波兰《税法》与《会计法》认定不合规税基的前提比较

Radosław Witczak
{"title":"波兰《税法》与《会计法》认定不合规税基的前提比较","authors":"Radosław Witczak","doi":"10.18778/2391-6478.s2.2022.08","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this article. The purpose of the paper is to compare and assess provisions on premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant to the regulations in the tax law and accountancy law as well as to discuss the possibility of using the tax judgments on this issue in the interpretation of compliant account books in the accountancy law. The research hypothesis is as follows: The tax judgments on the premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant may be also used directly for the interpretation of compliancy of account books in the accountancy law. \nMethodology. The descriptive study including critical attitude to the legal acts and literature was used to solve the research problem. \nThe result of the research. Both the tax law and accountancy law comprise the rules for recognizing tax books (account books) to be compliant to the regulations. The tax law uses the terms of the reliability and correctness. The Accountancy Act law uses the terms of the reliability, error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis. Although definitions of reliability are very similar, as the analysis shows, the character of reliability of tax books is not always the same as for account books. The judgments in the field of interpretation of the reliability for tax purposes may not always be used for accounting purposes. The term correctness in the Tax Ordinance does not always correspond to the terms:  error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the Accountancy Act. So, the tax judgment concerning correctness of the tax book from the tax law cannot be directly applied into the interpretation of such terms as error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the accountancy law. The paper additionally proposes some changes to the tax law concerning the unreliability of tax books, as well as changes to the Accountancy Act.","PeriodicalId":34805,"journal":{"name":"Finanse i Prawo Finansowe","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Comparison of Premises for Recognizing Tax Books as Kept not Compliant in the Tax Law and Accounting Law in Poland\",\"authors\":\"Radosław Witczak\",\"doi\":\"10.18778/2391-6478.s2.2022.08\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this article. The purpose of the paper is to compare and assess provisions on premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant to the regulations in the tax law and accountancy law as well as to discuss the possibility of using the tax judgments on this issue in the interpretation of compliant account books in the accountancy law. The research hypothesis is as follows: The tax judgments on the premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant may be also used directly for the interpretation of compliancy of account books in the accountancy law. \\nMethodology. The descriptive study including critical attitude to the legal acts and literature was used to solve the research problem. \\nThe result of the research. Both the tax law and accountancy law comprise the rules for recognizing tax books (account books) to be compliant to the regulations. The tax law uses the terms of the reliability and correctness. The Accountancy Act law uses the terms of the reliability, error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis. Although definitions of reliability are very similar, as the analysis shows, the character of reliability of tax books is not always the same as for account books. The judgments in the field of interpretation of the reliability for tax purposes may not always be used for accounting purposes. The term correctness in the Tax Ordinance does not always correspond to the terms:  error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the Accountancy Act. So, the tax judgment concerning correctness of the tax book from the tax law cannot be directly applied into the interpretation of such terms as error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the accountancy law. The paper additionally proposes some changes to the tax law concerning the unreliability of tax books, as well as changes to the Accountancy Act.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34805,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Finanse i Prawo Finansowe\",\"volume\":\"68 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Finanse i Prawo Finansowe\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18778/2391-6478.s2.2022.08\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Finanse i Prawo Finansowe","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/2391-6478.s2.2022.08","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的。本文的目的是比较和评价关于认定不符合税法和会计法规定的税务账簿的规定,并讨论在解释符合会计法规定的会计账簿时使用这一问题的税务判断的可能性。本文的研究假设是:在确认账簿不合规的前提下的税务判断也可以直接用于会计法中对账簿合规的解释。方法。采用描述性研究,包括对法律行为的批判态度和文献来解决研究问题。研究的结果。税法和会计法都包含确认税务账簿(帐簿)符合规定的规则。税法使用了可靠性和正确性的术语。《会计法》使用了可靠、无差错、可核实和持续的原则。尽管可靠性的定义非常相似,但正如分析所示,税务账簿的可靠性特征并不总是与会计账簿相同。为税务目的解释可靠性领域的判断不一定总是用于会计目的。《税务条例》中的“正确性”一词并不总是与《会计法》中的“无差错、可核实的方式和持续的基础”相对应。因此,税法中关于税簿正确性的税务判断不能直接适用于会计法中对无差错、可核实性和持续性等术语的解释。此外,本文还针对税务账簿不可靠的问题提出了对税法的修改,以及对《会计法》的修改。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Comparison of Premises for Recognizing Tax Books as Kept not Compliant in the Tax Law and Accounting Law in Poland
The purpose of this article. The purpose of the paper is to compare and assess provisions on premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant to the regulations in the tax law and accountancy law as well as to discuss the possibility of using the tax judgments on this issue in the interpretation of compliant account books in the accountancy law. The research hypothesis is as follows: The tax judgments on the premises for recognizing tax books as kept not compliant may be also used directly for the interpretation of compliancy of account books in the accountancy law. Methodology. The descriptive study including critical attitude to the legal acts and literature was used to solve the research problem. The result of the research. Both the tax law and accountancy law comprise the rules for recognizing tax books (account books) to be compliant to the regulations. The tax law uses the terms of the reliability and correctness. The Accountancy Act law uses the terms of the reliability, error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis. Although definitions of reliability are very similar, as the analysis shows, the character of reliability of tax books is not always the same as for account books. The judgments in the field of interpretation of the reliability for tax purposes may not always be used for accounting purposes. The term correctness in the Tax Ordinance does not always correspond to the terms:  error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the Accountancy Act. So, the tax judgment concerning correctness of the tax book from the tax law cannot be directly applied into the interpretation of such terms as error-free, verifiable manner and on an on-going basis in the accountancy law. The paper additionally proposes some changes to the tax law concerning the unreliability of tax books, as well as changes to the Accountancy Act.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信