Oral hygiene 24.12.2023
0 (0 votes)

About branches on the territory of a foreign state, about reporting. How is the right to conduct activities on the territory of a foreign state confirmed? The territory of a foreign state is

Bibliography

Butenko T., Petrov M., Tataurov O. Forced labor: an independent type of criminal punishment or an alternative to imprisonment? // Criminal law. 2012. No. 4.

Inogamova-Khegai L. V. Limits of criminal liability for economic crimes // Entrepreneurship. Limits of state legal intervention. M., 2001.

Kruglikov L.L. Changes in the criminal law (December 2011): evidence of its further development or stagnation? // Current problems of criminal law and criminology at the present stage. Vol. 1. Yaroslavl, 2012.

Review of judicial statistics on the activities of federal courts of general jurisdiction and justices of the peace in 2011 // Russian Justice. 2012. No. 10.

Foreign states as subjects of land legal relations on the territory of Russia

Umerenko Yuri Alexandrovich,

Researcher at the Department for Organization of Scientific Research, Moscow State Law Academy named after. O. E. Kutafina, Candidate of Legal Sciences

More than ten years have passed since the adoption and entry into force of the Land Code of the Russian Federation of 2001, but this regulatory legal act still has a number of gaps and problems that lead to the emergence of various contradictory positions and different law enforcement practices. One of these problems is the question of the possibility of classifying foreign states as subjects of land legal relations on the territory of the Russian Federation. It should be noted right away that the Land Code of the Russian Federation operates with the concept of “participants of land relations,” although from the point of view of the theory of legal relations, it seems more correct to use the concept of “subject of land relations.” However, in this article these concepts will be used in the same meaning. In modern legal literature, little attention is paid to the issue of the subject composition of participants in land legal relations, but the development of this issue has enormous theoretical and practical significance.

In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 3 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, land legislation regulates relations regarding the use and protection of lands in the Russian Federation as the basis for the life and activities of peoples living in the relevant territory (land relations). This rule is based on Part 1 of Art. 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, by virtue of which land and other natural resources are used and protected in the Russian Federation as the basis for the life and activities of the peoples living in the relevant territory.

According to paragraph 1 of Art. 5 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, participants in land relations are citizens, legal entities, the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and municipalities.

In paragraph 2 of Art. 5 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that the rights of foreign citizens, stateless persons and foreign legal entities to acquire ownership of land plots are determined in accordance with the Land Code of the Russian Federation and federal laws. Foreign states are not mentioned as participants, i.e. subjects of land relations on the territory of the Russian Federation, while in Art. 5 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation there is no blanket norm providing for the possibility of establishing the land legal personality of foreign states by other federal laws.

us. In addition, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Art. 212 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, property can be owned by citizens and legal entities, as well as the Russian Federation, constituent entities of the Russian Federation, and municipalities.

At first glance, from the analysis of the above norms of land and civil legislation of the Russian Federation, we can conclude that foreign states are not subjects of land legal relations on the territory of the Russian Federation, i.e. they cannot be the owners of land plots. However, this conclusion does not fully take into account law enforcement practice in the area under consideration, so this issue requires a more in-depth and comprehensive study.

The legislation of the Russian Federation also does not contain any norms that allow us to draw a conclusion regarding the possibility of foreign states owning land plots on the territory of the Russian Federation within the framework of obligatory legal relations (lease, gratuitous fixed-term use, etc.).

Considering that obligatory legal relations by their nature are derived from real legal relations, the question of the possibility of a foreign state to be the owner of land plots on the territory of the Russian Federation has a decisive influence on the ability of a foreign state to own land plots within the framework of obligatory legal relations.

In accordance with Part 2 of Art. 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, land and other natural resources can be in private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership. This norm of the Constitution of the Russian Federation corresponds to clause 1 of Art. 212 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which private, state, municipal and other forms of ownership are recognized in the Russian Federation.

Legislative consolidation of the legal possibility of existing

the introduction of other forms of ownership allows us to draw an indirect conclusion about the attribution of property rights of foreign states to other forms of ownership. This position, in particular, is shared by A.P. Anisimov and R.G. Melnichenko1. They note that there are dozens of embassies and consulates of foreign states on the territory of the Russian Federation, not only in Moscow, but throughout the country2, which means that foreign states can be considered as subjects of land legal relations on the territory of the Russian Federation.

In accordance with Art. 4 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, if an international treaty of the Russian Federation, ratified in the prescribed manner, establishes rules other than those provided for by the Land Code of the Russian Federation, the rules of the international treaty are applied. This norm fully corresponds to Part 4 of Art. 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which states: generally recognized principles and norms of international law and international treaties of the Russian Federation are an integral part of its legal system. If an international treaty of the Russian Federation establishes rules other than those provided for by law, then the rules of the international treaty apply.

Thus, if an international treaty of the Russian Federation, ratified in the prescribed manner, provides for the provision of land plots owned by the Russian Federation for ownership, lease, free-term use to other states, then the corresponding states will be the legal holders of the land plots in accordance with the terms of the agreement, however in such cases, it objectively appears

1 See about this: Anisimov A.P., Melnichenko R.G. On the issue of rights to land plots of foreign states on the territory of the Russian Federation // Bulletin of notarial practice. 2007. No. 5.

There is a need to consider a foreign state in the field of land legal relations in two qualities: as a public law entity and as a private law entity.

It seems that if a foreign state acts as a public legal entity, then the principle of extraterritoriality3 will apply to the land plot and, consequently, the legal regulation of the provision of a land plot will be related to the subject of regulation of public international law with the simultaneous occurrence of corresponding legal consequences4. In such cases, the provision of land plots is carried out on the basis of the principle of reciprocity for purposes related to the implementation of government functions.

So, according to Part 1 of Art. 1 Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany on the conditions for the provision of real estate in Frankfurt am Main, Munich and Moscow for the needs of the Russian Consulates General in Germany and the German Embassy in Russia, concluded in Berlin on October 11, 2006. , The Russian side provides the German side with a 99-year lease for use by the German Embassy in Russia of the following real estate assets: buildings, Moscow, st. Povarskaya, 46, buildings 1, 2, 3 with a total area of ​​1368.1 sq. m; land plot occupied by the above buildings with an area of ​​2405 sq. m. (clause 1, article 1).

