The main disadvantage of indirect taxes is that with them the tax ability of payers has to be judged on the basis of intermediate factors, for example, by a person’s expenses or consumption, while the true paying capacity does not always and does not fully correspond to such factors. Further, in indirect taxation it is very difficult to achieve uniformity of taxation. When taxing basic necessities, indirect taxes become inversely proportional to the funds of payers.

But, on the other hand, indirect taxes help to implement general taxation, which, given the current state of the national economy, is unattainable through direct taxation of income and capital alone; Indirect taxes are relatively insensitive to taxpayers and provide an opportunity to raise funds to cover the enormous modern government expenditures.

The advantages of indirect taxes include the fact that these taxes are paid as if voluntarily and that they, without extending to saved shares of income, promote frugality. But this cannot in any way apply to taxes on basic necessities, in which there can be no question of paying them voluntarily.

The main advantage of indirect taxes lies in their high fiscal qualities, which explains the widespread and strong development of these taxes.

Types of indirect taxes

Indirect taxes according to the objects of collection are divided into: excise taxes, fiscal monopoly, customs duties.

In developed countries they predominate excise taxes– indirect taxes on goods and services produced by private enterprises. Excise taxes are established on domestically produced goods; in some countries, excise taxes are also imposed on the import of goods (Russia). According to the method of collection, excise taxes are divided into individual - established on certain types and groups of goods, and universal - levied on the value of the entire gross turnover (VAT). Universal excise taxes are more profitable from a fiscal point of view (with the expansion of the range of goods, the income of the universal excise tax to the budget increases), they are levied on all goods that are sold. Initially, the universal excise tax was levied at one stage (consumption) in retail trade. After the Second World War, a cascading turnover tax was introduced (that is, it was levied at all stages of production). Today it is characterized by one-time taxation. A type of universal excise tax is VAT, which, unlike turnover tax, is not levied on the entire value of a product, but only on that part of the value that is added at a specific stage of production. Added value includes: wages, depreciation, interest on credit resources, overhead costs.

The second type of indirect taxes gov - fiscal monopoly - the state's monopoly right to the production and (or) sale of certain goods; it pursues a purely fiscal goal. Rates are not set, since the state is a monopolist in the production of certain types of goods (for example, wine and vodka products) and sells goods at a very high price, which includes the tax itself. A fiscal monopoly can be partial (either production or sales) or complete.

The third type of indirect taxes- These are taxes on foreign trade: customs duties. They are divided:

1. by type - export, import, transit;

2. on the construction of rates - for specific (set in a fixed amount), ad valorem (as a percentage of the cost) and complex (a combination of specific and ad valorem rates);
3. according to economic role - fiscal, protectionist (to protect the domestic market from imported goods), anti-dumping (increased duties on goods imported at dumping prices), preferential (system of preferences - preferential duties on one imported product, or on all imports) .

20. The ratio of direct and indirect taxes.

Assessing the relationship between direct and indirect taxation in Russia is important not only from the point of view of choosing tax policy priorities, but also from the point of view of the possibility of using foreign experience. Undoubtedly, the introduction of international developments in this area should take into account the economic and political situation, mentality, as well as differences in national legislation on taxes and fees. As a result, the reasonable use and improvement of foreign methods in Russian reality can lead to the calculation of an optimal model for the relationship between direct and indirect taxes.

Thus, to create an effective and sustainable tax model in Russia, it is necessary to determine the optimal level of the ratio of indirect and direct taxation, namely: their share. In addition, it is necessary to evaluate the impact and ratio of types of taxes within these two groups of taxes, that is, to arrive at their optimal value (tax burden that would be favorable both for the taxpayer and acceptable for the state).

In foreign practice, there are four basic models of taxation systems, depending on their focus on direct and indirect taxes.

The Anglo-Saxon model is focused on direct taxes on individuals, the share of indirect taxes is insignificant. In the USA, for example, personal income tax forms 44% of budget revenues. Payments from the population exceed taxes from enterprises. This model is also used in Australia, Great Britain, Canada and other countries.

The Eurocontinental model is distinguished by a high share of contributions to social insurance, as well as a significant share of indirect taxes: revenues from direct taxes are several times less than revenues from indirect ones. For example, in Germany, the share of revenues for social insurance is 45% of budget revenues, from indirect taxes - 22%, and from direct taxes - only 17%. The indicators are similar for other countries focused on this model - the Netherlands, France, Austria, and Belgium. The Latin American model is focused on traditional indirect taxes, which is due to high inflation. Thus, the share of indirect taxes in the country's budget revenues was 46% in Chile, 42% in Bolivia, and 49% in Peru. The mixed model, which combines features of other models, is used in many countries. States choose it in order to diversify the structure of income and avoid dependence of the budget on a particular type or group of taxes. A special feature is the significant preponderance of the share of direct taxes from organizations over the share of direct taxes from individuals. The Russian tax system is a representative of the Latin American and Eurocontinental models, i.e. it is characterized by priority in the distribution of the tax burden of indirect taxes on business (about 70%).

