Loan in conventional units. The parties may enter into an agreement and provide that payment under it is made in rubles in an amount equivalent to the value expressed in foreign currency or in conventional monetary units. The amount to be paid is determined at the official exchange rate of the relevant currency on the day of payment, unless a different rate is established by the agreement. Such rules are contained in paragraph 2 of Article 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. These conditions apply to any monetary obligations, including borrowed ones. Moreover, most often they resort to this form of expression in times of crisis. The contract is considered concluded from the moment the money is transferred.

Features of taxation of differences

A loan in conventional units has its own characteristics. The fact that amount differences are recognized as non-operating income or expenses is indicated, respectively, in paragraph 11.1 of Article 250 and subparagraph 5.1 of paragraph 1 of Article 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

However, in these cases, the differences are calculated on the date of sale or receipt of goods (work, services).

In a letter dated April 2, 2009 No. 03-03-06/1/204, specialists from the Russian Ministry of Finance indicated that, according to subparagraph 1 of paragraph 3 of Article 39 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, operations that are related to the circulation of Russian or foreign currency are not recognized as sales goods, works or services. That is why the difference between the assessment of the loan, expressed in conventional units, in Russian rubles on the date of its receipt by the borrower and the ruble assessment of the debt on the date of its repayment, is not income (expense) in the form of amount differences.

If the settlement results in more money being returned than was actually received, the negative difference represents a fee for using the loan. For profit tax purposes, it is taken into account according to the rules of Article 269 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

But the positive difference between the amount received by the borrower and returned to the lender is included in the borrower’s non-operating income.

Loan agreements, payments for which are expressed in conventional units, are currently (as confirmed by audit practice) not so popular. And not because the main (“calling the tune”) party to the contract suddenly became calm regarding the foreign currency exchange rate (remember, it is its instability that gives rise to the lender’s desire to “link” the borrower’s obligations to the exchange rate of any currency). But because this is a very troublesome (and fraught with surprises) business.
Nevertheless, questions on the topic raised still arise. As a rule, they are asked by borrowers whose debt (with a currency clause) extends from afar (we are talking, as you guessed, about long-term loan agreements). One of these questions found its way to the Ayudar Info ISS forum. Wanting to explain the situation in more detail, we have prepared this material.

The taxpayer who asked the question was “confused” by changes in the law relating to contracts where obligations are expressed in notional monetary units. Are there (he asked), among other things, any clarifications on loan agreements expressed in currency? e.?
Indeed, last year there were some changes in relation to obligations in the currency. That is, they occurred, but they have nothing to do with the situation under consideration. In addition, “implementation” (related to implementation) norms, in principle, cannot be compared with “borrowed” norms.

And now closer to the topic.
Situation
So, the situation is presented by the taxpayer as follows. The organization has a debt in accordance with a long-term loan agreement, the amount of which is expressed in yuan. e. Settlements under this agreement are carried out in rubles, but at the current euro exchange rate established by the Central Bank. Repayment of the principal amount of the debt and interest on it is made in equal tranches from 2012 to 2014. What should an accountant take into account?
A little about accounting
At the time of receipt of the loan, expressed in y. That is, the organization determines the ruble equivalent of the amount and reflects it as accounts payable (clause 2 of PBU 15/2008 “Accounting for borrowing costs”). But interest on the loan (including other possible expenses) should be taken into account separately from this amount (clauses 3, 4 of PBU 15/2008).

FYI
In general, interest is taken into account as part of the borrower’s other expenses in those reporting periods to which these accruals relate (clauses 6, 7 of PBU 15/2008). And only interest on a loan, the proceeds of which were used to finance an investment asset, if certain conditions listed in clause 9 of PBU 15/2008 are met, are included in the cost of the investment asset.

In the future - on the dates of transfer of funds to repay obligations, as well as on reporting dates (clauses 1, 4 - 7 of PBU 3/2006 "Accounting for assets and liabilities, the value of which is expressed in foreign currency") - ruble (at the exchange rate, established by the Central Bank for this day) recalculation of liabilities continues. The resulting exchange rate differences (positive and negative, depending on where the exchange rate has jumped) are taken into account as part of other income (clauses 3, 11 - 13 PBU 3/2006, clause 7 PBU 9/99 "Income of the organization ") or, accordingly, other expenses (clause 11 of PBU 10/99 "Expenses of the organization").

Please note
Exchange differences will be referred to only for accounting purposes.

Tax accounting
Let's talk about the principal amount of the loan...
For an amount difference to arise, the fact of sale is a prerequisite. Since there is no such loan when receiving (repaying) a loan, no difference in amount arises.
Here the differences we are considering acquire a special “status”. They are not summative (clause 11.1 of Article 250 and clause 5.1 of clause 1 of Article 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), as it may seem at first glance. Note that these norms speak about the obligations and requirements expressed in the y. e., and about the amount differences (more precisely, about their tax accounting) arising due to the discrepancy between the amounts (ruble equivalent) on the date of sale (receipt) of goods (work, services), property rights and the amounts actually received (paid) in rubles . But the provision of a loan does not apply to sales, so the reference to these norms is incorrect (which is also confirmed by officials).
There are no such differences in exchange rates, which, in fact, is understandable, because loan payments, as noted, are carried out in rubles, and not in foreign currency.
How should we call them? However, this is not so important, the main thing is to decide on the account. And the Ministry of Finance comes to the rescue. In Letter dated 05/31/2011 N 03 03 06/4/57, for example, the department explains: if an amount less than what was received in ruble equivalent is subject to return, a positive difference arises, which is included in the borrower’s non-operating income as non-operating income.

Example 1
Loan amount - 100,000 USD. e. According to the terms of the contract 1. e. equal to 1 euro, determined according to the Central Bank.
At the time of receiving the loan, the ruble equivalent of the debt amounted to 4,000,000 rubles. (at an exchange rate of 40 rubles/euro).
At the time of the refund, the euro exchange rate fell against the Russian ruble. As a result, the borrower repaid the debt to the lender in the amount of RUB 3,900,000. (100,000 euros x 39 rubles/euro).

Positive difference in the amount of 100,000 rubles. (4,000,000 - 3,900,000) is taken into account as part of the borrower's non-operating income.
But under such circumstances, the lender has a negative difference. Moreover, the Ministry of Finance does not object to its inclusion in tax expenses on the basis of paragraphs. 20 clause 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Letter dated December 13, 2011 N 03 03 06/2/197). The main thing is that these expenses meet the requirements established by paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
A similar approach is presented in the Determination of January 20, 2011 N VAS-18268/10, in which the senior arbitrators came to the conclusion that the expenses of the taxpayer-lender in the form of a negative amount difference arising as a result of a decrease in the foreign exchange rate against the Russian ruble and determined by calculation as a result of revaluation of the amount of the claim based on the exchange rate on the date of issue and the date of repayment of the loan, are economically justified. To calculate the maximum interest on loan agreements expressed in y. That is, it is necessary to use the standard applicable for debt obligations issued in rubles.