In turn, the German side provides the Russian side with

3 See about this: Morozov D.V. Extraterritorial norms and the doctrine of private international law // Journal of Russian Law. 2011. No. 7.

4 See: Vienna Convention on Consular

not for lease for 99 years for the use by the Consulate General of the Russian Federation of similar property in the relevant cities of Germany (clause 1 of article 2 and clause 1 of article 3 of the Agreement).

At the same time, on the basis of Art. 5 of this Agreement, the real estate objects provided for rent, specified in Art. 1, 2, 3 of the Agreement, in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 23 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of April 18, 1961 and paragraph 1 of Art. 32 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of April 24, 1963, are exempt from taxes of any kind imposed by the state, regional or local authorities, as well as from the payment of other fees, with the exception of fees for certain services.

Thus, here we are talking about the provision of land plots on the principles of reciprocity within the framework of the norms of public international law, and in fact, this international legal act establishes rules other than those provided for by land legislation, i.e. the Agreement in question goes beyond the subject of land regulation rights and creates distinctive norms. The Russian Federation has also concluded other similar agreements with foreign states5.

If a foreign state, on the basis of an international treaty, is provided with a land plot not for purposes related to the implementation of the functions of a foreign state, then in such a case we can say that the foreign state acts as a private legal entity, and this issue relates to the subject of regulation of international private law.

5 See, for example, Order of the Government of the Russian Federation dated December 27, 2010 No. 2439-r “On the signing of an Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Latvia on the conditions for the provision of real estate in Moscow and Jurmala.”

rights, and the scope of the rights of the relevant foreign state can be determined both by an international treaty and by the land legislation of the Russian Federation, taking into account the norms of private international law.

A.P. Anisimov and R.G. Melnichenko, considering the problem of the presence on the territory of Russia of land owned by another state, note that the main arguments denying this situation include6:

the absence in the land legislation of the Russian Federation of such a subject as a foreign state;

an exhaustive list of subjects of property rights in civil legislation, which does not include foreign states;

lack of modern practice of providing foreign states with ownership of land on the territory of the Russian Federation.

The following circumstances indicate the possibility of a foreign state’s ownership of land plots:

The Constitution of the Russian Federation mentions other forms of ownership, which should be understood as the right of ownership of a land plot of another state;

granting the right to another state to acquire ownership of land cannot detract from the sovereignty of the Russian Federation in this territory;

The principle of reciprocity obliges the Russian state to grant ownership of land to a foreign state.

The first two grounds denying the possibility of considering foreign states as subjects of land legal relations on the territory of the Russian Federation are interrelated and can be combined into one ground - the lack of provision

6 See: Anisimov A.P., Melnichenko R.G. Decree. op.

regulated by the legislation of the Russian Federation, the ability of foreign states to act as participants in land and property relations.

This argument at first glance is quite obvious, however, to find an answer to the question under consideration, it is necessary to turn to the practice of granting foreign states land plots of ownership on the territory of the Russian Federation not for public law purposes.

In Minsk on May 28, 2009, an Agreement was concluded between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Belarus (RB) on the mutual transfer of ownership of land plots and on the lease of land plots. This Agreement was ratified by Federal Law No. 231-F3 of July 27, 2010.

In accordance with Art. 1 of the Agreement, the Russian side transfers to the ownership of the Republic of Belarus land plots located on the territory of the Russian Federation in the village of Krasnaya Polyana, Adler district, Krasnodar Territory, with a total area of ​​16.32 hectares.

According to Art. 2 of the Agreement, the Belarusian side transfers into the ownership of the Russian Federation land plots located on the territory of the Republic of Belarus in Minsk and the Minsk region, with a total area of ​​16.32 hectares.

In addition, the Russian side leases to the state institutions of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Belarus "Sanatorium "Belaya Rus"" and "Sanatorium "Belarus"" for a period of 49 years land plots that are in constant (indefinite) use of these state institutions and located on the territory of the Russian Federation in the village of Maisky, Tuapse district, Krasnodar Territory, and the city of Sochi, Krasnodar Territory, respectively (Article 4 of the Agreement).

It is noteworthy that the principle of reciprocity in this case is implemented only in relation to the transfer of ownership of the parties to the agreement

small plots, and the provision of real estate assets and the land plots on which they are located to the Republic of Belarus for rent is carried out without reciprocal provision.

At the same time, the articles of the Agreement under consideration indicate that the list of land plots is determined in the manner established by Art. 7 of the Agreement, according to which the lists transferred in accordance with Art. 1, 2 and 4 of the Land Plot Agreement are determined after the Agreement enters into force in the Protocol signed by the Parties.

By virtue of Art. 3 of the Agreement, each of the Parties after the entry into force of the Protocol provided for in Art. 7 of the Agreement will ensure legal registration of the ownership rights of the state of the other Party to land plots transferred in accordance with Art. 1 and 2 of the Agreement, in the manner established by the legislation of the state where they are located.

Thus, based on the analysis of the above norms, it follows that the Russian Federation and the Republic of Belarus act as equal private law entities. This conclusion is due, firstly, to the incomplete implementation of the principle of reciprocity, and secondly, to the composition of the property transferred to the Republic of Belarus, the use of which is not related to the implementation of state functions.

The legitimacy of this position is also confirmed by Art. 6 of the said Agreement: registration of the transfer of land plots specified in Art. 4 of the Agreement, is carried out by concluding lease agreements between the authorized body of the Russian side and the state institutions of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Belarus “Sanatorium “Belaya Rus”” and “Sanatorium “Belarus””. These agreements are concluded in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation within three months from the date of entry into force.

leniya by virtue of the Protocol provided for in Art. 7 Agreements.

In addition, according to Art. 9 of the Agreement, the land plots that are the subject of the Agreement can be used only in accordance with their intended purpose and belonging to one or another category of land, provided for by the legislation of the state of their location. That is, these land plots are actually subject to the national legal regime at their location, while any exceptions in relation to the legal regime of land plots are not established by the Agreement, which means that in relation to land plots transferred in the prescribed manner into ownership or on a lease basis of the Republic of Belarus, the land legislation of the Russian Federation will be fully applied. In this case, the principle of extraterritoriality does not apply, which is a significant difference between contracts of a public law nature and contracts of a private law nature.

