In the very general sense justice in relation to taxation is a form of state behavior determined by equal treatment tax obligations and the rights of all citizens and organizations, and these obligations (rights) are equally assigned to both their citizens and other people. Being inherently moral and legal, the principle of fairness of taxation in individual countries has been consolidated at the constitutional level. In Art. 31 of the Spanish Constitution states: "Each
participates in the financing of public expenditures in accordance with its economic possibilities through a fair tax system based on the principles of equality and progressive taxation, which in no case should provide for confiscation.
This principle is basic in the system of taxation principles. At the same time, some scholars, recognizing its primacy and importance, attributed and refer the principle of fairness of taxation to conditional moments, historically changing and not having a solid core.
This judgment is only partly correct. It is much more correct to assert that this principle contains sufficiently stable (if not eternal) elements that can serve as firm criteria for tax policy and which confirm the correctness of the position of the French philosopher A. Camus: "Everything flows, but nothing changes." Analysis of the principle of fairness of taxation allows us to distinguish three such elements in it.
The first element can be formulated as follows: every citizen is obliged to pay for the work of his state, since he and his property are under its protection. The understanding of the tax in this sense arose in antiquity and lay at the basis of the economic activity of any state. But scientifically, the principle of fairness of taxation was first substantiated by A. Smith, who believed that subjects (citizens) are obliged to participate in supporting their state in accordance with their material resources, i.e. according to the income that everyone receives under the protection of the state. In essence, a similar definition of this principle was formulated at the beginning of the 20th century. Russian financial scientist M.I. Friedman: since all members of society are under the protection of the state and enjoy personal and political freedom, then each of them must pay taxes equally with others.
The essence of the second element: in case of tax evasion individuals the state forces them to do this, removing the part necessary by law from the property of these persons. The obligation to pay taxes acts as an unconditional requirement of the state for each person (physical and legal) who has a certain income and property. By evading tax, a citizen not only violates the economic rights of the state, but also the interests of other citizens, since such evasion leads to the need to increase tax rates and imposing additional obligations on bona fide payers.
The third element is expressed as follows: government taxes by extending to citizens and organizations, place the burden on some and provide tax incentives to others. Article 56 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation under tax benefits recognizes the benefits provided specific categories taxpayers and consisting in the possibility not to pay tax or pay it in a smaller amount. Thus, citizens are exempt from paying taxes, receiving state benefits for unemployment, pregnancy and childbirth. Without this element, the principle of fairness of taxation is incomplete.
At the same time, the state, using the mechanisms of tax incentives, can fairly and wisely solve complex political problems, including the demographic one that is urgent for our country. For example, two workers working in a factory in the same specialty receive the same salary, and one of them has one child, and the other has five dependent children. Can we assume that the state is treating them fairly by levying the same income tax?
The principle of justice is the most fundamental in the system of principles of taxation. It can be viewed from both sides. First, this principle is not only independent and has real content, but it also dominates other principles on a daily basis, and the eternally dissatisfied taxpayer appeals primarily to him. Not only in Russia, but also in the countries of prosperous Europe and in the United States, an ordinary taxpayer, if he is dissatisfied with the tax system, then most often points to injustice as its main drawback. The significance of this principle is great and indisputable. A well-known financial scientist of the early twentieth century. V.N. Tverdokhlebov wrote reasonably: "It is not for science to decide which principles are" more important "; but the" fairness "of taxes is beyond its competence, while other principles can serve as the subject of its objective analysis."
Secondly, the principle of fairness of taxation, being basic, is the starting point for most of the other principles, so when analyzing it, an old Russian proverb involuntarily comes to mind: "Rye bread for all breads, grandfather." Most of the principles of taxation logically and legally follow from the principle of justice, are, to a certain extent, its components.
In Russian legal science, this principle is often referred to as the principle of equal tax burden.
Tax law is closely related to the idea of the rule of law. Concept and content tax law are not thought in isolation from two main ideas: the idea of personal inviolability and the idea of inviolability of private property.