In Russia, “the objectively prevailing economic conditions do not yet allow us to focus on the Anglo-Saxon model, but now there are real opportunities to switch to a mixed model of distribution of the tax burden, in which direct income taxes and indirect taxes on business would be distributed approximately equally in total tax revenues

to the budget and extra-budgetary funds."

In order to distribute direct and indirect taxes evenly, it is necessary to calculate and establish a certain balance, since individual taxes and fees must coexist productively with each other, and the tax system as a whole must coexist with the external economic environment. In this case, it is possible to use the experience of foreign countries, but most importantly, taking into account the specifics of Russia's economic development.

Greetings! Increasingly, the Russian media are hinting at upcoming changes to the tax code. Regional budgets are empty - they urgently need to be filled. This time the government decided to take the “rich” seriously. And in a couple of years we may return to a progressive income tax scale.

Today we’ll talk about what a unified and progressive scale of income taxation is. And let's try to figure out which system is better for Russia and why?

In modern Russia, income tax was first introduced in April 1916 by decree of Nicholas II - at the height of the First World War. By the way, the ancestor of modern personal income tax had a progressive scale: from 7% to 12%.

Over the 100 years that have passed since then, the tax calculation system has been revised more than once. Both for the worse and for the better for payers.

Since 1998, a progressive tax scale has been in effect in Russia. What is the difference between a flat (straight, single) scale and a progressive one? The fact that in the second option the income tax rate depends on the amount of income of an individual. In the late 90s it was 12%, 20% and 30%.

In 2001, Chapter 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation “Tax on personal income” was adopted. Income tax has a new name: “NDFL”. And payers were divided into two categories: residents and non-residents.

Well, and most importantly: the income tax rate has become the same for everyone - 13%. Since 2001, Russians have given the state a little more than one-seventh of their salaries and bonuses, income from the sale of real estate and cars, rental of property and dividends on shares. In general, 13% of almost all income to the family budget.

Certain types of income are now subject to an increased rate of 35% (for example, lottery winnings). And a long list of incomes appeared that were completely exempt from personal income tax (pensions, scholarships, alimony, benefits).

In the first two years after the abolition of the progressive scale, personal income tax revenues to the budget increased by a third! In the 2000s, the flat system became the hallmark of the Russian economy and one of the few competitive advantages of the Russian tax system.

Was the flat scale really that effective? After all, in other countries it is almost never used. Not everything is so obvious.

The explosive growth in tax revenues was triggered by several factors:

1. The general personal income tax rate increased by 1% for most individuals (previously the minimum was 12%, not 13%)
2. Benefits for the military, judges, prosecutors, customs officers, police and even tax officials were cancelled. As a result, the number of taxpayers increased by almost a million people
3. In 2001, the tax burden in the economy was generally weakened (income tax and VAT rates were cut). This allowed the business to redirect part of the money saved on taxes to pay wages to employees
4. Population incomes grew every year. Russia has entered the period of “well-fed oil years”

In other words, the effectiveness of the transition from a progressive scale to a single one was greatly exaggerated.

Which countries currently have a unified personal income tax scale?

Among the countries of the former USSR, the flat scale is used in Russia, Georgia, Ukraine, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. Overseas, it operates in Hungary, Bulgaria, Albania, Macedonia, Romania, Czech Republic, Mongolia, Hong Kong and the Channel Islands (Guernsey and Jersey).

A unified tax scale is also relevant for individual federal entities of large countries. For example, for the Canadian province of Alberta and some US states: Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois.

Interesting fact. In developed countries with strong economies, flat taxation is not used!

Let's say in France the income tax rate varies from 5.5% to 75%. The income of the French is divided into eight categories. And income is calculated not per person, but per family. And the non-taxable minimum is 6,011 euros per year.

Examples of other countries with a progressive scale: USA, UK, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, Canada, Germany, China and Israel.

Russia, with its 13% personal income tax, is one of the ten European countries with the minimum income tax rate. Together with Kazakhstan, Belarus, Lithuania and Bulgaria.

Is Russia returning to the progressive scale?

In fact, a direct scale of income taxation is used only in poor European countries. And in almost all countries of the former USSR. Maybe that’s why in the last two years the question of switching to a progressive personal income tax scale in Russia has been raised more and more often?

In August 2016, LDPR deputies introduced a sensational bill to the State Duma.

It proposes to exempt Russians with a salary of less than 180,000 rubles per year from income tax. It is recommended to leave a rate of 13% for people with an annual income of up to 2.4 million rubles. And for the “rich” they came up with a flat tax of 289 thousand rubles plus 30% of the amount of income over 2.4 million rubles.

When will the new scale be introduced? For now, they promise that this and similar projects will be considered no earlier than after the 2018 elections.

Arguments against introducing a progressive tax scale

Will there be a progressive personal income tax scale in Russia? The system has both pros and cons. And the cons so far outweigh.