The presence of the above norms in the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Belarus is also due to the requirements of clause 2 of Art. 1213 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, according to which Russian law is applied to contracts in relation to land plots, subsoil plots and other real estate located on the territory of the Russian Federation.

V. S. Malenko rightly noted that the current legislation does not apply the principle of autonomy of the will of the parties and the law of the closest connection to transactions in relation to such property, but the law of the Russian Federation must be applied imperatively7.

Thus, we can conclude that in the above case, the Republic of Belarus is

7 See: Malenko V.S. Land relations with a foreign element // Law and Politics. 2007. No. 6.

acts as a private legal entity.

In this case, it is necessary to keep in mind the norm of Art. 5 of the Agreement, according to which the annual rent for each plot of land leased in accordance with Art. 4 of the Agreement will amount to 0.3% of the cadastral value of such a land plot, established in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation. Obviously, this norm provides for different rules for determining and establishing the amount of rent than those established by the land legislation of the Russian Federation, therefore, on the basis of Art. 4 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation, the Republic of Belarus can also be considered as a public legal entity. However, this feature is an exception, and land plots provided to the Republic of Belarus on the territory of the Russian Federation are fully subject to the legal regime established by the legislation of the Russian Federation, and therefore, the Republic of Belarus acts as a private legal entity and bears all the rights and obligations provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Indirect confirmation of the legitimacy of this conclusion is also the absence in the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Belarus of norms regarding the exemption of the Republic of Belarus from taxation of any kind established by the state, regional or local authorities, as well as from the payment of other fees (with the exception of fees for certain services in accordance with with paragraph 1 of Article 23 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and paragraph 1 of Article 32 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963), as, for example, provided by Art. 5 of the Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, which is of a public law nature.

Despite the fact that the provision of land plots in

the presence of foreign states on the territory of the Russian Federation is not a common practice, it should be noted that such an argument by A. P. Anisimov and R. G. Melnichenko against the possibility of the presence on the territory of the Russian state of land owned by another state is the lack of practice of providing land to foreign states ownership on the territory of Russia, has currently lost its relevance due to the existence of relevant practice.

In this regard, we can conclude that foreign states can act as lessees of land plots on the territory of the Russian Federation and, accordingly, be participants in other obligatory legal relations related to land plots.

The only argument about the impossibility of foreign states to own land plots on the territory of the Russian Federation, that is, to act as participants in land relations on the territory of the Russian Federation, is the absence of a direct indication of the law on this possibility.

It can be stated that foreign states are still subjects (participants) of land legal relations on the territory of Russia, acting as private legal entities with all the ensuing legal consequences, and they, like other participants in land relations, are equally subject to the rights and obligations provided for legislation of the Russian Federation.

The provision of land plots within the framework of international treaties for public law purposes has a legal nature that is significantly different from the provision of land plots to foreign states as private legal entities. In this regard, it seems necessary to make appropriate changes to the civil and land legislation of the Russian Federation regarding the possibility of classifying foreign

foreign states to subjects of land legal relations on the territory of the Russian Federation. However, such adjustments must be comprehensively worked out in order to prevent undermining the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, and also take into account foreign experience in regulating these legal relations.

So, according to Art. 4 of the Land Code of the Republic of Belarus dated July 23, 2008 No. 425-Z8, foreign states are classified as subjects of land relations on the territory of Belarus. Article 13 of the said Code establishes that land plots belonging to the following categories and types of land are not subject to granting into private ownership, the ownership of foreign states, or international organizations: agricultural lands; lands of environmental, health, recreational, historical and cultural purposes; forest fund lands; water fund lands; lands under roads and other transport communications; public lands.

In addition, this norm determines that the following land plots are not subject to granting into private ownership, the ownership of foreign states, or international organizations:

on which real estate objects are located only in state ownership;

in territories exposed to radioactive contamination (evacuation (exclusion) zones, priority resettlement zones and subsequent resettlement zones from which the population has been resettled);

in areas where explored mineral deposits occur. List of settlements, gardening partnerships,

8 URL: http://www.tamby.info/kodeks/zk.htm.

dacha cooperatives located in areas of explored mineral deposits are approved by the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus;

which, in accordance with the approved master plans of cities and other settlements, urban development projects of detailed planning, district land management schemes and land management documentation, are intended for intended use, excluding their provision as property.

The presence of these restrictions seems logical and fully consistent with the sovereign interests of the Republic of Belarus and makes it possible to ensure the preservation and use of land as the basis for the life and activities of the peoples living in the relevant territory.

It seems that it is necessary to take into account the experience of legal regulation of the Republic of Belarus in the area under consideration in relation to the land and civil legislation of the Russian Federation, including establishing similar restrictions on the provision of ownership of the corresponding land plots. The introduction of these changes will resolve the issue of the possibility of foreign states to act as participants in land relations on the territory of the Russian Federation and will ensure compliance with the theory and practice of land legislation of the Russian Federation.

Bibliography

Anisimov A.P., Melnichenko R.G. On the issue of rights to land plots of foreign states on the territory of the Russian Federation // Bulletin of notarial practice. 2007. No. 5.

Malenko V. S. Land relations with a foreign element // Law and Politics. 2007. No. 6.

Morozov D.V. Extraterritorial norms and doctrine of private international law // Journal of Russian Law. 2011. No. 7.

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation in a number of cases does not recognize the territory of the Russian Federation as the place of sale of works (services), if the buyer does not carry out activities on the territory of the Russian Federation. This standard applies when performing those types of work and services that are listed in paragraphs. 4 paragraphs 1 art. 148 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. How to correctly determine the place of sale of services in cases where the buyer, a foreign company, does (does not) have a representative office in Russia? If the services are provided by a branch of one Russian organization of another Russian organization on the territory of a foreign state? Does an object of taxation arise if a foreign company performs work (provides services) to a Russian organization? To the foreign representative office of a Russian organization? According to paragraphs. 4 p.

2. admission of foreign persons to investment activities

2. admission of foreign persons to carry out investment activitiesAbout the place of activity of the buyer (Ermoshina E.L.) Activities of foreign legal entities How foreign legal entities work in Russia in 2018 Article 13. labor activity of foreign citizens in the Russian Federation

2. admission of foreign persons to carry out investment activities Thus, foreign investors are subject to restrictive exemptions with the participation of such persons in the authorized capital of business companies that are of strategic importance for ensuring the defense of the country and the security of the state, and (or) their transactions entailing constitutes the establishment of control over these business companies.