For example, Adam Smith believed that proportional taxation is consistent with the principle of equity, when persons with different incomes contribute the same share of their income to the budget.
According to the economist N.I. Turgenev: "Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in the same proportion; donations of each for the common good must correspond to his strength, i.e. his income." common people. " He considers it extremely unjust when entire classes - for example, the clergy and nobility, especially in France - were exempted from tax. "Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in the same proportion, everyone's donations for the common good should correspond to his income."
Currently, the principle of justice has significantly transformed under the influence of changed economic, political and social conditions... It acquired two aspects: "horizontal justice" and "vertical justice".
Based on the broader principle of equality, the same facts should receive a single assessment. Therefore, persons who are in an equal position and have received the same taxable income must pay tax on uniform rates... This is the essence of "horizontal justice"
Those who have different material resources should alienate different shares of their income in the form of taxes. Therefore, higher tax rates should apply to higher incomes. This is aimed at redistributing income. This is how "vertical justice" is understood
Well-known American political scientists G. Almond, J. Powell, K. Strom, R. Dalton note: "Tax policy is aimed at achieving a variety of goals, which can sometimes contradict each other. On the one hand, the state seeks to finance various needs. collect from their citizens maximum amount taxes. On the other hand, it does not want to slaughter the goose that lays the golden eggs. The higher the taxation, the less incentive citizens have to work, and if the tax burden becomes unbearable, they may be tempted to leave the country. Tax policy should also strike a balance between efficiency and fairness. Efficiency means extracting the highest possible tax profit at minimum cost products.
Equity presupposes a taxation procedure in which no one bears an excessive tax burden. In most countries, the tax system is designed to redistribute wealth in favor of the less wealthy. Therefore, income tax is calculated, as a rule, on a progressive scale, i.e. the percentage of taxation depends on the amount of income. Here, however, there is a danger that excessive high stakes income tax will discourage people from working and earning and, having a detrimental effect on the formation of capital, will turn out to be ineffective "
The principle of justice will never lose its relevance and will not be fully explored, since it has an extremely fluid content that changes following the conditions of society. “It is difficult to find another such concept, to which legislators so often resorted to in words and which so often turned out to be disadvantaged in practice, as justice. Perhaps justice can be called the“ blue bird ”of jurisprudence: it is just as desirable and just as elusive. Justice has long been recognized as the basic principle of legislation, but now you can hardly find a country where they can honestly admit that this principle does not remain obscured anywhere in their country. This fully applies to tax law. Not only in Russia, but even in In prosperous European countries, citizens are very rarely satisfied with their tax system, and its injustice is most often indicated as its main drawback. "
Considering the problem of political and legal justice, it should be noted that modern tax law does not answer the question of the proportionality of taxes. In this regard, it seems no coincidence that in the conditions of such a legal vacuum, the Constitutional Court of Russia devoted its first tax case to the issue of fair taxation.
For the first time, this principle was formulated in clause 5 of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of April 4, 1996 N 9-P, and it sounds like this: "In order to ensure the regulation of taxation in accordance with the Constitution Russian Federation the principle of equality requires the actual ability to pay tax based on legal principles fairness and proportionality. The principle of equality in the welfare state with regard to the obligation to pay legally established taxes and fees (part 2 of Art. 6 and Art. 57 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation) suggests that equality should be achieved through a fair redistribution of income and differentiation of taxes and fees "
Subsequently, this principle was reinforced in paragraph 1 of Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, however, in a somewhat refracted form (without mentioning the fair distribution of collected taxes), namely: "... when establishing taxes, the taxpayer's ability to pay tax is actually taken into account based on the principle of fairness." At the same time, as we can see, the fairness of taxes and taxation is understood through the prism of the dogma "from each taxpayer according to his capabilities."