• The population and business will begin to massively “go into the shadows” and hide their income

The validity of the argument is indirectly confirmed by the results of the tax reform of the 2000s. After the introduction of a flat tax rate, personal income tax revenues increased by 0.7-0.8% of GDP. And many Russian businessmen and individuals have indeed stopped evading taxes.

The introduction of a progressive scale can provoke a reverse process. The rich will again “hide” their income (), and the volume of budget revenues will decrease. And the main financial burden will again fall on the middle class.

• Legal and administrative costs will increase

Why? Because the population will have to independently declare their income.

Today, almost all income of individuals is subject to a flat rate of 13%. And tax agents (banks, brokers, etc.) take full responsibility for “communication” with tax authorities.

But the progressive scale will force Russians to independently take into account income from various sources, summarize them, fill out a tax return and submit it to the relevant authorities.

In 2017, neither the population nor the tax authorities are ready for such activity.

• The gap between rich and poor regions will deepen

Personal income tax goes not to the federal, but to regional and local budgets. In other words, Moscow and St. Petersburg will receive even more compared to the impoverished Ryazan and Yaroslavl regions. Such “discrimination” will likely exacerbate interregional tensions.

• Business distrust of government will increase

Since 2001, the president and government of the Russian Federation have promised numerous times not to change the income tax rate. Breaking promises will cause another surge of business distrust in government and an outflow of private capital abroad.

The flow of investment will decrease, production will decrease, and the unemployment rate will jump. As a result, both rich and poor will lose.

Let me remind you that the increase in insurance premiums in 2011 was met, to put it mildly, without enthusiasm. And the introduction of a progressive personal income tax scale will only add fuel to the fire.

If not a progressive scale, then what?

No one argues that the personal income tax calculation system in Russia needs to be improved. But it is not at all necessary to change the flat scale to a progressive one!

Experts offer other milder options. One of them: to increase the share of tax deductions in the taxable income of individuals.

The essence of tax deductions is fair and obvious. Each of us has daily needs that must be met - otherwise we will not survive. And the state should not “tax” that part of the income that goes to maintaining a normal standard of living.

All that remains “on top” is the economic benefit of the taxpayer. Which can and should be taxed. Without tax deductions, income taxes become a "poor man's tax."

Let's look at a hypothetical example. Misha earns 10,000 rubles a month, and Oleg – 100,000 rubles. Hypothetically, with 10,000 rubles you can eat, dress second-hand, buy budget household chemicals for the home and pay for a tiny apartment and the Internet.

That is, 10,000 rubles is the minimum amount to support life for both Misha and Oleg. But the first spends all of his income on current needs, and the second still has 90,000 left, savings, etc.

“To be honest,” Misha should not pay personal income tax at all. What kind of income are we talking about if he spends everything he earns on essential goods? But it’s fair to tax Oleg’s “extra” 90,000 rubles – this is a pure economic benefit.

In Russia, tax deductions are essentially equivalent to benefits. Liquidators of the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster, participants of the Second World War, heroes of the USSR and the Russian Federation have the right to NV. By the way, the size of tax deductions is terrifying: from 500 to 3000 rubles!

Why not increase the tax deduction to an adequate value? Then it would be possible to deduct NV from an individual’s income and tax the difference at a higher rate. This approach is much fairer than both a single and progressive income tax scale.

How do you feel about a possible revision of the personal income tax scale in Russia?

In 2015 and for the last 14 years, Russia has had a unified tax collection system. A rate of 13% applies, and it is equal for citizens with any income level. Most countries today use progressive (sometimes even extreme) taxation, establishing gradations of income levels and levying personal income tax accordingly.

The essence of progressive taxation

Taxation of citizens' income with income tax is applied in all developed countries. However, in the vast minority of cases the tax rate is fixed. More often, a progressive income tax is used - it is collected at a rate, the size of which directly depends on the amount of income.

Currently, Russia uses a flat (unified) tax scale. A fixed rate of 13% for residents of the country is used regardless of the amount of profit, the sources of its receipt and the status of the payer.

A unified scale today exists in Estonia, Ukraine, Georgia, Bulgaria, Hong Kong, Mongolia, Lithuania and other countries. A progressive income tax rate is used in many European countries. France is a case in point: it has extreme progressive taxation.

For citizens' income up to 6,000 euros (very low level), no tax is levied at all. The highest rate of 45% applies to income at the level of 150 thousand - 1 million euros. Since 2013, a 75 percent tax rate has been imposed on the income of millionaires with an income level above 1 million per year. Instead of covering the budget deficit as planned, this government step led to an outflow of capital from the country.

In the UK, the rate ranges from 14-45%. The highest rates for maximum profit are in Sweden (56.6%), Israel (57%), the Netherlands (52%) and France. At the same time, developed countries can boast of low rates for low incomes - USA - 10%, China - 5%.

Advantages and disadvantages

A flat tax scale has been in effect in the Russian Federation since 2001 with a rate of 13%. The increased 35 percent rate applies exclusively to non-residents. And yet, over the past decades, the question of introducing a progressive income tax rate in the Russian Federation has regularly arisen.

