Q: we are a processing trade enterprise, and the processing of the material in the trade is subject to a customs investigation that determines that part of the electronic data transmitted is inaccurate
Response: according to the statement, customs controls may be penalized if the data are inaccurate. In accordance with article 22, paragraph 1 (d), of the regulations on the enforcement of administrative penalties of customs, failure to transmit electronic data, such as manifests, transmitted electronic data, to customs within the prescribed time frame, or failure to keep the relevant electronic data within the specified time frame, which affects customs control, shall be punishable by a fine of up to $50,000, if any, and by confiscation of the proceeds of the offence. In the light of the foregoing, the inaccuracy of parts of your electronic data transmitted to customs may constitute a violation of customs regulations in violation of the above-mentioned customs legal norms and may be punished by customs。
Typical case: on 31 may 2023, the client, a heavy equipment manufacturing company, ltd., wrote off xxxxx19a0001. During the write-off cycle, it was found that there were understatements in the counter-tax prices of the material items of the parties, as follows: on 6 may 2023, the parties declared six imports of goods such as flanges to the customs service by means of internal sales controls for feed items. The customs declaration number is xxxxx02323010062, with a total declared value of $578876. 45. The customs approval price should be $624905. 97. On 30 may 2023, the party declared imports of flanges, such as stainless steel, to the customs service by means of internal sales controls for feed materials. The customs declaration number is xxxxx02323012523, with a total value of $18677. 3 and a total customs clearance price of $2225. 72. It has been found that the material for which the person in question has made a deduction under the above-mentioned customs declaration is part of a series of imports, that it is not possible to determine the corresponding amount of the original import of the material, and that, in determining the price for the completion of the internal counter-tax in view of the indecency of the business, the party's operator, instead of applying the weighted average of the sale price of the imported material in the e account period, in accordance with customs regulations, uses the price of the imported material in any of the import declarations during the account period (which does not correspond in fact), which leads to the understatement of the above-mentioned price. On the basis of these calculations, the understatement of the prices of the parties resulted in the non-payment of rmb 618057. 79. On 12 june 2024, the parties voluntarily paid the guarantee in the amount of rmb 620,000. The above-mentioned acts are supported by records of the transactions, customs declarations for the reimbursement of taxes in question, a list of notes and contributions for which taxes have been paid; special audit reports issued by third parties; inspection notices; notes of inquiry; statements of case; receipt of security vouchers; certification of the calculation of taxes on goods and goods; and party registration information。
Guidelines for legal analysis and compliance: according to article 24, paragraph 1, of the customs code, the consignee of imported goods and the consignor of exported goods are required to submit the import and export licence and the relevant documents to the customs service for the proper declaration. The state imposes restrictions on the import and export of goods, which are not permitted without an import or export licence, and which are regulated by the state council. In accordance with article 86, paragraph 3, of the act, the import or export of goods, goods or goods in transit, trans-shipment or transport of goods in contravention of the provisions of the act shall be punishable by a fine, the confiscation of proceeds obtained in violation of the law. Under article 15 (4) of the regulations on the enforcement of administrative penalties of customs, the name of the goods imported or exported, the number of duties, the quantity, specifications, the price, the mode of trade, the place of origin, the place of departure, the place of arrival, the final destination or other items to be declared are not declared or falsely declared, which affects the collection of state taxes, and shall be subject to a fine of 30 per cent or less than two times the amount of the tax levied, the forfeiture of the proceeds of the offence。
In this case, the n-customs inspection found understated the value of the counter-tax payments made to the person in the material items during the write-off cycle of a heavy equipment manufacturing company, ltd. Xxxxx19a0001: on 6 may 2023, the party declared six imports of goods such as flanges to the customs service by means of internal sales controls for feed items, for a total value of us$ 57,8876. 45, and the total value of customs approvals was us$ 624,905. 97; on 30 may 2023, the party declared imports of 25 goods such as stainless steel for import to n customs by means of internal sales controls, for a total value of us$ 18,677. 3 and the total value of customs clearances was us$ 22,254. 572. After an investigation by n-customs, the items for which the reimbursement was paid under the above-mentioned customs declaration were imported in batches, the original import of the material could not be determined to correspond to a series of instalments, and, in the event that the person in question was incompetent and determined the price for which the reimbursement was paid, the weighted average price of the imported material during the e account period was not applied in accordance with the customs regulations, but rather the price of the imported material in any of the import declarations during the reporting period (which did not correspond in fact) resulting in the understatement of the above price. On the basis of these calculations, the understatement of the prices of the parties resulted in the non-payment of rmb 618057. 79。
Taken together, the fact that the person concerned had understated the value of the compensatory tax on the material, which affected the collection of state taxes, constituted a violation of article 24, paragraph 1, of the customs code. In view of the fact that the person in question has cooperated in the customs inspection and has been found guilty of an offence, the n customs has decided to impose a penalty of rmb 310,000 on the person in question, in accordance with article 32 (5) of the code of administrative penalties, article 15 (4) of the regulations on the enforcement of administrative penalties, article 9 (2) and article 14 (2) of the standards of discretion of administrative penalties of customs (1)。
