International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Russia: Supreme Court issues decision on allocation of costs to income

Sponsored by


Dmitry Garaev and Anastasia Avdonina of KPMG discuss the Supreme Court’s decision A47-9881/2017 of August 26 2019, which is of specific interest for companies receiving both operating profit and dividend income.

The Supreme Court's decision, A47-9881/2017 of August 26 2019, is of specific interest for companies receiving both operating profit and dividend income.

In the case in question, the tax authorities undertook an on-site tax audit of the company's activities for 2013, 2014 and 2015. As a result of the audit, the authorities challenged the company's deduction of certain costs on the basis that:

  • It had failed to allocate costs between taxable and non-taxable activities (specifically, the receipt of dividends, which are taxed at the 0% income tax withholding (WHT) rate); and thus

  • It had inappropriately deducted costs related to non-taxable dividend income.

The company appealed in vain against the authorities' decision to a higher tax office, so it then took the authorities to court. However, the first three instances of court supported the authorities. Finally, the company brought the case to the Supreme Court which, eventually, supported the company's position and sent the case for re-examination to the Court of First Instance.

The Supreme Court's judges supported the company for the following reasons. First, the company was not obliged to allocate its costs to different types of activities, as stated by Article 272 (the procedure for the recognition of expenses where the accrual-basis method is used) of the tax code. The court took the view that the receipt of dividends was not an activity, whereas the requirement to allocate costs applied only if different activities were carried out. Secondly, the company was not required to determine its tax base separately for operating and holding activities. Article 274.2 (tax base) provides that, for profit assessable at a rate other than 20% (as specified in Article 284.1 (tax rates)), the tax base should be calculated separately. The court concluded that this requirement did not apply either, because it applied to the calculation of profits whereas dividends are not profit per se but income.

We eagerly await the final decision of the Court of First Instance.


T: +7 495 937-44-77

E: and

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Discussion on amount B under the first part of the OECD's two-pronged approach to international tax reform is far from over, if the latest consultation is anything go by.
Pillar two might be top of mind for many multinational companies, but the huge variations between countries’ readiness means getting ahead of the game now, argues Russell Gammon, chief solutions officer at Tax Systems.
ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the looming battle between the UN and the OECD for dominance in global tax policy.
Company tax changes are central to the German government’s plan to revive the economy, but sources say they miss the mark. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The winners of the ITR Americas Tax Awards have been announced for 2023!
There is a ‘huge demand’ for tax services in the Middle East, says new Clyde & Co partner Rachel Fox in an interview with ITR.
The ECB warns the tax could leave banks with weaker capital levels, while the UAE publishes guidance on its new corporate tax regime.
Caroline Setliffe and Ben Shem-Tov of Eversheds Sutherland give an overview of the US transfer pricing penalty regime and UK diverted profits tax considerations for multinational companies.
The result follows what EY said was one of the most successful years in the firm’s history.
The plan is aimed at simplifying tax rules and lowering tax compliance costs for cross-border businesses in the EU.