place in the rating.

Anticipate a loss

What reasons can force a company to start trading at a loss. Here are just the most common:

• low demand for the product
• general decline in market prices,
• miscalculations in determining the purchase price, which led to the inability to make a profit during the subsequent sale of the goods.

These circumstances are intended to confirm the existence of conditions under which a sale at a loss is justified. Each of these factors can be considered as an independent basis, but their joint probative force increases significantly. Documentary evidence can be a market analysis carried out in-house or ordered on the side. The results of the study must be drawn up in the form of a report, on the basis of which a memo is drawn up (see Example 1), which explains the need to sell at a loss. In the memo itself or in an annex to it, it is advisable to provide calculations showing that such a sale will avoid further losses. The decision to reduce the price is approved by the order of the head (Example 2).

In addition to cases where a low selling price is due to market conditions, there may be situations where sales create a loss in the current period, but ultimately lead to a positive financial result in the future. For example, if a company expects a counter purchase from the buyer, due to the current supply. However, it should be borne in mind that such a scheme may be regarded by the tax authorities as a conspiracy aimed at reducing tax liabilities.

However, as the courts point out, tax legislation does not provide for the determination of the financial result of individual transactions for tax purposes, and if a profit is received at the end of the reporting (tax) period, then there is no reason to talk about the existence of a “scheme” (see Example 3).

Example 3

Collapse Show

According to the Decree of the FAS MO dated June 29, 2007 No. KA-A40 / 5388-07-A, B, the tax inspectorate is not entitled to draw conclusions about the intentional reduction of the tax base based on the financial result of a particular transaction. In addition, if the inspectors made a decision to charge additional taxes, since, in their opinion, the transaction amount did not correspond to the real one, they must provide the court with evidence of the study of market prices and their inconsistency with the price of a particular transaction.

Nevertheless, the given position of the court does not mean that one can neglect the documentary justification of the price for such transactions. At a minimum, it will reduce the risk of tax disputes. The justification must confirm that the future economic benefit cannot be achieved by means other than selling at a reduced price. As in the previous case, it is advisable to issue the justification in the form of a memo and the corresponding calculations.

There are additional mechanisms that traditionally make it easier to justify low prices - these are discounts and premiums. But in relation to unprofitable transactions, the use of discounts and premiums has its own characteristics.

Discounts and premiums

In its economic meaning, a discount is the amount by which the previously declared price is reduced. Arbitration courts adhere to a similar position.

Example 4

Collapse Show

As the FAS ZSO pointed out in its resolution No. F04-3446 / 2006 (25284-A27-33) dated August 21, 2006, the current tax legislation does not contain the concept of "discount". At the same time, in contractual relations, a discount means the amount by which the price of goods is reduced when the buyer meets certain conditions.

According to paragraph 3 of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, when determining the market price, discounts are taken into account caused by:

• seasonal or other fluctuations in consumer demand,
• loss of goods quality or other consumer properties,
• expiration (approaching the expiration date) of the shelf life or sale of goods,
• marketing policy, including when promoting new products that have no analogues to the markets, as well as when promoting goods, works, services to new markets,
• implementation of prototypes and samples of goods in order to familiarize consumers with them.

In principle, each of these conditions to some extent may be the basis for the sale of goods at a price below cost.

However, not all cases of sale at a loss are covered by the circumstances specified in paragraph 3 of Art. 40. They concern only the following cases:

• a) selling at a loss will lead to income in the future (promotion of goods, sale of prototypes and samples),
• b) selling at a low price is of a short-term nature (fluctuations in demand, loss of quality, expiration of the product).

It is unlikely that the drop in demand during the crisis can be unequivocally qualified as seasonal or other fluctuations in consumer demand. Such a position is, to say the least, highly questionable and therefore involves significant tax risks.

In this regard, it is impossible to recommend the use of discounts as the main mechanism for setting a low, unprofitable price in a crisis and falling demand. It should be confirmed primarily by a market research report and other documents mentioned above. Discounts only help to make it easier to justify a low price.

Discounts that do not reduce the price are included, according to sub. 19.1 p. 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as a part of non-operating expenses that are taken into account for the purposes of taxation of profits as discounts for the fulfillment of certain conditions of the contract. They are not part of the price, in their respect the rules of Art. 40 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not apply. At the same time, they are checked by the tax authorities for the validity of inclusion in the composition of expenses according to the rules provided for in paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

To avoid contradictions, it is advisable for the company to use the term “discount” in its documents only in relation to the reduction in the price of the goods, and the amounts that are paid to the buyer for the fulfillment of certain conditions of the contract or reduce his debt, called the premium. Thus, the norms of the legislation will be observed and, at the same time, the economic meaning of the discount will be preserved.

The contract (or supplementary agreement to it) must set out the conditions, the fulfillment of which gives the buyer the right to receive a premium, for example, the volume of purchases, early payment, etc.

It is advisable to record the fulfillment of these conditions in a bilateral act, which should not only state the fact that the conditions have been met, but indicate when and what conditions are met, by what primary documents (invoices, etc.) this is confirmed, when and in what amount the premium will be provided . The Act allows, in the event of a tax audit, to more clearly and clearly justify the economic feasibility of providing specific amounts of bonuses.

The premium can be both paid and provided without payment, by reducing the buyer's debt on payment. In the latter case, instead of a bilateral act, you can limit yourself to a credit note from the supplier. This is indicated in the letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated March 21, 2007 No. 19-11 / 25335.

Unlike discounts, there is no mention of a marketing policy in respect of premiums in the Tax Code. However, fixing the bonus method in it should be recognized as appropriate. This is also indicated by the tax authorities (letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated July 3, 2006 No. 19-11 / 58863).

With regard to the applicability of the premium as the main tool for setting a low, unprofitable price, the following should be taken into account. The purpose of entrepreneurial activity is to make a profit. The provision of bonuses is carried out within the framework of this activity, therefore, should not contradict this goal. It is doubtful that a premium covering the economic benefits from the sale of goods is consistent with the goal of making a profit. The only exception can be the relationship between the provision of the premium and the planned income from relationships with this buyer, for example, the conditionality of the premium by counter-purchases at a low price. But for other situations, the premium as a mechanism for establishing a loss-making price is hardly acceptable. Moreover, the method of providing the premium - payment or reduction of debt - does not fit well with the unprofitability of the transaction.