If the amount to be returned is greater than the ruble equivalent of the loan received, a negative difference arises. It, says the Ministry of Finance, should be considered as a fee for using a loan and included in non-operating expenses. Moreover, since such a difference is essentially akin to interest accrued for using a loan, it is included in expenses, taking into account the maximum amount of interest expenses established in paragraph. 4 paragraphs 1 art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, along with the interest itself for using the loan.
Thus, the resulting negative difference can be taken into account as part of non-operating expenses in the full amount only if, taken together with the amount of interest accrued for using the loan, it does not exceed the established standard.
A similar point of view can be seen in the Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 31, 2012 N VAS-7423/12. Let us note that before the dispute reached the highest arbitrators (by the way, the case has not yet been settled, since the case has been transferred to the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court for review by way of supervision), lower authorities tried to resolve it. The conclusions they made, in our opinion, are very strange, although they were in the interests of the taxpayer. The arbitrators, recognizing the legality of the company’s actions to re-evaluate the obligations that arose, proceeded from the fact that the obligations under the loan agreement between the company and the lenders are expressed in foreign currency (US dollars), therefore, expenses arising as a result of changes in the exchange rate of the US dollar to the Russian ruble from the moment the loan was issued at the time of its return, they are recognized as a negative exchange rate difference, subject to inclusion in non-operating expenses on the basis of paragraphs. 5 p. 1 art. 265 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
When considering this case, the panel of judges revealed a different legal approach of the courts when interpreting the provisions of Chapter. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in relation to the qualification of debt obligations denominated in foreign currency, justifying their position as follows.
In accordance with clause 11.1 of Art. 250 and pp. 5.1 clause 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, for the purposes of taxing the profits of organizations, a positive (negative) amount difference arising from the taxpayer is taken into account as part of non-operating income (expenses), if the amount of obligations and claims incurred, calculated at the rate of conventional monetary units established by agreement of the parties on the date of sale (receipt) of goods , works, services, property rights, does not correspond to the actual amount received (paid) in rubles.
Since according to Art. 807 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a loan agreement is considered concluded from the moment of transfer of money or other things and, accordingly, to the extent that such money and things are transferred (received), if the borrower, when returning the loan expressed in conventional units, returns the amount in rubles in an amount greater than he actually received, the resulting negative difference should be considered as an amount difference subject to accounting for profit tax purposes in accordance with Art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. (Please note: the courts used the phrase “amount difference”, but, as noted above, its name is not so important, the main thing is that it is correctly reflected in the accounting.)

And about the nuance
Since it is impossible to identify the difference in the principal amount of the debt until the repayment of the debt obligation, it is included in non-operating expenses or income only on the date of repayment of the debt obligation. This is evidenced by the explanations of the Ministry of Finance, presented in letters dated 05/31/2011 N 03 03 06/4/57, dated 05/15/2009 N 03 03 06/1/325 and N 03 03 06/1/324. This position was also confirmed in arbitration practice - see Resolution of the FAS Central District dated 08.08.2012 N A36-5098/2011 (however, we will return to this court decision).
Let's move on to the interest accrued on the loan amount
So, we’ve sorted out the principal amount of the loan. Now let's talk more about percentages.
By virtue of clause 8 of Art. 272 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, under loan agreements that are valid for more than one reporting period, the expense is recognized as incurred and is included in the corresponding expenses at the end of the month of the corresponding reporting period, in the case of repayment of the debt obligation before the expiration of the reporting period - on the date of repayment of the debt obligation.
It turns out that if the interest on a loan expressed in y. That is, they are repaid on the day they are accrued; differences (here they are total) do not arise. Otherwise, additional accounting is provided, only in contrast to the considered differences in the principal amount of the debt, the amount of differences between the ruble estimate of the amounts of interest on the date of their accrual and the ruble estimate of the amounts of interest on the date of their payment are taken into account by the borrower in the generally established manner as part of non-operating income and expenses, respectively . Explanations on this matter are presented in letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 05/15/2009 N 03 03 06/1/325, N 03 03 06/1/324, dated 03/13/2006 N 03 03 04/2/66.

Using a specific example
Taking into account the above, we offer a specific example in a simplified version (in particular, for the borrowing organization we will consider only one business transaction - receiving a loan, the amount of which is expressed in monetary units, and the period of time for which the loan is provided will be converted from long-term to short-term ).

Example 2
On September 1, 2012, the organization received a loan in rubles in an amount equivalent to 100,000 euros at 11% per annum. Interest was transferred to the lender with the principal amount of debt on 10/01/2012.
The euro exchange rate (conditionally) is equal to:
- as of 09/01/2012 - 39 rubles/euro;
- as of September 30, 2012 - 40.5 rubles/euro;
- as of 10/01/2012 - 40 rubles/euro.
The refinancing rate established by the Central Bank at the time of raising funds was 8% per annum and did not change during the term of the agreement.
The maximum interest rate taken into account for profit tax purposes is equal to 1.8 of the Central Bank refinancing rate.

In September, the following entries were made in the accounting records of the borrower organization:

* Loan in e. at reporting dates for profit tax purposes is not revalued. The expense from accounting revaluation is not accepted in tax accounting as of the reporting date (it can be included at the time of loan repayment as part of interest expenses, provided that, together with interest, it does not exceed the standardized amount). By virtue of PBU 18/02 “Accounting for calculations of corporate income tax” (approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 19, 2002 N 114n), temporary differences and the corresponding deferred tax asset should be reflected in accounting.
** In tax expenses (as opposed to accounting), loan interest is assumed based on the refinancing rate increased by 1.8 times (8% x 1.8 = 14.4%). The loan was provided at 11% per annum, therefore, tax interest is taken into account in expenses in full. Thus, there will be no differences between accounting and tax accounting for interest in September.

By the way, the amount of interest on the loan accrued in September will reduce the current income tax by 7,079 rubles. (RUB 35,396 x 20%). (A similar result is visible in the table: 37,079 - 30,000 = 7,079 (rubles).)