It is assumed that almost everyone will benefit from such an innovation:

• First of all, the budget will be filled and at least most of its deficit will be covered. However, the experience of France suggests that not everything is so simple.
• Stabilization of regional budgets. Many taxes and fees that were previously transferred in whole or in part to the local treasury have in recent years begun to flow in full to the state budget (for example, the mineral extraction tax). There is a trend toward a lack of money “locally,” which could be solved by increased tax revenues.
• Establishing social justice. In just two years - 2005-2007 - the number of Russian millionaires has tripled. And in the crisis year of 2008, the number of ruble billionaires more than doubled. The single personal income tax rate naturally causes dissatisfaction, since taxpayers transfer the same 13% from an income of 20 thousand rubles and 2 million rubles in the general manner.

But there are also disadvantages to the possible introduction of a progressive scale:

• enrichment of local budgets of the capital and large cities and impoverishment of remote regions - taxation is carried out at the place of employment, not residence;
• the need for citizens to independently report their income with all administrative costs;
• tax evasion, return to gray salaries and shadow business;
• increased unemployment, lack of incentives to work, decreased investment.

Is it possible to introduce a progressive scale in Russia?

This year, State Duma deputies introduced a proposal to introduce a progressive income tax in Russia. The following is offered:

• establishing the previous rate of 13% for income not exceeding 24 million rubles for 12 months;
• for incomes exceeding this mark, it is proposed to use a rate of 25%;
• if you “earn” 100-200 million a year, the rate will be 35%;
• if income exceeded 200 million rubles, the rate will be equal to 50%, that is, half of the citizen’s total profit.

Disputes about the fairness and expediency of the planned innovations continue. It is assumed that the use of such a progressive system will allow the profits of large organizations and enterprises to be directed to their own development and modernization, and not to the personal enrichment of actual leaders.

However, there are also pessimistic forecasts. For example, the wealthiest citizens of the Russian Federation, who, like all other taxpayers, pay taxes at their place of work, can simply register companies in another jurisdiction, where taxation will not force them to “halve” their profits.

Whether progressive taxation is necessary or not in Russia is a controversial issue. Even now, at the stage of discussion of the bill, it is necessary to clearly predict the consequences and build a transition plan if such a system is nevertheless introduced. The positive aspects are obvious - smoothing out the social disproportion in the incomes of the richest and poorest Russians. But there are also many disadvantages: income going into the shadows or abroad, the resumption of wage payments “in envelopes”.

Good day, dear friends! Vlad Novikov is with you again, and today we will talk about direct and indirect taxes. I think this information will be very useful to those who are engaged in commercial activities or are just planning to start their own business.

From this article you will learn:

— basic concepts related to taxation;
— principles of tax classification;
— what is the difference between direct and indirect taxes (pros and cons);
- you will also learn about ideal tax system!

But first, let's briefly look at what direct and indirect taxes are, in order to have a certain basis from which to base further judgments.

To put it in simple words, direct taxes- This is a contribution to the state that the taxpayer pays out of his own pocket.

Hence, indirect taxes– these are payments, the financial burden of which is shifted from the taxpayer to his clients by including such taxes in the cost of services and/or goods. A simple example is the excise tax on tobacco products. The money is taken from the buyer's pocket, but the payment to the state budget is made by the seller.

The methodology by which we will study direct and indirect taxes is borrowed from the first of a kind of philosophers - the great Socrates.

Socrates is an Ionian (ancient Greek) sage who lived in Athens from 469 BC. e., to 399 BC. e., which laid the foundation for the entire modern scientific system of knowledge. Replacing the mystical approach of studying everything with rationalism.

According to the concept of knowledge of the greatest of the sages, the process of studying and transmitting information is divided into several stages:

First, you need to decide whether the participants in the process speak the same language. This means whether the definitions and concepts that people use when talking about the same thing are identical.

Secondly, you need to divide the object(s) being studied into its components and consider its advantages and disadvantages in order to understand what it is.

Thirdly, it is necessary to systematize the studied knowledge and draw conclusions in order to understand the degree of usefulness of the object, if any.

What-what do you say it's called? (basic concepts).

Let's proceed to the first stage - we will give definitions of the basic concepts that are used when discussing taxes to make sure that we are talking about the same thing.

Tax(duty) is a gratuitous payment collected by the state from a private or legal entity. Ideally, this is a contribution to the general “treasury”, from which money is distributed for the creation and development of common goods.

Tax system (TS) – a legislatively regulated system of interaction between the state and the taxpayer, including: rules for the collection of taxes; rules for their distribution; and the benefits and sanctions associated with the process.

Object of taxation (IT) - this is an object that has physical, quantitative or price characteristics that necessitate the payment of tax by an individual or legal entity if they own (use) this object.

Taxpayer or the subject of taxation is a private or legal entity who, within the framework of the current Tax Code, is obliged to pay taxes.

