Undantagande av handlingar vid Skatteverkets revision

• Main Author: Vasarainen, Sandra
• Format: Others
• Language: Swedish
• Published: Karlstads universitet, Avdelningen för juridik 2014
• Online Access: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kau:diva-33018

Abstract The tax authority has an obligation to ensure that all tax cases are adequately investigated according to 40:1 SFL. In order to fulfill this obligation the tax authority has a number of investigation options. The most common form of investigation is so- called desktop investigations, which means that the tax authority will send written inquiries or injunctions to taxpayers. The most intrusive and resource-intensive form of investigation is audit. The general rule is that the tax authority’s auditor may examine all accounting records and other documents related to the business. Since an audit decision cannot be appealed, the revised may request that certain documents should be excluded from the audit, 47:3 SFL. There are three possibilities for excluding documents according to 47:2 SFL. The first reason applies to documents that may not be seized and the second reason applies to documents that are not covered by the audit. The third and last possibility for exclusion applies to documents with a significant protective value. The last mentioned possibility may only be exempted if the protective value outweighs the importance of the tax authority’s control. If the tax authority doesn’t agree that the document should be excluded the county’s administrative court must decide the case on the basis of the documents contents and the revised evidence. This essays first purpose is to examine which documents can be excluded from a tax authority’s audit and therefore to investigate the legal situation. To fulfill the first purpose, a legal dogmatic method has been used. Analyzing court cases has concluded the following. Documents may not be seized if there is a confidential relationship between a lawyer and a client. It is therefore not the content of document, but the fact that the document has been entrusted to a lawyer that is the reason for exclusion. The confidential relationship has also been considered to include a third party in some specific situations. However, certain information in documents has not been considered as information entrusted by a lawyer in his profession. This information relates to clients identity, lawyers fees and other expenses. The question regarding documents that should be excluded because they are not covered by the audit is not completely clear. This is due to the absence of precedence. The documents that can be excluded on this basis are if the documents do not refer to the taxation or if they are not of importance in the business. Documents may also be excluded because of its significant protective value if they contain sensitive personal information, qualified tax advice or industrial secrets. It also requires that the tax authority’s need to control is relatively low. This essay also aims to examine how the legal rules of exclusion of documents relate to the rule of law. The aspects of the rule of law that has been considered are: integrity, predictability, the principle of legality and the principle of equal treatment. To fulfill the second purpose, a legal political method has been used. The following has been determined by an analysis of the legal rules of exclusion in relation to the rule of law. Audit is a form of control that ensures a high efficiency. The rules of exclusion of documents increase legal certainty in an acceptable way for the revised. That is because the rules strengthens the integrity, are acceptably predictable, are legislated and fulfill the principle of equal treatment. Therefore the rules of exclusion do not require any change in relations to the rule of law.