The ruble equivalent of the principal loan amount is RUB 3,900,000. (100,000 euros x 39 rubles/euro). RUB 4,000,000 was returned to the lender. (100,000 euros x 40 rubles/euro). The difference arising due to the changed exchange rate is equal to 100,000 rubles. - loan fee, which is taken into account as part of the interest on the loan on the date of its repayment.
Interest on an accrual basis amounted to RUB 36,601, including:
- in September - 35,396 rubles. (873.97 euros);
- in October - 1,205 rubles. (30.14 euros).
In addition, interest accrued on September 30, 2012 was paid to the lender on October 1, 2012. The total difference due to the revaluation of interest amounted to 437 rubles. (873.97 euros x (40 - 40.5) rubles/euro).
The total amount of loan costs is 136,164 rubles. (36,601 - 437 + 100,000).
Let's calculate the standard (recognized in tax expenses) value: 3,900,000 rubles. x 14.4% / 365 days x 30 days = 46,159 rub.
Exceeding the interest rate in the amount of RUB 90,005. (136,164 - 46,159) is not taken into account for the purposes of calculating income tax. Therefore, it is necessary to reflect a permanent tax liability in the amount of RUB 18,001. (RUB 90,005 x 20%).
In October, the following entries will be made in the borrower’s accounting records:

* The difference in the principal amount of the loan is recognized as a tax expense at the time the debt is repaid. At that time, the previously accrued deferred tax asset should be written off.

For profit tax purposes, the amount of 46,159 rubles will be taken into account as part of non-operating expenses.
Thus, as a result of this financial transaction, corporate income tax will be reduced by 9,232 rubles. (RUB 46,159 x 20%). By the way, a similar result (which confirms the correctness of the calculations) can be seen in the table based on the turnover of account 68.

And one more thing...
...which I would like to draw the attention of readers to, will be drawn from arbitration practice. It can arise under long-term loan agreements with a currency clause.
The essence of the matter is this. In 2008, the lender (individual) provided the borrower (organization) with a sum of money (RUB 1,824,758,000) at 17% per annum for a period of 360 days. A little later, the parties established the dollar equivalent as the loan currency (when recalculated, the amount of the debt amounted to $71,332,492). The interest rate was reduced to 11.5% per annum.
According to the terms of the agreement, interest for the entire term of the loan is payable on the same date on which the borrower must repay the full amount of the loan to the lender. Then (by an additional agreement to the contract) it was clarified that interest payments are made:
- for the period from 09.09.2009 to 09.09.2010 - no later than 09.09.2010;
- for the period from 09.09.2010 to 09.09.2011 - no later than 09.09.2011;
- for the period from 09.09.2011 to 09.09.2012 - no later than 09.09.2012.
In addition to the above, the organization entered into several more loan agreements with similar conditions (also with individuals).
During the inspection, the inspectorate found that the company unreasonably included interest on the loan and negative exchange rate differences (as the controllers called it - author's note) in non-operating expenses for 2008, which led to an understatement of the tax base for profits. At the same time, the controllers appealed to Resolution No. 11200/09 dated November 24, 2009, in which the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court concluded that interest costs cannot be incurred by the taxpayer before the period established by the loan agreement, therefore their inclusion in the reduction of the tax base in earlier periods illegal.
The judges (first instance) supported the tax authorities (Decision of the Arbitration Court of the Lipetsk Region dated 02/08/2012 N A36-5098/2011).
But the organization thought differently and filed an appeal. According to the taxpayer, the dispute under consideration is not identical to the case set out in Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 11200/09. In addition, the organization was guided by the explanations of the official bodies (letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated June 15, 2011 N 03 03 06/1/345, dated March 5, 2011 N 03 03 06/1/122, dated December 23, 2010 N 03 03 06/1/802 , as well as the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated June 16, 2010 N ShS-3733/4248, dated August 11, 2010 N ShS-37-3/8802, dated March 17, 2010 N 3-2/06/22). Attention was also drawn to the incorrect approach of the controllers to the issue of applying tax rules: according to society, the difference that arises when recalculating the principal debt cannot be attributed to the exchange rate, since it is similar to the interest accrued for using a loan. Interest, by force of law, is subject to accrual in the corresponding period of use of borrowed funds. The fact that they were payable at a time does not indicate the absence of an obligation to accrue interest and, accordingly, the right to account for them for tax purposes as they accrue.
The appellate court (Resolution of the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated April 28, 2012 N A36-5098/2011) upheld the decision of the first instance court. At the same time, it was noted that the negative difference on the debt obligations in question, expressed in conventional units and payable in rubles, was unlawfully included in expenses earlier than the period in which the loan was repaid.
The court also agreed with the inspectorate’s conclusions that it was illegal to include interest on debt obligations as expenses (for 2008) earlier than the period in which the obligation to pay interest arose based on the terms of the contract. At the same time, the company’s reference to the fact that it was guided by the position set out in letters from the Ministry of Finance and the Federal Tax Service, which indicates the absence of guilt in committing a tax offense, was rejected by the court. As follows from the case materials, the violation identified by the inspection was committed by the taxpayer in the tax periods of 2008, and the explanations provided refer to 2010, that is, they were given later than the disputed tax periods.
Let us note that the cassation instance (Resolution of the FAS Central District dated 08.08.2012 N A36-5098/2011) also supported its colleagues.

S. N. Zaitseva

E. L. Ermoshina, magazine editor

Often organizations, experiencing the need for working capital, attract borrowed funds. Often, lenders are individuals (including the founders of an organization). In this case, the agreement may stipulate that the loan is issued and repaid in rubles in an amount equivalent to a certain amount in conventional monetary units. In this case, the loan amount is determined at the exchange rate. e. (usually the official exchange rate of the relevant currency) on the day of receipt and repayment of the loan. It is quite natural that when the loan is repaid, the exchange rate will be y. e. can change, and, as a result, total differences are formed. If the exchange rate has increased (this most often happens), the borrower has a negative loan. Its reflection in tax accounting has long been controversial 1 .

For several years, the Ministry of Finance stubbornly believed that such differences should be reflected in accordance with Art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (that is, they are subject to rationing by analogy with interest on borrowed funds). We believe that with the advent of Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated November 6, 2012 No. 7423/12 (hereinafter referred to as Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 7423/12), the situation will change and negative amount differences on debt obligations can be reflected in non-operating expenses. In addition, this resolution is also valuable for lenders - individuals. You will find out what from the article.

The essence of the problem

According to clauses 1, 2 of Art. 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a monetary obligation must be expressed in rubles. It may provide that it is payable in rubles in an amount equivalent to a certain amount in foreign currency or conventional monetary units. In accordance with clause 2 of the Information Letter of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated November 4, 2002 No. 70, a monetary obligation can be expressed in foreign currency only when, in the manner and under the conditions specified by law, or in the manner prescribed by law, the use of foreign currency on the territory of the Russian Federation is allowed as a means of payment for a monetary obligation. Moreover, in the case when the contract expresses a monetary obligation in foreign currency without indicating its payment in rubles, such a contractual condition should be considered as provided for in paragraph 2 of Art. 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, that is, as an obligation expressed in conventional units.