Article 2. basic concepts

According to the Federal Law of April 29, 2008 On the place of business of the buyer (Ermoshina E.L.), the Arbitration Court of First Instance found the refusal to register the company to be inconsistent with Article 23 of the Federal Law of August 8, 2001 N 129-FZ “On State Registration legal entities and individual entrepreneurs” and obliged the tax authority to carry out state registration of Far Eastern International Trade Fair LLC.
Activities of foreign legal entities N 510 “On the Government Commission for Control of Foreign Investments in the Russian Federation” // Ibid. 2008. N 28. Art. 3382.<367 СЗ РФ. 2008. N 44. Ст. 5097.Сделки, совершенные с нарушением требований Федерального закона от 29 апреля 2008 г.

On the place of business of the buyer (Ermoshina e.l.)

Attention

Let’s assume that one Russian organization (contractor) has concluded an agreement with another Russian organization (customer) to perform work (render services) from the list of paragraphs. 4 paragraphs 1 art. 148 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In this case, the customer has a branch registered in the territory of a foreign state, and the recipient of the work (services) is this branch directly.

Important

It turns out that the territory of the Russian Federation is not recognized as the place of sale. But the tax authorities do not always agree with this approach. For example, the FAS PO in Resolution No. A06-8981/2012 of September 17, 2013 considered the following tax dispute.

A Russian organization (contractor) entered into an agreement with another Russian organization (customer) for the provision of personnel to provide canteen services to the customer’s employees.
The Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation issues a reasoned order on the cancellation of the registration of a lawyer of a foreign state in the register. 14. The decision to cancel registration in the register can be appealed to the court in the manner prescribed by the legislation of the Russian Federation.
15. A lawyer of a foreign state, whose registration in the register has been cancelled, returns the registration certificate to the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. 16. Information contained in the register is provided for a fee of 300 rubles, which is subject to credit to the federal budget.
State authorities and local governments are provided with this information free of charge. Information is provided in the form of extracts about specific lawyers.


The form of the extract, as well as the procedure for its provision, are established by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation.
An application from a lawyer of a foreign state to register him in the register, an order from the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation to register a lawyer of a foreign state in the register and other documents related to the lawyer of a foreign state are formed into a registry file. 11. Cancellation of the registration of a lawyer of a foreign state in the register is carried out at the request of the lawyer or at the initiative of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. 12. The Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation will cancel the registration of a lawyer of a foreign state in the register in the event of: a) establishing the unreliability of the documents submitted for registration; b) expulsion of the lawyer from the Russian Federation in accordance with the established procedure; c) the entry into force of a court verdict finding the lawyer guilty of committing a crime. 13.

of the Russian Federation, as well as their rights to free exit from the Russian Federation and entry into the Russian Federation. A residence permit issued to a stateless person is also a document proving his identity.

A residence permit cannot be issued in the form of an electronic document; (as amended by Federal Law No. 227-FZ of July 27, 2010) (see the text in the previous edition) a foreign citizen legally staying in the Russian Federation is a person who has a valid residence permit, or temporary residence permit, or visa and (or ) migration card, or other documents provided for by federal law or an international treaty of the Russian Federation, confirming the right of a foreign citizen to stay (reside) in the Russian Federation; (edited)

Federal Law of July 18, 2006 N 110-FZ) (see.

    On the place of activity of the buyer (Yermoshina E.L.) Activities of foreign legal entities How foreign legal entities work in Russia in 2018 Article 13. labor activity of foreign citizens in the Russian Federation

2. admission of foreign persons to carry out investment activities N 1545-1 “On foreign investments in the RSFSR”, concluded that foreign investments on the territory of the Russian Federation can be invested in any objects not prohibited by law; the introduction of 40,930.5 German marks into the property of an enterprise is not a currency transaction, and therefore there were no grounds for applying administrative liability in this case<364. Внимание См.: Постановление Федерального арбитражного суда Поволжского округа от 21 сентября 2000 г.
In this Resolution, the judges noted that their legal position is confirmed by the explanations provided at the request of the executing organization in Letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 07.07.2011 N 03-07-08/209, dated 10.10.2012 N 03-07-08/284.B The first of them states that if the buyer of engineering services provided by a Russian organization is a branch of a Russian organization registered and operating on the territory of a foreign state in accordance with the legislation of that state, then the territory of the Russian Federation is not recognized as the place of sale of these services and, accordingly, such services VAT is not subject to VAT in the Russian Federation provided there is documentary evidence of the use of these services during the construction of facilities on the territory of a foreign state.
See the text of the appendix in the previous edition Appendix No. 1 to the Regulations on maintaining the register of lawyers of foreign states carrying out legal activities on the territory of the Russian Federation Register of lawyers of foreign states carrying out legal activities in the territory of the Russian Federation As amended and supplemented from: December 30, 2005, December 8, 2008 Registration number Last name, first name, patronymic and citizenship of the lawyer Address and telephone number of permanent residence or place of stay in the Russian Federation Date of receipt of the application for registration Details of the document confirming the status of a lawyer in a foreign country Details of the lawyer’s identity document Date and number of the order for registration of the lawyer Date issuance of a registration certificate and its duplicate Information about changes: By Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 8, 2008

Therefore, Russian taxpayers purchasing the specified works (services) from foreign entities are required to pay VAT in respect of those works (services) that, in accordance with the norms of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, are subject to this tax on the territory of the Russian Federation. For example, a Russian organization purchasing a foreign organization has engineering services, services for providing personnel to work on the territory of the Russian Federation, work on developing computer programs (see Letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated October 19, 2011 N 03-07-08/291, dated November 2, 2010 N 03-07- 08/304, dated 04/09/2010 N 03-03-06/2/70, respectively).

Conclusion. When performing work (providing services) named in paragraphs. 4 paragraphs 1 art. 148 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a foreign company for a Russian organization recognizes the place of sale as the territory of the Russian Federation and becomes subject to VAT. The Russian organization becomes a tax agent.

