试论虚开增值税专用发票罪

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

作者:

龙进洋

导师:

李邦友

导师单位:

行政法学院(纪检监察学院)

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

虚开增值税专用发票罪;认定;防范

摘要:

虚开增值税专用发票罪自1 9 9 5年确定以来,1 9 9 7年新修订的《中华人民共和国刑法》正式将其规定进刑法典,指违反国家税收征收管理、发票管理法律、法规,为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开增值税专用发票,数额较大的行为。 因该罪是一个相对“年轻”的罪名,刑法理论和司法实践中存在诸多的认识和分歧。对此,本文对虚开增值税专用发票罪的犯罪构成进行了分析和论述。 本罪侵犯的客体是指我国家的税收征管制度,具体是指发票管理制度,尤其是增值税专用发票管理制度; 本罪客观方面表现为:违反税收征收和发票管理法律、法规,在无真实货物交易或应税劳务的情况下,为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开增值税专用发票的行为,虚开增值税专用发票的行为的数额较大; 本罪的犯罪主体为一般主体,既可为自然人,也可为单位。由于单位主体的复杂性和本罪实践的特点来看,本文对该部分进行详述; 本罪的犯罪主观方面表现为直接故意,行为人明知没有真实的货物交易或者应税劳务发生却要虚开增值税专用发票,要求行为人必须是出于直接故意。本文认为,间接故意和过失均不构成该罪的故意。 由于本罪在单位主体、实施行为、与其他类似或者相近犯罪的认定和量刑上较为复杂,本文对上述问题进行了专门论述: 本文认为单位实施的虚开增值税专用发票罪的认定必须把握以下特点: 必须是以单位的名义实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为;必须是在单位意志支配下由内部人员实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为;必须是为了单位的整体利益。一些公司、企业、事业单位在工商行政管理部门登记注册后取得法人资格,有的还取得了一般纳税人资格,有自己的名称、组织机构、场所、一定的财产及经费,同时也能承担一定的民事责任,只是这些单位在注册登记的过程中虚报注册资本或者虚假出资或者成立后抽逃出资。这些单位既有一定的实际生产能力,又实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为,那么对此行为按自然人犯罪处理还是按单位犯罪论处存在分歧。为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开四种虚开增值税专用发票行为之间是否成立共同犯罪?行为人在没有实际生产经营活动的情况下,虚开销项增值税专用发票以后,为了掩盖其犯罪事实, 又虚开进项增值税专用发票进行抵扣,其犯罪数额是以虚开的销项税额或者虚开的进项税额中较大的一项计算,还是把两项合并计算?我国刑法第二百零五条第一款、第二款分别规定了虚开增值税专用发票罪不同的量刑档次。第二款“骗取国家税款”一语的主语未写明,便产生了“谁骗”的问题,是指开发票的人去骗呢?还是指取得发票的人去骗呢?或是不论是谁拿去骗,只要虚开的增值税专用发票实际已被抵扣税款,给国家利益造成了损失,其他条件也符合本款规定便可适用我国刑法第二百零五条第二款呢?这就涉及犯罪行为骗取国家税款及给国家造成损失的行为主体认定问题。正确认识这一点非常重要,特别是正确适用死刑。 本文认为,为了准确定罪量刑,充分认识虚开增值税专用发票罪,必须与偷税罪、骗取出口退税罪、伪造增值税专用发票罪、出售伪造的增值税专用发票罪、非法购买增值税专用发票罪、走私罪、盗窃罪、诈骗罪等罪进行比较,澄清认识,准确定罪和量刑。 同时,为进一步预防、减少此类犯罪的发生,本文从犯罪学的角度,提出七个切实防范措施。

学科:

