Shipping tax surprises. Russian accountant. Delivery of goods - how to arrange to avoid problems Will the seller have VAT ...

According to Article 510 Civil Code RF, under the supply contract, the goods are delivered to the buyer by the supplier. The obligation to transfer the goods to the buyer can be considered fulfilled at the moment the valuables are placed at the disposal of the buyer, the person indicated by him or at the moment the goods are delivered to the carrier (clauses 1, 2 of article 458 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). Consider possible pricing options.

The price of the goods includes shipping costs to the buyer

Since the contract price of the goods includes the cost of its transportation, in primary documents and invoices, the cost of transport services is not separately indicated. At the same time, the cost of delivery actually increases VAT, because it is already paid from the final price of the goods (taking into account its transportation) (clause 1, article 154 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

For the purpose of taxation of profits, the supplier's income is recognized as sales proceeds, which is calculated on the basis of all receipts related to the goods sold, excluding VAT (clause 1, article 248, clause 2, article 249 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). Therefore, the proceeds from the sale of goods include its total cost, which is formed taking into account the price for delivery. At the same time, the costs of delivering goods to the buyer are taken into account by the supplier when taxing profits as part of the costs associated with production and sale (subclause 1, clause 1, article 253, article 320 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

True, according to the opinion (letter of March 19, 2007 No. 03-03-06 / 1/157), the costs of delivering goods can be included in material costs only until the moment the goods are transferred to the buyer. Therefore, if the supplier delivers the goods to the buyer's warehouse, the ownership of the goods under the terms of the contract should not pass to the buyer before the date of transfer of this goods to him in the warehouse.

The price of the goods does not include the cost of delivery to the buyer

If the seller does not include transportation costs in the price of the goods, and for its delivery to the buyer involves transport organizations, then the contract with the buyer must state that the seller is an intermediary between the carrier and the buyer in terms of transport services. In this case, the sale and purchase agreement between the seller and the buyer will contain elements of an agency agreement by the type of commission, since the seller acts on his own behalf when organizing delivery.

If the amount of remuneration for delivery is specified in the contract separately (in excess of the price of the goods), then for the seller it is income from the sale, as well as the proceeds from the sale of goods to the buyer. Other amounts received by the supplier to fulfill obligations to arrange delivery are not recognized as income for profit taxation purposes (subclause 9, clause 1, article 251 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). Moreover, the costs of the supplier for the delivery of goods are not taken into account for the purpose of taxation of profits - they are taken into account by the buyer. Therefore, the supplier, fulfilling the obligation to deliver the goods as an agent, is obliged to provide the buyer with documents confirming the transportation costs:

• agent's report (Article 1008 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) with copies of documents confirming the agent's expenses (waybill, bill of lading, invoices issued by the carrier);
• an act of work performed and an invoice for the amount of remuneration (if it is provided for in the contract).

The basis for the agent's VAT is only the amount of the intermediary fee (clause 1, article 156 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). If the agent's remuneration is included in the price of the goods (not specified in the supply agreement separately), then only the cost of selling the goods is subject to VAT.

invoice received from transport organization, the supplier registers in the journal of received invoices. It is not reflected in the supplier's purchase book.

The buyer pays the supplier for the cost of shipping the goods.

According to the clarifications of the Ministry of Finance of Russia (letter dated March 10, 2005 No. 03-03-01-04 / 1/103), if, in accordance with the terms of the contract, the costs of the transport organization are reimbursed by the buyer, then these costs are reflected in accounting on account 76 “Settlements with various debtors and creditors. In this case, the supplier does not provide services for the delivery of goods to the buyer, in connection with which he does not have the obligation to charge VAT and present it to the buyer on the cost of transport services (subclause 1, clause 1, article 146 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

If no intermediary agreement has been concluded between the buyer of the goods and the supplier for organizing the delivery of goods to the buyer's warehouse, then the supplier has no reason to issue an invoice to the buyer, in which the indicators of the invoice received from the transport organization are transferred. The basis for reimbursement of expenses for the transportation of goods will be the report of the organization with attached copies of the transportation documents issued by the transport organization to the supplier.

