国家税务总局关于企业财产损失所得税前扣除中有关涉税鉴证业务问题的通知

《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》（国家税务总局令第13号，以下简称《办法》）第十五条规定：企业申报扣除各项资产损失时，均应提供能够证明资产损失确属已实际发生的合法证据，包括：具有法律效力的外部证据、具有法定资质的中介机构的经济鉴证证明和特定事项的企业内部证据。为规范税务师事务所的执业行为，提高执业质量，     

资产损失税前扣除新规给税企减负松绑

根据《企业所得税法》及其实施条例、《税收征收管理法》及其实施细则,以及前不久财政部、国家税务总局下发的《关于企业资产损失税前扣除政策的通知》（财税[2009]57号）等税收法律、法规和政策规定,国家税务总局近日发布了新的《企业资产损失税前扣除管理办法》（国税发[2009]88号）,以此来代替《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》（国家税务总局令2005年第13号）,规范了企业资产损共税前扫除执行中的著干问题,     

应避免重复扣除商业银行税前呆账损失

目前,商业银行的呆账损失认定和核销主要依据财政部《金融企业呆账核销管理办法》(以下简称50号文件),损失税前扣除主要依据国税局《金融企业呆账损失税前扣除管理办法》(以下简称4号文件)和《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》(以下简称13号文件)。     

企业年终结账应注意的财税问题(下)

三、财产损失 (一)财产损失的税前扣除,须关注国家税务总局下发的<企业财产损失税前扣除管理办法>(国税发[2005]第13号)几个"关键点"     

企业执行新《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》五个要点

为进一步规范和完善企业财产损失所得税前扣除的管理,促进企业所得税管理的精细化,根据《中华人民共和国税收征收管理法》及其实施细则、中华人民共和国企业所得税暂行条例》及其实施细则的有关规定,国家税务总局于2005年8月9日以国家税务总局第13号令发布《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》(简称《办法》),并于2005年9月1日起执行。《办法》共10章53条,就税前扣除财产损失的审批,财产损失认定的证据、货币资产损失的认定、非货币性资产损失的认定、资产永久或实质性损害的认定、资产评估损失的认定、其他特殊财产损失的认定、责任等几个…     

关于2007年度具备出具企业所得税税前扣除事项审核鉴证报告资质的税务师事务所名单（第二批）公告

根据国家税务总局《注册税务师管理暂行办法》和《武汉市税务中介机构从事企业所得税税前扣除事项审核鉴证管理试行办法》的规定。经审核确定，现将我市2007年度第二批具备出具企业所得税税前扣除事项审核鉴证报告资质的税务师事务所名单公告如下（排名不分先后）：[第一段]     

新旧企业资产损失税前扣除政策差异分析

2009年4月16日财政部、国家税务总局发布了<关于企业资产损失税前扣除政策的通知>(财税[2009]57号),新的资产损失税前扣除政策(以下相同)同2005年8月9日国家税务总局发布的<企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法>(国家税务总局令第13号)相比,在范围、申报时间、审批权限等方面发生了一些变化,下面笔者对这些变化进行一一分析,供读者参考.     

具备出具涉税鉴证报告资质的税务师事务所及执业注税师名单（2010年度）

根据国家税务总局《注册税务师管理暂行办法》和《武汉市税务中介机构从事企业所得税税前扣除事项审核鉴证管理试行办法》（武国税发[2007]6号）、《市国家税务局关于2009年度企业所得税汇算清缴工作的通知》（武国税函[2010]11号）,《市国家税务局、地方税务局关于税务中介机构办理从事企业所得税涉税事项审核鉴证业务备案登记的通知》（武国税发[2010]17号）的规定,经备案确定,     

金融企业资产损失税前扣除政策的近期调整研究

新《企业所得税法》及其实施条例在2008年1月1日开始施行后,为进一步明确企业资产损失核销和税前扣除有关政策,财政部、国家税务总局在2009年上半年先后下发了《财政部国家税务总局关于企业资产损失税前扣除政策的通知》（财税[2009]57号）、《关于金融企业贷款损失准备金企业所得税税前扣除有关问题的通知》（财税[2009]64号）和《国家税务总局关于印发（企业资产损失税前扣除管理办法）的通知》（国税发[2009]88号）等一系列财产损失税前扣除的财税政策。     

对国税函[2008]635号“实际利润总额”的理解

我公司对某公司的长期股权投资低价转让,因此造成的投资损益,是不是要报税务部门审批？（江西省孙国庆）在线专家：根据《企业财产损失所得税前扣除管理办法》（国家税务总局令第13号）第七条的规定,企业因下列原因发生的财产损失,须经税务机关审批才能在申报企业所得税时扣除：     

跨行查询收费:替银行说几句话

银行卡跨行查询收费一经推出即遭到铺天盖地的反对,有的消费者甚至诉诸法庭。银行收取跨行查询费的行为究竟是出于对市场化原则的尊重还是蔑视?     

