Sunfish Sailboat Books

01/01/2007 EXTENDED UNTIL THE OBLIGATION TO PAY THE MANNER IN MODELS F24 TELEMATICS

E 'was finally issued a decree extending the obligation at January 1, 2007 already 'established by Article 37, paragraph 49 of Decree Law No 223, converted with amendments by Law 248 of August 4, 2006, which imposes an obligation on all registered for VAT to perform all the tax and benefit payments through the use of the Electronic F24.

The extension is not 'but was' granted to the entities referred to in Article 73 of the Income Tax Code, paragraph 1:

letter A) (company 'limited by shares, limited by shares, companies' responsibility to 'limited company' cooperatives and companies 'mutual insurance);

B) (public and private entities other than companies' who have sole or main object of the exercise activity 'trade.

For these the term' entered into force on 1 October 2006, and from that date can no longer 'F24 paper use templates to perform all tax and benefit payments.

Softwell De Instalacao Do Painel Da Twister

non-issuance of purchase receipt

Official Gazette No 230 of 03.10.2006 and 'was released on DL number 262, 10.03.2006, entered into force on the day of its publication.

Paragraph 8 of Article 1 provides: paragraph 2 of Article 12 of Legislative Decree 18 December 1997, n. 471, the words "where it has been definitively established, at different times, three separate violations of the obligation to issue the tax receipt or tax invoice made on different days over a period of five years" shall be substituted the following: "If is finally found to infringe the obligation to issue the tax receipt or tax invoice.

The new text in place since Oct. 3, 2006, and 'then the following: If
is finally finding of a breach of the obligation to issue a receipt tax or the receipt, even if sanctions were imposed under the provisions of Legislative Decree establishing the framework for administrative penalties in tax matters, and 'willing suspension of license or authorization to carry on 'or of engaging' it for a period of fifteen days to two months. If the fees have not been documented during the five years exceed the sum of two hundred million lire to the suspension and 'readiness for a period of two to six months.

This 'means that the failure to issue a single receipt or receipt of a single door at the close of trading for a period' for fifteen days to two months.

While in the past, many taxpayers, the bankrupt, admitted their error and paid the penalty paid, today and always will deny even the evidence, while not incurring the penalty ancillary reporting period, resulting in increased costs and appeal for their that for the Italian State.

Atvs At Police Auctions

IRAP - JUDGEMENT OF THE EUROPEAN COURT - NO REFUND

With the judgments of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 3 October 2006, and 'practically wrote an end to the now long-standing problem of duplication IRAP with VAT.

The Sixth EU VAT Directive, art. Article 33 No 1, places a ban on the levying of other domestic taxes which can be characterized as turnover taxes, and more 'precisely means, without prejudice to other Community provisions, particularly those provided by existing Community provisions on the general arrangements for the holding, movement and monitoring of products subject to excise duty, the provisions of this Directive shall not prevent a Member State from maintaining or introducing taxes on insurance contracts, taxes on betting and gambling, excise duties, stamp duties and, more? generally, any taxes, duties or charges which can not be characterized as turnover tax, PROVIDED 'However, such taxes, duties and charges do not, in trade between Member States, a formality' associated with the passage of a border.

has' argued that IRAP was contrary to this directive, as though it is calculated by a method different from that used for VAT, levied on the value net proceeds from the activity? productive, and more? exactly the net value added to the product by the manufacturer, so that 'the IRAP would be VAT.

has 'also claimed that the amount of IRAP collected at various stages of the cycle, from production to consumer input, and' equal to the rate of IRAP applied to the selling price of goods and services charged for home use .

derimere To that question, and the European Court 'was then asked the following question: If the art. 33 of the Sixth Directive must be interpreted in the sense that it prohibits a charge to IRAP of the net value of production deriving from the regular activities of a 'self organized the production of or trade in goods or the provision of services.

Among the many and 'raised the following exception, which appears to have tipped the balance in favor of the Italian Ministry: it must first be noted that, while VAT and' charged at each stage at the time of marketing and its amount and 'proportional to the price of goods or services provided, IRAP and' instead of a tax calculated on net production value of the company during a certain period. Its tax base and 'in fact the difference is that, depending on income, including the production value and costs of production, as defined by Italian legislation. It includes elements as changes in inventories, amortization and depreciation, which have no direct relationship with the supply of goods or services as such. IRAP should not be considered proportional to the price of goods or services provided.

For Italian taxpayers, with this ruling effectively clears up all hope of a refund for the IRAP paid in the past.