Is a civil claim for unpaid excise tax examination and the award in criminal cases of illegal possession of excise goods contrary to the principles of criminal law?

Nesumokant akcizų mokesčio žala yra padaroma valstybei, todėl valstybė (ją atstovaujančios atitinkamos institucijos) įgauna teisę teikti civilinį ieškinį baudžiamojoje byloje. Ir tokiu būdu, remiantis Lietuvos Respublikos įstatymais valstybė bylose dėl neteisėto disponavimo akcizais apmokestinamomis prekėmis negautų pajamų pavidalu prisiteisia nusikaltimo pagrindu kilusios žalos kuri yra lygi nesumokėto akcizo mokesčio dydžiui, atlyginimą. Toks reguliavimas sukelia tam tikrą problematiką, kadangi kyla klausimas ar gali iš neteisėtos (nusikalstamos) veikos kilti pareiga apskaičiuoti ir mokėti mokesčius ir ar toks mokesčio numatymas neprieštarauja bendriesiems protingumo, sąžiningumo ir teisingumo principams bei draudimui versti asmenis duoti parodymus prieš save? Atsižvelgiant į tai, baigiamajame darbe keliama hipotezė, kad civilinio ieškinio dėl nesumokėto akcizo mokesčio nagrinėjimas ir priteisimas baudžiamosiose bylose dėl neteisėto disponavimo akcizais apmokestinamomis prekėmis prieštarauja baudžiamosios teisės principams. Siekiant patvirtinti hipotezę šio baigiamojo darbo struktūrа išdėstytа atitinkаmai išsikeltam tyrimo tikslui bei uždаviniams ir susideda iš keturių dalių. Pirmoje darbo dalyje trumpai pateikiama akcizo mokesčio samprata bei vieta mokesčių teisės sistemoje ir remiantis akcizo mokesčio objektu bei prievolės mokėti akcizą atsiradimo momentu yra apibrėžiamas akcizo mokestis. Antroje dalyje aptariami bendri civilinio ieškinio baudžiamojoje byloje klausimai bei konkrečiai nagrinėjamos teismų praktikos bylos dėl neteisėto disponavimo akcizais. Šioje dalyje nustatomas žalos atsiradimo valstybei pagrindas bei rūšis, t. y., kad žala valstybei kyla neteisėtos veikos pagrindu ir turi būti atlyginama priteisiant valstybei akcizo mokesčio dydžio sumą kaip negautas pajamas. Trečioje šio darbo dalyje vertinama ar akcizo mokesčio priteisimas už neteisėtą veiką neprieštarauja bendriesiems teisingumo, protingumo ir sąžiningumo principams. Atlikus teismų praktikos analizę nustatoma, jog žalos atlyginimas negautų pajamų pavidalu priteisiant akcizo mokesčio dydžio sumą prieštaravo teisingumo, sąžiningumo ir protingumo principams tuo atveju, kai prekės buvo neteisėtai importuojamos ir konfiskuojamos ar sunaikinamos, tačiau toks reglamentavimas buvo pakeistas, bet akcizo mokesčio priteisimas už neteisėtai pagamintas ir konfiskuotas ar sunaikintas prekes iki šiol prieštarauja minėtiems principams. Be to šioje dalyje buvo nustatyta, kad situacijos, kai vienose baudžiamosiose bylose civilinis ieškinys dėl neteisėto disponavimo akcizais apmokestinamomis prekėmis pareiškiamas, o kitose baudžiamosiose bylose dėl to paties dalyko – nepareiškiamas, vertintinos kaip prieštaraujančios sąžiningumo principui. Paskutinėje šio darbo dalyje siekiama nustatyti ar įpareigojimas mokėti akcizo mokestį neteisėtos veikos pagrindu neprieštarauja parodymų davimo prieš save principui ir yra nustatoma, jog prieštaravimo nėra. Baigiamojo darbo pabaigoje yra pateikiamos išvados bei rekomendacijos ir nurodoma, kad darbe iškelta hipotezė, jog civilinio ieškinio dėl nesumokėto akcizo mokesčio nagrinėjimas ir priteisimas baudžiamosiose bylose dėl neteisėto disponavimo akcizais apmokestinamomis prekėmis prieštarauja baudžiamosios teisės principams iš dalies pasitvirtino. Without paying excise tax is the damage done by the state, so the state (to represent the relevant authorities) to gain access to a civil action in a criminal case. And so, in accordance with the laws of the Republic of Lithuania, the State in cases of illegal disposal of excise goods adjudge compensation of damages which is equal to the amount of the unpaid excise tax. This poses certain problems, since the question of whether to illegal (criminal) offense be obliged to calculate and pay taxes, and whether such a tax anticipation in compliance with the general reasonableness, fairness and justice and the principles of the prohibition to force persons to