At present, the research on the differences between the current accounting system and the tax law is relatively mature, and there are also some discussions on how to solve the differences. After the promulgation of the new accounting standards, we need to re-examine the differences between the new accounting standards and the tax law, and make some ideas on how to coordinate in the next step. This paper simply lists and analyzes some differences related to income tax.

First, the main differences between the new accounting standards and the tax law

Generally speaking, the main difference between the new accounting standards and the tax law still lies in the recognition of income and investment income, as well as the time and deductibility of expense deduction.

(A) revenue recognition differences

Income is divided into three categories: income from selling goods, income from providing services and income from transferring the right to use assets. Take a look at their differences in accounting and tax law about confirmation.

1, sales revenue

When an enterprise sells goods, the new standard stipulates that five conditions must be met at the same time to confirm the income: (1) The enterprise has transferred the main risks and rewards of commodity ownership to the buyer; (2) The enterprise neither retains the right to continue management, which is usually associated with ownership, nor controls the goods that have been sold; (3) The amount of income can be measured reliably; (4) Relevant economic benefits are likely to flow into the enterprise; (5) Related costs that have occurred or will occur can be measured reliably.

The basic principle of tax law to confirm sales income is to confirm it on the day when sales money is received or sales vouchers are obtained. It can be seen that the recognition of income realization in the new standard pays attention to the "substantive conditions" of commodity ownership transfer; The tax law focuses on "formal conditions" such as payment settlement and invoice issuance. To give a typical example, according to the accounting income recognition standard, leaseback is essentially a financing behavior, but this kind of financing has not been recognized in the tax law, but is regarded as two economic businesses: sales and lease-in. When an enterprise has met the income recognition conditions stipulated in the tax law, it has the obligation to pay taxes. Regardless of whether the income is recognized in accounting, turnover tax and enterprise income tax should be calculated and paid at the same time.

The new standard adopts the fair value model when measuring, stipulating that "income should be measured according to the fair value of the consideration received or receivable". If the difference between the nominal amount of income and its fair value (usually present value) is small, it can be measured according to the nominal amount; If there is a big difference between the nominal amount of income and its fair value (usually present value), it should be measured at fair value. This is not allowed by the tax law, which follows the principle of certainty and avoids artificially adjusting the tax basis as much as possible.

2. Income from providing labor services

The recognition of inter-annual labor income in the new accounting standards can be divided into two situations according to whether the labor results can be reliably estimated. The standard of reliable estimation of labor results is to meet four conditions at the same time: the amount of income can be reliably measured, and the related economic benefits are likely to flow into the enterprise; The completion schedule of the transaction can be reliably determined; The costs that have occurred and will occur in the transaction can be reliably measured.

On the balance sheet date, if the labor service result can be reliably estimated, the labor service income will be recognized by the percentage of completion method: if the labor service result cannot be reliably estimated, the following two situations will be treated: (1) If the labor service cost that has occurred is expected to be compensated, the income will be recognized according to the amount of labor service cost that has occurred, and the cost will be carried forward according to the same amount; (2) If the labor cost that has occurred is not expected to be compensated, the labor cost that has occurred shall be included in the current profit and loss, and the income from providing labor services shall not be recognized.

However, out of caution, the tax law does not recognize labor income. As long as enterprises are engaged in labor services, they must confirm their income.

However, the new standard adds the following provisions: if the contract or agreement signed between an enterprise and other enterprises includes the sale of goods and the provision of services, if the sale of goods and the provision of services can be distinguished and measured separately, the provision of services will be regarded as the provision of services; If the part of selling goods and the part of providing services cannot be distinguished, or if they can be distinguished but cannot be measured separately, the part of selling goods and the part of providing services shall be treated as selling goods. This is consistent with the tax provisions of the tax law on mixed sales, and all income is subject to VAT.

3. Income from the transfer of asset use rights

The income from the transfer of the right to use assets includes interest income, royalty income and cash dividend income. According to the new accounting standards, the recognition principle of interest and royalty income is to meet two conditions at the same time: (1) the economic benefits related to the transaction can flow into the enterprise; (2) The amount of income can be measured reliably.

