There is a 40-year-old business owner who falsely issued 70 million invoices. How will he be punished?

What are the penalties for falsely issuing 70 million yuan invoices?

First of all, what needs to be clear is what kind of invoice is falsely issued. Is it a special VAT invoice or an ordinary invoice? Falsely issuing special VAT invoices is suspected of falsely issuing special VAT invoices; If it is a fake invoice, it is suspected of being a fake invoice. Secondly, according to the charges, according to the number of false open to conviction and sentencing.

1. Crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices

The conviction and sentencing standard of the crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax shall be based on the falsely issued tax amount. Therefore, it is necessary to determine whether the false invoice of 70 million yuan is the total price tax or the false tax. If it is the total amount of price tax, it must be converted into tax.

Specifically: VAT = sales including tax /( 1+ tax rate) * tax rate.

According to the Notice of the Ministry of Finance in State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China on Adjusting the VAT Rate (Caishui [20 18] No.32) and the Announcement of the General Administration of Customs of the Ministry of Finance on Deepening the VAT Reform (Announcement No.39 of the State Administration of Taxation of the Ministry of Finance), the applicable tax rate before April 30, 2018 is 65438+. The tax rate is 1 6% from May 2065438 to March 3, 2065438, and 13% after April 20 19. According to the tax rate of 13%, the total tax of 70 million yuan is:

Tax amount = 70 million yuan/(1+13%) *13% = 8.05 million yuan.

According to the provisions of Article 205 of the Criminal Law and the Notice of the Supreme People's Court on Issues Concerning the Criteria for Convicting and Sentencing Special VAT Invoices (Law [2018] No.226), if the amount of tax falsely made out is more than 2.5 million yuan, it is a "huge amount", and it shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of more than 10 years or life imprisonment, and a fine of more than 50,000 yuan and less than 500,000 yuan.

8.05 million yuan and 70 million yuan are huge. Those who did not receive mitigated punishment were all sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of more than 10 or life imprisonment. So, how many years will it be sentenced? What kind of punishment will be given from the following cases with similar amounts?

A fine of 70 million yuan for falsely issuing taxes.

1. 1. Case 1: Chen falsely issued a special VAT invoice.

1.2. Case number: Taizhou Intermediate People's Court (20 19), Zhejiang 10, No.34 at the beginning of the sentence.

1.3. Basic case: The defendant Chen Moumou and Pan Mou 1 discussed in advance and obtained 539 special invoices for value-added tax from Tianjin XXX Metal Products Co., Ltd. and Tianjin XXX Materials Trading Industry Co., Ltd., with a total tax amount of 828 19 153.76 yuan.

1.4. Referee's result: Although the defendant Chen Moumou can voluntarily surrender, he has always evaded the important and neglected the criminal facts. Judgment: Defendant Chen Haihua was guilty of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to life imprisonment, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated all personal property.

2. 1. Case 2: Ke Moumou and others falsely issued special VAT invoices.

2.2. CaseNo.: Guang 'an Intermediate People's Court of Sichuan Province (20 18) Chuan 16 15.

2.3. Basic case: Ke Moumou and others conspired to set up a company and falsely issued special VAT invoices, among which the defendants Ke Moumou and Chen Moumou falsely issued special VAT invoices of118016588.8 yuan and the defendant Cai Moumou falsely issued special VAT invoices of 63,438,788 yuan. Defendant Pei Moumou falsely issued a special VAT invoice with an amount of 5 1702976.8 yuan, and defendant Lu Moumou falsely issued a special VAT invoice with an amount of 32256452.85 yuan.

2.4. Referee's result: Ke Moumou is the principal offender; Chen is an accomplice and can plead guilty after arriving at the case; Cai Moumou is an accomplice and has a frank plot. The defense opinions of the first offender are consistent with the facts ascertained; Pei Moumou is an accomplice and has the plot of surrender. Judgment: The defendant Ke Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined RMB300,000; Defendant Chen was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to eight years and six months' imprisonment and fined RMB 200,000. Defendant Cai Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to six years and six months in prison and fined RMB 100,000. Defendant Pei Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to five years' imprisonment and fined RMB 90,000.

3. 1. Case 3: Wu Moumou and Wu Moumou falsely issued special VAT invoices.