give evidence against himself? Taking into account, the general target of this Thesis is to determine whether a civil claim for unpaid excise tax examination and award in criminal cases of illegal possession of excise goods contrary to the principles of criminal law by analyzing the doctrine of the doctrine of Lithuanian and foreign case law and science of law. The hypothesis of this Thesis is that a civil claim for unpaid excise tax examination and award of criminal cases of illegal possession of excise goods contrary to the principles of criminal law. This Thesis consists of four parts. On the first part are briefly presented excise tax concept and place of tax system on the basis of the excise tax on the object and the obligation to pay excise duty on the occurrence of the time, indicating that the excise tax is a European Union-wide harmonized indirect tax levied on ethyl alcohol and other alcoholic and fermented beverages processed tobacco, energy products and electricity, and the obligation to pay the duty arises in the case of the absence of a duty suspension arrangement taxable product or service release, storage, production and importation, irrespective of whether these actions were carried out legally or illegally. The second part deals with general civil claim in a criminal case and the issues specifically examined case files for the illegal disposal excise. This section determined that the damage done by the state on the basis of a wrongful act and should be compensated for award of state excise tax rate amount as a loss of income. Also, given the fact that the different tax law and criminal law framework, the legislative branches of the substance and the objectives, in this Thesis refers that the obligation to pay taxes and the obligation to answer for the commission of a crime or misdemeanor may be present at the same time, the rise of the same action or its result, also in view of the fact that it must be guided by principle of fiscal neutrality, which does not draw a distinction between legally and illegally circulation of similar goods, it is concluded that all excise goods both in legally and illegally circulation, if only can compete with each other, must be subject to excise tax. If it is determined that the damage to the state caused by the illegal disposal of excise goods, the third part of this Thesis assessed excise tax for the award of a wrongful act contrary to justice, reasonableness and fairness principles. This part after case law analysis determined that the compensation of lost income in the form of an award of the sum of the excise tax was contrary to justice, fairness and reasonableness in the case where the goods were illegally imported and confiscated or destroyed. But the entry into force of the Union Customs Code, damages for illegally imported and confiscated or destroyed excise duty and goods are no longer compensated. However, for illegally produced and confiscated or destroyed goods damages award to pay excise tax on the sum has not been repealed, but it is also contrary to justice, fairness and reasonableness. Moreover in this section it has been found to be a situation where some criminal cases, civil claim for wrongful disposition of excise goods brought in, and in other criminal cases concerning the same subject - has been expressed, assessed as contrary to the principle of fairness and it is recommended to establish a common procedure which entails the obligation to file a civil action in a criminal case for illegal possession of excise goods. In the fourth part of this thesis aims to determine whether the obligation to pay excise duty on the basis of illegal activities in compliance with giving evidence in front of you, as it is concluded that the consolidation of these duties in compliance with statutory level of insurance compelled to give evidence against himself principle. At the end of this Thesis indicates that the hypothesis that a civil claim for unpaid excise tax examination and award of criminal cases of illegal possession of excise goods contrary to the principles of criminal law is hereby confirmed