The problem of terminological inconsistency in the regulation of tax regimes and such related concepts as general and special tax regimes is studied. The author provides his own definitions of these concepts.

The purpose of the article is to study the current legal regulation of tax regimes, to define the content of the tax regime and the features of general and special tax regimes, and to develop proposals for improving the conceptual framework. The article is a continuation of the study of the problem of terminological inconsistency in tax and legal regulation.

The article analyses the concepts which are systemically important for tax and legal regulation. It is about the tax regime and its types. It is concluded that there are two tax regimes: general and special. The latter is represented by the simplified system of taxation, accounting and reporting, which is currently the only type of special tax regime. The author notes that it is illogical to contrast the simplified system of taxation, accounting and reporting with the general taxation system. In law enforcement, the latter is given the content of the general tax regime. The author notes the possibility of special tax regimes within the framework of certain taxes. One such example is the special regime of value-added taxation of activities related to art, collectibles or antiques.

The study allowed us to define a tax regime as a set of legal rules that determine the list of taxes and fees for which a tax liability arises. The general tax regime is defined as a set of legal rules that determine a fixed list of taxes and fees in respect of which business entities are subject to tax liability, unless such business entity has chosen a special tax regime. The special tax regime is proposed to be understood as a set of legal provisions of Section 14 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, which define a coordinated set of procedures that may determine the procedure for keeping tax records, filling in and submitting tax reports, paying taxes by business entities in a substantially different way from the general tax regime and may provide for a different procedure for determining the elements of tax and fee and/or exemption from certain taxes and fees.

Bibliography

Bibliography

1. Kucheriavenko M, Kurs podatkovoho prava, t 2 (Pravo 2004).

Journal articles

2. Kotenko А, ‘Pryntsypy podatkovoho zakonodavstva yak vykhidni zasady pobudovy podatkovoi systemy’ [2020] 4 Law of Ukraine 43–56 <https://doi.org/10.33498/louu-202004-043>.

3. Kotenko А, ‘Podatkova systema: osoblyvosti poniatiinoho aparatu’ [2021] 4(36) Law and innovations 80–4 <https://doi.org/10.37772/2518-1718-2021-4(36)-11>.

4. Parashchenko О, ‘Rehuliuvannia podatkovykh rezhymiv v Ukraini: terminolohichnyi aspekt’ [2021] 8 Juridical scientific and electronic journal 250-3 <https://doi.org/10.32782/25240374/2021-8/56>.

5. Shaptala Ye, ‘Podatkovo-pravovyi rezhym: poniattia ta oznaky’ [2018] 81 Current Problems of State and Law160–7.

Theses

 6. Daniielian S, ‘Pravove rehuliuvannia yedynoho podatku’ (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2015).

7. Andriievskyi K, ‘Spetsialni podatkovi rezhymy’ (dys kand yuryd nauk, 2009).