Empirical Study On Tax-related Gross Misunderstanding

As one of the important reasons for the revocation of civil legal acts in the civil law,the application of the major misunderstanding system itself is complex.In the court trial,the judge has a certain discretion in judging whether the parties express their true intention,resulting in the denial of the judgment,different judgments in the same case and so on.On this basis,the complexity of tax-related major misunderstanding cases is higher,which involves not only the judgment of whether the parties express their true intention,but also the application of tax legal norms.Tax-related major misunderstandings cases can be divided into two main categories: one advocates a wrong understanding of the tax burden stipulated in the tax law,and the other advocates a wrong understanding of the agreement on the transfer of tax burden.However,unlike most matters in the civil law,which can produce legal effect through the agreement of the parties,the tax legal norms,as a public law norm,can only be observed by the parties in principle,and can not produce the effect of tax burden transfer without the provisions of the law through the true intention.It is precisely because tax laws and regulations have less clear provisions on the arbitrary transfer of tax burden,leading to the majority of cases advocating tax-related major misunderstandings.At the same time,through the cases collected and sorted out in this paper,it finds that the cases of tax-related major misunderstandings in the sale of second-hand houses and online judicial auctions account for the majority,and there are some problems in their own court decisions.These problems reflect the current situation of chaotic tax burden agreement in modern transactions,imperfect market transaction system,inconsistent court judgment standards and so on.Based on this background,this paper focuses on empirical research,expounds the judgment problems in tax-related major misunderstanding cases,analyzes the reasons and puts forward suggestions.The full text is divided into three chapters.The first chapter summarizes and analyzes the current situation of tax-related major misunderstandings cases and the problems of judicial adjudication based on the cases of tax-related major misunderstandings in the sale of second-hand houses and online judicial auction.Through judicial cases,it can be seen that the judgment of the legal effect of tax-packup clauses and tax burdening agreements has become the premise for the court to judge most cases,and the views of the courts are divided into three categories: affirming its effect,denying its effect,and not judging it.In addition,the parties have the situation that they claim a major misunderstanding on tax-related clauses in contracts to ask for cancelling the contract,but in fact they want to avoid the transaction risk by this way,which also brings difficulties to the court’s judgment.The second part studies the reasons for the problems summarized above,mainly including the conflict of principles in the cross field of public law and private law,which is mainly reflected in the conflict between the principle of tax legality and the principle of self-will autonomy.How to integrate these two principle when the parties agree on the transfer of tax burden needs to be studied;The legislation of relevant laws and regulations is blank or insufficient.At the current stage,China’s tax legislation has not been fully completed,and the connection between tax law and civil law system is not mature,so that there is no clear basis for judges to judge;The tax collection and management system is imperfect,judges and trading individuals have not formed sufficient tax awareness,and lack of thinking about tax laws and regulations.The third part gives corresponding solutions to the above problems and reasons,mainly including clarifying the effectiveness of tax burdening agreement,improving the legal system in the cross field of civil law and tax law and promoting model cases,which can provide unified standards for court adjudication of cases;Enhancing the tax knowledge and tax awareness of judges and trading individuals,and improving the confusion of agreements in the trading market;Improving the tax related information disclosure system in order to reduce the occurrence of such cases from the source.