Translation. Region: Russian Federation –
Source: KMZ Cargo – KMZ CARGO –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The Federal Tax Service is identifying discrepancies between contracts and actual services in logistics. This results in denial of deductions and additional assessments.
When reviewing cargo transportation schemes, tax authorities and courts primarily look at documents, and the key basis for claims is the discrepancy between the legal form of the transaction and its economic essence. Alexey Kozhevnikov, a representative of Risk Control and a member of the expert group at the Financial University, spoke about this in an interview with Logirus.
"In the event of a discrepancy, all actual actions of the parties will be established, and the consequences will include additional charges, fines, and penalties," Kozhevnikov stated. The expert explained that in logistics, similar problems are regularly identified in "freight forwarding." Often, a party to a transaction is listed in the contract as a freight forwarder, but in fact provides agency services. This casts doubt on the validity of the issued invoice in the eyes of the Federal Tax Service. "For many accountants, this is like a bolt from the blue," he noted.
According to the expert, the outcome for the cargo owner could be severe: the court has the right to reclassify the contract, applying commission or agency provisions to it, which would lead to the denial of a tax deduction. Kozhevnikov emphasized that there are already plenty of similar cases, and given the latest amendments to the Russian Tax Code, such cases will become even more common.
The bill of lading plays a special role in proving a fictitious shipment. Alexey Kozhevnikov pointed out a critical error: "If you, as a cargo owner, continue to indicate the 'forwarding agent' company, which is actually an 'agent,' as the 'shipper' or 'carrier' on the bill of lading, then it's only a matter of time before the provisions of Article 54.1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation are applied to such schemes, leading to subsequent additional charges." The expert warned that the apparent savings from such schemes will ultimately result in significant losses due to additional charges, fines, and penalties. In his experience, tax clauses in contracts often fail, as collecting anything from an unscrupulous service provider is practically impossible.
As a reminder, an analysis of over 6,000 completed taxpayer-FTS court cases for 2024-2025 identified over 60,000 "technical" companies. The data was obtained through a study by Risk Control, presented by its representative, Alexey Kozhevnikov, a member of the expert group at the Financial University. The study demonstrates the systemic nature of the use of shell companies in the economy. LR
Read more:http://logirus.ru/nevs/transport/tax_learned_to prove_the fictitious_transportation_by_one_error_in_the_invoice.html
Publication date: 01/27/2026
Please note; this information is raw content obtained directly from the information source. It is an accurate account of what the source claims, and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