Lawyer (surname, initials) Signature Date Appendix No. 3 to the Regulations on maintaining a register of lawyers of foreign states carrying out legal activities in the territory of the Russian Federation Questionnaire Place for photo 1. Last name first name patronymic (if you changed your last name, first name or patronymic, then indicate them) 2.

Info

Gender 3. Date, month and year of birth 4. Place of birth 5. Citizenship 6. Information about higher legal education (when and which educational institutions you graduated from, diploma number, specialty and qualifications for the diploma) 7.

Details of the document confirming the lawyer's status in a foreign country Name of document N Issued by Date of issue 8. Address of permanent residence Telephone 9. Address of place of stay in the Russian Federation Telephone 10.

1. Citizens of the Russian Federation who have committed a crime on the territory of a foreign state are not subject to extradition to that state.

2. Foreign citizens and stateless persons who have committed a crime outside the Russian Federation and are located on the territory of the Russian Federation may be extradited to a foreign state for prosecution or serving a sentence in accordance with an international treaty of the Russian Federation.

1. In accordance with Part 1 of Article 61 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, a citizen of the Russian Federation cannot be expelled from the Russian Federation or extradited to another state. This constitutional principle is also enshrined in Part 1 of the commented article. Foreign citizens and stateless persons who have committed a crime outside the Russian Federation and are located on the territory of the Russian Federation may be extradited to a foreign state for prosecution or serving a sentence in accordance with an international treaty of the Russian Federation.

2. Extradition is an act of legal assistance carried out in accordance with the provisions of special international treaties and Russian legislation, consisting in the extradition to a foreign state of a person who is accused of committing a crime directed against the interests of that state, by the state on whose territory this person is located, as well as the extradition by a foreign state of the Russian Federation of its citizen accused of committing a crime under the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, in order to bring these persons to criminal liability.

The main purposes of issuance are:

1) criminal prosecution of a person accused of committing a crime entailing criminal punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of at least one year;

2) execution of a court-ordered sentence that has entered into force, providing for punishment in the form of imprisonment for a term of at least six months or a more severe punishment in relation to a person who has not served this sentence.

3. The Constitution of the Russian Federation (Part 2 of Article 63) establishes that extradition is carried out on the basis of the Federal Law and the international treaty of the Russian Federation. If the question of extradition arises, a person can become a subject of extradition only if this person has citizenship of the requesting state, lacks citizenship of the country in which he is located, and also if the person requested for extradition is a stateless person or a citizen third state.

4. The following categories of persons may be the subject of extradition:

1) Russian, foreign citizens and stateless persons in case of their extradition to the Russian Federation;

2) only foreign citizens and stateless persons upon their extradition by the Russian Federation.

The extradition of persons located on the territory of the Russian Federation, accused of committing a crime, for criminal prosecution or execution of a sentence against these persons is carried out on the basis of an international treaty of the Russian Federation or on the basis of the principle of reciprocity, when, in accordance with the assurances of the foreign state that sent the request for extradition, there are grounds expect that in a similar situation, extradition will be carried out at the request of the Russian Federation.

5. According to the Law of the Russian Federation of October 25, 1999 No. 190-FZ “On the ratification of the European Convention on Extradition, the Additional Protocol and the Second Additional Protocol thereto,” the Russian Federation, in accordance with Article 1 of the Convention, reserves the right to refuse extradition:

1) if the extradition of a person is requested for the purpose of bringing to justice in an emergency court or in summary proceedings or for the purpose of executing a sentence passed by an emergency court or in summary proceedings, when there are grounds to believe that during such proceedings this person will not be or are not the minimum guarantees provided for in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in articles 2, 3 and 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms were ensured. At the same time, the concepts of “extraordinary court” and “summary procedure” do not include any international criminal court, the powers and competence of which are recognized by the Russian Federation;

2) if there are serious grounds to believe that the person in respect of whom the extradition request has been made has been or will be subjected in the requesting State to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or that this person has not been subjected or the minimum guarantees provided for in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in articles 2, 3 and 4 of Protocol No. 7 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms will not be provided;

3) based on considerations of humanity, when there are grounds to believe that the extradition of a person may entail serious complications for him due to his advanced age or state of health;

4) The Russian Federation, in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 2 of the Convention, reserves the right not to extradite persons whose extradition could harm its sovereignty, security, public order or other essential interests. Crimes in connection with which extradition cannot be made are established by federal law.

6.According to Section IV of the CIS Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Cases, extradition is not carried out if:

1) the person whose extradition is required is a citizen of the requested Contracting Party;

2) at the time of receipt of the request, criminal prosecution according to the legislation of the requested Contracting Party cannot be initiated or the sentence cannot be executed due to the expiration of the statute of limitations or for other legal grounds;

3) in relation to the person whose extradition is required, in the territory of the requested Contracting Party a verdict was passed for the same crime or a decision to terminate the proceedings was passed, which entered into legal force;

4) the crime, in accordance with the legislation of the requesting or requested Contracting Party, is prosecuted as a private prosecution (at the request of the victim).

Alexandra Degtyareva, senior lawyer at ZAO Advokat FREMM

In the legislation of the Russian Federation there is no direct rule regulating the procedure for paying value added tax in the event that consulting and engineering work (services) (which, by virtue of paragraph 4 of paragraph 1 of Article 148 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, include engineering and consulting services, pre-design and design services) provided by a foreign branch of a Russian organization for the needs of a branch of another Russian organization, also located and registered in the territory of a foreign state.

As a rule, the tax authorities of a foreign state rightly believe that work (services) provided on its territory should be taxed in accordance with the legislation of that state and require its payment. However, the absence of an international treaty on the avoidance of double taxation on such taxes gives the Russian tax authorities grounds to also demand payment of VAT, but to the budget of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the tax authorities of the Russian Federation rely on the provisions of tax legislation, interpreting them extremely formally and not taking into account the existing inconsistency of these norms.

For taxpayers, this approach of the tax authorities is unacceptable, since it forces them to pay double taxes and incur additional expenses. In this regard, there is a need to clarify the existing gap in the legislation.
First of all, you should define the concept of “buyer of works (services)”, which, from the point of view of the tax authorities, in this case can only be the Russian organization itself.

It should be noted that the clarifications of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation and the emerging judicial practice follow the path of recognizing branches of organizations as buyers of goods, works and services. However, due to the absence of a direct rule in tax legislation, the corresponding concept is interpreted by the tax authorities as narrowly as possible: from their point of view, the buyer of goods, works, and services can only be the Russian organization itself, but not its foreign branch.