3.2. Case number: Haikou Intermediate People's Court (20 18) Qiong 0 1 Criminal Chu Zi No.38.

3.3. Basic case: In the name of 18 Tool Company, Wu Moumou and Wu Moumou earned the price difference by obtaining input invoices and falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax to the downstream. The total price tax was 626 128094. 16 yuan, and the actual tax deduction was 90975876.93 yuan.

3.4. Judgment result: Defendants Wu Moumou and Wu Moumou falsely issued special invoices for value-added tax in order to seek illegal benefits, resulting in a huge amount of falsely issued taxes and a loss of 90,975,876.93 yuan in national taxes. The circumstances are particularly serious, which has constituted the crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax. The accusation of the public prosecution agency is established and should be supported. Wu Moumou is the principal offender and Wu Moumou is an accessory, which has a frank plot. Judgment: The defendant Wu Moumou committed the crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax, sentenced to life imprisonment, deprived of political rights for life, and confiscated all personal property; Defendant Wu Moumou was guilty of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 13 years in prison, deprived of political rights for three years, and fined 200,000 yuan.

(two) a fine of 8 million yuan for falsely making out taxes.

1. 1. Case 1: Zheng Moumou falsely issued a special VAT invoice.

1.2. Case number: People's Court of Dingyuan County, Anhui Province (20 19) Anhui 1 125 No.203 at the beginning of the sentence.

1.3. Basic case: The defendant Zheng Moumou asked others to falsely issue a special VAT invoice for himself in order to seek illegal benefits, and the tax amount was RMB 7909 154.03, which was huge.

1.4. verdict: the criminal facts and charges charged by the public prosecution agency were established. After the defendant Zheng Moumou was brought to justice, he was able to truthfully confess the facts of the crime and could be given a lighter punishment according to law. During the trial, he voluntarily pleaded guilty and pleaded guilty, and voluntarily returned some of the stolen money. He did show remorse and can be given a lighter punishment according to law. Judgment: Defendant Zheng Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 10 years and 3 months' imprisonment and fined RMB300,000.

2. 1. Case 2: Chen falsely issued a special VAT invoice.

2.2. Case number: People's Court of Runzhou District, Zhenjiang City, Jiangsu Province (20 19) Su111/92.

2.3. Basic case: Defendant Chen Moumou asked Jiang to falsely issue 572 special VAT invoices in the form of billing fees for six companies including Guizhou Yinjiang Moumou Industrial Co., Ltd., with a tax amount of 9347977.59 yuan, all of which were recorded and deducted.

2.4. Judgment result: Chen pleaded guilty, truthfully confessed, paid most of the taxes, and actively withdrew from the illegal income. Judgment: Defendant Chen Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 10 years and 3 months' imprisonment and fined RMB300,000.

3. 1. Case 3: Ding Moumou and others falsely issued special VAT invoices.

3.2. Case number: People's Court of Nong 'an County, Jilin Province (20 18) Ji 0 122 No.434 at the beginning of the sentence.

3.3. Basic case: Ding Moumou and others falsely made out special VAT invoices for others or introduced them in order to earn the billing fee, knowing that there was no real transaction. Among them, defendant Ding Moumou falsely issued 553 special VAT invoices for others, and the tax amount was 92,49711.165,438 0 yuan, of which 54 1 invoices were deducted, and the tax amount was 9,086,455.92 yuan, which was huge; Defendant Gao Moumou falsely issued a special VAT invoice of 43 1 piece, and the tax amount was 723 1723.49 yuan, of which 42 1 piece was deducted, and the tax amount was 7096752.92 yuan, which was huge.

3.4. Judgment result: The accusation of the public prosecution agency is established and should be supported. Judgment: Defendant Ding Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 13 years' imprisonment and fined RMB 300,000. Defendant Gao Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment and fined 200,000 yuan.

4. 1. Case 4: Li Moumou falsely issued a special VAT invoice.

4.2. Case number: Liao 07(20 19), No.23, Xingchu, Jinzhou Intermediate People's Court, Liaoning Province.

4.3. Basic case: Li Moumou falsely issued 528 sets of special VAT invoices, with a total tax amount of 879 1675.07 yuan. All taxes were deducted, and the deducted taxes were not recovered.

