Tax control and law enforcement system: conflicts of competencies and ways to resolve them

• Published in: Юридические исследования no. 7; pp. 79 - 88
• Main Author: Aleksandrov, Artem Romanovich
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 01.07.2025
• ISSN: 2409-7136; 2409-7136
• DOI: 10.25136/2409-7136.2025.7.75156

The subject of this study is the multilayered complex of legal relations arising between the Federal Tax Service and law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation: the Investigative Committee, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Federal Security Service, and the Prosecutor's Office in the process of identifying, qualifying, and prosecuting violations of tax legislation. The article analyzes the regulatory and legal grounds for involving law enforcement agencies at the stages of desk and field tax audits, collection of tax arrears, and initiation of criminal cases under Article 199 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation; inter-agency cooperation mechanisms established by departmental agreements and instructions; case law reflecting the conflict between the tax authority's obligation to send audit materials to investigative bodies (paragraph 3 of Article 32 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) and the protective measures that suspend the enforcement of decisions of the Federal Tax Service (part 3 of Article 199 of the Administrative Procedure Code of the Russian Federation). The study is based on the use of the following complementary methods: regulatory and legal analysis, comparative legal method, casuistic method, and summarizing empirical data. This research offers an integral model for the distribution of competencies between the Federal Tax Service and four law enforcement agencies, reflecting their "points of entry" and interdependence at all stages of a tax dispute. It introduces the concept of "preemptive prosecutorial lawsuit," a situation where the prosecutor, relying on the data in Article 82 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, achieves recognition of the transaction as invalid even before a tax decision is made, effectively transforming the balance of power in the upcoming judicial process. A legal conflict has been established between paragraph 3 of Article 32 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation and part 3 of Article 199 of the Administrative Procedure Code of the Russian Federation in the context of a unified tax account, and options for its legislative resolution have been formulated. The key findings of the study are: Firstly, excessive duplication of the functions of law enforcement agencies exacerbates the accusatory bias and reduces the procedural opportunities of conscientious businesses, often driven by the complexity of modern evasion schemes. Secondly, the existing practice does not ensure uniformity: in some districts, audit materials are blocked by protective measures, while in others they are immediately directed to investigative bodies, undermining the principle of equality among taxpayers. Thirdly, clear regulatory delimitation of the powers and timeframes for the intervention of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Investigative Committee, and the Prosecutor's Office is required, necessitating procedural filters (judicial permission for the use of coercive evidence, the prosecutor's assessment of the legality of the actions of the Federal Tax Service).