Disagreements in this case arise when qualifying income and expenses in tax accounting.

The letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated March 19, 2007 No. 03-03-06 / 1/157, dated October 3, 2006 No. 03-11-04 / 2/195 indicate: if the supply contract states that the buyer compensates in excess of the price transportation costs, then the amount of compensation in tax accounting is considered the income of the supplier. At the same time, payment by the supplier for the delivery of the goods will be an expense.

Note that some judges do not recognize such amounts of compensation from buyers for the delivery of goods for tax purposes as income of the supplier. And the amount of expenses for the delivery of goods paid transport company and subject to reimbursement by the buyer, - the expense of the supplier (decisions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District dated July 31, 2006 No. A35-6168 / 04-C3, FAS Northwestern District dated February 28, 2005 No. A05-6138 / 04-12).

Another problem is related to the practice of applying Article 162 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, according to which the buyer's compensation for the delivery of goods increases the supplier's VAT taxable base as "other income related to the sale." From the amount of such compensation, the supplier must calculate VAT at the estimated rate, issue an invoice in one copy and register it in the sales book. In this case, the buyer does not receive the right to a deduction.

S. Khvostova,
Deputy - Practice of LLC ACF "Expert Center "Partners""

With the cash method, shipping costs finished products take into account as they are paid (with the exception of depreciation on fixed assets used for delivery, which will be taken into account in the accrual period) (clause 3 of article 273 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). For example, the cost of the salary of a driver delivering products, take into account at the time of its payment. The dates of recognition of certain types of expenses under the cash basis are given in table.

Trade organizations take into account the costs of delivery of goods in the following order. With the accrual method, delivery costs reduce income tax in the period in which they were made (regardless of the date of their payment) (Article 320 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

Under the cash method, take into account the costs of delivering goods as they are paid (with the exception of depreciation on fixed assets used for delivery, which will be taken into account in the accrual period). For example, the cost of the salary of the driver involved in the delivery, take into account at the time of its payment. Such rules are established by paragraph 3 of Article 273 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

“Input” VAT on delivery-related expenses (for example, on payment for services of a third-party transport company) can be deducted subject to the general conditions for applying the deduction (Art. 171, 172 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

An example of reflection in accounting and taxation of delivery costs included in the price of finished products. The organization applies the general system of taxation

OJSC "Production Company "Master"" is engaged in the manufacture of bricks. According to the sale and purchase agreement, the ownership of the shipped products passes to the buyer at the time of its receipt. "Master" delivers products to the buyer at his own expense. In March, for delivery to the buyer of a batch of 10,000 pieces worth 118,000 rubles. (including VAT - 18,000 rubles) a transport company was involved. The cost of transportation services amounted to 23,600 rubles. (including VAT - 3600 rubles). The buyer does not pay for shipping separately. The organization approved the same list of direct costs in both accounting and tax accounting, so the cost of finished products is the same and amounts to 40,000 rubles. The costs of delivering finished products to the buyer are not included in the list of direct costs in either accounting or tax accounting. The organization calculates income tax on a monthly basis on an accrual basis.

The sales of finished products in March, the accountant reflected the following entries:

Debit 44 Credit 60
- 20,000 rubles. (23,600 rubles - 3,600 rubles) - the cost of services for the delivery of finished products is taken into account;

Debit 19 Credit 60
- 3600 rub. - allocated VAT on delivery services;

Debit 68 subaccount "VAT settlements" Credit 19
- 3600 rub. - Accepted for deduction of VAT on delivery services;

Debit 62 Credit 90-1
- 118,000 rubles. - shipped finished products to the buyer;

Debit 90-3 Credit 68 sub-account "VAT calculations"
- 18,000 rubles. - VAT is charged on sold finished products;

Debit 90-2 Credit 43
- 40,000 rubles. - written off the cost of sold finished products;

Debit 90-2 Credit 44
- 20,000 rubles. - expenses for the delivery of finished products are written off.

