Main » 2011»October»13 » Advertising expenditure tax authorities require illegal to distribute
16:52
Advertising expenditure tax authorities require illegal to distribute
Advertising expenses were formed from the taxpayer with his participation in the exhibition. These costs are not standardized on the basis of paragraph 4 of Article 264 of the Tax Code. Tax, during a spot-check, this can be addressed only part of these costs. Advertising costs were inflated by the taxpayer. This conclusion was verified by the control measures. Since
the auditee participated in the exhibition together with a partner, and
paid advertising services on their own, legitimate expenses are limited
to the part that refers to the movement of goods and services of the
taxpayer, rather than his partner. The company did not agree with it and was forced to seek protection in court. The Federal Arbitration Court of the Volga region sided with the taxpayer. In
its order number A65-24579/2010 on August 2, 2011 the arbitrators
explained that the costs incurred by an organization closely associated
with advertising of the goods that it sells. In
addition, a strong argument on the question of recognition of
advertising costs served as a fact that inspectors have failed to show
documented the relationship of the audited entity with its partners to
promote the products. There is no agreement on joint financing of advertising services issued and signed. Accordingly, the court concluded that advertising costs the taxpayer was legally incorporated in its entirety. In
addition, remember that advertising spending on leaflets, for example,
used for exhibitions, providing information about the organization or
individual for services rendered by it are advertising costs to be
considered for taxation of income under paragraph 4 of paragraph 4 of
Article 264 Russia, and are non-normed. And
reassurance, recall that the advertising costs for production of
souvenirs, which are often distributed at trade shows, are also
established and may be considered in accounting. This
is explained at the time the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian
Federation in its ruling number VAS-12305/09 of September 28, 2009.
aifwp<a href=> jared allen jersey </a> gmsla<a href=> jason williams jersey </a> mbvlo<a href=> eric berry jersey </a> wakog<a href=> matt forte jersey </a> noqnm<a href=> john kuhn jersey </a>
ed from the taxpayer with his participation in the exhibition. 