Of course, in accordance with the requirements of the legislation of the Russian Federation, namely by virtue of clause 3 of Art. 55 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a branch of an organization is not an independent legal entity, and, therefore, is not an independent participant in civil transactions and does not have the right to enter into transactions on its own behalf. Therefore, the contract for the relevant work (services) must formally be concluded between the parent organizations. However, in the contract, it is recommended to indicate that the implementation of work (services) will be carried out through a branch of the contractor organization for the needs of a foreign branch of the customer organization. In this case, the tax authority will not have formal grounds to assert that foreign branches of the parties to the contract have nothing to do with it.

It seems that in this case, the decisive factor should be who will use the result of the work, the parent organization or its foreign branch, as well as for what purposes the work (services) is provided. It is obvious that, for example, the construction of a real estate property on the territory of a foreign state by a branch of a Russian organization indicates that the design work for such an object was carried out for the needs of the branch.

In addition, in such a situation, the definition of such concepts as “the moment of implementation of work (services)” and “place of implementation of work (services)” is essential.
The moment of implementation of consulting and engineering work (services) is not defined in the tax legislation of the Russian Federation. It can be interpreted in different ways, including as the period during which the service is provided or as the moment of direct transfer of the results of work (services). The second option seems correct, since only in this case is it possible to determine the place of implementation of work (services).

The general provision provided for by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation when determining the place of implementation of work (services) is established by Art. 148 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. In particular, from paragraphs. 4 clause 1 of this article it follows that the place of implementation of consulting and engineering work (services) is the territory of the Russian Federation if the buyer of the work (services) operates on the territory of the Russian Federation. The place of activity of the buyer is considered to be the territory of the Russian Federation in the case of the actual presence of the buyer of works (services) in the territory of the Russian Federation on the basis of state registration of the organization, and in its absence - on the basis of the place specified in the constituent documents of the organization, place of management of the organization, location its permanent executive body, the location of the permanent representative office (if work (services) are provided through this permanent representative office).

Moreover, from paragraphs. 4. clause 1.1 art. 148 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, which is in relation to paragraph 1 of Art. 148 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, a special norm and subject to application on a priority basis, it follows that the territory of the Russian Federation is not recognized as the place of implementation of consulting and engineering work (services) if the buyer of the work (services) does not carry out activities on the territory of the Russian Federation.

The place of implementation of work (services) is confirmed by a contract concluded with foreign or Russian persons and documents confirming the fact of performance of work (rendering services).

As already noted, when drawing up a contract and all accompanying documentation, it should be indicated that the work (service) is provided for the needs of a foreign branch, the place of transfer of the result of the work (services), that is, the place of their implementation is the territory of a foreign state, the documents must be signed by authorized representatives branches. Compliance with these formalities will also allow you to successfully challenge decisions and orders of the tax authorities on the need to pay VAT in this case.

It should be noted that most of the explanations of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation confirm the position stated above. Including in letters of the Ministry of Finance dated November 29, 2006 No. 03-04-08/243, dated October 27, 2008 No. 03-07-08/246, dated July 7, 2011 No. 03-07-08/209, dated October 10, 2012 No. 03-07-08/284, reflects the point of view that if the buyer of engineering services provided by a Russian organization is a branch of a Russian organization registered and operating on the territory of a foreign state in accordance with the legislation of that state, then the place of sale of these services is the territory of the Russian Federation is not recognized and, accordingly, such services are not subject to value added tax, provided there is documentary evidence of the use of these services during the construction of facilities on the territory of a foreign state. Unfortunately, these clarifications are not mandatory for the tax authorities, and therefore are rarely taken into account by them.

However, the emerging judicial practice on this issue takes the side of the taxpayer, giving the correct interpretation of the provisions of the law and filling the gaps in the legislation (for example, Resolution of the Thirteenth AAC in case No. A56-59638/2012 dated April 16, 2013, Resolution of the Thirteenth AAC in the case No. A56-59631/2012 dated 06/07/2013).

1. Diplomatic missions and consular offices of the Russian Federation, trade missions of the Russian Federation, official missions of the Russian Federation to international organizations and other customers operating on the territory of a foreign state (hereinafter referred to as customers operating on the territory of a foreign state) have the right to carry out activities on the territory of foreign state procurement of goods, works, services from Russian or foreign suppliers (contractors, performers) by requesting quotations to support their activities in the territory of a foreign state, taking into account the features provided for in Part 2 of this article and Article 111 1 of this Federal Law.

2. When customers operating on the territory of a foreign state request quotations:

1) the restrictions established by Part 2 of Article 72 of this Federal Law may not apply;

2) in the requests provided for in Part 4 of Article 74 of this Federal Law, the customer indicates:

a) information provided for in paragraphs 1 - 5 of part 1 of Article 73 of this Federal Law. At the same time, the customer imposes requirements on the procurement participant that are established for persons supplying goods, performing work or providing services that are the object of the procurement, including taking into account the requirements of the legislation of the foreign state in whose territory the customer is making this purchase;

b) information on the possibility of submitting applications to participate in the request for quotations using any means of communication and delivery, including in writing in a sealed envelope, which does not allow viewing the contents of such an application before opening the envelope, or in the form of an electronic document;

3) the notice of a request for quotation and the requests provided for in Part 4 of Article 74 of this Federal Law may be accompanied by a draft contract prepared taking into account the requirements of the legislation of the foreign state in whose territory the customer is making this purchase;

4) the customer has the right to cancel the request for quotation before concluding the contract;

5) all submitted applications for participation in the request for quotation, regardless of the means of communication and delivery through which such applications are submitted, are considered in accordance with the requirements of Article 78 of this Federal Law. At the same time, the customer does not have the right to reject such applications due to their non-compliance with the provisions of Part 2 of Article 77 of this Federal Law;

6) placement in the unified information system of the notice provided for in Article 73 of this Federal Law, the protocol provided for in Article 78 of this Federal Law, and other information and documents provided for by this Federal Law are not required;

7) the contract with the winner of the request for quotation is concluded no later than twenty days from the date of signing the protocol provided for in Article 78 of this Federal Law.”;