The tax law divides interest income into three categories: enterprise deposit interest, enterprise loan interest and debt interest. For the first two, it is regarded as taxable income, but the income from debt interest is exempt from enterprise income tax.

(B) Investment income recognition differences

1, content difference

The new accounting standards stipulate that both the holding income and the disposal income during the holding period of long-term equity investment are recognized as investment income; The tax law clearly distinguishes income from equity investment (holding income) and income from equity investment transfer (disposal income). Equity investment income refers to dividends and dividend income recovered from the undistributed profits and accumulated surplus reserves accumulated by the invested enterprise after tax, including cash dividends and stock dividends; The income from equity investment transfer, also known as capital gains, refers to the balance after deducting the investment cost from the income from the recovery, transfer or liquidation of equity investment. Since the income from equity investment is distributed by the after-tax profit of the invested enterprise, the income tax has been levied on the invested enterprise, and the tax law stipulates that only the part with tax rate difference between the invested enterprise and the invested enterprise is taxed; However, there is no problem of double taxation on the income from equity transfer, and it should be fully included in the taxable income.

Step 2 calculate the difference

The new standard stipulates that the initial investment cost is the fair value of the assets paid for the equity investment obtained by business combination under different control and the long-term equity investment obtained by non-business combination. The repeated use of fair value leads to the difference between accounting standards and tax laws. The new standard cancels the accounting of equity investment differences under the equity method, which narrows the differences to some extent. Under the equity method, if the initial investment cost should enjoy the fair value share of the identifiable net assets of the investee, the initial investment cost of long-term equity investment will not be adjusted, and the difference less than it will be included in the current profit and loss, and the long-term equity investment cost will be adjusted at the same time. The tax law does not recognize the part included in the current profit and loss at the initial measurement, and all investment costs are measured according to the book value of the assets paid. The new standard simplifies the accounting treatment of equity method. When disposing of long-term equity investment, the difference between the book value and the actual purchase price shall be regarded as eight current profits and losses. Because the accounting standards and tax laws identify the initial cost differently, the book value may be different, thus affecting the disposal income.

3. Confirm the time difference

When accounting by the equity method, the investment profit and loss shall be confirmed according to the share of the net profit and loss realized by the invested entity, and the book value of the long-term equity investment shall be adjusted. When accounting by the cost method, the cash dividend or profit declared by the investee is recognized as the current investment income. According to the tax law, no matter what accounting method is adopted for enterprise accounting investment, when the invested enterprise actually distributes profits (including surplus reserves and undistributed profits) in accounting, the investing enterprise shall confirm the realization of investment income. Therefore, the tax payment time of investment income is different from both the equity method and the cost method, but between them, later than the confirmation time of the equity method, but generally earlier than the cost method.

Second, the new accounting standards and tax law differences analysis

There are differences between the new accounting standards and the tax law. Although the details, such as the classification standard of lease and the scope of bad debts, can be consistent as far as possible, it is difficult to achieve complete unification of the two. The reason for this difference lies in the differences in objectives and principles between the new accounting standards and the tax law.

Different goals

According to the new accounting standards, the goal of financial accounting report is to provide users with accounting information related to the financial status, operating results and cash flow of enterprises, reflect the performance of entrusted responsibilities of enterprise management, and help users make economic decisions. Users of financial accounting reports include investors, creditors, the government and its relevant departments and the public. In other words, the goal of accounting is to provide useful information for the users of accounting statements, and the tax department is only a small part of the users of accounting statements. The tax law aims at taxation and ensures the country's fiscal revenue. At the same time, it also plays a role in regulating the economy and promoting fair competition, and is also convenient for collection and management.

(2) The principle is different.

Different purposes lead to different principles.

1. Compared with the five confirmation principles of income tax pre-tax deduction, the accounting principles all stipulate the matching principle and related principles, but the contents are different.

