Discrepancies between tax rates for vehicle losses and actual maintenance
— wang vs. The eps property insurance contract
Basic information on the case
1. The title of the decision
Municipal intermediate people's court of tezhou, jiangsu province (2019) civil decision no. 1918 of the people's republic of su
Subject matter: property insurance contract dispute
Parties
Plaintiff (applainant): wang chi
Defendant (appellant): e. S. A
[basic case]
On 11 august 2017, wang was insured, for all his minibus a, for motor vehicle loss insurance (including non-compensation) at eps, for the period from 11 august 2017 to 11 august 2018, and for motor vehicle loss insurance in the amount of $442,600. On 3 august 2018, at around 1730 hours, song xiao's minibus a crashed with ja yi's light semi-trailer and damaged both vehicles. According to the traffic police, song was fully responsible for the accident and jaa was not. On 20 september 2018, wang applied to the third party conciliation office for insurance disputes in the city of thailand for an assessment of the loss of the car a, which commissioned an assessment by the sunshine public assessment company, thai state branch (hereinafter referred to as the public assessment company), which assessed the loss of the vehicle at $311,200, of which the material costs totalled $294,200 and the working hours totalled $17,000. Wang paid $15560 for the assessment. The nueva luong auto repair plant repaired the car a and issued four generic jiangsu vat invoices with a 3 per cent rate and a total price tax of $311,200. When the vehicle is repaired, wang has disposed of the spare parts and replaced them。
In the course of the case, the court consulted the public evaluation company on the price of the spare parts, the qualification, etc., and the company replied in writing that: the assessment assesses that the price of the vehicle material subject to the standard approval of the price of the original fittings of the brand (i. E., the price of the brand 4s store or the offer of a special maintenance station) is based on the standard hourly rate of 16 per cent, as determined by the jiangsu transport association motor vehicle repair and repair trade branch's guidelines for the hours and fees of motor vehicle maintenance settlement in jiangsu province (version 2014), and the rate of 16 per cent if the actual repair plant is a non-small taxpayer. The queen applied for an assessment of the residual value of the replacement parts and the time spent on vehicle maintenance at the nueva luang gas workshop. On 15 april 2019, the public estimate company issued a public assessment report, which assessed: 1. The proposed residual value of the replacement parts was $974; 2. The amount of $12,600 required for the maintenance work was assessed on the basis of three types of vehicle maintenance qualifications. Wang pays assessment fee of $2,000。
The focus of the case
The case relates to the amount of the vehicle loss。
"the order of the court"
The people's court of the seamount district of taizhou, jiangsu province, considered that, as a professional third-party evaluation body, the public evaluation company had no interest in the dispute and that the public evaluation report produced was impartial and objective and could serve as a basis for the determination of the facts of the case. With regard to the issue of tax differentials, the argument that the issue of which invoices related to the identity of the taxpayer was not tax evasion and that the costs of repairing the plaintiff were not reduced because the repair plant did not have a general taxpayer status was rejected。
In accordance with articles 23 and 64 of the insurance law of the people's republic of china, the people's court of the seamount district of taizhou city, jiangsu province, decided as follows:
A payment of $30,5826 to wang for an insurance settlement within 10 days of the entry into force of the judgement
2. Rejects wang's other claims。
It appealed against the first instance judgement. The intermediate people's court of tezhou, jiangsu province, considered that the property insurance contract was a contract for the purpose of filling the loss and that the property insurance contract was based on property and property-related interests as the subject of the insurance, thereby determining the sole purpose of the property insurance contract to compensate the insured person for the loss of real property, which is the principle for the filling of damage to the property insurance contract. The type of invoice issued relates to the identity of the taxpayer, but the insurance contract must be filled with actual property losses. The cost of the spare parts materials calculated in the public valuation report in this case was calculated on the basis of either the price of the branded flat plant in jiangsu province or the price of the authorized maintenance station price for the logo, which was only $24,7128 after the deduction of the 16 per cent tax, which was the basis and standard for the approved vehicle spare parts charges, and the cost of the spare parts materials provided by wang after the approval of the invoice and maintenance list, which amounted to $28,5374 after the deduction of the 3 per cent tax, which the wang was unable to substantiate from the point of view of filling the actual losses, the cost of the spare parts materials in this case could only be calculated on the basis of the amount of $24,728, plus the amount of $7413,84 (24,7128 x 3 per cent) which had been approved in the public valuation report。
