Asgat Safarov’s crusade against the “shadow economy” of Tatarstan

The workgroup against the “one-day” firms headed by Asgat Safarov, Deputy Prime Minister, presented the six-month report on its activities. The fighters against “cashing” claim as their achievements the criminal cases initiated against founders of the “one-day” firms, one billion roubles of additionally charged taxes, increased “migration” of firms from Tatarstan to other regions and blocking 22 addresses of “mass registration”. BUSINESS Online experts point out that the business resorts to cashing schemes because it has to – to lower the tax burden and to pay bribes. The experts also fear that the campaign against the “shadow” will affect the normal small-scale business.

The BUSINESS Online newspaper has questioned the experts regarding the shadow market and the efficiency of the measures, which the Tatarstan Government takes against “one-day” firms.

Alexander Bolomatov, Associated Partner of the Law Firm "YUST"

The check of notaries by their documents is understandable; the refusal to register with the “mass registration” address is also understandable. The banks increasing the commission fee for cashing the funds is something completely different. I believe that the exchange of the FTS information is a normal work situation.

The idea is that each of said institutions (excluding the exchange of information) would regulate separate branches. Increasing the commission fee is the matter regulated by the banking legislation; the notaries are autonomous. Mass registration addresses are a story, which is not quite clear; the regulation scheme is incomprehensible, what does Rospotrebnadzor have to do with it. For example, a business center is located at a certain address, where a huge number of companies are actually located. A person may work in 10 organizations simultaneously – and legally. And there is no need to impose any similar encumbrances on the owners of business centers. It seems to me that such requirements (except the exchange of information) are an additional burden on normal business. Such measures will perhaps be efficient to a certain degree, but this will be leveled out by that they fill additionally disrupt the normal business operations of common entrepreneurs, who breach no rules.

The same is valid for the checks of the notaries. If there is fact of forged documents, this is extremely grave, and the tax authority should contact the chairperson of the notarial chamber of the republic and report the occurrence. But, as far as I know, fake seals are usually done at the notarial offices and documents are drawn up. The proven fact and cancelling the notary’s license after second admonition is better.

Of the above-listed, I support the exchange of information between the FTS inspectorate strongest. But this should not be a heavy burden for the members of the circulation or for the participants of the legal market – the very notaries, for example.

The fund-cashing system exists because there is a corruption market, which requires settlements in cash. Decrease the corruption market – and the demand for cash drops. Meanwhile, the members of the circulation will keep inventing ways to obtain the cash.

The full version of the publication is available here.