The matching principle of accounting requires that income and related costs and expenses should be recognized in the same accounting period, that is, causal matching and time matching; Matching in tax law means that the deductible expenses that taxpayers should declare in a tax year cannot be deducted in advance or later. On the one hand, the tax law has a strong concept of "expired invalidation", on the other hand, it strictly controls taxpayers to deduct the occupied tax in advance.

The relevant principles of accounting require that the accounting information provided by enterprises should reflect the financial status, operating results and cash flow of enterprises to meet the needs of accounting information users; The meaning of tax law relevance is related to tax payment-the expenses that taxpayers can deduct must be related to the taxable income obtained from the nature and source, and irrelevant expenses cannot be deducted before calculating the taxable income.

2. The principle of prudence and the principle of substance over form in accounting are not applicable in tax accounting, which is a prominent manifestation of the difference between the two principles.

Accounting should follow the principle of prudence, do not overestimate assets or income, do not underestimate liabilities or expenses, and reasonably predict possible expenses or losses. Under this principle, the new accounting standards for business enterprises stipulate that enterprises can accrue eight impairment reserves, and enterprises should recognize probable contingencies as liabilities, which is contrary to the certainty principle of pre-tax deduction. In order to prevent enterprises from adjusting profits by using impairment reserves and estimated liabilities, so as to achieve the purpose of delaying tax payment or even avoiding taxes, the principle of certainty requires that deductible expenses have been "determined" and the amount must be determined: the tax law only recognizes that bad debt reserves can be deducted before tax, and stipulates a deduction limit of 5‰, but does not recognize the other seven reserves; Estimated liabilities can only be deducted in the actual period. Accounting sets strict conditions for the recognition of income and strives to raise the threshold; On the other hand, the tax law extracts as much income as possible to prevent fish from escaping from the net.

The essence of accounting is more important than the principle of form, which requires paying attention to the economic essence of transactions or events and not sticking to its legal form; On the other hand, tax law respects the essence of business, but pays more attention to its legal requirements. For example, the property loss to be handled is determined by the accountant as not conforming to the definition of assets, and it is required to be handled at the end of the accounting period, and the actual net loss is included in non-operating expenses; According to the tax law, it must be declared by the enterprise and approved by the tax authorities before it can be charged before tax. Similarly, the accounting stipulates that the start-up expenses shall be included in the profit and loss at one time from the month when the production and operation are started, while the tax law requires that the start-up expenses be amortized in five years.

Their different goals and principles mean their different starting points, which determines that it is difficult for them to come together on tax-related issues and achieve comprehensive harmony between them. The idea of unifying standards and tax laws is far away, but the coordination between them cannot be ignored.

Three. Coordination suggestion

The methods of coordination include how to deal with differences and try to make the accounting treatment of differences conform to accounting principles. In addition, accounting standards and tax laws themselves need to be coordinated and improved.

1, communication between standard system makers should be strengthened, that is to say, the Ministry of Finance and State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China should consult each other's opinions before the introduction of relevant systems to avoid unnecessary differences due to ignoring each other's regulations.

2. In the case of little impact on tax revenue and little obstacle to tax collection and management, the tax law can appropriately narrow the differences in details with the new accounting standards. State Taxation Administration of The People's Republic of China's "Notice on Issues Related to the Implementation of the New Accounting Standards for Business Enterprises" unifies the classification standards, the scope of bad debts and accounting provisions of leases in the tax law, which is a good start. Especially for businesses with standardized accounting treatment, tax laws need to adhere to their own principles on the one hand, and actively coordinate with new accounting standards on the other.

3. Accounting should provide necessary information for tax supervision to reduce tax costs. Accounting standards can consider the requirement of mandatory disclosure of such information, which is the idea to further improve the standards. In addition, certified public accountants can also help tax officials in the audit process, and even become appraisers of taxpayers' tax information declaration. In this way, it can effectively stop the tax evasion caused by the difference of artificial transfer and adjustment of profits.