Classification– dividing an object or objects into its component parts and/or combining them within one category. For example: tree - apple or oak, money - cash and electronic, taxes - direct and indirect.

Tax rate – the size or amount of contributions to the budget.

To consolidate the material, let's put what we've learned into practice.

Regarding the investment tax, this refers to trading in securities or material resources (oil, gold, bananas) on stock exchanges. One of these types of trade was written about in the article. Read it at your leisure if you are interested in this issue.

Group No. 2. This is income from future (expected) income. These include all payments where the taxable object is potential income that a particular taxpayer can receive through the use of certain assets. In other words, it is a tax on property that can generate profit. It should be noted that tax collection is mandatory, even in cases where the taxpayer has not received any income (profit).

Such taxes include:
- land tax;
— payment for the use of mineral (fossil) resources;
— transport tax (road or environmental tax);
- real estate tax.

There are a few more nuances, but we will look at them when we consider the question of how direct taxes differ from indirect ones.

Indirect taxes- these are mandatory payments that are paid by the taxpayer, but in this case the financial burden of these payments is shifted to a third party (buyer, client), who pays these payments to the taxpayer, and he, in turn, gives them to the state.

For example, a seller (subject of taxation) sells a liter of milk (subject of taxation) to his client, the price of which already includes VAT (additional value tax). Thus, the buyer pays VAT, but the seller makes the payment to the state budget for this tax.

Indirect taxes, like direct ones, can be grouped according to certain criteria:

Group No. 1. Universal – this is a mandatory increase in cost for all services and goods (exceptions are possible). The most striking and famous example of such a tax is the previously discussed VAT. He is the most controversial and ambiguous.

Group No. 2. Individual taxes are indirect taxes that apply only to certain services and goods. An example of such duties:
— tax on the purchase and sale of real estate;
- excise taxes;
— tax levied on the purchase of jewelry (luxury tax).

Group No. 3. Fiscal are payments levied by the state when issuing certain state permits. For example:
— payments for the preparation of certain documentation (by the state);
— licensing;
— payment for obtaining permits (construction, extraction/use of minerals).

Group No. 4. Customs duties are, in essence, a fee for crossing the state (sometimes administrative) border by an object of taxation. This tax is also called “customs clearance”. Examples of customs tax are mandatory payments when purchasing cars, household appliances, electronics, meat, etc. abroad and subsequently importing them into the territory of the Russian Federation.

How will we divide the money? The ratio of direct and indirect taxes in the budget of the Russian Federation.

I won’t languish for long and say right away - in Russia the ratio of direct and indirect taxes is somewhere around 30% to 70% in favor of indirect payments. The situation is similar in Latin American countries and in the western part of the EU. Good or bad... let's think about it.

But first, let's look at how direct and indirect taxes are distributed in the world. According to this criterion, all states can be divided into 4 conditional groups:

First group- that's what they're called "Anglo-Saxons": USA, Australia, UK, Canada and more. Their model implies the dominance of direct taxes over indirect ones (≃ 70% to 30%). Moreover, as a rule, in these countries there are more payments from individuals than tax revenues from legal entities.

Second group- This Eurocontinental model NS: Germany, Austria, Belgium and France. In these countries, payments from indirect taxes are several times larger than payments from direct taxes. This is largely explained by the strong social orientation of these states, as a result of which many payments are transferred to a third party. As with the same medical or social insurance.

The third group is the Latin American model: Boli, Chile, Peru and more. Within the framework of this tax system, states impose traditional indirect taxes on taxpayers. Because it is believed that they are able to compensate for the high inflation of national currencies.

The fourth group is a mixed model. Frankly speaking, this is not even a model, but a simple and most likely random combination of features of the three previous models. What is typical for developing or unstable (new) states. Since they do not have a strategy for economic development, and leaders often change. Therefore, there is simply no one there to balance different types of taxes, direct and indirect, within the framework of any effective model for the development of the tax system.

Regarding Russia, as was said earlier, the ratio of direct and indirect taxes here is a combination of two models. An excessive social burden is taken from one (the Eurocontinental model) - in the Russian Federation there is a huge number of civil servants (40 million) and a large number of pensioners. And at the same time, the burden of the tax burden is shifted to the final consumers of goods and services through indirect payments (Latin American model).

As a result, the Russian economy tends to a simple formula:

high prices + low wages = economic crisis and social tension.

What comes of this is described in the books of P.A. Sorokin. However, everything is not so bad, since in the last few years there has been a noticeable trend towards an increase in the share of direct taxes.

Verdict for Russia: if you want to earn money, become an entrepreneur, not an end consumer. In order to shift taxes to a third party.

True, two questions may arise here:
1. What kind of business should I start?
2. Where to get money for start-up capital?

Regarding the first question, this is an individual matter. Choose what you are good at and what brings you pleasure.

I already answered the second question in the article.

Yes, it is difficult and requires entrepreneurial spirit, but, nevertheless, it is better than the average salary. With which you pay direct taxes for yourself and indirect taxes for entrepreneurs!

