HOW TO REDUCE THE ERROR IN THE DECLARATION OF INCOME?

Filling in the annual income declaration, the entrepreneur did not specify the amount of the PIT calculated for the year in either Annex F2 or in the declaration (line 1.5 of section III of the application of F2 is not filled out and, accordingly, of the letter 6 of line 10.7 of the declaration). At the same time, he timely paid PIT-advances and the final PIT on the basis of the year. How to fix the situation? What are the consequences of self-regulation? Will it be possible to correct the check? Now we will understand.

   How to handle? Since the deadline for submission of an annual income declaration (meaning a tax return on property and income) has long been missed, there are only two ways to correct the error:

1) submit a clarifying income declaration. Keep in mind: in addition to the "self-justifying" section of Declaration VII, you will have to fill out all the other sections that are required to fill it out (fill in them without a mistake, indicating the correct amount of personal income tax, a military exam).

   In Section VII, in line 24, we list "0.00" in the column with the PDO, and in line 25, calculated based on the results of the year, the PIT. If such a mistake is made on the military collection, we also fill out the graph with the military college.

   In line 26.1 decks indicate the difference, in line 27 - a fine of 3%, because we corrected through the refinement.

   And then the question arises: do you need a fine for self-regulation? After all, the entrepreneur paid everything on time, simply did not declare the corresponding obligations. So, on the personal account, he has a overpayment, which "will collapse" with obligations to clarify.

   According to clause 50.1 of the PCU, in the case of self-regulation, a fine of 3% of the underpayment is provided through the clarifying declaration. At the same time under the underpayment, oddly enough, is meant not a debt, namely, the understatement of the tax liability of the previous reporting period (par. 3, clause 50.1, p. 120.2 PKU).

 It turns out that the existence of overpayment, unfortunately, does not save the situation. As the entrepreneur did not calculate the tax liability on the PIT on time, it means that it was underestimated and now it needs to be reckoned. And in case of an additional payment, the "fine" for the underpayment is automatically triggered.

  To pay such a fine is necessary before submitting a clarifying declaration. PATFs are optional, since the PIT-underpayment is simply charged with overpayment.

   But the penalty will not be (line 28 decks), since the debt did not arise. After all, the PIT-obligation to specify "curtailed" with overpayment, therefore, there is no penalty to pay;

2) the second way of correction: to wait until the end of the year and to file a income declaration for 2019, simultaneously correcting in it a mistake in 2018. The error is also corrected in section VII (we fill it in the same way as in the refinement). But all other sections of the deck are filled in according to 2019 data.

  In this case, the penalty for the payment of the tax liability, unfortunately, will be 5% of the amount of the PIT. And the reason is the same: if there is an additional payment - the automaton is a fine. This fine can be paid simultaneously with the PIT - an obligation for 2019, ie E. After the filing of the deck (and not before, as in the case of a correction through the refinement).

    At the same time, the fine will not continue, as there was no delay in the payment of personal income tax.

   As you can see, in terms of economy, it is more profitable to rectify due to refinancing (less fines). But it is quite clear that in such a situation, the entrepreneur is unhappy with paying fines, since PIT was paid on time.

   And what if you wait ...

If during three years, the tax does not reveal an error in the entrepreneur (which is unlikely in this case, since overpay in mind), then after this period, he will be free from the fine (102.1 PCU).
   If they find a mistake, they themselves will determine the amount of the personal income tax liability of the entrepreneur and may fined him in accordance with clause 123.1 of the Tax Code in the amount of 25% of the accrued amount! That is, the risk is significant.

  In such a situation, it is not surprising that the entrepreneur is concerned with the question: is it possible to correct directly before the inspection or already during the inspection (ie E. When the inspection came, but not yet finished)? Let's just say that you can correct this.

   In the case of a desk review or correction after receipt of a plan audit, but until the date indicated in the direction / notification of the planned inspection as the start date of the inspection, there will be no issues even from the tax. But if you correct your thoughts during the period of the audit, then the risk of getting fines or messing with lawsuits is quite high. Probably tax will be based on p. 50.2 PKU (046391400).

   "The taxpayer during the conduct of documentary planning and unscheduled inspections shall not have the right to submit corrective calculations from the tax, which is checked by the controlling body. This rule does not apply to cases established by Article 177 of this Code ".
   

   However, here are some useful nuances:

1) the refinement of the calculation during the inspection can not be filed, but to correct through the reporting declaration, paragraph 50.2 of the PCU formally does not prohibit (option 2, which we wrote in the beginning of the article);

   Please note: you can file (without fines) an annual income decree only from January 1 to February 9. So, if the check comes at another time, this method of "self-correcting" will not take place.

2) in clause 50.2 of the PCU it is expressly stated that it does not apply to cases established by Art. 177 PKU! But it is in this article that the duty of entrepreneurs to file a deck on income (paragraph 177.5, 177.11 PCU). Therefore, it is always possible to submit a refinement to the deck on income: even during a planned / unscheduled inspection!

   However, in our opinion, tax will be able to resist this in every way. In order to avoid such situations, Prikhodko & Partners Law Firm provides outsourcing services as well as, separately, tax reporting services and providing them to relevant government agencies.