调增应税所得额的十五种涉税事项

应纳税所得额是企业所得税的计税依据,按照企业所得税法的规定,应纳税所得额为企业每一个纳税年度的收入总额,减除不征税收入、免税收入、各项扣除以及弥补以前年度亏损后的余额。纳税人在进行企业所得税汇算清缴时,应按照税收法律、法规和企业所得税的有关规定进行纳税调整。企业所得税汇算清缴,需要重点关注     

钟税官信箱

问题来自征纳一线解答均经总局业务部门审定核定征收企业是否需要进行汇算清缴?Q钟税官:我企业实行核定征收企业所得税方式。今年初企业所得税汇算清缴期间,主管税务机关要求我企业进行汇算清缴,我们对此不理解。我们认为,既然税务机关通过计算收入、成本、费用,并已核定应税所得率计征了企业所得税,就不需     

汇算清缴须关注会计与税法的差异

一年一度的企业所得税汇算清缴就要拉开序幕,会计与相关税法规定存在的差异值得关注。企业在汇算清缴时,最关键的是要把握会计制度与企业所得税法之间的差异,即纳税调整的时间性差异和永久性差异。     

聚焦企业所得税汇算清缴

汇算清缴是企业的重要工作,今年的企业所得税汇算清缴又有哪些更新和异同?国家又颁布了哪些最新企业所得税扣除、抵免以及优惠政策?税收法规不断更新调整的当下,2011年度的企业所得税汇算清缴拉开了帷幕,按规定企业自年度终了之日起五个月内,向税务机关报送年度企业所得税纳税申报表,并汇算清缴,结清应缴应退税款。     

2013年度企业所得税汇算清缴风险提示

企业所得税汇算清缴风险,是指负有企业所得税汇算清缴义务纳税人在主观遵从税收法律、法规的前提下,由于自身的生产经营活动以及税务行政当局的征管活动等各种内外部原因,造成企业所得税汇算清缴义务的不遵从以及不当遵从,导致各种经济利益损失和权益灭失的可能性。     

2014年企业所得税汇算清缴需关注的重点问题解析

一年一度的企业所得税汇算清缴是广大纳税人十分关注的重要事项,为帮助纳税人准确理解2014年度汇算清缴实务操作中的重点、难点和疑点问题,正确进行纳税调整,切实防范税务风险,笔者对2014年企业所得税汇算清缴需要关注的问题进行了归纳解析。     

企业汇算清缴关注哪些纳税调整事项

税法规定，纳税人应在年度终了后5个月内，进行企业所得税汇算清缴。在汇算清缴过程中，要特别关注收入、成本、费用、资产损失等项目的归集与核算，规范税前扣除，调整有关项目，尽量减少税收风险。     

时政纵览

公告明确了企业接收政府划人资产、企业接收股东划人资产、保险企业准备金支出、核电厂操纵员培养费、固定资产折旧等五类企业所得税处理的若干问题。本公告适用于2013年度及以后年度企业所得税汇算清缴。企业2013年度汇算清缴前接收政府或股东划入资产,尚未进行企业所得税处理的,可按本公告执行。对于手续不齐全、证据不清的,企业应在2014年12月31日前补充完善。企业凡在2014年12月31日前不能补充完善的,一律作为应税收入或计入收入总额进行企业所得税处理。     

如何有效规避企业所得税汇算清缴税务风险

作为企业工作中重要组成部分,企业所得税汇算清缴对于企业发展具有重要意义.但企业在所得税汇算清缴处理过程中,因企业所得税汇算清缴工作技术性强、政策性强,相应带来了很多潜在税务风险.因此,本文探讨了企业所得税汇算清缴常见的涉税问题,期望通过相应分析可以给企业所得税汇算清缴带来实质性帮助,从而有效的规避税务风险.     