29) in article 77:

a) part 2 should be stated as follows:

"2. An application for participation in a request for quotation is submitted to the customer in writing in a sealed envelope, which does not allow viewing the contents of such an application until the envelope is opened, or in the form of an electronic document before the date and time of opening the envelopes with applications for participation in the request for quotation and opening access to those submitted in the form electronic documents for applications for participation in the request for quotation specified in the notice of the request for quotation.”;

b) in part 4 in the first sentence, delete the word “(or)”;

30) in article 78:

a) part 1 should be stated as follows:

"1. The quotation commission opens envelopes with applications for participation in the request for quotation and opens access to applications submitted in the form of electronic documents for participation in the request for quotation at the time and place specified in the notice of the request for quotation. The opening of all received envelopes with such applications and the opening of access to such applications submitted in the form of electronic documents, as well as the consideration and evaluation of such applications are carried out on the same day. Information about the place, date, time of opening envelopes with such applications and about opening access to such applications submitted in the form of electronic documents, name (for a legal entity), last name, first name, patronymic (if any) (for an individual), postal address of each participant in the request for quotation, the envelope with the application for participation in the request for quotation is opened or access to the application submitted in the form of an electronic document for participation in the request for quotation is opened, proposals for the contract price specified in such applications are announced upon opening of the envelopes with such applications and opening access to such applications submitted in the form of electronic documents.”;

b) in part 2 in the first sentence the word “(or)” and the second sentence should be deleted;

c) in parts 3 and 5, delete the word “(or)”;

31) paragraph 3 of part 5 of article 80 shall be stated as follows:

“3) requirements for pre-selection participants and an exhaustive list of documents that must be submitted by pre-selection participants in accordance with paragraph 1 of part 1 of Article 31 of this Federal Law, as well as the requirement for pre-selection participants in accordance with part 1 1 (if there is such a requirement) of Article 31 of this Federal Law;”;

32) in article 83:

a) in part 2:

paragraph 5 is declared invalid;

paragraph 9 should be stated as follows:

“9) procurement of folk arts and crafts products of recognized artistic merit, samples of which are registered in the manner established by the federal executive body authorized by the Government of the Russian Federation;”;

b) in paragraph 4 of part 4, delete the word “(or)”;

c) add part 7 1 with the following content:

"7 1 . Acceptance of applications for participation in the request for proposals ceases with the deadline for opening envelopes with applications for participation in the request for proposals and opening access to applications submitted in the form of electronic documents for participation in the request for proposals.”;

d) in parts 8, 9, 10 and 13, delete the word “(or)”;

e) in part 15, delete the word “(or)” and add the word “worker” after the word “next”;

f) in parts 18, 19 and 20, delete the word “(or)”;

33) in Part 4 of Article 84, delete the word “calendar”;

34) in article 85:

a) in part 11, replace the words “part 3” with the words “parts 3 and 4”;

b) in part 15, replace the words “part 3” with the words “parts 3 and 4”;

35) in paragraph 5 of part 2 of Article 88, replace the numbers “28 - 30” with the words “28 and 29”;

36) in article 93:

a) in part 1:

paragraph 1 should be supplemented with the words “as well as central depository services”;

in paragraph 4 the words “In this case, the total annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to carry out on the basis of this paragraph does not exceed five percent of the amount of funds provided for the implementation of all purchases of the customer in accordance with the schedule, and amounts to no more than fifty million rubles in year. The specified restrictions regarding the establishment of limit values ​​for determining the amount of funds do not apply to purchases of goods, works, and services carried out by customers for the needs of rural settlements;” replace with the words “In this case, the annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to carry out on the basis of this paragraph should not exceed two million rubles or should not exceed five percent of the total annual volume of purchases of the customer and should not amount to more than fifty million rubles. The specified restrictions on the annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to make on the basis of this paragraph do not apply to purchases made by customers to meet the municipal needs of rural settlements. In relation to the federal executive body carrying out procurement to meet the federal needs of state bodies formed to support the activities of the President of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Russian Federation, the calculation of the specified restrictions on the annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to carry out on the basis of this paragraph is carried out separately for such federal body executive power and each such government body;”;

in paragraph 5 the words “In this case, the total annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to carry out on the basis of this paragraph does not exceed fifty percent of the amount of funds provided for the implementation of all purchases of the customer in accordance with the schedule, and amounts to no more than twenty million rubles in year;" replace with the words “In this case, the annual volume of purchases that the customer has the right to make on the basis of this paragraph should not exceed fifty percent of the total annual volume of purchases of the customer and should not amount to more than twenty million rubles;”;

paragraph 14, after the words “or electronic publications”, add the words “(including the software and hardware and information security tools used in them)”, after the words “access to”, add the word “such”;

paragraph 20, after the words “operation of computer equipment,” add the words “office equipment, sound equipment (including for providing simultaneous translation)”;

in paragraph 21, after the words “operation of computer equipment,” add the words “office equipment, sound equipment (including for providing simultaneous translation),” and replace the words “providing safe food” with the words “providing food (including safe food”);

paragraph 24 should be stated as follows:

“24) recognition of the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) by a closed method as invalid and the customer’s decision to conclude a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) in accordance with the provisions of Part 9 of Article 89 and Article 92 of this Federal Law in agreement with the authorized Government of the Russian Federation for the implementation of these functions by the federal executive body. In this case, the contract must be concluded with a single supplier (contractor, performer) on the terms provided for in the procurement documentation, at the price proposed by the procurement participant with whom the contract is concluded. Such a price should not exceed the initial (maximum) contract price or the contract price proposed in the application of the relevant procurement participant. The customer's request for approval of the conclusion of a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is sent to the specified federal executive body no later than ten days from the date of signing the relevant protocols containing information on recognizing the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) by closed method as invalid . In this case, the approval period should not be more than ten working days from the date of receipt of the application for approval of the conclusion of a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer). A contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is concluded within a period of no more than twenty days from the date the customer receives approval. The procedure for agreeing to conclude a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is established by the federal executive body regulating the contract system in the field of procurement;”;

paragraph 25 should be stated as follows:

“25) recognition as invalid of an open tender, a tender with limited participation, a two-stage tender, a repeated tender, an electronic auction, a request for quotations, a request for proposals in
in accordance with parts 1 and 7 of Article 55, parts 1 - 3 1 of Article 71, parts 1 and 3 of Article 79, part 18 of Article 83 of this Federal Law. Coordination of the conclusion of a contract in these cases, with the exception of cases of concluding contracts in accordance with parts 1 and 3 of Article 79 of this Federal Law, is carried out when making purchases to meet federal needs, the needs of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, municipal needs, respectively, with the federal executive body authorized to exercise of control in the field of procurement, or by a control body in the field of state defense procurement, an executive body of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, a local government body of a municipal district or a local government body of a city district authorized to exercise control in the field of procurement. In accordance with this paragraph, the contract must be concluded with a single supplier (contractor, performer) on the terms provided for in the procurement documentation, at the price proposed by the procurement participant with whom the contract is concluded. Such a price should not exceed the initial (maximum) contract price, the contract price proposed in the application of the relevant procurement participant, or the contract price proposed by the relevant procurement participant during an electronic auction. Customer's request about

approval of a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is sent to the control body in the field of procurement no later than ten days from the date of posting in the unified information system of the relevant protocols containing information on recognizing the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) as invalid. In this case, the approval period should not be more than ten working days from the date of receipt of the specified request. A contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is concluded within a period of no more than twenty days from the date the customer receives such approval or in cases provided for in parts 1 and 3 of Article 79 of this Federal Law, within the period established by Part 13 of Article 78 of this Federal Law. The procedure for agreeing to conclude a contract with a single supplier (contractor, performer) is established by the federal executive body regulating the contract system in the field of procurement;”;

in paragraph 30, after the word “proposals”, add the words “Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation,” the words “municipalities with a number of voters of over two hundred thousand people” should be replaced with the words “municipalities that are administrative centers (capitals) of constituent entities

Russian Federation, except for the cases established by clause 6 of part 2 of article 1 of this Federal Law";

paragraph 32 should be stated as follows:

“32) rental of a non-residential building, structure, structure, non-residential premises to meet federal needs, the needs of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation, municipal needs, as well as rental of residential premises located on the territory of a foreign state by customers operating on the territory of a foreign state;”;

add paragraph 35 with the following content:

“35) conclusion by organizations engaged in educational activities and recognized in accordance with the legislation on education as federal or regional innovation platforms, contracts for the supply of equipment (including its technical operation), software necessary for the implementation of scientific and technical results and results of intellectual activity , with the holder of exclusive rights to such equipment and software at the expense of funds allocated for the development of innovative infrastructure in the education system;”;

add paragraph 36 with the following content:

“36) conclusion by a budgetary institution of a contract, the subject of which is the issuance of a bank guarantee;”;

add paragraph 37 with the following content:

“37) procurement of folk arts and crafts products of recognized artistic merit, samples of which are registered in the manner established by the federal executive body authorized by the Government of the Russian Federation.”;

b) part 3 should be supplemented with the following sentence: “The provisions of this part do not apply to cases of procurement from a single supplier (contractor, performer) provided for in paragraphs 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 15, 16, 19 - 21, 24 - 26, 28, 29, 33, 36 of part 1 of this article.”;

c) part 4 should be supplemented with the words “except for cases of procurement from a single supplier (contractor, performer), in which documentary execution of the report provided for in part 3 of this article is not required”;

37) in article 94:

"4. The customer is obliged to involve experts and expert organizations in conducting an examination of the goods supplied, work performed or services provided if the purchase is made from a single supplier (contractor, performer), except for the following cases:

1) provided for in paragraphs 1 - 9, 14, 15, 17 - 23, paragraph 24 (only when making purchases to meet federal needs), paragraphs 25, 26, 28 - 30, 32, 33, 36 of part 1 of article 93 of this Federal Law ;

2) procurement of services of experts, expert organizations;

3) if the result of the work performed under the contract is the design documentation of a capital construction project and (or) the results of engineering surveys that have passed state or non-state examination, the implementation of which is mandatory in accordance with the provisions of the legislation of the Russian Federation.”;

b) add part 4 1 with the following content:

"4 1 . The Government of the Russian Federation has the right to determine other cases of mandatory examination by experts and expert organizations of the goods supplied, work performed, and services provided under the contract.”;

c) paragraph one of part 9 after the words “execution of the contract” should be supplemented with the words “(except for the contract concluded in accordance with paragraph 4 or 5 of part 1 of Article 93 of this Federal Law)”;

38) in article 95:

a) in part 12 the words “within one working day following the date” should be replaced with the words “no later than three working days from the date”;

b) part 15 after the words “does not correspond to the established ones” should be supplemented with the words “notification of a request for quotation”;

c) in part 20 the words “within one working day following the date” should be replaced with the words “no later than three working days from the date”;

39) in article 96:

a) in part 2, delete the number “5,”;

"8. The provisions of this Federal Law on contract enforcement do not apply in the following cases:

1) concluding a contract with a procurement participant who is a state or municipal government agency;

2) purchasing services for providing a loan;

3) conclusion by a budgetary institution of a contract, the subject of which is the issuance of a bank guarantee.”;

40) in article 97:

a) part 4 should be stated as follows:

"4. Monitoring of procurement to meet state and municipal needs is ensured by the federal executive body regulating the contract system in the field of procurement in the manner established by the Government of the Russian Federation.”;

b) part 8 should be stated as follows:

"8. In accordance with acts of the highest executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local administrations, executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation to regulate the contract system in the field of procurement, local government bodies can monitor procurement to meet the needs of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipal needs, respectively.”;

c) part 10 is declared invalid;

41) in Part 27 1 of Article 99, replace the numbers “11 1” with the numbers “11 2”;

42) in part 7 of article 106, the first sentence should be stated as follows: “The control body in the field of procurement has the right to suspend the determination of the supplier (contractor, performer) in terms of concluding a contract until the complaint is considered on the merits, by sending it to the customer, the operator of the electronic platform, to the authorized body, an authorized institution, a specialized organization, a procurement commission, a requirement to suspend the determination of a supplier (contractor, performer) in terms of concluding a contract until consideration of the complaint on the merits, which is mandatory for them.”;

43) Chapter 7 shall be supplemented with Article 111 1 as follows:

“Article 111 1. Features of planning and implementation



We recommend reading



Related Posts