宪法学与行政法学

提交日期

2026-01-07

引用参考

龙进洋. 试论虚开增值税专用发票罪[D]. 西南政法大学,2006.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 试论虚开增值税专用发票罪
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 2003131
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 龙进洋
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 行政法学院(纪检监察学院)
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.childdegree
  • 法律硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2006
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 李邦友
  • dc.contributor.advisorAffiliation
  • 行政法学院(纪检监察学院)
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 虚开增值税专用发票罪;认定; 防范
  • dc.subject
  • fabricate ; VAT specia invoices;vitall need prevent
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 虚开增值税专用发票罪自1 9 9 5年确定以来,1 9 9 7年新修订的《中华人民共和国刑法》正式将其规定进刑法典,指违反国家税收征收管理、发票管理法律、法规,为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开增值税专用发票,数额较大的行为。 因该罪是一个相对“年轻”的罪名,刑法理论和司法实践中存在诸多的认识和分歧。对此,本文对虚开增值税专用发票罪的犯罪构成进行了分析和论述。 本罪侵犯的客体是指我国家的税收征管制度,具体是指发票管理制度,尤其是增值税专用发票管理制度; 本罪客观方面表现为:违反税收征收和发票管理法律、法规,在无真实货物交易或应税劳务的情况下,为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开增值税专用发票的行为,虚开增值税专用发票的行为的数额较大; 本罪的犯罪主体为一般主体,既可为自然人,也可为单位。由于单位主体的复杂性和本罪实践的特点来看,本文对该部分进行详述; 本罪的犯罪主观方面表现为直接故意,行为人明知没有真实的货物交易或者应税劳务发生却要虚开增值税专用发票,要求行为人必须是出于直接故意。本文认为,间接故意和过失均不构成该罪的故意。 由于本罪在单位主体、实施行为、与其他类似或者相近犯罪的认定和量刑上较为复杂,本文对上述问题进行了专门论述: 本文认为单位实施的虚开增值税专用发票罪的认定必须把握以下特点: 必须是以单位的名义实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为;必须是在单位意志支配下由内部人员实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为;必须是为了单位的整体利益。一些公司、企业、事业单位在工商行政管理部门登记注册后取得法人资格,有的还取得了一般纳税人资格,有自己的名称、组织机构、场所、一定的财产及经费,同时也能承担一定的民事责任,只是这些单位在注册登记的过程中虚报注册资本或者虚假出资或者成立后抽逃出资。这些单位既有一定的实际生产能力,又实施了虚开增值税专用发票的行为,那么对此行为按自然人犯罪处理还是按单位犯罪论处存在分歧。为他人虚开、为自己虚开、让他人为自己虚开、介绍他人虚开四种虚开增值税专用发票行为之间是否成立共同犯罪?行为人在没有实际生产经营活动的情况下,虚开销项增值税专用发票以后,为了掩盖其犯罪事实, 又虚开进项增值税专用发票进行抵扣,其犯罪数额是以虚开的销项税额或者虚开的进项税额中较大的一项计算,还是把两项合并计算?我国刑法第二百零五条第一款、第二款分别规定了虚开增值税专用发票罪不同的量刑档次。第二款“骗取国家税款”一语的主语未写明,便产生了“谁骗”的问题,是指开发票的人去骗呢?还是指取得发票的人去骗呢?或是不论是谁拿去骗,只要虚开的增值税专用发票实际已被抵扣税款,给国家利益造成了损失,其他条件也符合本款规定便可适用我国刑法第二百零五条第二款呢?这就涉及犯罪行为骗取国家税款及给国家造成损失的行为主体认定问题。正确认识这一点非常重要,特别是正确适用死刑。 本文认为,为了准确定罪量刑,充分认识虚开增值税专用发票罪,必须与偷税罪、骗取出口退税罪、伪造增值税专用发票罪、出售伪造的增值税专用发票罪、非法购买增值税专用发票罪、走私罪、盗窃罪、诈骗罪等罪进行比较,澄清认识,准确定罪和量刑。 同时,为进一步预防、减少此类犯罪的发生,本文从犯罪学的角度,提出七个切实防范措施。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • The crime of fabricating VAT (value-added tax) special invoices, constituted in 1995, was officially regulated into the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, which was newly revised in 1997. This crime refers to one, in violation of system of tax collection management and invoice supervision. Since the crime of fabricating VAT special invoices is relatively"young", there exist many differences in the criminal law theories and judicial practices. Therefore, the constitution of this crime is analyzed and discussed in this paper. The object that this crime violates is the national tax collection and management. system, and. the. invoice. supervision. system, especial. the. system. ofVAT. special invoices supervision. The external action of crime include: violating the laws and regulations related to the tax collection and invoice managements; under the circumstances without authentic goods or the circumstances of taxable services, fabricating VAT special invoices for others or oneself, letting others fabricating VAT special invoices for oneself or introducing others to fabricating VAT special invoices; and the amount of money involved is relatively large. The subject of this crime is general, i. e., either a natural person or a unit. In view of the complexity of a unit subject and the practical characteristics of this crime, this part is discussed in detail in this paper. The subjective side of this crime is direct deliberation: the doer, knowing perfectly well that the trade without authentic goods and the taxable services will occur, still fabricating VAT special invoices. In