In the doctrine of US tax law, the principle of fair taxation is understood somewhat differently - through the actual principle of uniformity of taxation or the principle of the unity of the tax space. It is enshrined in Art. 1 of Section 8 of the US Constitution: "... all taxes, duties and taxes shall be uniform throughout the United States." At the same time, this principle means uniform legal conditions for levying tax, taking into account real opportunities taxpayer (the same throughout the country) and uniform requirements for tax law
The considered principle, of course, is enshrined in the legislation of most countries of the world. For example, in Art. 53 of the Italian Constitution says: "Everyone is obliged to participate in government spending according to their ability to pay ".
The principle of fairness of taxation is indicated, for example, in the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova, in Art. 58 which states: "The tax system provided for by law must ensure a fair distribution of the tax burden"
The most remarkable in terms of establishing the most important foundations of taxation should be recognized the Brazilian Constitution, which enshrines a number of relevant principles, both general and specific. It stipulates that taxes should be as personal as possible and allocated in accordance with the economic ability of the taxpayer; in particular, in order to ensure the implementation of these principles, the tax administration, subject to personal rights and in accordance with the provisions of the law, may ascertain the status, income and economic activity taxpayer (Art. 145).
How are political attitudes implemented through the most important tax principle- fairness of taxation? As the practice of state building shows, different ways, the main of which is the legislative activity of the state. For example, the President of the Russian Federation in his Address for 1998 writes: "Tax reform should include: expanding the tax base while ensuring a fair distribution of the tax burden between different categories of taxpayers; simplifying tax legislation, making tax laws more transparent; reducing the number of taxes, etc. etc. " Later, the specified political guidelines of the President of the Russian Federation were implemented in specific laws, for example, in Art. 3 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which states: "... legislation on taxes and fees is based on the recognition of universality and equality of taxation. When establishing taxes, the actual ability of a taxpayer to pay tax is taken into account.
Taxes and fees cannot be discriminatory and can not be applied differently based on social, racial, national, religious and other similar criteria. It is not allowed to establish differentiated rates of taxes and fees, tax incentives depending on the form of ownership, citizenship of individuals or the place of origin of capital "
A fair taxation system is the ideal dream of any state and society, which has not yet been achieved by any country in the world. Human civilization has been moving towards this goal for centuries, and it seems that there is still a very long way ahead. The imperfection of the taxation system inevitably causes and will cause criticism of any fiscal institutions of society. However, regardless of this, the search for ways to rational, efficient and fair taxation must continue.
The main feature of a fair tax system is the availability of benefits. Benefits representing certain advantages (exemptions, discounts, exemptions, deferrals, etc.) in the calculation and payment tax payments are a necessary element of any tax system. In addition, through tax incentives, government regulation the country's economy.
As the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation pointed out in its Resolution No. 9-P of April 4, 1996, tax laws should provide for certain benefits, and without a direct link to income. In addition, when choosing the form of taxation, any legislator must proceed from the principle of goodness and justice.
Therefore, the consolidation of the principle of fair taxation in tax legislation will ultimately not only make it possible to make domestic tax system more effective, but it will also help to increase the authority of the authorities, political stability and the education of a civilized taxpayer.
The principles of taxation are nothing more than the basic rules, ideas, provisions that are applied in the field of taxation. Thus, we can say that they are the principles of building the entire tax system.
Modern principles of taxation are a guideline for the formation tax and legal politics of any state. All guidelines for the taxation system are divided into two subsystems: classical principles of taxation and national ones. The principles in the first group idealize taxation. It means that provided that the construction is based solely on their use, it is considered optimal. The fundamental principles of taxation are described in the numerous works of N. Turgenev, D. Ricardo, A. Smith and others. It is customary to refer to the classical principles of uniformity, fairness, cheapness and convenience.
Adam Smith in his time formulated four basic principles of taxation. The first was that the subjects of any state must necessarily cover the costs of the government, while each is as possible, that is, relative to their own solvency. The second principle is that the tax paid by everyone should be clearly defined, and in no case arbitrary. Third, any tax is collected from the payer at the time and in the manner that is most convenient for him. The fourth principle is that the structure of the tax should be such that it extracts from the pockets of the payers as little as possible in excess of what goes into the state treasury.