Thus, a monetary obligation expressed in foreign currency, if, according to the contract or based on the essence of the transaction, it is payable in Russian rubles, should be considered as an obligation expressed in conventional units. In accordance with Art. 807 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a loan agreement, one party (the lender) transfers into the ownership of the other party (borrower) money or other things determined by generic characteristics, and the borrower undertakes to return to the lender the same amount of money (loan amount) or an equal number of other things received by him of the same kind and quality. The loan agreement is considered concluded from the moment the money or other things are transferred.

According to clause 11.1 of Art. 250 and pp. 5.1 clause 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, for the purposes of taxing the profits of organizations, a positive (negative) amount difference arising from the taxpayer is taken into account as part of non-operating income (expenses), if the amount of obligations and claims incurred, calculated at the rate of conventional monetary units established by agreement of the parties on the date of sale (receipt) of goods (works, services), property rights, does not correspond to the actual amount received (paid) in rubles.

Article 39 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation stipulates that the sale of goods, work or services by an organization or an individual entrepreneur is recognized as the transfer on a paid basis (including the exchange of goods, work or services) of ownership of goods, the results of work performed by one person for another person, the provision of services by one person to another person, and in cases provided for by the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the transfer of ownership of goods, the results of work performed by one person for another person, the provision of services by one person to another person - on a free basis.

Subclause 1, clause 3, art. 39 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation provides that the implementation of operations related to the circulation of Russian or foreign currency (except for numismatic purposes) is not recognized as the sale of goods, work or services. Based on the above norms, the Ministry of Finance in its letters (dated 05/31/2011 No. 03-03-06/4/57, dated 10/14/2009 No. 03-03-06/1/662) 2 comes to the following conclusion. A debt obligation can be expressed in conventional units and subject to issue/return in ruble equivalent.

When receiving a loan, the amount received in ruble equivalent differs from the amount to be repaid in ruble equivalent. In this case, the resulting difference in itself is not recognized as a total difference, since it does not correspond to the definition of these differences. For an amount difference to arise, the fact of sale is a prerequisite. However, when receiving/repaying a loan, there is no fact of sale. Consequently, the resulting difference will not be recognized as a total difference.

The Ministry of Finance proposes to take these differences into account as follows. If the amount to be returned is less than what was received in ruble equivalent, a positive difference arises, which is included in the borrower’s non-operating income. A negative difference arises on the date of fulfillment of the obligation to repay borrowed funds if the amount to be repaid is greater than the received loan amount in ruble equivalent.

Officials propose to consider the negative difference as a fee for using the loan and include it in non-operating expenses. The accrued interest is a fee for using the loan, therefore, in essence, the difference between the received and repaid loan amounts is also similar to the interest accrued for using the loan. The negative difference is included in expenses taking into account the maximum amount of interest expenses established in paragraph. 4 paragraphs 1 art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, along with the interest itself for using the loan. If this difference in total with the amount of interest accrued for using the loan does not exceed the established standard, the resulting negative difference can be taken into account as part of non-operating expenses.

Thus, differences arising on debt obligations expressed in conventional units and payable in rubles are included in expenses or income for income tax purposes only on the date of repayment of these debt obligations, since until this moment it is not possible to determine the difference. As for the payment of interest under a loan agreement expressed in conventional units, the amount of differences arising in this case between the ruble estimate of the amounts of interest on the date of their accrual and the ruble estimate of the amounts of interest on the date of their payment are taken into account by the borrower in the generally established manner as part of non-operating income and expenses, respectively.

Until recently, a similar opinion could be found in arbitration practice. For example, FAS UO in Resolution No. F09-2890/11 3 dated June 30, 2011, came to the conclusion that the negative amount difference under a loan agreement in the tax accounting of the borrower is recognized on the date of repayment of the debt obligation and is included in non-operating expenses, taking into account the maximum amount expenses in the form of interest taken into account for profit tax purposes. In this case, the limit value is determined taking into account the amount of interest accrued on the loan. We believe that with the release of Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 7423/12, the situation will change in favor of taxpayers. Judge for yourself.

Supreme arbiters on amount differences arising under loan agreements

The essence of the case, which was considered by the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court, is as follows. The organization signed a loan agreement dated November 17, 2008 with individuals for a total amount of 200,000,000 rubles, which corresponds to $7,315,663.56. Under this agreement, the borrower undertakes to transfer the received loan amount in US dollars or rubles at the exchange rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation on the date of repayment of the debt, and also pay interest on the loan amount at the rate of 8.5% per annum. On 02/03/2009, the organization returned the borrowed funds to individuals, taking into account interest accrued on them in the amount of RUB 268,283,844. The difference between the amount of borrowed and returned funds amounted to RUB 68,283,844. The taxpayer included this amount in non-operating expenses, including RUB 3,627,278. - interest on loan agreements and RUB 64,656,566. - negative difference.

In 2011, the taxpayer was checked, which was guided by the same principles as the Ministry of Finance in the above letters: the negative difference is taken into account in expenses, but in accordance with the provisions of Art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, that is, subject to rationing. The tax inspectorate recalculated the maximum amount of interest taken into account in expenses and came to the conclusion that the amount exceeding the maximum amount was 62,886,704 rubles. As a result of the audit, the organization was awarded an additional amount of RUB 12,577,341. plus the corresponding amount of penalties plus a fine for failure to pay income tax in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 122 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in the amount of RUB 2,517,582. Disagreeing with this decision of the inspectorate, the organization went to court. And although the courts of three instances declared it invalid, the conclusions made by the judges, in our opinion, were not entirely correct. Thus, the judges of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Russian Federation in the Resolution of February 14, 2012 No. F037141/2011 (third instance), as well as the Ministry of Finance, considered that the differences under loan agreements in conventional units (due to the fact that there is no implementation) cannot be called sum for tax purposes. In their opinion, in this case there is an exchange rate difference. Let us recall that according to paragraphs. 5 p. 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, non-operating expenses are included in the form of negative exchange rate differences arising from the revaluation of property in the form of currency values ​​and claims (obligations), the value of which is expressed in foreign currency, carried out in connection with a change in the official exchange rate of foreign currency to the ruble of the Russian Federation, established by the Central Bank RF.