When calculating income tax, the dates of recognition of delivery costs and write-offs of the cost of goods sold coincided. This is explained by the fact that income from the sale of finished products was recognized in the same month in which it was delivered. When calculating income tax in March, income in the amount of 100,000 rubles was recognized. (118,000 rubles - 18,000 rubles) and expenses in the amount of 60,000 rubles. (20,000 rubles + 40,000 rubles).

USN

The tax base of simplified organizations that pay a single income tax does not reduce the cost of delivering finished products (goods) (clause 1, article 346.14 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

The costs of delivering finished products (goods) to the buyer can be taken into account by organizations that pay a single tax on the difference between income and expenses. When calculating the tax base, recognize only those costs that are listed in paragraph 1 of Article 346.16 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (for example, payment for the services of third-party transport companies, the salary of a driver when delivered by their own transport, etc.). For more information on the procedure for accounting for expenses by an organization on a simplified system, see. What expenses to take into account when calculating the single tax on the simplified tax system .

The date of recognition of expenses is the date of their payment, unless a special recognition procedure is established for them (clause 2 of article 346.17 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). For the recognition of separate expenses, see table.

Buyers do not need to pay UTII upon delivery of finished products (goods). See more on this. .

UTII

If the sale of finished products (goods) falls under UTII, then the cost of their delivery does not affect the calculation of the single tax, since when determining the single tax, only the imputed income of the organization is taken into account (Article 346.29 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

It is not necessary to calculate UTII for a separate type of activity - transportation of goods. See more on this.What road transport services are subject to UTII .

OSNO and UTII

If the costs of delivering goods to customers are simultaneously related to the activities of an organization subject to UTII and activities on common system taxation, then their amount should be distributed (Clause 9, Article 274 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). The cost of shipping goods related to the same type of activity of the organization does not need to be allocated.

The amount of VAT allocated in the invoice of the transport company involved in the delivery, distribute according to the methodology defined in paragraph 4.1 of Article 170 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation.

To the received share of expenses on the activities of the organization subject to UTII, add the amount of VAT that cannot be deducted (subclause 3, clause 2, article 170 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

1. If shipping is included in the price of the item

A lot has been said and written about the problems of goods delivery - for example, in the article). However, it will not be superfluous to talk about them again.

And we will start with the simplest situation - when, under the terms of the contract, the supplier is obliged to deliver the goods to the buyer, and the cost of delivery is included in the sale price of the goods.

In this case, the waybill and invoice presented to the buyer will indicate only the goods sold, there will be no mention of delivery services in these documents.

The supplier will include the costs of delivering the goods as part of the sales costs, that is, regardless of whether he engages a third-party transport organization or provides delivery on his own, using his own or rented vehicles and full-time drivers, all actual costs will be debited to the account 44 Selling costs.

Example 1

The retail trading company "Kopeechka" purchases from the wholesale trading company "Mercury" a consignment of goods worth 590,000 rubles, incl. VAT 90,000 rubles. The purchase price of this product in the accounting of the company "Mercury" is 370,000 rubles.

In accordance with the terms of the contract, the supplier ensures the delivery of the goods to the buyer's warehouse at his own expense, that is, the cost of delivery is included in the price of the goods.

Let us assume that in order to fulfill its delivery obligations, the Mercury company entered into an agreement with a transport company. The services of which cost 11,800 rubles, incl. VAT RUB 1,800

The Mercury accountant will record transactions with the following entries:

DEBIT 62 CREDIT 90-1

DEBIT 90-3 CREDIT 68

DEBIT 90-2 CREDIT 41-1

DEBIT 44 CREDIT 60
- 10,000 rubles. - reflected the cost of delivery of goods;
DEBIT 19 CREDIT 60
- 1800 rub. - reflected VAT on delivery costs;
DEBIT 68 CREDIT 19
- 11800 rubles. - presented for deduction of VAT on transportation costs;
DEBIT 60 CREDIT 51
- 11800 rubles. - paid transportation costs;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Business expenses" CREDIT 44
- 10,000 rubles. - expenses for the delivery of goods are written off as part of the sale expenses (at the end of the month);
DEBIT 51 CREDIT 62

And the accountant of the Kopeechka company (provided that retail does not fall under UTII) will reflect the purchase of goods with the following entries:
DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 60

DEBIT 19 CREDIT 60
- 90,000 rubles. - reflected VAT on these goods;
DEBIT 68 CREDIT 19

DEBIT 60 CREDIT 51
- 590,000 rubles. - paid goods.