this paper, it is held that the indirect deliberation and negligence will not constitute the deliberation of this crime. As it is not easy to identify the unit subject and the criminal act of this crime from those of other similar crimes and it is also complex to sentence this crime, therefore, the questions mentioned above are specially addressed in this paper.The unit crime of fabricating VAT special invoices according with the following characteristics: The action of crime must be committed in one institution name by insiders under the control of the institution's will; and the act must be committed for the sake of the institution's benefits. After their registration in industrial and commercial administrative departments, some companies, enterprises and institutions obtain the qualification of corporation, and some of them also obtain the qualification of general taxpayer, having their own names, institutional frameworks, places, some property and expenditure, and bearing some certain civil liability. But some of these units falsely declare their registered capitals or their financial contributions in the process of their registrations, or take out their financial contributions after the founding of their units. These units have certain production capacities and commit the act of fabricating VAT special invoices as well, and there exist some different view as to whether these units should be sentencedin the name of natural persons or units. Among the four kinds of act of fabricating VAT special invoices( for othersor oneself, letting others and introducing others), do joint crimes exist? Under thecircumstances without production activities, a doer fabricates VAT special invoices, and then in order to cover his crime, the doer fabricates VAT special invoices to offset. In this situation, the criminal amount of money involved should be based on the amount of the falsely made-out sales tax or that of the falsely made-out receipts tax or that of the both taxes? In the Criminal Law of thepeople's Republic of China, the first paragraph and second paragraph of Article 205 respectively provide for different sentencing levels to the crime of fabricating VAT special invoices and the identification of the criminal act of defrauding tax money of the State, which causes especially heavy losses to the interest of the State. In the second paragraph, the subject of the act of"defraudingtax money of the State" is not clearly indicated. Then there exists a question: whodefrauds tax money of the State? Is it the person who fabricaties VAT special invoices or the one who obtains the special invoices? Or no matter who defrauds,if only the fabricated special invoices for value-added tax have been used tooffset tax, causing losses to the interest of the State, and other conditions also accord with the provision of this paragraph, is the second paragraph of Article 205 applicable? Then the identification of criminal subject of the crime ofdefrauding tax of the State and causing losses to the interest of the State is concerned. It is of vital importance to correctly recognize this, especially to the correct application of death. The author argue that, in order to actually sentence and clarity cognition, this crime must be compared with the crime of tax evasion, the crime of defrauding a tax refund for exports, the crime of forging special invoices for value-added tax, the crime of selling forged special invoices for value-addedtax, the crime of unlawfully purchasing special invoices for value-added tax, thecrime of smuggling, the crime of stealing and the crime of fraud etc. Only in thisway, this crime can be clearly identified and sentenced. Meanwhile, in order to further prevent and reduce this kind of crime, seven practical measurements are brought forward in this paper from theperspective of criminology.
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2026-01-07
回到顶部