4.4. Judgment result: In the crime in which Li participated, he and the * * * co-offenders, Wang, Guo and Li who were dealt with in another case constitute a * * * joint crime, which plays a secondary and auxiliary role and is an accessory, and the punishment shall be mitigated according to law. After Li Xinshe arrived at the case, he was able to truthfully confess the facts of the crime, which was frank and was given a lighter punishment according to law. The defendant and his defender's arguments and defense opinions that Li Xinshe has a statutory lighter and mitigated punishment are adopted by the court. The tax on its falsely issued special VAT invoice has been fully deducted, and the deducted tax has not been recovered, resulting in a huge amount of national tax losses, which should be severely punished as appropriate. Li Xinshe was sentenced to punishment for committing a crime and was given a heavier punishment as appropriate. Judgment: Defendant Li Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, sentenced to four years and six months in prison and fined RMB 130,000.

Second, the crime of falsely issuing invoices.

According to Article 205 of the Criminal Law, there are two sentencing grades for the crime of falsely issuing invoices: first, if the circumstances are serious, they shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years, criminal detention or public surveillance, and shall also be fined; Second, if the circumstances are particularly serious, they shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than two years but not more than seven years and fined.

Although there is no judicial interpretation that clearly stipulates the criteria for determining the crime of falsely invoicing "the circumstances are particularly serious", as far as the filing criteria of the crime of falsely invoicing "the accumulated amount of falsely invoicing is more than 400,000 yuan" are concerned, falsely invoicing 70 million yuan is 175 times of 400,000 yuan, which will definitely be considered as "the circumstances are particularly serious".

1. 1. Case 1: Li Moumou, Xie Moumou and Deng Moumou falsely invoiced.

1.2. CaseNo.: Maoxian People's Court (20 19) Chuan 3223 No.28 at the beginning of the sentence.

1.3. Basic case: Li Moumou set up four companies through online agents, and falsely declared ordinary invoices in the names of four companies by means of false tax declaration and non-payment of taxes. From July to 65438+February of the same year, Xie Moumou and Deng Moumou were instructed to directly collect more than 770 ordinary VAT invoices from the tax authorities, amounting to 7768730 1.68.

1.4. verdict: the actions of the defendants Li moumou, Deng moumou and Xie moumou are the same crime. Defendant Li Moumou played a major role in the joint crime of * * * and was the principal offender, so he should be punished according to all the crimes he participated in, organized or directed. Defendants Deng Moumou and Xie Moumou played an auxiliary role in the joint crime of * * * and were accomplices, so they should be given a lighter, mitigated or exempted punishment. After discussion and decision by the judicial Committee of our hospital, the above determination was made. The defendant Li Moumou was sentenced to more than fixed-term imprisonment for committing the crime of opening a casino. After the execution of the penalty, he commits the crime of fixed-term imprisonment or more within five years, which is a recidivist and should be severely punished. The defendants Deng Moumou and Xie Moumou were able to truthfully confess their crimes after they arrived at the case, and they had a frank plot. They voluntarily pleaded guilty in court and could be given a lighter punishment. Judgment: Defendant Li Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing invoices, sentenced to three years and six months in prison and fined 200,000 yuan; Defendant Deng Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing invoices, sentenced to one year and six months in prison, suspended for two years and six months, and fined RMB30,000. Defendant Xie Moumou was convicted of falsely issuing invoices, sentenced to one year and six months in prison, suspended for two years and six months, and fined RMB 30,000.

2. 1. Case 2: Shen Moumou's false invoicing case.

2.2. Case number: Shenzhen Luohu District People's Court (20 19) Guangdong 0303, the first sentence of 53 1.

2.3. Basic case: Shen Moumou illegally obtained the business license of a shell company established under another person's identity, used the shell company to apply for Shenzhen ordinary invoice on the website of the tax bureau, and then falsely invoiced according to the customer's needs, making illegal profits. * * * 1 1439 invoices were falsely invoiced, and the total invoice amount was133,772,376 yuan, and the total tax amount was 40 yuan.

2.4. Referee's result: Shen Moumou can truthfully confess his crimes after returning to the case, which is a confession. You can be given a lighter punishment and plead guilty according to law. Judgment: The defendant, Shen Moumou, was convicted of falsely issuing invoices, sentenced to two years' imprisonment and fined RMB 100,000.

Key words: He Lawyer's crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, defense lawyer's crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, and defense lawyer's crime of falsely issuing tax invoices.

False invoicing not only causes tax loss, but also seriously disrupts the tax order. In particular, the special VAT invoice, as an important proof of the tax deduction method of the special VAT invoice, has the function of currency in essence, and can directly deduct the tax payable, which leads some lawless elements to evade state taxes and obtain huge illegal benefits by falsely issuing special VAT invoices.