Since with such a formalization of relations - when delivery is included in the price of goods - the activity associated with the delivery of goods to the buyer is not an independent type entrepreneurial activity organization, and the method of fulfilling the obligation of the seller to transfer the goods in accordance with the norms of paragraph 1 of Art. 458 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the delivery of goods is considered as an accompanying service, inextricably linked with trade - and therefore the services for the delivery of goods in such a situation are not subject to the taxation system in the form of UTII. This interpretation was confirmed by specialists of the Ministry of Finance of Russia in a letter dated October 4, 2007 No. 03-11-04/3/389.

2. If delivery services are separated from the cost of goods

In practice, there are cases when the supplier in waybills and invoices indicates separately the cost of goods, and separately - the cost of transport services.

In this case, both the buyer and the seller face a number of problems.

Firstly, as experts of the Ministry of Finance of Russia explained in a letter dated February 27, 2007 No. 03-03-06 / 1/135, if, in addition to the invoice and invoice, the buyer does not have other documents confirming the fact of the provision of transport services - for example, an act signed by both parties - the buyer will not be able to recognize the amount of expenses for the delivery of goods in tax accounting.

Secondly, by singling out services as a separate line, the supplier shows that he actually carries out two types of activities - not only trading, but also activities in the provision of transport services. If the delivery is carried out by the supplier on his own, he needs to recognize revenue and form financial results from the implementation of two types of activities, opening for these purposes different sub-accounts to account 90 "Sales", as well as to ensure the formation of the cost of transport services - for example, on account 20 "Main production".

Example 2

Let's change the conditions of example 1.

First, let's assume that the company "Mercury" delivers goods to customers on its own - it has its own or rented transport, hires drivers, purchases fuel, etc. The actual costs for the delivery of goods under the deal with Kopeechka amounted to 8,000 rubles.

Secondly, suppose that the cost of delivery is not included in the price of the goods, but nevertheless the responsibility for arranging delivery is assigned to the supplier. In accordance with this, when issuing an invoice for the goods, the wholesale company "Mercury" registered its delivery services as a separate line, that is, the invoice reads:
- cost of goods - 590,000 rubles, incl. VAT 90,000 rubles;
- the cost of services for the delivery of goods - 11,800 rubles, incl. VAT 1800 rub.

- 590,000 rubles. - reflected the proceeds from the sale of goods;
DEBIT 90-3 CREDIT 68
- 90,000 rubles. - VAT charged;
DEBIT 90-2 CREDIT 41-1
- 370,000 rubles. - written off the purchase price of goods sold;
DEBIT 62 CREDIT 90, sub-account "Implementation of transport services"
- 11 800 rubles. - reflected the proceeds from the sale of goods;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Implementation of transport services" CREDIT 68
- 1800 rub. - VAT charged;
DEBIT 20 CREDIT 02, 10, 70, 69 p.m.
- 8000 rub. - reflected the actual costs for the provision of transport services;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Implementation of transport services" CREDIT 20
- 8000 rub. - written off actual cost transport services;
DEBIT 51 CREDIT 62
- 601 800 rubles. - received payment from the buyer.

DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 60
- 500,000 rubles. – goods are accepted for accounting (excluding VAT);
DEBIT 41-2 or 44 CREDIT 60
- 10,000 rubles. - reflects the cost of transport services without VAT (these costs, depending on the accounting policy, may be included either directly in the cost of goods, or as part of the sale costs);
DEBIT 19 CREDIT 60
- 91 800 rubles. - reflected VAT on these goods and transport services;
DEBIT 68 CREDIT 19
- 91 800 rubles. – submitted for VAT deduction on purchased goods and transport services;
DEBIT 60 CREDIT 51
- 601 800 rubles. - paid for goods and transport services.

Thirdly, if no more than 20 vehicles are used for the delivery of goods, it must be taken into account that the activities to provide road transport services for the carriage of goods can be translated into UTII. Therefore, you need to carefully study the local legislation and do not forget to submit UTII declarations on a quarterly basis in a timely manner, if, nevertheless, this activity turns out to be in this mode.