微笑传递快乐 激情奉献奥运

前言：在2008年北京奥运会上,奥运志愿者成为了一道亮丽的风景线,他们用自己最美的微笑和热情的服务给世界留下了深刻的印象。在这个充满青春朝气的群体中,也活跃着财政青年的身影,他们以40天辛勤付出和无私奉献,圆满完成使命,为北京奥运的成功举办贡献了力量,也留下人生中美好的回忆。现刊载中评协奥运志愿者——李念辰和崔新园的文章,将他们辛苦工作的经历再现,让他们的欢乐与广大读者共享。     

Managing for efficiency, managing for equity

It is a truism that not all managers do the same things in the same ways. Less often recognized, however, is the fact that the essential tasks and goals of management are not everywhere the same. Indeed, so unlike each other are the two primary systems of management--the "technocratic" and the "political"--that they consistently vary in the implicit contract offered to participants, the career path of members, the use of organizational structure, the choice of purpose, and the allocation of resources, but also provides a conceptual framework for understanding why they happen and what can be done to prevent their happening in the future.     

寿险产品评价体系研究

中国保险市场的发展,迫切需要建立保险评价体系.保险产品的评价体系是保险评价的核心,其主要目标是以保险产品相对透明为目的进行的.在所有的保险产品中,人身保险产品与社会大众关系最为密切,人身保险在保险业的保费收入中也占有决定性地位.所以,当务之急是首先建立人身保险产品的评价体系.寿险保单的保障程度、投资价值以及附带的服务水平是寿险产品的核心问题,应当成为寿险产品评价的主要内容.本文重点从寿险产品保障程度进行评价研究.     

Trust for accounting and accounting for trust

This paper combines insights from the sociology of knowledge and the emerging practice-based literature on learning and knowing to extend the institutional framework of accounting change developed by Burns and Scapens [Burns, J., Scapens, R.W., 2000. Conceptualising management accounting change: an institutional framework. Manage. Acc. Res., 11, 3–25]. In particular, it explores how management accounting systems (MAS) can be implicated in processes of learning and culture change, and used to identify ‘trustworthy’ solutions in the face of organisational crises. A case study of an Italian company, which was subject to massive change following its acquisition by General Electric, is used to discuss how, when crises arise and organisation members find themselves under intense pressure for change, their rationales and routinised behaviour, which are driven by the existing knowledge and cultural assumptions, are challenged. The case illustrates how MAS can act as sources of trust for the processes of change – i.e., accounting for trust; while at the same time being socially constructed objects of trust – i.e., trust for accounting. Drawing on the concept of personal trust and the notion of roles as access points to organisational (expert) systems, the paper discusses how, in this case, finance experts facilitated the acceptance and progressive sharing of new rationales and routines. Clearly, this does not guarantee that change will occur or occur in some ‘desired’ direction in other cases, but it increases the possibility of replacing trust in the predictability of routines with feelings of trust for change.     

Accounting for decisions and decisions for accounting

Behavioral decision theory (BDT) is concerned with “accounting for decisions”. The development of this interdisciplinary field is traced from the appearance of several key publications in the 1950s to the present. Whereas the 1960s saw increasing theoretical and empirical work, the field really started to flourish in the 1970s with the appearance of the review by Slovic & Lichtenstein (Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, pp. 549–744, 1971), and key papers on probabilistic judgment (Tversky & Kahneman, Science, pp. 1124–1131, 1974), and choice (Kahneman & Tversky, Econometrica, pp. 263–291, 1979). From the early 1980s to the present, BDT has seen considerable consolidation and expansion and its influence now permeates many fields of enquiry. After this brief history, eight major ideas or findings are discussed. These are: (1) that judgment can be modeled; (2) bounded rationality; (3) to understand decision making, understanding the task is more important than understanding the people; (4) levels of aspiration/reference points; (5) use of heuristic rules; (6) the importance of adding; (7) search for confirmation; and (8) thought as construction. Next, comments are addressed to differences between BDT and problem solving/cognitive science. It is argued that whereas many substantive differences are artificial, two distinct communities of researchers do exist. This is followed by a discussion of some major shortcomings currently facing BDT that include questions about the robustness of findings as well as overconcern with a few specific, “paradoxial” results. On the other hand, there are many interesting issues that BDT could address and several specific suggestions are made. Moreover, these issues represent opportunities for accounting research and several are enumerated. Finally, BDT presents “decisions for accounting” in the sense that scarce resources need to be allocated to different types of research that could illuminate accounting issues. The argument is made that BDT is one research metaphor or paradigm that has proved useful in accounting and that should be supported. Such support, however, may mean that some researchers may work on issues that, at first blush, might seem distant from accounting per se.     

关于《以财务报告为目的的评估指南（试行）》的起草说明

为适应新兴评估市场领域的发展,规范注册资产评估师执行以财务报告为目的的评估业务,保证评估执业质量,维护社会公共利益和资产评估各方当事人合法权益,中评协在财政部有关司局的帮助和指导下,组织有关专家起草了《以财务报告为目的的评估指南（试行）》（以下简称《指南》）。为便于评估机构和注册资产评估师以及相关部门、人士全面理解《指南》,现将有关起草情况说明如下。