Судове провадження як наслідок захисту порушеного інтересу у сфері оподаткування: практика ЄСПЛ та баланс приватного і публічного інтересу

Abstract

blic interest. – Article. The article highlights the practice of the European Court of Human Rights in protecting private and public interest in taxation. It is established that the law enforcement activity in taxation is a precondition for the realization of private and public interest, and this form of realization of the norms of tax law is characterized by the dualism of tasks and goals: satisfaction of needs and interests of persons whose rights and obligations are realized, as well as satisfaction of needs and interests of the society as a whole. The key decisions in the practice of tax disputes of recent years have been analyzed, which testifies to the dynamics of the ratio of private and public interest in taxation and search for the optimal variant of legal support of their implementation. The positions of the European Court of Human Rights relate to: the presumption of lawfulness of the taxpayer's actions in the presence of contradictory regulatory acts; provisions on the integrity of the taxpayer (the taxpayer should not be liable for violations committed by its counterparties); the need to take into account the mandatory presence of guilt in the case of fines, if they are exclusively punitive and deterrent in nature, comply with criminal prosecution in the sense of Article 6 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; the principles of proportionality and proportionality; the need to take into account the fact that the taxpayer is not liable for violations committed by its counterparties. It has been determined that in making decisions the European Court of Human Rights is guided by the principle of a fair balance between the private and public (general, public) interest, taking into account that the sphere of taxation is the prerogative of the state's domestic policy. Deprivation of property, interference in the use of property, control over the use of property by the state must be justified by the corresponding public purpose in carrying out control measures and must meet a fair balance between the requirements of the public interest and the requirements of protection of fundamental human rights. It is summarized that the domestic judicial practice in general develops in accordance with the principles of the European Court of Human Rights, which is an international body for the protection of rights and legitimate interests of subjects of legal relations, including in the field of taxation, operates in accordance with the principles defined by the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, taking them as a basis to resolve tax disputes in essence, creating legal precedents that are binding on both the states and taxpayers of these states. However, it is in no way allowed to use the positions of the t European Court of Human Rights, which do not correspond to the actual circumstances of the case.