In practice, there are also cases when the supplier organizes the delivery of goods by a third-party transport organization and charges the corresponding shipping cost from the buyer - that is, in fact, “re-bills” the transport company to the buyer. In such a situation, it is important to correctly formulate the terms of the contract - to prescribe that the supplier undertakes to organize the delivery of the goods, and not to deliver the goods. The difference is significant, because:

If, under the contract, the supplier is obliged to deliver the goods, formally it is he who is the person carrying out the activities for the delivery of goods, which means not only that he must recognize the revenue from the provision of such services, even if in fact he turns to a specialized transport organization to provide them, but and that he must, in cases prescribed by law, have the appropriate licenses;
- if, under the contract, the supplier is only obliged to arrange delivery, in fact he acts as an intermediary between the buyer and the transport organization, and then not the entire amount charged from the buyer for delivery, but only the agreed remuneration, is considered his revenue.

Example 3

Let's change the conditions of example 1 again.

Suppose that the contract provides for the obligation of the Mercury company to organize the delivery of goods to the warehouse of the Kopeechka company, while the intermediary fee for these services is 118 rubles, incl. VAT 18 rub.

As a result, the buyer is charged RUB 601,918, including:
- cost of goods - 590,000 rubles, incl. VAT 90,000 rubles;
- the cost of delivery of goods by a third-party transport organization - 11,800 rubles, incl. VAT 1800 rubles;
- remuneration for transportation organization services in the amount of 118 rubles, incl. VAT 18 rub.

In this case, the accountant of the company "Mercury" will reflect the transactions with the following entries:

DEBIT 62 CREDIT 90, sub-account "Sale of goods"
- 590,000 rubles. - reflected the proceeds from the sale of goods;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Sale of goods" CREDIT 68
- 90,000 rubles. - VAT charged;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Sale of goods" CREDIT 41-1
- 370,000 rubles. - written off the purchase price of goods sold;
DEBIT 76 CREDIT 51
- 11 800 rubles. - transferred to the transport organization;
DEBIT 62 CREDIT 76
- 11 800 rubles. - reflects the buyer's debt to pay (reimburse) the cost of transport services;
DEBIT 62 CREDIT 90, sub-account "Provision of intermediary services"
- 118 rubles. - reflected the proceeds from the provision of intermediary services;
DEBIT 90, sub-account "Provision of intermediary services" CREDIT 68
- 18 rubles. - VAT charged on intermediary services;
DEBIT 51 CREDIT 62
- 601,918 rubles. - received payment from the buyer.

And the accountant of the Kopeechka company will reflect the purchase of goods with such entries (assume that all expenses associated with the purchase of goods, according to the accounting policy, are included in the purchase price of these goods):
DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 60
- 500,000 rubles. – goods are accepted for accounting (excluding VAT);
DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 60
- 10,000 rubles. - reflects the cost of transport services (excluding VAT);
DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 60
- 100 rubles - reflects the cost of intermediary services related to the purchase of goods (excluding VAT);
DEBIT 19 CREDIT 60
- 91 818 rubles. - reflects VAT on goods, transport services and intermediary services;
DEBIT 68 CREDIT 19
- 91 818 rubles. - presented for VAT deduction;
- 601,918 rubles. - paid for goods and services.

3. Pickup

In all the cases discussed above, the supplier took care of the organization of delivery.

In practice, the buyer himself often deals with the problem of exporting goods from the supplier's warehouse. Moreover, he can either take the goods out with his own transport, or conclude an appropriate agreement with the carrier (transport company), so that the carrier’s representative picks up the goods from the supplier and delivers them to the buyer’s warehouse or to another agreed place.

In this case, the supplier's accounting reflects only operations for the sale of goods: revenue recognition, VAT accrual, write-off of prime cost (purchase value).

The buyer must ensure that his actual expenses for the delivery of goods.