The principles of taxation are divided into two groups, and the second is domestic. On their basis, whole tax concepts are created, as well as the conditions for the operation of the tax mechanism are set in accordance with the type of state, political regime and the possibilities of the economic basis.
The principles of taxation of the Russian Federation are enshrined in the Tax Code. Here is a list of them:
3. The principle of economic feasibility. It is understood that fees and taxes should be arbitrary and not.
4. The principle of a single economic space. It consists in the fact that it is unacceptable to establish fees and taxes that violate the single economic space. That is, they should not restrict free movement. financial resources, works, services, goods within the Russian Federation, as well as create obstacles and restrict the economic activity of individuals and organizations, which is not prohibited by law.
No one can be charged with the obligation to pay fees and taxes, as well as other payments and contributions, if they have signs of taxes and fees that are established Tax Code, but not really provided for by it.
5. The principle of certainty and clarity legal regulation... In the process of establishing taxes, everything must be determined. Each taxpayer must know exactly which fees and taxes, in what order and when, he needs to pay them.
In the economic literature, various principles of constructing a taxation system are considered.
For the first time he formulated the principles of taxation. In his classic essay, he named four basic principles that were detailed and received different interpretations in the later works of many economists (Fig. 1):
- principle of justice- the tax must be collected from all taxpayers on a permanent basis, i.e. “Every citizen is obliged to pay taxes according to his income”;
- certainty principle- taxation should be strictly fixed, not arbitrary;
- the principle of convenience for the taxpayer - tax collection should not cause inconvenience to the payer in terms of place and time;
- principle of economy of collection- the costs of tax collection should be less than the amount of taxes themselves.
Further development of A. Smith's ideas, their adaptation to the current socio-economic situation in Russia and the tasks of the state financial policy conceptually, the following basic principles of building an effective taxation system will correspond.
Rice. 1. The principles of taxation according to Adam Smith
The principle of obligation. This principle implies the obligation, compulsion and inevitability of paying taxes (difficulties for tax evasion, minimization of the shadow economy). The formula “Taxes are not negotiated” must be in effect.
Equality principle, according to which the distribution of the tax burden should be equal.
There are two approaches to the practical implementation of this principle. The first is based on the terms of taxpayers' benefit, those. taxes paid must be consistent with the benefits that taxpayers receive from government services. Consequently, tax equity is linked to the structure of budget expenditures.
The second approach is based on the terms of solvency. At the same time, the taxation system is not tied to targeted spending budget funds, and each taxpayer must pay a share depending on his ability to pay.
In practice, advanced economies are built on different combinations of both considered approaches. The combination of these approaches, based on the conditions of benefit and solvency of individuals, in our opinion, should become the norm for building an effective tax system in Russia. At the same time, the problem of solvency, which is characteristic of most of the population of our country, should be taken into account first of all.
The principle of certainty. It means that the regulatory legal acts before the commenced tax period rules for fulfilling the obligations of taxpayers to pay taxes and fees must be determined.
The principle of economy. The taxation system must be economical or productive. Some studies have shown that the system will be counterproductive if the costs of collecting taxes exceed 7% of the tax revenue.
Proportionality principle. It is supposed to establish a limit of the tax burden in relation to GDP.
The principle of mobility (elasticity). This implies the ability of the tax system to rapidly expand in the event of extraordinary additional spending by the state, or, conversely, to reduce it, given the capabilities of the state and the goals of its socio-economic (fiscal) policy.
The principle of stability. This refers to the stability of the current tax system over time, combined with periodic volatility, reform (in the economic developed countries ah, the normal interval is three to five years).
Optimality principle. This principle implies the optimal (from the point of view of the implementation of the fiscal function of taxes, the creation of prerequisites economic growth, the achievement of social justice, environmental protection measures, etc.) the choice of the source and object of taxation.