4. Large-scale enterprises can add tax accounting in addition to financial accounting, that is, accounting for economic business according to the requirements of tax law, providing useful information for tax departments and enterprise managers and ensuring the accuracy of tax payable. I believe that the benefits outweigh the costs.

5. In the process of formulating guidelines for the application of standards, we should listen to the opinions of taxpayers as accounting subjects and pay attention to the problems encountered in actual operation. Income tax accounting is a bridge to coordinate the two. Accounting standards for enterprises no 1. 18- income tax adopts the balance sheet debt method to calculate temporary differences, which has changed greatly compared with the current system and put forward higher requirements for accountants. It is very necessary to provide detailed and specific guidelines for the application of standards.

The new accounting standards have been fully implemented in listed companies since June 65438+1October 65438+1October 2007. A few days ago, at an expert seminar on the differences between new accounting standards and income tax held by China Tax Network and other units, the participating experts discussed the differences between new accounting standards and income tax from different angles, focusing on the reasons, contents and solutions of the differences between new accounting standards and tax laws, and how to master the new accounting standards.

Sun Jianguo, a professor of accounting and chief expert of China Tax Network, believes that it is inevitable that there are differences between accounting standards and tax laws. First of all, they have different goals. The goal of accounting is to truly and objectively reflect the financial situation, operating results and cash flow of enterprises, while the goal of tax law is to ensure the realization of fiscal revenue mainly through fair tax burden and fair competition. Secondly, the basic premise of the two is different. The four premises of the new accounting standards are accounting subject, going concern, accounting staging and monetary measurement. However, corporate income tax payers are different from accounting subjects, and the time and scope of recognition and measurement of income, expenses, assets and liabilities are different, which will inevitably lead to temporary differences and permanent differences. Third, they follow different principles. In addition to following some accounting principles, the income tax law mainly adheres to the principles of legality, fairness, income balance, anti-tax avoidance and administrative efficiency.

"Because of the difference between accounting and tax law, we should study this difference and let everyone know how to deal with it." Wang Fang, an associate researcher at Beijing National Accounting Institute, said, "This happens to be an important reason why our national accounting institute, China tax network and other consulting services have made it an important research topic in 2007."

Professor Yu Yingmin from the School of Accounting of the Central University of Finance and Economics believes that the promulgation of the new accounting standards mainly reflects three major breakthroughs. First, it has achieved a breakthrough from domestic systems to international norms. Generally speaking, the old accounting standards and accounting system are basically based on the domestic system. However, the accounting standards for business enterprises issued this time adopt the principles and treatment methods that are basically consistent with international accounting standards, and have been recognized by the International Accounting Standards Committee. The second is to achieve a breakthrough from service managers to service stakeholders. The old accounting standards and accounting system mainly meet the needs of managers, especially government management departments. Generally speaking, it is enough to satisfy the superior. According to the new standards, it is necessary to meet the information needs of investors, creditors, operators, regulatory authorities and the public as much as possible. Third, the new standards have achieved a breakthrough from focusing on current profits to focusing on long-term development. For example, the new standards establish the core position of the balance sheet in the recognition, measurement and financial statement structure, thus limiting the short-term behavior of enterprises. For many years, the income statement has been in a prominent position in the enterprise financial statement system. Profit has become an important index to assess the performance of enterprise management and measure the profitability of enterprises in all aspects, but it is also easy to leave room for some enterprises to pursue short-term interests. The new accounting standards system highlights the core position of the balance sheet in the reporting system, requiring enterprises to improve the information quality of assets and liabilities. Only the balance of assets minus liabilities, that is, the increase of owners' equity, can be manifested as the increase of enterprise value and the increase of shareholders' wealth, which breaks through the simple concept of profit in the traditional sense, helps to promote enterprises to implement Scientific Outlook on Development, improve asset-liability management, optimize asset capital structure, improve decision-making level, avoid focusing only on immediate interests and implementing income distribution in advance, and pay full attention to the long-term strategy and sustainable development of enterprises.