Types of taxes: direct and indirect. Which one is better and why?

It's time to compare direct and indirect taxes to understand which is better.

First, let's look at the main advantages of direct taxes:

- ease of calculation;
— ease of collection (procedural);
— it is easy to determine their impact on the economy.

Now the cons:

— they are very often not paid, both within the framework of current legislation and by circumventing it;
— difficulties with linking to profit (debatable);
— are ineffective during a crisis or economic stagnation.

Regarding the controversial point. The duality is that direct income is paid regardless of whether the taxpayer has a profit or not, which seems to be unfair. But on the other hand, it stimulates economic activity. And this is very good!

Let's move on to indirect taxes. Their advantages are:

— help cover colossal government costs;
— stimulate/save business;
— a small number of defaulters (for indirect taxes).

Well, accordingly, let’s consider the disadvantages of this type of tax deductions:

- procedural complexity of collection (if there are many counterparties in the chain between the consumer and the state);
— the tax burden is distributed unevenly (the poor pay almost everything, the rich pay almost nothing);
- highly dependent on customer demand.

From my point of view, direct and indirect taxes are largely inversely proportional to each other. Where one is good, the second is bad and vice versa. For example, direct taxes are more or less evenly distributed between rich and poor, paying a percentage of income and/or property. But at the same time, they become a burden if there is no economic development.

At the same time, indirect taxes stimulate economic development in bad or crisis times. But this is not done at the expense of large capital, but at the expense of the simple and, as a rule, poor population.

It’s difficult to say which of these is better. And I don’t want to choose, because I know a different model of the tax system, which has absorbed all the advantages of both types, getting rid of their disadvantages.

Ideal tax system!

What I am was written about earlier in an article about mine. Therefore, I will not repeat myself. Let me just say that my point of view is the point of view of an existing entrepreneur with a successful practice of opening and running his own business.

Therefore, I know what I'm talking about, unlike the "expert theorists".

And I'm talking about " Inflation tax" Its concept is extremely simple - instead of printing money, giving it to people, and then collecting it into the state budget, you can simply print money directly to finance the state budget - without intermediaries in the form of the taxpayer, the tax system and other fiscal services.

What will come of this? The fact that the tax, roughly speaking, will be ruble inflation, which will “eat up” equally part of the financial resources of all holders of ruble money and of those who have certain resources (property), whose value is denominated in rubles.

Moreover, this tax completely equalizes the poor and the rich before the tax system, since it takes away from everyone a certain percentage of their wealth. For example, if you have 100 million rubles, and the inflation tax is 10%, then you will lose exactly this 10% - 10 million rubles. And at the same time, if you have 100 rubles, then you will lose the same 10% - 10 rubles. The perfect equalizer!

Pros of an inflation tax:

1. Simplicity collection. The tax service and everything connected with it becomes unnecessary. Because there is no need to collect taxes!

2. Disappearance of tax offenses! How to violate something that does not exist?

3. Inflation fee will include direct and indirect taxes as far as their merits are concerned. This means that it will stimulate economic development and at the same time levels poor and rich.

Of course, this tax also has disadvantages, or rather two disadvantages:

1. You can get around it by transferring money to another currency. But this is compensated by the introduction of a commission on transactions in foreign currencies.
2. Reflection of the rich. This tax is unprofitable for them, so they will oppose its introduction in every possible way. This is actually why it is still not used in any country, although this concept was developed quite a long time ago.

Apology (not Socrates)

So, following the behest of Socrates, we studied direct and indirect taxes, defining the basic terms related to the taxation system and grouping its components into separate groups. All this made it possible to understand how things stand with this issue in Russia, and where it needs to move next. Therefore, we have fully understood this issue.

At all times, governments of various countries have actively resorted to the use of indirect taxes to cover government spending.

Indirect taxes are taxes on expenses and those who spend more pay them more, that is, these are taxes on consumption. The payer of such taxes is always the final consumer of products, works and services, purchasing them at a price that already includes the tax. The peculiarity of these taxes is that they are transferred to the budget not by the one who pays, but by the one who collects taxes from buyers when they sell goods, perform work, or provide services, which is why they are called indirect.

Indirect taxes are taxes that, by their economic nature, are a premium to the price of goods, works (services) sold. These are value added tax, payments calculated from proceeds from sales of products, excise taxes, sales tax, and other fees on revenue.

To assess the effectiveness of the indirect tax system in world practice, various criteria are used, the most important of which are:

• - neutrality: the tax should influence the manufacturer’s command and the buyer’s choice as little as possible, i.e. economic distortions from the introduction of a tax should be minimal;
• - fairness: the tax should produce politically acceptable income distribution consequences, i.e. the tax must be accompanied by corresponding changes in other taxes or in the system of social payments;
• - price stability: the tax should not lead to inflationary processes both during the introduction of the tax and in the long term;
• - profitability: the tax must provide the state with the necessary revenues and, as far as possible, prevent avoidance and evasion of payment;
• - administrative simplicity: the tax should strive to minimize the costs of its calculation, payment by the taxpayer, as well as collection and monitoring of payment by the tax authority.