The principle of unity. Unity presupposes the operation of the tax system throughout the country and for all legal entities and individuals. At the same time, the implementation of this principle depends on the organizational and legal forms of enterprises, the type of activity, the disposition to receive legal benefits, the presence of the disposition of lower-level authorities to establish, reduce, increase or abolish taxes.
The principle of justice. Currently, Russian tax legislation is in serious violation of this principle. For example, for failure to comply tax liabilities the taxpayer bears administrative and criminal liability, pays large financial fines. And for excessive collection of taxes and unjustified imposition of fines tax authorities practically do not bear any responsibility. As a result, there are numerous appeals to courts, appeals against illegal actions of tax authorities.
One of the main problems with Russian tax legislation is that tax laws are not directly applicable. Along with the laws, there are numerous bylaws, instructions, additions and amendments to them, regulatory letters and explanations of the tax authorities.
Lack of clarity and clarity normative documents and too frequent changes in tax legislation make it difficult for themselves to work tax services, make the taxpayer disenfranchised. We need clear, legislatively established regulations for introducing amendments and additions to tax legislation, establishing or abolishing taxes. At the same time, a legislative decision on the introduction of new taxes should enter into force no earlier than the next calendar year, and changes that worsen the position of the taxpayer should not have retroactive effect.
The principle of the convenience of tax collection. According to this principle, tax collection should not cause inconvenience to citizens in terms of place and time. It's not just about the convenience of paying taxes individuals... The modern interpretation of this principle, introduced into economic science by A. Smith, means a search for a solution to the problems of rational distribution of taxes between categories of payers, territorial provision of budgets due to timely receipt of taxes, solution of social problems, etc.
The formulated principles characterize, in a certain sense, an ideal tax system, a certain model, a standard to which one should strive. Reality, the state of the economy and financial situation, the interests of the existing political forces, the emerging market conditions, make certain adjustments to this model. In addition, the above systematization of the principles, of course, is not the only possible one. In the educational and methodological literature, their more detailed classifications are also given.
1. The moral category of justice as a concept of what should be done, as a correspondence between deeds and retribution, is the fundamental idea on which any system of legal regulation is built. At the same time, the principle of justice, despite fierce disputes over its essence and content, has been the main reference point of any civilized taxation system for two hundred years. According to V. Pushkareva, the historical dispute about priority in the principles of taxation has made a kind of spiral movement: from justice according to A. Smith, sufficiency according to A. Wagner, again to the principles of justice in the tax systems of industrialized countries at the end of the 20th century.
The idea of tax fairness in a number of countries has received legislative and often constitutional reinforcement. Thus, the Liechtenstein Constitution provides that the state establishes fair taxation, exempting from taxation the minimum for existence and taxing higher rates larger income and property. In some cases, the category of justice was fixed directly in the names of the tax laws themselves. For example, the financial reforms of R. Reagan in 1982 in the United States began precisely with the "Law on Fair Taxation and Fiscal Responsibility."
The issue of justice is primarily an ethical issue. Back in 1887, the Russian researcher M. Alekseenko noted that when forming taxes, people strive for "justice", but "human justice" is relative and depends on the socio-political structure.
However, speaking about the principle of justice in tax area, it is necessary to take into account its economic and legal nature, which forces us to consider this category from two points of view: economic and legal.
2. In economic terms, the principle of equity means that government taxes and spending should influence the distribution of income, placing a burden on some people and granting privileges to others. In the overseas economics there are two main aspects of this principle: horizontal and vertical.
The principle of horizontal equity assumes that payers who are in an equal economic position should also be in an equal tax position, that is, everyone should pay tax of the same amount. (principle of solvency). This principle is based on the idea that the amount of taxes levied should be determined depending on the size of the payer's income. According to NI Turgenev: “Taxes should be distributed among all citizens in the same proportion; donations of each for the common good must correspond to his strength, that is, his income
However, in in this case an ethical problem arises in defining equality, since equality cannot always be achieved by comparing current income. Take, for example, two people working in the same factory doing the same job and crawling the same pay. One of them has one child, and the other has five dependent children. Can we consider them to be on an equal footing? Apparently not.