So, for the purposes of Chap. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the exchange rate difference arising when devaluing claims denominated in foreign currency or when revaluing liabilities denominated in foreign currency is recognized as negative. Thus, according to the judges of the FAS FAS, the provisions of Chapter. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not contain a prohibition on including in non-operating expenses negative exchange rate differences that arose during the revaluation of obligations under loan agreements (credit agreements) denominated in foreign currency.

The Tax Inspectorate filed a complaint with YOU. It must be said that she did not find support there either. The Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court upheld the judicial acts on this episode, which declared the inspectorate’s decision to assess additional income tax illegal. However, he noted that he considered the courts’ conclusion (regarding the exchange rate difference) to be erroneous due to the following. In accordance with the provisions of paragraphs. 10 p. 1 art. 251 and paragraph 12 of Art. 270 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, funds received and returned under a loan agreement are not taken into account as part of income and expenses when determining the tax base for income tax. Meanwhile, when making payments under loan agreements denominated in foreign currency but subject to transfer in rubles, as a result of changes in the exchange rate, a difference arises between the amount received from the lender and the amount returned to him.

Since according to Art. 807 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a loan agreement is considered concluded from the moment of transfer of money or other things and, accordingly, to the extent that such money and things are transferred (received), if the borrower, when returning the loan, expressed in conventional units, returns the amount in rubles in an amount greater than he actually received, the resulting negative difference should be considered as an amount difference that must be taken into account in the same way as amount differences are taken into account for tax purposes when selling goods, works, services and property rights. At the same time, according to the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court, the restrictions established by Art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation for accounting for interest on debt obligations do not apply to negative amount differences arising on the principal debt due to the following. This article of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation establishes the specifics of classifying interest on debt obligations as expenses when calculating income tax. Moreover, in accordance with paragraph 3 of Art. 43 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, interest is recognized as any previously declared (established) income, including in the form of a discount, received on a debt obligation of any type (regardless of the method of its execution). Interest is recognized, in particular, as income received from cash deposits and debt obligations.

Thus, only pre-declared income on a debt obligation should be considered interest; Accordingly, the amount difference arising in connection with a change in the exchange rate in the form of the difference between the amount of funds in rubles received and repaid under the loan cannot be recognized as interest and is limited in the possibility of its inclusion in expenses when calculating income tax at the time of termination the specified obligation. Taking into account the above, the company rightfully included in non-operating expenses the differences on the loans it received without applying the restrictions established by Art. 269 ​​of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

What about the income of individuals?

According to Art. 210 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, when determining the tax base for personal income tax, all income of the taxpayer that he received both in cash and in kind or the right to dispose of which he has acquired is taken into account. Article 41 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation defines income as an economic benefit in cash or in kind, taken into account if it can be assessed and to the extent that it can be assessed, and determined for individuals in accordance with Chapter. 23 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the official position of the Ministry of Finance on this issue, expressed in Letter No. 03-04-06/6-50 dated March 26, 2010, is as follows: if the borrower returns an amount of money exceeding the loan amount received by him, the lender faces an economic benefit (income) subject to personal income tax. The tax inspectorate reasoned in a similar way in the case considered in Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation No. 7423/12. (Note that in addition to the income tax, personal income tax was assessed in the amount of 8,876,899 rubles, penalties for personal income tax - 1,987,572, a fine under Article 123 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation - 1,775,380 rubles.)

However, the judges were of a different opinion: since the terms of the loan agreement stipulate that obligations are expressed in foreign currency, and payments to fulfill the agreement are made in rubles, in this case, when the borrower repays the loan amount expressed in foreign currency with conversion into rubles on the date of repayment, the economic There is no benefit for the lender, since the borrower actually returns the loan amount established in the agreement.

Taking into account the above, the lender who received from the borrower the ruble equivalent of the loan amount specified in the agreement, expressed in foreign currency, does not have personal income tax. Under such circumstances, the judges of the appellate and cassation instances 4 recognized the decision of the tax authority regarding the additional assessment of personal income tax for the amount of the difference paid to individuals as invalid. According to the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court, the position of the courts of appeal and cassation instances corresponds to the provisions of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

1 See article by S. N. Zaitseva Long-term loan agreements expressed in currency. e., No. 19, 2012.
2 A similar opinion was expressed in letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated May 27, 2009 No. 03-03-06/1/348, dated May 15, 2009 No. 03-03-06/1/325, No. 03-03-06/1/324, and also in letters of the Federal Tax Service for Moscow dated December 22, 2010 No. 16-15/134822@, dated November 3, 2010 No. 16-15/115767@, dated February 9, 2010 No. 16-15/012759.
3 By decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated December 26, 2011 No. VAS-13382/11, the transfer of this case to the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court was refused.
4 The court of first instance supported the tax authorities.

Loans in conventional units are ruble loans, usually tied to the foreign currency exchange rate. For example, according to the loan agreement, its amount is 1000 USD. e., where 1 y. e. corresponds to the ruble equivalent of 1 euro, calculated at the Central Bank exchange rate. The amount of interest paid on these loans is also calculated taking into account the exchange rate of the conventional unit. But the organization receives the loan, repays it, and pays interest on it exclusively in rubles.

How to take into account the amount differences paid by the borrowing organization in expenses: as payments similar to interest, or otherwise? And is it necessary to charge personal income tax on such differences if the recipient (lender) is an individual and the exchange rate is y. i.e. on the date of loan repayment greater than on the date of issue? Not long ago, the Supreme Arbitration Court expressed its opinion on these issues.

Looking for differences between percentages and total differences

According to the rules for calculating the income tax base, interest paid on loans and credits must be normalized Art. 269 ​​Tax Code of the Russian Federation. At the same time, the tax service and the Ministry of Finance believe that the amount differences paid on obligations in y. e., is the fee for using the loan. Therefore, to determine the maximum amount that can be taken into account as interest in tax accounting, you need to add up real interest and negative amount differences (if the currency exchange rate has increased against the ruble). And then compare them with the standard Letters of the Ministry of Finance dated October 8, 2010 No. 03-03-05/216, dated December 13, 2011 No. 03-03-06/2/197, dated November 12, 2012 No. 03-03-06/1/584. In this case, such a difference must be taken into account in expenses on the date of repayment of the debt obligation.

When the exchange rate of a conventional unit decreases, the positive difference must be taken into account in non-operating income x clause 11.1 art. 250 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Moreover, the Ministry of Finance does not allow reducing the amount of interest (which must be normalized) by such a difference. clause 1 art. 269, paragraph 7 of Art. 271, paragraph 9 of Art. 272 Tax Code of the Russian Federation; Letters of the Ministry of Finance dated October 14, 2009 No. 03-03-06/1/662; Federal Tax Service for Moscow dated 02/09/2010 No. 16-15/012759. There is an inconsistency in the explanations of the Ministry of Finance. After all, logically, if negative differences should increase the amount of standardized interest, then positive ones should reduce them.