Example 4

For the last time, we will change the conditions of example 1 - now suppose that the contract value of the goods in the amount of 590,000 rubles. shipping costs are not included and, in accordance with the terms of the contract, the Kopeechka company must organize self-delivery of the goods from the warehouse of the Mercury company.

Let us also assume that the Kopeechka company carried out the export of goods by its own transport, and its expenses for the transportation of goods amounted to 6,700 rubles. Let also the accounting policy of the Kopeechka company provide for the use of accounts 15 and 16 to reflect transactions for the purchase of goods, while the accounting value of the purchased batch of goods amounted to 505,000 rubles.

In this situation, the accountant of the company "Mercury" will reflect the transactions with the following entries:
DEBIT 62 CREDIT 90-1
- 590,000 rubles. - reflected the proceeds from the sale of goods;
DEBIT 90-3 CREDIT 68
- 90,000 rubles. - VAT charged;
DEBIT 90-2 CREDIT 41-1
- 370,000 rubles. - written off the purchase price of goods sold;
DEBIT 51 CREDIT 62
- 590,000 rubles. - received payment from the buyer.

And the accountant of the Kopeechka company will reflect the purchase of goods with the following entries:
DEBIT 41-2 CREDIT 15
- 505,000 rubles. - goods are credited at book value;
DEBIT 15 CREDIT 60
- 500,000 rubles. - reflects the purchase price of the goods (excluding VAT);
DEBIT 19 CREDIT 60
- 90,000 rubles. - reflected VAT on goods;
DEBIT 68 CREDIT 19
- 90,000 rubles. - submitted for VAT deduction on purchased goods;
DEBIT 60 CREDIT 51
- 590,000 rubles. - paid for goods;
DEBIT 15 CREDIT 02, 10, 70, 69 etc.
- 6700 rubles. - reflects the actual costs for the delivery of goods on their own;
DEBIT 16 CREDIT 15
- 1700 rub. (500,000 + 6,700 - 505,000) - the deviation in the cost of goods was written off (at the end of the month).

It is not enough to sell the goods, it still needs to be delivered to the buyer. However, the delivery process is fraught with many tax risks that every organization needs to be aware of. On the basis of arbitration practice, we considered the controversial issues that arise during the delivery of goods by the seller and the buyer.

All delivery options can be divided into two groups: delivery by the seller (buyer) on their own and delivery with the involvement of third-party organizations providing cargo transportation services. Practice shows that no matter which delivery option is chosen, neither the buyer nor the seller is immune from claims from the tax authorities.

Delivery by a third party

In order to increase sales volumes, many suppliers incur the costs of shipping the goods sold. At the same time, the contract stipulates that the buyer must reimburse the seller for the corresponding costs. But providers do not always have their own transport to perform such a service. Solution: conclude a contract of carriage with a specialized company. And then there is a problem with VAT, both for the supplier and the buyer.

Will the seller have VAT ...

If the supplier concludes an agreement with a transport company for the transportation of goods to the buyer, then it is he (as the customer) who receives the corresponding services. Upon their implementation, the transport company issues an invoice and an act to the supplier. The buyer of the goods acts only as a consignee and simply compensates the supplier for his costs associated with the delivery of the goods. That is, there is no implementation of transport services between the buyer and the supplier. And if so, then the compensation of the supplier's expenses for the delivery of goods, highlighted in the shipping documents as a separate line, should not be subject to VAT. However, practice shows that the tax authorities think otherwise. They insist that the supplier sells transport services to the buyer and must tax such sales with VAT. But the majority of courts do not share this opinion.

Thus, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District, in its resolution No. A66-7801/2009 of May 26, 2010, came to the conclusion that the cost of compensation for the delivery of goods, allocated in a separate line in the supplier's documents, does not need to be subject to VAT. In this case, the organization carried out the supply of manufactured products to customers with the involvement of a transport company. For the shipped products and their delivery, the supplier issued invoices to buyers, in which, in the column “name of goods (description of work performed, services rendered)”, the delivery cost was separately indicated as “reimbursement of transportation costs”.