The connection between administrative law enforcement and criminal justice in the case of falsely issuing VAT invoices

(1) According to Article 205 of the Criminal Law, whoever falsely issues special invoices for value-added tax or other invoices used for defrauding export tax rebates or tax deduction shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention, and shall also be fined not less than 20,000 yuan but not more than 200,000 yuan; If the amount of tax falsely made out is relatively large or there are other serious circumstances, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years and fined not less than 50,000 yuan but not more than 500,000 yuan; Whoever falsely makes out a huge amount of tax or has other particularly serious circumstances shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 or life imprisonment, and shall also be fined not less than 50,000 yuan but not more than 500,000 yuan or confiscated of property.

If a unit commits this crime, it shall be fined, and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years or criminal detention; Whoever falsely makes out a large amount of taxes or has other serious circumstances shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than three years but not more than ten years; Whoever falsely levies taxes, if the amount is huge or there are other particularly serious circumstances, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than 10 years or life imprisonment.

Falsely issuing invoices other than those stipulated in Article 205 of the Criminal Law, if the circumstances are serious, shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than two years, criminal detention or public surveillance, and shall also be fined; If the circumstances are especially serious, he shall be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not less than two years but not more than seven years and shall also be fined. If a unit commits a crime, it shall be fined, and the directly responsible person in charge and other directly responsible personnel shall be punished in accordance with the above provisions.

Crime and filing standards

The Supreme People's Court's Decision on the Application of the NPC Standing Committee to Punish the Crime of Falsely Issuing, Forging and Illegally Selling Special VAT Invoices: Paragraph 3 of Article 1 stipulates that anyone who falsely issues a tax amount of more than RMB 10000 or falsely issues a special VAT invoice, resulting in defrauding the state tax of more than RMB 5,000, shall be convicted and punished according to law.

Article 61 of the Provisions of the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security on the Standards for Public Security Organs to Jurisdiction over Criminal Cases stipulates: "Cases of falsely issuing special VAT invoices, defrauding export tax rebates and tax deduction invoices (Article 205 of the Criminal Law), falsely issuing special VAT invoices or other fraudulent export tax rebates and tax deduction invoices shall be filed for prosecution."

Article 2 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Supreme People's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security on the Standards of Criminal Filing and Prosecution under the Jurisdiction of Public Security Organs stipulates that falsely issuing invoices other than those stipulated in Article 205 of the Criminal Law shall be filed for prosecution if it is suspected of one of the following circumstances: ① falsely issuing more than 65,438,000 invoices or falsely issuing a total amount of more than 400,000 yuan. (2) Failing to meet the above-mentioned amount standard, but being subject to administrative punishment for falsely issuing invoices for more than two times within five years. ③ Other serious circumstances.

Sentencing standard

Telephone reply of the Supreme People's Court Research Office on how to apply the amount standard of judicial interpretation of Fa Fa Fa [1996] No.30 (Fa Yan [20 14] 179) The telephone reply of the Supreme People's Court Research Office on how to use the amount standard of judicial interpretation of Fa Fa Fa Fa [1996] No.30 of Xizang Autonomous Region Higher People's Court is as follows: Implementation crime. The standard of sentencing amount in the case of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax can no longer refer to 1996 "Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of the Decision of 〈NPC Standing Committee on Punishing the Crime of Falsely Issuing, Forging and Illegally Selling Special Invoices for Value-added Tax". Before the new judicial interpretation is formulated, the conviction and sentencing standards of the case of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax can be implemented with reference to the relevant provisions of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Laws in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Fraudulent Export Tax Refund. "

Article 3 of the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Specific Application of Laws in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Fraudulent Export Tax Refund stipulates: "Those who defraud the state of export tax refund of more than 50,000 yuan belong to the' large amount' as stipulated in Article 204 of the Criminal Law; Cheating the state export tax rebate of more than 500,000 yuan belongs to the' huge amount' stipulated in Article 204 of the Criminal Law; Those who defraud the state export tax rebate of more than 2.5 million yuan belong to the' extremely huge amount' stipulated in Article 204 of the Criminal Law. "

Therefore, the false invoicing of 70 million yuan depends on the comprehensive judgment of the type of false invoicing, the tax amount, and the amount and circumstances that caused the national tax to be defrauded.

If all the falsely invoiced invoices are special VAT invoices, the judgment shall be made according to the falsely invoiced tax amount and with reference to the sentencing amount standard and circumstances of the Supreme Court.