However, the Supreme Arbitration Court did not agree with such an identification of negative amount differences and borrowed interest. He came to the conclusion that the organization can fully take into account such amount differences in non-operating expenses and they do not need to be normalized according to the rules established for accounting for interest in subp. 5 p. 1 art. 265, Art. 269 ​​Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

The Supreme Arbitration Court explained that if the borrower, when repaying a loan expressed in conventional units, returns a larger ruble amount than he received, then the negative difference that arises should be considered precisely as a total difference. And it must be taken into account in the same way as amount differences in the sale of goods, works, services and property rights are taken into account for tax purposes. That is, write off as non-operating expenses without any standards. After all, interest is a predetermined and agreed upon income between the borrower and the lender. clause 3 art. 43 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. And the amount difference depends on the exchange rate, and not on the agreement of the parties.

We do not withhold personal income tax from the amount differences received by a citizen.

Let's give an example: a citizen lent, for example, 100,000 rubles, and receives back 120,000 rubles. And this does not include interest. He received 20,000 rubles. more, which means this money is nothing more than his income. And from them the organization - as a tax agent - must withhold personal income tax at a rate of 13% and transfer it to the budget Art. 209 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. This is exactly how the inspectors reasoned in the dispute considered by the Supreme Arbitration Court Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of November 6, 2012 No. 7423/12. But the court did not support them.

VAS indicated that in Ch. 23 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, although there is an open list of income, the concept of income is quite specific. And it implies economic benefit in monetary or in-kind form. Art. 41, paragraph 1, art. 210 Tax Code of the Russian Federation. When the borrower returns the ruble loan amount, no economic benefit arises from the lenders - individuals. Even if this amount is the result of conversion into rubles at the exchange rate. i.e. on the return date. After all, the borrower repays only the loan amount established in the contract and clause 2 art. 317 Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Are there any provisions allowing for the consideration of amount differences as income in Ch. 23 NK no.

Thus, the positive difference that arises for individuals does not form an economic benefit recognized as income for the purposes of calculating personal income tax. This means that the borrowing organization should not withhold personal income tax from this money and transfer it to the budget. Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of November 6, 2012 No. 7423/12.

As we can see, the Supreme Arbitration Court adopted a Resolution that is very beneficial for many organizations. There is no guarantee that tax inspectors will adhere to this point of view. But arbitration courts, when considering disputes, usually take into account the position of YOU. This means that the chances of a favorable outcome in court are high. And you can tell the inspectors about this if you have any disagreements with them.

Currency differences: calculations in conventional units for debt obligations and interest from the creditor (not differences) (Sibiryakov N.)

Article posted date: 01/16/2016

The goal of any business is to make a profit, which often comes not only from the main activity, but also from those that are carried out in parallel. An example of obtaining additional income is renting out property or providing cash loans on a paid basis. Moreover, in modern economic conditions, domestic businessmen who lend money prefer to enter into loan agreements not in rubles, but in conventional monetary units (hereinafter - cu). After all, such contractual relationships allow you to earn money not only on interest, but also on changes in the exchange rate of foreign currency, which is the equivalent of y. e. At the same time, for the lender, the loan agreement in y. That is, it can bring many problems, which we will talk about in this material.

First, we note that the loan agreement as a type of civil agreement is regulated by the norms of Chapter. 42 “Loan and Credit” of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). By virtue of Art. 807 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the parties to the loan agreement are the lender and the borrower. If the subject of the loan is money, then under the agreement the lender transfers the money into the ownership of the borrower, and the borrower undertakes to return it to the lender in the same amount.
Civil law does not limit the subject composition of the parties to a loan agreement; therefore, the lender can be either an individual or a legal entity. However, in the latter case, regardless of who the money is provided to - an individual or a legal entity, the loan agreement is always concluded in writing. Typically, the written form of a contract is maintained by drawing up one document signed by both parties. In this case, the loan agreement is a real contract, that is, it is considered concluded from the moment the money is transferred to the borrower.
Unless otherwise provided by law or agreement, the lender has the right to receive interest from the borrower on the loan amount in the amount and in the manner determined by the agreement. Since the provision on payment for a loan provided is not mandatory, the parties to the agreement may provide otherwise.

Pay attention! Providing interest-free loans to other organizations can result in a problem for the lending organization. Especially if the provision of a loan coincides in time with the lender with the presence of a credit relationship with the bank. The fact is that tax authorities have difficulty recognizing the costs of servicing loans in the presence of issued interest-free loans. In their opinion, the costs of servicing the loan in this case do not meet the criteria of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) and, as a result, cannot be taken into account by the debtor for tax purposes. Moreover, tax officials voiced this point of view quite a long time ago - back in the Letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated February 28, 2005 No. 20-12/12463 “On accounting for expenses in the form of interest for loans received.”
It must be said that judicial practice on this issue does not have a uniform approach. Thus, some regional courts agree with the approach of tax authorities, as evidenced, for example, by the Resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court (hereinafter - FAS) of the Volga-Vyatka District dated March 11, 2011 in case No. A28-5351/2010, Resolution of the FAS Moscow District dated 6 May 2009 No. KA-A40/2336-09 in case No. A40-23493/08-118-89 and a number of others.
Others, on the contrary, support taxpayers, as evidenced, for example, by the Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District of January 19, 2011 No. Ф09-11444/10-С3 in case No. A07-9140/2010. Considering the materials of this case, the court indicated that tax legislation does not contain any restrictions on the inclusion in expenses of interest on debt obligations depending on their further use. Therefore, attributing interest to expenses for the use of a loan subsequently transferred by the taxpayer on the terms of an interest-free loan is legal.

