Bonus depreciation in tax accounting

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (63) ◽  
pp. 30-34
Author(s):  
Olga Polonskаyа ◽  
◽  
Tatiana Motroshilova ◽  
Ekaterina Stolyarova ◽  
◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 1356-1382
Author(s):  
E.V. Olomskaya ◽  
A.A. Aksent'ev

Subject. This article discusses the methodological features of Russian Accounting Standard (PBU) 18/02 Income Tax Accounting when using the balance method to account for deferred taxes. It considers whether the clarification of permanent tax differences is justified, and it analyzes in detail the features of accounting for temporary differences and offers a visual and descriptive method for determining and correlating them in accounts. Objectives. The article aims to justify the reason for linking permanent tax differences to such accounting categories as Income and Expenses. It also aims to develop a methodological toolkit that simplifies the perception of the balance method and demonstrates the procedure for determining temporary differences. Methods. For the study, we used the methods of analysis, synthesis, observation, comparison, and other general scientific methods. Results. The article justifies the clarification of permanent differences from the position of accounting categories. It offers an original approach that helps visually classify temporary differences. The formalization of the balance method helped identify the logic of its reflection in accounting statements. Conclusions and Relevance. To ensure that accounting is not distorted due to the impact of taxation, it is necessary to develop a unified conceptual framework, as well as develop existing methods and introduce new ones that do not contradict the public concept of interaction between accounting and tax accounting. The research results are intended for training, scientific and practical activities of specialists in the field of accounting and audit, as well as students studying under this program, in order to study the features of applying the balance method for accounting for deferred taxes.


2021 ◽  
pp. 089443932110039
Author(s):  
Viktor Shestak ◽  
Alla Kiseleva ◽  
Yuriy Kolesnikov

The objective of the study is to determine the status of a digital financial asset and the features of its taxation in the Russian Federation and progressive countries. Currently, there are three main taxation models that are used in this area: income tax, corporate income tax, and capital gains tax. The article explores the prospects for introducing the experience of foreign countries in the Russian Federation. The possible changes that may occur in tax regulation are analyzed. The experience of leading countries in the field of legal regulation of the use of digital financial assets and the taxation of cryptocurrency transactions is analyzed. Such an analysis will allow Russia to keep pace with countries with a leading economy and at the same time increase state budget revenue through taxation of cryptocurrency transactions. The study provides an analysis of the conceptual scenarios of digital income taxation and objects of taxation in the process of cryptocurrency creation. The study critically assesses possible options for applying international standards for tax accounting of digital assets. Groups of problematic issues that arise in the tax accounting of digital assets are developed. The prospect of further research is the development of tax accounting methods for each of the established entities for the creation and circulation of digital financial assets in accordance with accounting objects.


1973 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-88
Author(s):  
E.L. LaDue ◽  
W.R. Bryant

Recent Congressional testimony has focused on the desirability of eliminating certain income tax “preferences” that are important in agriculture. Specifically, separate proposals have urged that capital gains treatment pertaining to livestock, vineyards and orchards be eliminated and that the cash method of tax accounting no longer be permitted. The justification for these proposals is based on the continued activity of wealthy individuals in tax loss or tax sheltered farming, despite provisions of the Tax Reform Act of 1969 to limit such ventures. Furthermore, it is argued that these tax preferences result in a greater subsidy to the high tax bracket individual than low tax bracket individual and thus place low income bonafide farmers at a competitive disadvantage which could force them out of business.


1975 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 211-225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jay Reamer ◽  
Eugene E. Comiskey ◽  
Roger E.V. Groves

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document