VAT invoicing comes into force in Russia

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

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

VAT invoicing comes into force in Russia

Alexei Matveev of Ernst & Young welcomes the introduction of electronic VAT invoicing in Russia but says the new rules cannot operate until the tax authorities prescribe the format of some of the documents that will be used

One of the key requirements for a Russian taxpayer claiming input VAT for offset is to obtain from a seller, and have in place, a duly executed VAT invoice, a document with the set of specific attributes envisaged by the VAT chapter of the Tax Code. Historically, this document should have been issued in hard copy form only.

The provisions allowing the issuance of VAT invoices in electronic format were added to article 169 of the Tax Code in the second half of 2010. However, in practice the application of these provisions was not feasible because of the absence of required subordinate Acts.

On June 3 2011 Order No 50n of the Ministry of Finance of April 23 2011 “Concerning Establishment of the Procedure for the Issuance and Receipt of VAT Invoices in Electronic Format through Telecommunication Channels Using a Digital Signature” (the order) was officially published and came into force.

The order is a subordinate Act regulating the exchange of VAT invoices in electronic format through telecommunication channels. In particular, the procedure provides for:

· VAT invoices may be issued in electronic format by mutual agreement of the parties provided that those parties have compatible technical equipment and resources for the acceptance of and processing of those VAT invoices.

· VAT invoices issued in electronic format should be transferred through special companies (operators of electronic document exchange). The exchange of VAT invoices in electronic format may be performed through either one or several operators of electronic document exchange.

· VAT invoices in electronic format should be signed by the digital signature of a person authorised by a counterparty of electronic document exchange.

· Participants in electronic document exchange should receive a signature key certificate from one of the companies which are authorised certificatory centres of the Federal Tax Service.

· The issuance and receipt of VAT invoices in electronic format is allowed provided that information cryptographic protection facilities compatible with the facilities used by the Federal Tax Services are applied.

· VAT invoices in electronic format may be issued in encrypted or unencrypted form.

· Electronic exchange should be made with respect to each VAT invoice separately.

· The procedure provides for a set of accessory electronic documents (confirmation of issuance, notification of receipt and other), determines the date of issuance and the date of receipt of VAT invoices in electronic format and prescribes the procedure for adjustment of VAT invoices issued in electronic format.

· Participants in electronic document exchange should ensure storage of all documents signed by the digital signature jointly with the signature key certificate.

The order does not provide everything needed for the implementation and application of the electronic exchange of VAT invoices in practice and further development of the regulatory framework is required. In particular, the Russian government should establish new forms of VAT invoice, purchase and sales ledgers, a journal of received and issued VAT invoices, and a procedure of their completion.

Notably, the transitional rules state (point 4 of article 10 of Federal Law No. 229-FZ of 27 July 2010) that taxpayers should follow the current procedure until such documents are adopted.

The most crucial from the purpose of implementation of electronic VAT invoice exchange is that the Federal Tax Service has not yet prescribed the electronic formats of a VAT invoice, purchase and sales ledgers, and journal of received and issued VAT invoices.

These documents are still being prepared and only when they are adopted will the issuance of VAT invoices in electronic format be feasible and legitimate.

It is noteworthy that implementation of electronic document exchange (in particular, VAT invoice exchange) may significantly affect taxpayers’ costs related to workflow management. So, it is essential for companies deciding to switch to electronic document exchange to evaluate the costs and benefits effect of such a decision. Furthermore, companies should also analyse the conditions of the IT-systems they apply as well as their general process structure to estimate their level of readiness to apply electronic document exchange.



 

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The ruling underscores the need for companies to provide robust and defensible valuations of intangible assets, one partner tells ITR
Pillar two is certain to be a game-changer for tax advisers and their clients. Russell Gammon of Tax Systems outlines 10 reasons why
Despite a general decline in corporate tax rates around the world, jurisdictions are now more reliant on it than in 1990, a Tax Foundation economist found
Australian law firm Webb Henderson’s report said PwC had met 46 of 47 targets; in other news, the OECD has issued new transfer pricing country profiles
The arrival of a seven-strong team from Baker McKenzie will boost WTS Germany’s transfer pricing capabilities and help it become ‘a European champion’, the firm’s CEO said
Germany has forgotten to think about digital reporting requirements, a WTS partner claimed at ITR’s Indirect Tax Forum 2025
E-invoicing is currently characterised by dynamism, with fragmentation acting as a key catalyst for increasing interoperability, says Aida Cavalera of the International Observatory on eInvoicing
Pillar two and the US tax system ‘could work in harmony’, Scott Levine tells ITR in an exclusive interview to mark his arrival at Baker McKenzie
Peter White, who has a tax debt of A$2 million, has been banned for five years from seeking registration with Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board (TPB)
Wopke Hoekstra’s comments followed US measures aimed against ‘unfair foreign taxes’; in other news, Grant Thornton and Holland & Knight made key tax partner hires
Gift this article