If there is no provision in the agreement on the amount of interest, their amount is determined by the bank interest rate (refinancing rate) existing at the location of the lending organization on the day the borrower pays the debt amount or its corresponding part.
The procedure for paying interest is established by agreement of the parties and is specified in the agreement. Unless otherwise agreed, interest is paid monthly until the date of repayment of the loan amount.
According to the general rule of Art. 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the monetary obligation under a loan agreement must be expressed in rubles, since the legal tender in the Russian Federation is the ruble. At the same time, paragraph 2 of Art. 317 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation allows you to express the monetary obligation for a loan in foreign currency or in currency. e., but on the condition that it will be repaid in ruble equivalent. In this case, the loan amount to be repaid in rubles is determined either at the official rate of the corresponding currency or conventional monetary units, or at the contractual rate on the date of its repayment.
The issuance of a loan, like all other facts of the economic life of the lending organization, is necessarily reflected in its accounting records, the obligation to maintain which for all Russian companies, without exception, is established by Federal Law of December 6, 2011 N 402-FZ “On Accounting "(hereinafter referred to as Law No. 402-FZ).
At the same time, in the absence of federal and industry standards provided for by Law N 402-FZ, for now accounting is carried out by organizations in accordance with the rules of accounting and reporting approved by the Ministry of Finance of Russia before January 1, 2013. This is indicated by clause 1 of Art. 30 of Law No. 402-FZ.
For an organization that lends money, the issuance and repayment of a loan is not an expense or income. This is indicated by clause 2 of the Accounting Regulations “Expenses of the Organization” PBU 10/99, approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated May 6, 1999 N 33n, and clause 3 of the Accounting Regulations “Income of the Organization” PBU 9/99, approved By Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated May 6, 1999 N 32n (hereinafter referred to as PBU 9/99).
For the lending organization, funds provided for the use of another organization on a paid basis are regarded as financial investments and are reflected in accounting in accordance with the standards set forth in the Accounting Regulations “Accounting for Financial Investments” PBU 19/02, approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated December 10 2002 N 126n (hereinafter referred to as PBU 19/02).
In accordance with the Chart of Accounts for accounting the financial and economic activities of an organization and the Instructions for its application, approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated October 31, 2000 N 94n (hereinafter referred to as the Chart of Accounts), information on financial investments in the form of loans provided is maintained in a subaccount 58-3 “Provided loans”, opened to balance sheet account 58 “Financial investments”.
Clause 8 of PBU 19/02 establishes that financial investments are taken into account at their original cost, which in this case means the loan amount established by the agreement.
In accordance with the loan agreement concluded in the That is, the equivalent of the latter, as a rule, is a specific foreign currency (usually the euro or the US dollar).
Accounting records are kept in rubles, as indicated by Art. 12 of Law N 402-FZ, while clause 3 of this article directly provides that accounting items whose value is expressed in foreign currency are, as a general rule, converted into rubles.
The rules for such recalculation are currently established by the Accounting Regulations “Accounting for Assets and Liabilities, the Value of which is Expressed in Foreign Currency” (PBU 3/2006), approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 27, 2006 N 154n (hereinafter referred to as PBU 3/2006).
By virtue of clause 4 of PBU 3/2006, the value of the foreign currency financial investment of the creditor organization is recalculated into rubles for reflection in accounting. According to paragraphs 5 and 6 of PBU 3/2006, conversion into rubles is carried out at the official exchange rate established by the Bank of Russia on the date of the transaction in foreign currency, which in this case, as a rule, is the date of debiting money from the bank account. If the agreement provides for its own exchange rate, then recalculation is made at the rate established by agreement of the parties.

Pay attention! A lending company can issue a cash loan to its partner only in an amount not exceeding the equivalent of 100 thousand rubles. at the official exchange rate of the Bank of Russia on the date of cash payments, as indicated by clause 6 of Bank of Russia Directive No. 3073-U dated October 7, 2013 “On making cash payments” (hereinafter referred to as Directive N 3073-U).
In addition, it is necessary to remember that it is impossible to issue loans using cash received at the organization’s cash desk as revenue. Such operations are carried out using cash received at the organization’s cash desk from its bank account (clause 4 of Directive N 3073-U).

In the future, guided by the norms of paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of PBU 3/2006, the borrower’s debt on the loan in USD. e. recalculated by the lender at each reporting date (end of the month) and at the date of loan repayment.
Since the foreign exchange rate is equivalent to y. e. is changeable, then fluctuations in the exchange rate of the currency against the ruble during such recalculation lead to the formation of exchange rate differences in the creditor’s accounting, as stated in clause 3 of PBU 3/2006.
Based on clause 13 of PBU 3/2006, depending on which direction the exchange rate deviates, the resulting exchange differences are taken into account by the creditor organization as part of other income or expenses.
In accordance with the Chart of Accounts, account 91 “Other income and expenses” is used to reflect other income and expenses of the organization.
Interest on a loan provided is income from the financial investment of the creditor company, which, by virtue of clause 34 of PBU 19/02, is recognized as income from ordinary activities or other income in accordance with PBU 9/99. It is clear that interest is taken into account as part of revenue only by those companies that specialize in issuing loans. For all others, interest receivable is included in other income. Interest is accrued monthly (even if the agreement stipulates that they must be paid simultaneously with the repayment of the loan) - on the last day of the current month for the entire term of the agreement. If they are expressed in y. That is, in the creditor’s accounting, in addition to exchange rate differences on the amount of the loan itself, exchange rate differences will also arise from the revaluation of debt on interest. The recalculation of this debt is carried out in the same manner as the recalculation of the debt on the loan itself.
Now, regarding the tax accounting of loans provided in Ukraine. f. Note that organizations that apply the general taxation system maintain tax accounting in accordance with the rules of Chapter. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred to as the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). From the point of view of this chapter, when the amount of obligations and claims calculated at the established rate of conventional monetary units on the date of sale (receipt) of goods (work, services) does not correspond to the actual amount received (paid) in rubles, amount differences are formed in the tax accounting of the taxpayer . This is indicated by the provisions of clause 11.1 of Art. 250 Tax Code of the Russian Federation and paragraphs. 5.1 clause 1 art. 265 Tax Code of the Russian Federation.
At the same time, the occurrence of tax amount differences within the framework of the loan agreement provided in the That is, perhaps the lender only pays interest. In terms of the loan itself provided in the That is, amount differences cannot arise by definition.
The fact is that the key condition for the occurrence of tax differences is the fact of sale. At the same time, from paragraphs. 1 clause 3 art. 39 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation it follows that the implementation of operations related to the circulation of Russian or foreign currency (except for numismatic purposes) is not recognized as the sale of goods (work, services). Consequently, the issuance and repayment of a loan from the point of view of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation is not a sale, which means that the difference between the amount of the issued and repaid loan cannot be considered a total, which is confirmed by the opinion of the Ministry of Finance of Russia contained in Letter dated May 27, 2013 N 03-03 -06/1/18920.
However, there is no need to rejoice; this opinion does not mean at all that the positive difference between the amount of the loan repaid to the lender does not need to be subject to taxation, as well as the negative difference that arises when the exchange rate falls at the time the loan is repaid.
Despite the fact that the procedure for taxation of positive and negative amount differences on the principal amount of a loan issued in U.S. That is, it has not been determined what to do, it is said in the Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated December 13, 2011 N 03-03-06/2/197. In it, officials explain that in accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, expenses are any justified and documented expenses incurred (incurred) by the taxpayer (with the exception of expenses specified in Article 270 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). In this regard, negative amount differences on debt obligations expressed in currency. e., can be taken into account in the lender’s expenses on the basis of paragraphs. 20 clause 1 art. 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, subject to their compliance with the requirements of paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Arbitrators adhere to a similar approach, as indicated by the Ruling of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation of January 20, 2011 No. VDS-18268/10 in case No. D22-1272/2008.
In turn, positive amount differences on the loan in y. e. in the tax accounting of the lender they are recognized as non-operating income on the basis of paragraph. 1 tbsp. 250 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation as other non-operating income.
When using the accrual method, differences in the principal amount of the loan are included in the non-operating expenses (income) of the lender on the date of repayment of the loan, which follows from the relationship of clauses 1 and 9 of Art. 272 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, as well as clauses 1 and 7 of Art. 271 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, respectively.
The taxation of interest due from the lender does not raise any questions - on the basis of clause 6 of Art. 250 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, they are recognized as non-operating income of the creditor company. In accordance with paragraph 6 of Art. 271 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, they are included in taxable income on the last day of the corresponding month, as well as on the date of termination of the loan agreement. If from the moment interest is accrued in y. That is, before the date of payment, the exchange rate has risen or fallen, then in the tax accounting of the creditor, total differences in interest are formed, which are taken into account by him on the date of receipt in the general manner - as part of non-operating income or expenses.
We draw your attention to the fact that amount differences in interest are recognized in tax accounting in the same manner as in accounting, so in relation to them the lender will not have to apply the Accounting Regulations “Accounting for calculations of corporate income tax” PBU 18/02 , approved by Order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated November 19, 2002 N 114n (hereinafter referred to as PBU 18/02).
Due to the fact that exchange rate differences will arise in accounting for the principal amount of the loan as of the reporting date, but not in tax accounting, the lender’s accounting income (expenses) will not coincide with those in tax accounting, which will lead to the need to apply PBU 18/ 02. If the creditor is a small business entity or a socially oriented non-profit organization, it may refuse to use it by enshrining this provision in its accounting policies.
Let's consider providing a loan in USD. e. a creditor organization using an example.