Countries that falsely issue VAT invoices will always maintain a high-pressure situation. Don't take any chances. Even if there is an opportunity, you can get a lot of benefits temporarily. However, under the application of intelligent analysis tools such as big data and the increasingly strict tax system, it is bound to be investigated. Once some enterprises that falsely invoice or accept false invoices are found out, the obtained invoices will flow to the upstream and downstream enterprises involved through the VAT invoice electronic ledger system. It's not too late to regret it.

If the so-called "relationship" is not too hard, there will be jail.

At least 10, the amount is too large!

Get in there and squat.

Paragraph 1 of Article 205 of China's Criminal Law clearly stipulates the basic elements and legal punishment range of the crime of falsely issuing special invoices for value-added tax, defrauding export tax rebates and deducting tax invoices, while the second paragraph stipulates the aggravated punishment of this crime, that is, "whoever commits the act mentioned in the preceding paragraph to defraud the state tax, the amount is extremely huge, and the circumstances are particularly serious, resulting in particularly heavy losses to the national interests, shall be sentenced to life imprisonment or death, and his property shall be confiscated."

The statutory conditions for the application of this paragraph.

1. behavioral elements. The application of this paragraph must have two acts: "false opening" and "tax fraud". The former is the basis and premise of tax fraud, including making false statements for others, making false statements for oneself, making false statements for others and introducing others. The latter's "tax fraud" refers to the act of actually deducting the tax payable or defrauding the export tax rebate by using the false special VAT invoice, which directly leads to tax fraud by the state.

2. Elements of the result. The application of this paragraph must have two results: "defrauding the state tax" and "losing the state interests", and both of them must meet the requirements of a certain amount standard.

3. Amount elements. Applying this paragraph, we should examine three amounts: (1) false amount. There is no explicit provision in the criminal law, which belongs to the implicit amount requirement. Because the criminal law sets "defrauding the state tax" as "the amount is extremely huge" in the application of this clause, and based on the internal logical relationship between "falsely making out" and "defrauding the tax" in this crime, it is difficult to defraud the tax without falsely making out, and "defrauding the state tax, especially huge" is based on the premise that the amount of falsely making out invoices by the actor reaches or exceeds this amount. (2) the amount of tax fraud. The criminal law stipulates that it must be "extremely huge". According to the Supreme People's Court's judicial interpretation, the specific amount should be more than 6,543,800 yuan. (3) the amount of loss. According to the legislation, "causing great losses to national interests" is a necessary consequence element for the application of this clause. This requirement is essentially different from "the amount of tax fraud". On the surface, both of them show that the national tax has been cheated, but being cheated does not mean "loss", because after being cheated, the tax cheater voluntarily quits because of repentance, or "national loss" before the investigation is over. Therefore, the aforementioned judicial interpretation defines "causing particularly heavy losses to national interests" as "causing a loss of more than 500,000 yuan in national tax revenue, which cannot be recovered before the end of the investigation".

The forms of crime to which the statutory punishment of this paragraph applies.

1. The statutory penalty stipulated in the second paragraph is applicable to the case where the same criminal subject falsely issues a special VAT invoice.

Where the same actor falsely issues a special VAT invoice and then uses the invoice to defraud tax deduction or export tax rebate, the provisions of this paragraph shall apply when the result meets the requirements. The act of falsely making out or defrauding taxes by the same entity is determined by the functions and operating principles of special VAT invoices and other special invoices. As the drawer's "self", invoices falsely drawn for others cannot be deducted at all, and can only be deducted or defrauded by the drawee's "others". Therefore, the statutory punishment stipulated in the second paragraph of this article should be applied by the same subject of crime, and the subject of its "false opening" behavior can only be.

2. The statutory punishment stipulated in the second paragraph is applicable to the crime of falsely issuing special VAT invoices by different criminal subjects.

(1) The provisions in the second paragraph are applicable to tax fraud by different subjects and tax fraud by the same crime.

Although the application of the second paragraph of this article is a necessary condition for the behavior to meet the complex elements, it does not mean that the fraud applicant and the tax fraud subject must be the same subject. In the same criminal case, the tax fraud applicant colluded with the tax fraud personnel before committing the crime, cooperated with each other in the crime, and shared the stolen money and goods with each other afterwards. Although a single subject does not fully meet the requirements of complex behavior, criminal law does not fully meet * * *.

(2) Can the provisions of the second paragraph be applied to the crime of deliberately making false statements and the crime of tax fraud?