华税 HUA SHUI 北京市朝阳区东三环北路霞光里18号佳程广场B座17层TEL：010-64108688V WEB:www.huashui.cor 北京市朝阳区东三环北路霞光里18号佳程广场B座17层 TEL:010-64108688 WEB: www.huashui.com 涉税犯罪司法 裁判趋势研究报告 2026 华税律师事务所 二〇二六年二月 涉税犯罪司法裁判趋势研究报告（2026） 前言 2024年3月，最高人民法院、最高人民检察院联合发布《关于办理危害税 收征管刑事案件适用法律若干问题的解释》（法释（2024）4号），对长期争议 的虚开增值税专用发票罪认定作出实质性限缩，明确将"不以骗抵税款为目的， 没有因抵扣造成税款被骗损失的"的虚开行为排除在该罪之外，同时引发发票类 犯罪罪名适用的调整。此外，最高人民法院通过发布权威解读文章、典型案例、 法官培训教材等多种方式细化裁判规则，引发理论与实务界持续关注。 从司法实践来看，传统重点罪名的刑事打击仍保持高压态势，虚开增值税专 用发票罪案件数量仍居主导，始终是涉税刑事领域的打击核心。与此同时，罪名 分流的司法实践愈发活跃，对于不具备骗税目的、未造成国家 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has become more cautious in defining the crime of issuing false VAT invoices, which can effectively prevent light penalties for minor offenses against enterprises and help maintain national tax sources [3][6]. Summary by Sections Case Overview - The Supreme People's Court recently published eight typical cases of punishing crimes that harm tax collection management, with the first case involving the reclassification of issuing false VAT invoices as tax evasion, attracting significant industry attention [3][6]. - In 2018, two defendants, Guo and Liu, registered a company in Tianjin and obtained 880 false VAT invoices totaling 160 million yuan in value, leading to a tax amount of over 23 million yuan [3][4]. Initial Ruling - During the first trial, Liu's family compensated 200,000 yuan. The Tianjin court found both defendants guilty of issuing false VAT invoices and sentenced Guo to 13 years and 6 months in prison, with a fine of 400,000 yuan, and Liu to 4 years and 6 months, with a fine of 150,000 yuan [4]. Appeal and Reclassification - Guo appealed the ruling. The Tianjin Intermediate People's Court determined that the distinction between issuing false VAT invoices and tax evasion lies in the subjective intent of the defendants. The court ruled that their actions constituted tax evasion, reducing Guo's sentence to 6 years and Liu's to 2 years [5][6]. Significance of the Ruling - The Supreme People's Court emphasized the need to distinguish between tax evasion and fraud based on the principles of subjective-objective unity and proportionality of crime and punishment. This approach aims to prevent excessive penalties for genuine enterprises and to enhance national tax sources [6][7]. - The court's decision reflects a trend towards reducing criminal responsibility for enterprises, considering various factors such as industry practices and the nature of the offenses [7]. Legal Clarifications - In April of the previous year, the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate issued an interpretation regarding the application of laws in tax-related criminal cases, clarifying the legal issues surrounding tax collection crimes [8]. - Over the past five years, tax-related crimes have constituted a small percentage of total criminal cases, with the crime of issuing false VAT invoices accounting for approximately 80% of these cases [8].

Core Viewpoint - The Supreme People's Court has adopted a more cautious approach in defining the crime of issuing false VAT invoices, which can effectively prevent heavy penalties for minor offenses by enterprises and is beneficial for nurturing national tax sources [1][4]. Group 1: Case Overview - The Supreme People's Court recently published eight typical cases of punishing crimes that harm tax collection, with the first case involving the reclassification of issuing false VAT invoices as tax evasion, attracting significant industry attention [1]. - In recent years, crimes related to tax collection in China have primarily involved issuing false VAT invoices, with the maximum statutory penalty for this crime being life imprisonment, while tax evasion carries a maximum sentence of seven years [1][4]. - In a specific case, from February to December 2018, two defendants obtained 880 false VAT invoices totaling 160 million yuan, leading to a tax amount of over 23 million yuan [1]. Group 2: Judicial Decisions - During the first trial, the defendants were found guilty of issuing false VAT invoices and were sentenced to significant prison terms, with one receiving 13 years and the other 4.5 years [2]. - Upon appeal, the court differentiated between the crimes of issuing false VAT invoices and tax evasion based on the defendants' intent, ultimately reclassifying the charges and reducing the sentences significantly [3]. - The reclassification resulted in a reduction of the prison term for one defendant from 13.5 years to 6 years, and for the other from 4.5 years to 2 years [3]. Group 3: Legal Implications - The Supreme People's Court emphasized the need to distinguish between tax evasion and fraud, advocating for a unified approach that aligns subjective intent with objective harm, which is crucial for preventing excessive penalties on legitimate enterprises [4][5]. - The recent legal interpretations aim to clarify the application of laws regarding tax-related crimes, indicating a trend towards reducing criminal liability for genuine business operations while still addressing fraudulent activities [5][6]. - The interpretation also aims to exclude behaviors that do not result in tax losses from the scope of punishment for issuing false VAT invoices, aligning legal practices with the realities of business operations [6].

Core Viewpoint - China's tax regulation is shifting from "ticket-based tax management" to "data-driven tax governance," with increased efforts to combat tax-related crimes and enhance precision in regulatory measures [1] Group 1: Tax Regulation Changes - The shift in tax regulation aims to address evolving tax evasion methods, including the use of "yin-yang contracts" and secret asset transfers to evade tax liabilities [1] - The rise of professional and sophisticated criminal activities in tax evasion has made detection and prosecution more challenging [1] - The government is committed to punishing tax-related crimes to maintain tax order and promote fair economic development [1] Group 2: Case Summaries - **Case 1**: Two individuals were sentenced for issuing fake VAT invoices totaling 1.6 billion yuan, resulting in a tax evasion of over 23 million yuan. The main perpetrator received a six-year prison sentence and a fine of 400,000 yuan [2][3] - **Case 2**: An individual was sentenced to three years in prison for tax evasion involving 386,000 yuan, which constituted over 30% of the taxable amount [4][5] - **Case 3**: A business owner was sentenced to three years in prison and four years of probation for evading tax payments of over 406,000 yuan by transferring funds to avoid detection [6][7] - **Case 4**: A company executive was sentenced to life imprisonment for defrauding the government of over 870 million yuan in export tax rebates through a complex scheme involving fictitious exports [8][9] - **Case 5**: An individual was sentenced to ten years in prison for illegally selling VAT invoices, with a total tax amount of over 8.27 billion yuan involved in the fraudulent activities [10][11]