Example. On May 31, 2014, organization "B" provided organization "A" with a loan in the amount of 10,000 USD. e. for a period of two months at 12% per annum. According to the agreement 1. e. equal to 1 euro, interest is paid simultaneously with the repayment of the principal amount of the loan - August 1, 2014.
Let us assume that the Bank of Russia rate is:
May 31, 2014 - 47.26 rubles. for euro;
June 30, 2014 - 45.82 rubles. for euro;
July 31, 2014 - RUB 47.89 for euro;
August 1, 2014 - 47.46 rubles. per euro.
Organization "B" is a small business entity and does not apply PBU 18/02.
In the accounting of organization “B”, operations for the issuance and repayment of a loan, the cost of which is expressed in yuan. That is, reflected as follows:
May 31, 2014:
Debit 58-3 Credit 51 - 472,600 rub. (10,000 euros x 47.26 rubles per euro) - a loan was issued in USD. e. by transferring money to the borrower’s current account;
June 30, 2014:
Debit 91-2 Credit 58-3 - 14,400 rubles. (10,000 euros x (47.26 rubles per euro - 45.82 rubles per euro)) - the negative exchange rate difference that arose when revaluing the loan amount as of the reporting date is reflected in other expenses;
Debit 76 Credit 91-1 - 4519.23 rubles. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 30 days x 45.82 rubles per euro) - interest accrued for June 2014;
July 31, 2014:
Debit 58-3 Credit 91-1 - 20,700 rubles. (10,000 euros x (47.89 rubles per euro - 45.82 rubles per euro)) - the positive exchange rate difference that arose when revaluing the loan amount as of the reporting date was taken into account as part of other income;
Debit 76 Credit 91-1 - 204.16 rubles. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 30 days x (47.89 rubles per euro - 45.82 rubles per euro)) - the debt is revalued based on the amount of interest for June;
Debit 76 Credit 91-1 - 4880.84 rubles. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 31 days x 47.89 rubles per euro) - interest accrued for July 2014;
August 1, 2014:
Debit 91-2 Credit 58-3 - 4300 rub. (10,000 euros x (47.89 rubles per euro - 47.46 rubles per euro)) - the negative exchange rate difference that arose when revaluing the loan amount as of the reporting date is reflected in other expenses;
Debit 91-2 Credit 76 - 42.41 rub. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 30 days x (47.89 rubles per euro - 47.46 rubles per euro)) - the debt is revalued based on the amount of interest for June;
Debit 91-2 Credit 76 - 43.82 rubles. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 31 days x (47.89 rubles per euro - 47.46 rubles per euro)) - the debt is revalued based on the amount of interest for July;
Debit 51 Credit 58-3 - 474,600 rubles. (10,000 euros x 47.46 rubles per euro) - borrowed funds are returned;
Debit 51 Credit 76 - 9518 rub. (10,000 euros x 12% / 365 x 61 days x 47.46 rubles per euro) - interest paid for using the loan.
End of the example.

Pay attention! From January 1, 2015, the changes made to Art. Art. 250, 265, 271, 272, 273, 316 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation by Federal Law No. 81-FZ of April 20, 2014 “On Amendments to Part Two of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation” (hereinafter referred to as Law No. 81-FZ). In accordance with these changes from Ch. 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation the concept of “amount differences” will be excluded. Differences arising from the additional valuation and discounting of obligations and claims expressed in conventional monetary units due to changes in their exchange rate to the ruble of the Russian Federation will be included in exchange rate differences, the accounting of which will be carried out in a unified manner.
At the same time, amount differences arising on transactions concluded before January 1, 2015 will be taken into account for tax purposes of corporate profits in the manner established before the entry into force of the above Law (clause 3 of Article 3 of Law No. 81-FZ) .
Analyzing the new procedure for accounting for differences arising during the execution of transactions in currency. That is, proposed by Law N 81-FZ, we can say that from next year they will be taken into account in tax accounting in almost the same way as in accounting. If today in tax accounting obligations and requirements under agreements in y. e. recalculated on the date of completion of settlements in y. That is, according to the agreement, then from next year it will be necessary to recalculate receivables and payables not only on the date of their repayment, but also on the last day of the current month, depending on what happened earlier. Since the moments of occurrence of differences arising during the execution of contracts in y. That is, in accounting and tax accounting will be the same, then the organization participating in such a transaction will no longer need to apply PBU 18/02. In addition, to recalculate obligations and claims under contracts into currency. That is, it will be possible to use not only the official rate of the Bank of Russia, but also the negotiated conversion rate.