According to the principle of vertical justice, persons who are in an unequal position must be in an unequal tax position; in other words, whoever receives more benefits from the state should pay more in taxes. (principle of benefits). However, how fair the benefit principle is depends on where the public funds raised through taxes are spent. Thus, it is common knowledge that older people, on the one hand, have lower incomes compared to young able-bodied people, but, on the other hand, they are more likely to use public health services. The principle of ability to pay says that older people should pay lower taxes. At the same time, according to the principle of benefits, older people should pay more taxes, as they benefit more from government funding for hospitals and clinics. It is obvious that in this case, the application of the principle of benefits to pensioners and the elderly would be unfair.
If we consider the issue of financing construction and repair highways then many would agree that road users and vehicle owners should contribute more to road maintenance. This is exactly what is being done - the system of federal tax payments to road funds (tax on road users, tax on the sale of fuels and lubricants, tax on vehicle owners, etc.) is the main source of funding for the country's road infrastructure.
It should be noted that the allocation of "vertical" and "horizontal" justice still does not solve one of the main problems that exist in the tax area today: how to determine the degree of fairness of taxation?
3. From a legal point of view, the principle of fairness proceeds from how reasonably the legislator regulates the procedure for the seizure of property from payers, as well as how the state that collects taxes and the persons obliged to pay them relate to each other.
Considering the problem of legal justice, it should be noted that modern tax legislation does not provide an answer to the question of the proportionality of taxes. In this regard, it seems no coincidence that in the conditions of such a legal vacuum, the Constitutional Court of Russia devoted its first tax case to the issue of fair taxation.
In the Resolution of the Constitutional Court dated April 4, 1996, No. 9-P “In the case of checking the constitutionality of a number of normative acts of the city of Moscow and the Moscow region. Stavropol Territory, Voronezh Region and the city of Voronezh, regulating the procedure for registering citizens arriving for permanent residence in these regions "^ it is noted that fair taxation is based on the Constitution of Russia and should not deprive citizens of the opportunity to exercise their constitutional rights (right to property, right to housing etc.). In addition, taxation that prevents citizens from exercising their constitutional rights must be deemed disproportionate.
Despite the fact that the rule of law begins with formal equality, the equality of citizens still cannot be brought to the point of absurdity, limiting itself to only one formal equality of legal statuses. V modern conditions when establishing and levying taxes, it is necessary to take into account a large number of different conditions and circumstances.
As for the question of the relationship between the legal status of the state and the payer, then there should be a state of complete equality between them, since in Art. 8 and 19 of the Constitution of Russia enshrined equality in the existence and protection of all forms of property, including state and private.
However, at the moment, tax legislation cannot be called fair, since the state, represented by its tax authorities, has a priority position. So, for example, a taxpayer can claim the return of overpaid tax payments within three years, while the tax authorities can apply an indisputable procedure for the collection of tax arrears from legal entities within six years from the date of arrears (clause 3 of Article II of the Law on the basics of the tax system). In addition, for non-fulfillment of tax obligations, the taxpayer bears strict responsibility in the form of the application of measures of administrative and criminal liability, and also pays large financial penalties even without taking into account his fault. At the same time, the tax authorities bear practically no responsibility for excessive collection of taxes and unjustified imposition of fines.
Moreover, the very right of the tax authorities to interpret laws, which follows from Art. 25 of the Law on the Fundamentals of the Tax System, initially puts the payer in an unequal position in comparison with the tax inspectorate.
4. Based on the above, we can draw some conclusions about the practical significance of the principle of fair taxation. If we proclaim the idea of justice as a basic postulate of the Russian tax system, then the consequences of this will be the recognition by the legislator and their unswerving adherence to the provisions indicated below.