By their economic nature, indirect consumption taxes can be classified as universal (VAT) and special (excise taxes).

In modern taxation theory, there are two main systems for collecting indirect taxes:

one-stage collection:

multi-stage collection.

A single-stage levy involves levying a tax once at the production or distribution stage. In this case, three subsystems are possible:

manufacturer tax:

wholesale tax;

retail sales tax.

Producer tax is levied only in the manufacturing sector. A particular advantage of this collection system is the low cost of tax administration, since the number of tax payers is small and the objects of taxation are quite impressive. But this advantage is outweighed by a number of disadvantages.

Firstly, a number of manufacturing enterprises are involved in the creation of products. Subsequently, the inclusion of all these enterprises in the taxation scheme leads to the fact that the tax becomes a “pyramid”, and in order to minimize tax pressure, enterprises involved in the same production chain have an incentive to unite. The consequences of such a system are less efficient production and taxation.

Secondly, when using this tax collection system, its neutrality is not ensured, i.e. the tax burden is distributed unevenly. In particular, the share of tax in the price of identical goods can vary significantly depending on the number of enterprises involved in the production chain.

Wholesale tax is levied at the stage prior to retail sale. Compared to the producer tax, not only do the previously noted disadvantages remain, but the number of taxpayers also increases, which creates additional difficulties in administering the tax.

The retail turnover tax covers not only retailers, but also manufacturers and wholesalers, subject to the delivery of products to direct consumers. The tax base is the retail price, which eliminates discrimination between different distribution channels, but the circle of taxpayers expands sharply, which clutters and, accordingly, complicates the tax administration (collection) procedure.

Unlike single-stage collection, multi-stage collection covers several stages of the production and distribution process and can be divided into:

cumulative multi-stage collection;

non-cumulative multi-stage collection.

In a cumulative cascade system, tax is levied at all stages of production and distribution. The main disadvantages of such a system are:

significant cascading effect, i.e. The tax burden becomes greater the longer the distance to the consumer. Moreover, the scale of such a “pyramid” in comparison with single-stage collection systems is much larger, since the tax covers all stages of the movement of products from producer to consumer;

distortion of competition, since with a longer production or distribution chain the tax burden also increases.

As a result, such taxes are rightly considered to be the most ineffective and non-market, since they are levied without taking into account the results of economic activity, have an offset mechanism and therefore allow double taxation (on production costs). This reduces the economic effect of the social division of labor and specialization. Moreover, in order to minimize the tax burden, there is an interest in creating vertically integrated associations covering almost all stages of production, and this is a movement in the opposite direction from the social division of labor and specialization to “subsistence farming”.

It should be noted that these disadvantages become dominant when high tax rates are used.

Paradoxically, cumulative systems, with all their shortcomings, have become most widespread and have been preserved for a very long time and continue to be preserved in individual countries to this day as the main systems for collecting indirect taxes. Most likely, this is caused by one, but very important, advantage. It consists in providing relatively high income to the state budget at a fairly low tax rate. But when the tax rate goes beyond “low enough,” the tax becomes a drag on economic development and negates these benefits.

Non-cumulative multi-stage levies are represented by value added tax, which is an important source of budget revenue in most countries of the world. It should be noted that the use of this system makes it possible to realize not only the advantages of the cumulative system, but also to avoid almost all of its disadvantages.

The economic significance of this tax is explained by the fact that in countries with a developed market system, VAT helps to strengthen its balance. This is achieved due to the fact that, along with the fiscal one, it plays a regulatory and stimulating role.

The main advantage of VAT is that it is able to have a regulatory impact in curbing the crisis of overproduction and in accelerating the ousting of weak producers from the market. It acts as a demand limiter in the case of a high degree of market saturation, when the consumer responds to an increase in the price of a product by reducing consumption, and the producer responds to a decrease in price by expanding production.

VAT is an indirect multi-level tax, as it is included in the price of the product and is ultimately paid by the end consumer. The object is added value, the subjects are legal entities, regardless of industry affiliation or form of ownership.

The main advantages of VAT are:

the use of a single tax rate for all industries or several unified rates for individual industries, preferential rates for individual industries;

ensuring a real level of taxation for all industries and types of economic activity, including the service sector;

simplicity and reliability of the tax collection procedure for the payer and tax authorities;

a stable source of increasing state revenues;

the possibility of harmonization with taxation in neighboring countries.

VAT is also effective as a means of regulating foreign economic activity: to stimulate the growth of export potential, exporting firms are refunded the entire amount of tax paid at previous stages.

Among the negative aspects of VAT, it is necessary to highlight its regressive nature for the end consumer and the fact that its introduction involves the use of a new calculation of production costs. Moreover, its use leads to an increase in administrative costs due to the expansion of the circle of taxpayers.