In accordance with article 170, paragraph 1 (b), of the code of civil procedure of the people's republic of china, the intermediate people's court of tezhou, jiangsu province, decided as follows:
I. Maintenance of civil judgement no. 5812, no. 2, of 1202, of the people's court of the seamount district of the city of thailand (2018)
The first of the changes in the main text of the above-mentioned civil judgement is: the amount of usd 266,167. 84 to be paid to wang within 10 days of the entry into force of this judgement。
"judge's queen"
The property insurance contract is a contract for the purpose of filling the loss, and the property insurance contract is the subject of insurance against property and property-related interests, thereby determining the sole purpose of the property insurance contract to compensate the insured person for the loss of real property, which is the principle for the filling of damage to the property insurance contract。
The present case is a property insurance contract dispute, the main dispute being the determination of the difference in tax rates between the amount of the damage to the vehicle and the amount of the actual maintenance, to which there are two different opinions. One view was that the amount stated in the actual maintenance invoice submitted by the policyholder should be determined directly, and that no distinction should be made between the tax rate for the amount of car damage determined in the assessment report and the tax rate in the actual maintenance invoice issued, since what kind of invoice was issued related to the identity of the taxpayer rather than tax evasion, and that the policyholder had not reduced the cost of repair because the repair plant did not have a general taxpayer status. According to another view, the amount of car damage identified in the assessment report was taxed and the tax rate varied depending on the identity of the taxpayer, and the actual loss of the insured person should be calculated on the basis of different tax rates, based on the amount of loss of the vehicle after tax deductions identified in the assessment report, without allowing the insured person or the maintenance plant to derive additional benefits from property insurance. The essence of the argument is the understanding and application of the principle of impairment in insurance law。
In the property insurance contract, the amounts stated in the repair invoices provided by the parties cannot automatically be directly recognized as the actual amount of the loss of the insured vehicle, but are analysed in relation to the particular case. In this case, the price of the vehicle loss found in the evaluation report issued by the evaluation body was a tax-bearing price of 16 per cent, while in the case of the actual maintenance of the vehicle, the tax rate for the actual vehicle loss price was 3 per cent because of the identity of the taxpayers involved in the different repair plants. As material evidence of the actual loss of the vehicle in this case, the assessment report does not provide a direct indication of the actual loss of the vehicle in the repair invoice when the tax rate differs from the lost price in the actual repair invoice。
The award is guided by the principle of filling in damages under insurance law to assess the price of lost vehicles in the report, and to calculate, after deduction of the tax rates set out in the assessment report, the amount of lost vehicles that do not contain the tax price, which is determined by the assessment body on the basis of the price of spare parts in the original plant for which the vehicle parts are to be replaced, and the price of spare parts that are currently accepted by the industry on the market. On this basis, the insured person was able to issue an invoice corresponding to the amount of the vehicle loss approved in the assessment report on the basis of a 3 per cent change in tax rate. The insured person was required to provide evidence of the list of spare parts actually replaced, the price of the spare parts actually replaced, the price of which was higher than the value of the spare parts found in the assessment report. When it was unable to do so, the court could only calculate the actual loss of the insured person's vehicle on the basis of the tax rate paid by the actual maintenance plant on the basis of the amount of loss of the vehicle subject to tax deduction as determined in the assessment report。
Judicial practice cannot rely solely on evaluation reports and maintenance invoices to determine the amount of the actual loss of the vehicle, but must take into account evidence such as the repair and replacement spare parts list, the tax rate for the amount lost, etc. The reasoning behind the decision in this case was that the evidence in the case involved neither direct recognition of the amount of the loss of the vehicle in the case by simply maintaining the amount of the invoice and assessing the amount of the damage to the vehicle, nor the details of the avoidance of the difference in tax rates due to the different tax rates involved by the identity of the taxpayer, but rather that, from the point of view of the principle of filling the damage in the insurance law, the clue of the actual loss of the vehicle in the case was kept in check and the possibility of over-compensation was effectively protected against while safeguarding the insured against the loss。
Prepared by: intermediate people's court of tezhou, jiangsu province
