Abstract
The article substantiates the possibility of identifying socially dangerous acts that are de jure not criminal offenses, but de facto can be attributed to the subject of legalization. Attention is drawn to the problematic aspects of the practice of lifting the criminal law prohibition of acts, which according to the level of public danger should be defined as criminal offenses, and at the same time, be considered a source of origin of the subject of legalization. It emphasizes the inaccuracy of the legislative approach to the restrictive interpretation of the list of criminally punishable actions, which, objectively, provide for economic gain in an illegal manner, as a result of which it is not possible to classify them as predicate criminal offenses. The scientific basis for the possibility of using civil transactions to commit criminal offenses and under the guise of lawful business activities to hide the actual goal, the achievement of which involves criminal intent, including obtaining economic benefits. The ratio of the categories «tax minimization» and «tax evasion» is considered, as well as the possibility of classifying not only criminal but also other offenses as sources of legalization is clarified. The purpose of the study is to develop an author’s scientific approach to addressing the possibility of classifying as sources the subject of legalization of acts in respect of which there is no criminal law prohibition. It is concluded that the existence of a legally defined criminal law prohibition is a crucial aspect in the context of resolving the issue of the possibility of classifying socially dangerous actions as predicate criminal offenses, which are the sources of the subject of legalization. The opinion is expressed about the erroneousness of the legislative approach to the restrictive interpretation of the list of criminally punishable actions, which objectively provide for economic gain in an illegal way, as a result of which it is not possible to classify them as predicate criminal offenses. It is proved that the norms of the domestic law on criminal liability do not fully take into account the level of public danger of actions that are an illegal source of economic benefit. It is substantiated that the level of public danger of such actions is a necessary factor for adequate awareness of the need, first, for a criminal law prohibition of conduct that is unacceptable from the point of view of the state and society and contradicts the characteristics of its development; secondly, the distinction between criminal and administrative offenses and non-criminal conduct; thirdly, the identification of actions aimed at using gaps to reduce their own tax liabilities, which necessitate the need to improve legislation in this area.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have