The assessment of the place and role of VAT in the Belarusian economy is ambiguous. Practitioners believe that this tax provides the best possible way to meet budgetary needs, while analysts criticize it for being too fiscal, an undeveloped tax base and high rates.

In the Republic of Belarus, single-stage systems for collecting indirect taxes are also used. We are talking about taxes on the manufacturer (excise taxes) and on the retailer (sales taxes, taxes on certain types of services).

Advantages of indirect taxes:

• 1. Indirect taxes are characterized by ease of payment and regularity of receipts into the budget. Retention and control of the receipt of indirect taxes does not require expansion of the tax apparatus.
• 2. Since indirect taxes increase government revenues due to population growth or its welfare, they are more beneficial for countries that are progressing economically.
• 3. Taxes affect aggregate consumption by increasing the price of a particular product. In this case, the restraining influence of the state on the consumption of products harmful to the health of the nation and morality is especially important.
• 4. Direct taxes, from the point of view of the average person, are paid to the state for free, while the indirect tax is veiled in the price of the product, and even if the payer realizes that the price has been increased by the tax, he still receives the necessary product in return.
• 5. For the end consumer, indirect taxes are convenient because they are determined by the size of consumption, the convenience of payment in time, proximity to the place of payment, the absence of a compulsory nature, the absence of loss of time for payment, and do not require the accumulation of certain amounts.

The disadvantages of indirect taxes include the following:

• 1. In fact, tax payment is carried out by the head of the family, and is collected by all family members. Direct taxes tax the average tax capacity, while indirect taxes implement the principle of self-taxation, since with the help of indirect taxes the payer himself regulates individual tax capacity.
• 2. Since the right to levy indirect taxes is almost never contested, the object of political struggle, as a rule, is income tax or profit tax.
• 3. Indirect taxes fall on individuals disproportionately to their capital or income, unduly burdening the low-wage segments of the population.
• 4. Indirect taxes in conditions of developed market relations limit the amount of profit of a business, since in a competitive environment it is not always possible to increase prices by the amount of indirect taxes, especially in cases where the rates of these taxes are increased.

A direct tax is usually called one that is directly paid by the person whom the state intends to impose.

Direct taxes are taxes that include mandatory payments, the source of payment of which is profit (income). The list of direct taxes includes tax on profits and income, income tax, real estate tax, single tax on individual entrepreneurs and other individuals, tax on the gambling business, local taxes calculated from profits.

Finding the optimal combination of direct and indirect taxation is one of the main strategic problems in tax policy. It is known that in countries with developed market economies, the tax system gravitates towards direct taxes, which directly implement not only the fiscal, but also the distribution function of taxation.

Historically, direct taxes appeared before indirect taxes. Direct taxation is the simplest and most ancient form of tax collection. The original types of direct taxes were: tithe, poll tax or poll tax.

It should be noted that direct taxes can historically be divided into three main types. The object of the first type of taxes is real capital, while certain types of income are subject to taxation (land tax, property tax, inheritance and gift tax). The object of the second type of taxes is the independent manifestation of personal capital, such as personal earnings, housing, profession (income tax, property tax, dividends). The object of taxes of the third type is the total activity of material, monetary and personal capital in production (income tax, tax on fishing). As we can see, direct taxes are based on either personality or income, regardless of sources, or property, regardless of income.

Supporters of direct taxation consider it the most progressive form, since, firstly, the income and general financial position of the payer, his property are taken into account, and secondly, there are certain difficulties in shifting direct taxes to other persons or in evading their payment.

Currently, direct taxes form the basis of tax systems in developed countries, as they have a number of advantages compared to other types of taxes. The main advantages of direct taxation are as follows:

• 1. Economic - direct taxes make it possible to establish a direct relationship between the payer’s income and his payments to the budget.
• 2. Regulatory - direct taxation is an important financial lever for regulating economic processes (investment, capital accumulation, aggregate consumption, business activity, etc.).
• 3. Social - direct taxes contribute to the distribution of the tax burden in such a way that those members of society with higher incomes have greater tax expenses. This taxation principle is considered the most fair.

However, the disadvantages of direct taxes should also be noted:

• 1. Organizational - a direct form of taxation requires a complex mechanism for collecting taxes, as it is associated with a rather complex method of accounting and reporting.
• 2. Control - control of the receipt of direct taxes requires a significant expansion of the tax apparatus and the development of modern methods of accounting and control of payers.
• 3. Police - direct taxes are associated with the possibility of tax evasion due to imperfect financial control and the presence of trade secrets.
• 4. Budgetary - direct taxation requires a certain development of market relations, since only in real market conditions can a real market price and, consequently, real income (profit) be formed, but losses can also occur with the same probability. Therefore, direct taxes cannot be a stable source of budget revenue.

In addition to indirect taxes, a significant contribution to the formation of budget revenues is made by direct taxes and fees, the list of which includes profit and income tax, income tax, real estate tax, a single tax on individual entrepreneurs and other individuals, and local taxes calculated from profits.