A fundamental feature of the legal regulation of social relations determines a clear distinction between the constructions of legal influence and legal regulation. If the legal regulation involves the implementation of legal norms regarding the organization and correction of the behaviour of the participants of the relations, then the legal influence is based on the very fact of the existence of the law and the bodies that apply it, the dissemination of information about its consequences, on the basis of which we are talking about the stimulation of law-abiding behaviour.

 Systematic influence on the behaviour of participants of tax relations is provided through obligations, authorizations and prohibitions directed at the organization of actions and inactions of subjects of tax relations. Binding tax-legal norms determine the limits of the implementation of the duties of individuals to carry out certain positive actions in the field of taxation. The construction of the authorization is aimed at securing the positive, subjective rights of the participants of tax relations. Legal prohibitions are associated with an assessment of a person’s behaviour, on the basis of which adverse consequences are applied to offenders.

Article 19 of the Constitution of Ukraine lays down the fundamental principles for clarifying the legal nature of the public meaning of the prohibition. It is established how the subject of authority should organize his behaviour, the legislator introduces clear restrictive boundaries that exclude the possibility of actions of such subject in another way. In this sense, three components of the legal prohibition for the subject of authority in tax regulation are distinguished: a) participation in legal relations must take place exclusively on the basis of a legislative norm; b) the limits of the behaviour of a subject of authority are determined by the powers established by law, which makes it impossible for his behaviour due to the implementation of powers that are not defined by the law; c) the activity of subjects of authority in the tax sphere must be carried out in accordance with the relevant procedures, without violations of procedural norms

Bibliography

Authored books

1. Kucheriavenko M, Podatkovi protsedury: pravova pryroda i klasyfikatsiia (Alerta, KNT, TsUL 2009) (in Ukrainian).

2. Kucheriavenko N, Kurs nalogovogo prava, t II: Vvedenie v teoriju nalogovogo prava (Legas 2004) (in Russian).

3. Ponomarenko Yu, Zahalna teoriia vyznachennia karanosti kryminalnykh pravoporushen (Pravo 2020) (in Ukrainian).

Edited books

 4. Kucheriavenko N, ‘Pravovaja priroda nalogovyh procedur: k voprosu o ponjatii i klassifikacii’ v Finansovye procedury stran Vostochnoj Evropy (Presnarovich S red, Belostok 2013) 39 (in Russian).

Journal articles

5. Kucheriavenko M, ‘Pravova pryroda protsedurnoho rehuliuvannia opodatkuvannia’ [2011] 2 (15) Yuryst Ukrainy 28 (in Ukrainian).

6. Kucheriavenko N, ‘Pravovaja priroda processual’nogo regulirovanija nalogovyh otnoshenij’ (2012) 4 Ezhegodnik ukrainskogo prava 205 (in Russian).

Conference papers

7. Baulin Yu, ‘Fundamentalni problemy kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti’ v Fundamentalni problemy kryminalnoi vidpovidalnosti: materialy nauk. polilohu (Baulin Iu, Ponomarenko Yu uporiad, Pravo 2018) 15–6 (in Ukrainian).

8. Kucheriavenko M, ‘Spivvidnoshennia materialnoho ta protsesualnoho v podatkovopravovomu rehuliuvanni’ v Finansove pravo u XXI storichchi: zdobutky ta perspektyvy: zbirnyk naukovykh prats za materialamy Mizhnarodnoi naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii, сh II (Alerta 2011) 143 (in Ukrainian).