Recently, a "Notice on Tax Matters" issued by a district tax bureau in Haikou City to a property company suddenly attracted widespread attention and heated discussion. The reason is that the document actually verified and collected the taxes of an enterprise 30 years ago and ordered it to pay within a specified time limit. This can't help but make many people wonder, "Can the tax authorities indefinitely pursue tax collection on non tax evading enterprises?" In this article, we discuss the issue of the tax recovery period together.

In daily life, in addition to providing insight into tax dynamics through the release of tax related documents, the release of hot news and typical cases also reveals tax related information. "Tax Eye News" aims to extract and interpret tax related information from news, tax related legal documents, or major tax cases, and share it with readers.

Since November 10th of last year, electronic cigarettes have been officially included in the "Regulations on the Implementation of the Tobacco Monopoly Law" for regulatory purposes. Since implementation with reference to relevant regulations on cigarettes, relevant departments have successively issued a number of new regulatory regulations, proposing a series of specific measures for the regulation of electronic cigarettes. Recently, the Ministry of Finance, the General Administration of Customs, and the State Administration of Taxation jointly issued the "Announcement on the Collection of Consumption Tax on Electronic Cigarettes" (No. 33 of 2022, hereinafter referred to as "Announcement 33"), stipulating that the consumption tax shall be levied on electronic cigarettes as of November 1, 2022. This article provides a brief introduction to the new regulations on the regulation of electronic cigarettes, the background of the collection of consumption tax on electronic cigarettes, and a detailed interpretation of the regulations on the collection and management of consumption tax on electronic cigarettes from the perspective of the six elements of taxation, in order to help taxpayers of consumption tax on electronic cigarettes operate in compliance with the law and effectively address tax risks.

The "Double 11" has ended. In previous years, e-commerce platforms such as Tmall have already announced amazing sales during the Double 11 period (November 1-11), but this year, no relevant data has been released on any platform. However, the author found that multiple media reported a set of sales data for cross-border e-commerce. During the "Double 11" period, the Shenzhen Customs accumulated more than 60 million import and export lists under the supervision of the cross-border e-commerce management platform, an increase of about 40% year-on-year. Cross-border e-commerce can maintain a reverse growth trend under the impact of the epidemic, and it has clearly become a growth point that cannot be ignored in China's economic development. According to the Economic Daily, "In the first three quarters of this year, the total import and export volume of cross-border e-commerce in Guangdong exceeded 300 billion yuan." In Guangzhou, Shenzhen, and other places in China, there are a large number of small and micro enterprises engaged in foreign trade export business through cross-border e-commerce platforms. While they are developing rapidly, they have hidden many tax risk points due to inadequate understanding of tax legal documents. Here, the author takes the reader to understand the common tax related risk points of cross-border e-commerce export enterprises and the key points of tax compliance, hoping to bring inspiration to cross-border e-commerce practitioners.

Recently, the internet has been flooded with various sensational and absurd rumors about the "Golden Tax Phase IV", falsely stating how the "Golden Tax Phase IV" should target high-income people in order to win high traffic and achieve the purpose of promoting and selling a certain product. However, in fact, there is no official document specifying the launch time and functions of the "Golden Tax Phase IV". We can only get a glimpse of its construction progress and functions from the news released by the General Administration about the "Golden Tax Phase IV". Here, the author collates and summarizes the information about the "Golden Tax Phase IV" that has been confirmed by the State Administration of Taxation, in order to restore the true identity of the "Golden Tax Phase IV" to the readers.

In the past few decades, Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) has been the cornerstone of the global financial system, providing a reference for pricing various financial agreements, the most important of which is the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR). By 2018, when the global market decided to shift from LIBOR, there were approximately $400 trillion worth of financial agreements around the world that were linked to LIBOR pricing (financial agreements included everything from derivative financial agreements to loan agreements and interest rate agreements). Currently, major global markets, including the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, the Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, have made it clear that no LIBOR interest rate agreement can be entered into after December 31, 2021. Certain dollar denominated LIBOR agreements are valid until June 30, 2023, but are limited to legacy contracts. According to the "Best Practices for Completing the LIBOR Transition from LIBOR" and other guidance documents published by the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (ARRC), it is no longer recommended to use US dollar LIBOR as the reference interest rate for new commercial loan agreements signed after June 30, 2021; If market participants still insist on using US dollar LIBOR in loan agreements, they need to at least ensure the inclusion of fallback language, and ensure that there are other interest rate mechanisms that can replace LIBOR after the disappearance or loss of representativeness of US dollar LIBOR.

进入21世纪以来，我国的银行业经历了十多年的黄金发展期，存贷规模高速增长，行业整体盈利水平明显高于其他行业，但由于相关制度的缺失和监管的空白，粗放化管理和发展的特点比较突出，导致整个银行业市场乱象丛生。进入新的发展时期，一系列行业乱象治理的专项行动也相继提上日程。2020年2月20日，中国银保监会办公厅《关于预防银行业保险业从业人员金融违法犯罪的指导意见》中也明确将信贷业务领域违法犯罪行为作为重点金融领域

"If an enterprise has tax risks and cancels them as soon as possible, will the risks also be lost?" The answer to this question was originally clear, "If the enterprise has a criminal risk of being suspected of fraudulent, then even if it is cancelled, the criminal liability of the relevant responsible person has not been eliminated. If there are tax related violations such as tax evasion and underpayment, then the cancellation of the legal entity, like the death of a natural person, should no longer be held accountable."

随着2016年《最高人民法院关于人民法院办理财产保全案件若干问题的规定》正式确立财产保全责任险制度，司法实践中以财产保全责任险（以下统称“保全保险费”）的方式提供担保、申请财产保全的案件越来越多。但鉴于现行法律和司法解释并未就保全保险费的主体承担问题作出明确规定，在合同纠纷中对于原告主张诉讼保全保险费由被告承担的请求是否支持，司法裁判中存在截然不同的观点。本文拟通过对此类问题司法裁判数据的梳理和裁判