Regarding the positive impact of the new accounting standards, experts attending the meeting agreed that, for example, the new accounting standards introduced the capitalization system of R&D expenses in the choice of accounting policies, which changed the current provisions of full expense of R&D expenses and allowed capitalization of development activities that met the confirmation conditions. This policy will encourage enterprises to increase investment in science and technology and R&D activities, promote technological upgrading and industrial restructuring, and create a good accounting policy environment for implementing the call of the central government to rejuvenate the country through science and education and encourage enterprises to innovate independently, which has immediate and long-term benefits. For another example, the new accounting standards focus on ensuring the harmonious development of economy and society. In terms of cost accounting, in accordance with the requirements of marketization and internationalization, the cost compensation system has been further improved, the items and methods of cost accounting have been improved, and social responsibilities such as the obligation of scrapping fixed assets undertaken by enterprises have been brought into the accounting system, reflecting cost information more scientifically, reasonably and comprehensively, ensuring cost compensation and workers' remuneration, avoiding premature distribution and implementing the requirements of harmonious development.

What are the differences between the new accounting standards and the tax law? Gao Yunbin, who has many years of experience in tax practice, compared the differences between the new standards and the tax law in terms of important accounting principles such as substance over form, prudence, accrual basis and cash basis. He believes that there are obvious differences between the old and new accounting standards and tax law in income tax, and there should be more room for coordination between accounting standards and income tax system. Chen Pingsheng, an expert in the Tax Risk Research Office of China Tax Network, believes that the current tax authorities are a bit slow in this respect. He said that because the scope of implementing the new accounting standards is still limited to listed companies, other enterprises are only implementing them. In other words, it can be implemented or not, so there is a policy transition period for tax authorities. In addition, no matter how the accounting system changes, if the tax policy remains unchanged, taxpayers should still pay taxes according to the principle that accounting is subordinate to taxation.

Professor Zhang Chunping of capital university of economics and business, Associate Professor Cai Chang of Shandong University of Finance and Economics, and Wang Ling, an expert of China Tax Network Policy Group, also gave two tips on matters needing attention in applying the new accounting standards. First, pay attention to the application of fair value must meet strict preconditions. According to the provisions of the new accounting standards, listed companies should establish and improve the decision-making system related to fair value, and carefully and appropriately choose the fair value measurement mode in strict accordance with the requirements of the new standards. Once the determination method of fair value, relevant valuation assumptions and the selection of main parameters are determined, they should be fully disclosed. At the same time, fair value measurement is allowed for some financial assets and liabilities, exchange of non-monetary assets, etc., which are in line with international practice and the reality of China. In view of the problem put forward by some media that "the introduction of fair value will greatly increase the risk of enterprises manipulating profits and losses, and will lead to confusion of accounting information", experts attending the meeting think this kind of worry is unnecessary. Because the new standards set many restrictions on the application of fair value, as long as they are correctly grasped, they can be accurately applied and effectively supervised.

Second, when applying some standard projects, we should grasp the policy boundary. The construction of enterprise accounting standards system has properly adjusted and improved some important accounting policies. For these related standards, we should grasp the policy boundaries and make good use of policies. For example, the new standards require enterprises to make provision for impairment of assets in time, confirm impairment losses and truthfully reflect the value of assets, but they are not allowed to make more provision for impairment, to establish secret reserves, to turn back long-term asset impairment reserves confirmed in the previous period, or to make use of the convergence of the old and new standards to arbitrarily turn back the impairment losses in the previous period and adjust profits. For another example, the new standards have changed the practice of R&D expenses, allowing some development expenses to be capitalized and reported as asset recognition. This policy will greatly improve the financial situation and performance level of high-tech enterprises, venture capital enterprises or enterprises with large R&D investment, and encourage these enterprises to increase R&D investment. However, these expenditures must meet strict recognition conditions, and enterprises may not recognize unqualified development expenditures as intangible assets. To master these specific policies, it is necessary for enterprise financial personnel and relevant responsible persons to strictly control and earnestly assume responsibilities.