企业所得税汇算常见纳税调整事项

由于会计制度与税法的分离,两者规定存在许多差异,当企业财务会计的确认、计量与税收法规不一致时,就会出现会计利润与应税所得之间的差异,在年度所得税汇算清缴时,企业需要对年度企业所得税进行纳税调整。下面,笔者按照企业财务报表顺序,就企业所得税的年度申报中常见的纳税调整事项做一介绍。一、资产类项目1、折旧与无形资产、递延资产摊销。对于折旧与摊销,如果企业处理与     

升值之言该如何听

自今年6月中国暗示将松动人民币汇率以来,人民币升值幅度仅为0．4％,这大大低于华盛顿的期待,因此,中美两国的关系日益紧张起来。随着失业率的膨胀,以及选举年即将到来,美国国会再一次将人民币汇率摆上了议事日程：9月6日,华盛顿两位高官为缓和中美关系前往北京,就人民币及其他重要问题进行高峰会晤,以期达成共识。     

商业银行如何应对利率市场化

最近,中国央行的利率政策传达出利率市场化步伐骤然加快的信号,沉浸在央行利率管制环境下的国内商业银行突然感到"利基"竞争的性质发生了重要变化。那么.在利率市场化环境下商业银行应采取怎样的风险偏好,才能使贷款定价覆盖风险溢价?这是银行管理者必须回答的问题。     

When to ally & when to acquire

Acquisitions and alliances are two pillars of growth strategy. But most businesses don't treat the two as alternative mechanisms for attaining goals. Consequently, companies take over firms they should have collaborated with, and vice versa, and make a mess of both acquisitions and alliances. It's easy to see why companies don't weigh the relative merits and demerits of acquisitions and alliances before choosing horses for courses. The two strategies differ in many ways: Acquisition deals are competitive, based on market prices, and risky; alliances are cooperative, negotiated, and not so risky. Companies habitually deploy acquisitions to increase scale or cut costs and use partnerships to enter new markets, customer segments, and regions. Moreover, a company's initial experiences often turn into blinders. If the firm pulls off an alliance or two, it tends to enter into alliances even when circumstances demand acquisitions. Organizational barriers also stand in the way. In many companies, an M&A group, which reports to the finance head, handles acquisitions, while a separate business development unit looks after alliances. The two teams work out of different locations, jealously guard turf, and, in effect, prevent companies from comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the strategies. But companies could improve their results, the authors argue, if they compared the two strategies to determine which is best suited to the situation at hand. Firms such as Cisco that use acquisitions and alliances appropriately grow faster than rivals do. The authors provide a framework to help organizations systematically decide between acquisition and alliance by analyzing three sets of factors: the resources and synergies they desire, the marketplace they compete in, and their competencies at collaborating.     

How to Tie Equity Compensation to Long-Term Results

Companies, investors, and regulators around the world are now seeking to tie executives' payoffs to long-term results and avoid rewarding executives for short-term gains. Focusing on equity-based compensation, the primary component of top executives' pay, the authors analyze how such compensation should best be structured to provide executives with incentives to focus on long-term value creation.
To improve the link between equity compensation and long-term results, the authors recommend that executives be prevented from unwinding their equity incentives for a significant time period after vesting. At the same time, however, the authors suggest that it would be counterproductive to require that executives hold their equity incentives until retirement, as some have proposed. Instead, the authors recommend that companies adopt a combination of "grant-based" and "aggregate" limitations on the unwinding of equity incentives.
Grant-based limitations would allow executives to unwind the equity incentives associated with a particular grant only gradually after vesting, according to a fixed, pre-specified schedule put in place at the time of the grant. Aggregate limitations on unwinding would prevent an executive from unloading more than a specified fraction of the executive's freely disposable equity incentives in any given year.
Finally, the authors emphasize the need for effective limitations on executives' use of hedging and derivative transactions that would weaken the connection between executive payoffs and long-term stock values that a well-designed equity arrangement should produce.     

NYSE execution quality subsequent to migration to hybrid

In October 2006, the NYSE began rolling-out phase three of a four-phase plan initiate its new Hybrid trading mechanism. The results show that this new trading platform introduced a much larger proportion of electronic transactions relative to floor auction transactions. This migration to electronic transactions is further evidenced by a mirror shift in price discovery from floor trades to trades marked for automatic electronic execution. In addition, the move to Hybrid trading introduced a significant decrease in inventory control costs, as well as a noticeable increase in trade persistence. Finally, the new trading platform has increased the speed with which orders are met, and has also decreased the proportion of executed shares which receive price improvement.

How to stop the race to the bottom

Standard tax multipliers are a widespread feature of fiscal equalization systems. A simple theoretical model shows that actual tax multipliers respond positively to changes in standard tax multipliers. This theoretical prediction is tested empirically using data on municipalities in Germany. A quasi-experiment in the state of North Rhine-Westphalia is exploited to identify the incentive effect. The empirical results confirm that local business tax policy is shaped by standard tax multipliers. They provide a straightforward practical tool to avoid a race to the bottom in local business tax rates.