DOI: 10.25136/2409-7802.2018.2.25755

Abstract: This research is devoted to existing academic approaches that offer definitions and describe purposes of 'customs duty' (including those that were formed in the pre-revolutionary period) as well as positions of scientists regading the legal nature of customs duty. The need to understand and systematize views on the matter is caused by the legal reforms that have been made recently as well as The Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union that came into effect on January 1, 2018 and made amendments to the previous process of legal regulation thereof. In the course of the research the author has used a combination of different methods that related to both overall and specific research methods. These methods combined have allowed to achieve the research objectives and obtain necessary results. Based on the results of the research, the author has made a number of conclusions that allowed to extend current concepts and views on the customs duty. The author proves that customs duty is not a payment for imported goods or payment for creation of such a right but also a payment for actions committed by a customs authority. The main conclusion of the research that brings forth the scientific novelty and rationale of the research is that customs duty payment cannot be viewed as a necessary condition for import of goods but should be regarded as a payment for release of goods in accordance with the customs procedure the payment is subject to. Based on the aforesaid conclusions, the author offers a definition of customs duty and suggests what changes should be made in applicable legislation. 

DOI: 10.7256/2409-7136.2017.2.21828

Abstract: The author considers the current problems of registration and confirmation of maintenance requirement inception time for a vehicle of international transportation which is one of the conditions that should be observed if the shipowner aims at avoiding customs clearance charges and ad valorem taxes as specified in the sub-clause 1, clause 1, article 347 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union. Special attention is paid to the established arbitration court rulings filling the current legal vacuum, caused by the absence of the established list of documents, confirming the maintenance requirement inception time. The author applies the methods of analysis and legal interpretation, formal-legal method and the method of legal prognostication, etc. The author formulates the list of documents (together with the seamanship examples and detailed explanations) which could confirm the maintenance requirement inception time for the vehicle of international transportation and the appropriateness of application of the sub-clause 1, clause 1, article 347 of the Customs Code. 

DOI: 10.7256/2409-7136.2017.2.22132

Abstract: The article studies one of the problems accompanying the shipowner’s right to avoid customs clearance charges and ad valorem taxes for vessel maintenance carried out beyond the Customs Union’s territory (sub-clause 1, clause 1, article 347 of the Customs Code). The author studies the established judicial legal approaches to the conditions of maintenance requirement inception time for a vehicle of international transportation, and proves their inconsistency with the sense of this condition. The author applies the set of general scientific and specific legal research methods of cognition, which help obtain the necessary results. The scientific novelty consists in the fact that the author is the first who pays attention to the recently established incorrect judicial interpretation and enforcement of the condition, specified in the sub-clause 1, clause 1, article 347 of the Customs Code of the Customs Union, about the maintenance requirement inception time for a vehicle of international transportation, which in fact except the possibility to use the privilege specified in this legal provision. The author formulates the conclusions and suggestions, which, in his opinion, comply with the spirit of this condition and the legislator’s logic.