1. The budgetary and tax policy of the state should be based on the redistribution of tax payments between payers with different capabilities. This means that the very idea of "equal taxation" is flawed and untenable. In addition, the choice of directions for reforming the taxation system should be made taking into account the existence among taxpayers of the most different groups, united among themselves according to their ability to equally bear the tax burden. A fair tax system cannot fail to take into account that large industrial enterprises and small enterprises are payers with different capabilities, and they cannot be equated in the same issue on the payment of advance payments for income tax and VAT. In addition, it is necessary to highlight the tax opportunities for newly created enterprises and enterprises that have been operating for several years.
2. To achieve fairness, the tax system must be differentiated in terms of the variety of certain taxes. Any tax system should have taxes focused on financing specific government needs. payers of which are persons who receive benefits from the state more than others. The above example of financing the construction and repair of domestic highways is the most illustrative in this regard.
In this regard, the idea of introducing the so-called “flat tax”, which is widely discussed in the US and Europe, providing for one fiscal payment with the abolition of all other taxes, is untenable in terms of ensuring justice and equality between members of society.
3. The main feature of a fair tax system is the availability of benefits. Benefits that represent certain advantages (exemptions, discounts, exemptions, deferrals, etc.) in the calculation and payment of tax payments are essential elements of any tax system. In addition, state regulation of the country's economy is carried out through tax incentives.
As the Constitutional Court of Russia pointed out in its Resolution of April 4, 1996 No. 9-P, the final laws should provide for certain benefits, and without direct linkage to income. In addition, when choosing a form of taxation, any legislator must proceed from the principle of goodness and justice, and fair benefits to individual citizens correct the ethical flaws of formal equality between all citizens.
In this regard, one should agree with Professor D. Chernik, who spoke out against the "comprehensive reduction of tax benefits" when developing the concept of the Tax Code ^ Still, the main "evil" does not lie in tax incentives as such, but in their "illegibility" and lack of computation arising from the opportunistic or even populist, and not a balanced and scientifically based approach (for more details, see § 8.8 of this manual).
4. The methodological basis of the principle of justice is progressive and shedular taxation. According to the classical definition, a tax system is progressive if, after taxes are paid, inequality in the economic position of payers is reduced. In fact, this is achieved through a complex progression: the rate increases with the taxable object, but the increased rate is not applied to the entire object, but only to the amount exceeding the maximum level. Thus, under proportional taxation, the wealthier payer pays a larger share of his income in taxes than the less wealthy payer.
As for the sheduly (classification, partial) taxation, this methodology divides the taxable objects, as a rule, income, depending on the source of their income into different groups - shedules. Each shedule has its own rules and tax rates. The sheduular methodology allows each type of income to be taxed differentially, therefore it is no coincidence that this system is used in many countries of the world ^.
5. From a legal point of view, tax authorities and taxpayers should have equal rights and equal opportunities in protecting their interests. In addition, the principle of justice will be strengthened by bringing taxpayers to financial responsibility, depending on the degree of their guilt in committing a tax offense. Currently, tax evaders and taxpayers who have violated tax laws by mistake or negligence are equally liable.
A fair taxation system is the ideal dream of any state and society, which has not yet been achieved by any country in the world. Human civilization has been advancing towards this goal for centuries, and it still has a very long road ahead of it. The imperfection of the taxation system inevitably causes and will cause criticism of any fiscal institutions of society. However, regardless of this, the search for ways to rational, efficient and fair taxation must continue. But in the words of the French enlightener Charles Montesquieu (1689-1755), nothing requires so much statesmanship and intelligence as determining the part that is taken from the subjects and the part that is left to them. Therefore, the consolidation of the principle of fair taxation in tax legislation will ultimately not only make the domestic tax system more efficient, but will also contribute to the establishment of tax discipline and the education of a civilized taxpayer.