The tax authorities considered that the supplier, by carrying out the implementation of transport services, in violation of Art. 146 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation did not calculate VAT on the proceeds from their sale. Therefore, he was held liable (adding tax, penalties and fines). The court of first instance upheld the tax authorities. The logic of his reasoning was as follows. The terms and conditions of supply contracts in terms of reimbursement by the buyer of transportation costs cannot be considered as the provision of intermediary services, since they do not contain provisions on the remuneration of the supplier. The sale of services is recognized as an object of VAT (clause 1, article 146 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). At the same time, in addition to the price of services, the taxpayer is obliged to present to their buyer the corresponding amount of VAT (clause 1, article 168 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

However, both the appellate and cassation courts supported the organization. They pointed out that the reimbursement of transport costs did not create additional income for the supplier, since the amount of funds received by him from the buyers did not exceed the amounts paid to the carriers. Therefore, the transport costs reimbursed by the buyers by virtue of Art. 39 and 146 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not apply to the sale of services, and therefore cannot be recognized as an object of VAT. The Federal Arbitration Court of the Urals District came to similar conclusions in its decision No. Ф09-4806/09-С3 dated 14.07.2009 (Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated 08.09.2009 No. VAS-11613/09 refused to transfer this case to the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation).

So, the reimbursement of transportation costs should not be subject to VAT by the supplier. Accordingly, they must be indicated on the invoices without VAT and not reflected in the invoice (since there is no sale). Note that the Ministry of Finance of Russia agrees that if, under the terms of the supply agreement, the buyer undertakes to reimburse the transport costs incurred by the seller, then the invoice issued by the seller for the shipped goods does not indicate the services for transporting goods sold by the carrier (letter dated 15.08. 2012 No. 03-07-11/299).

In order not to bring the case to court, we offer the following options for getting out of this situation. The first option is to conclude a separate agency agreement for the delivery of goods, under the terms of which the supplier undertakes, on behalf of the buyer, to organize the delivery of goods, and establish a minimum remuneration in it. In this case, VAT will be charged only on the agency fee. The second option is to include the cost of delivery in the price of goods and do not highlight it separately in the documents.

...and a deduction from the buyer

If the supplier, under pressure from the tax authorities, nevertheless presents the buyer with the cost of compensation for transportation costs with VAT, the buyer will have problems. The tax authorities will most likely refuse to deduct such VAT. Thus, in a case considered by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District (Decree No. А53-10110/2008-С5-46 dated May 19, 2009), the tax authority refused to deduct VAT on the transport costs allocated to the buyer in the documents of the supplier of goods as a separate line. He justified his position by the fact that the supplier does not independently provide transport services to the buyer (in this case, the delivery of goods was carried out by a transport company under a transportation agreement concluded with the supplier). Therefore, he is not entitled on his own behalf to draw up documents for the provision of these services, including invoices. Services for the delivery of goods are actually provided by the transport company. The cost of delivery is not included in the price of the goods, and the company's suppliers are intermediaries in the provision of these services. Tax deductions for transport services can only be applied by their original purchaser, that is, the supplier. Therefore, the buyer is not entitled to a VAT deduction.

The court rejected the arguments of the tax authorities and cited the following arguments. The obligation to pay the cost of delivery arises from the obligation to deliver the goods, the participants of which are the company and its supplier, and not the transport company that actually carried out the delivery. The supply contract concluded by the parties does not impose on the supplier the obligations of an intermediary nature inherent in contracts of agency, commission or agency. Tax office did not provide evidence of fictitious business transactions for which VAT is claimed. As a result, the court came to the conclusion that the buyer reasonably accepted the amount of VAT on delivery for deduction.

In a similar situation, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Urals District (Resolution No. Ф09-3324/09-С3 dated May 25, 2009) also supported the buyer in his right to deduct VAT. He pointed out that in itself re-invoicing to a buyer who is a VAT payer, in the presence of the fact of consumption of the relevant services, is not a basis for refusing the right to apply VAT tax deductions. It should be noted that by the Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated September 11, 2009 No. VAC-12036/09, the revision of this case was denied.

So, the buyer has a chance to defend his right to accept VAT for deduction in court. But to avoid such problems, it is better for the supplier to follow our recommendations given in the previous section.

Delivery outsourced to others

A disputable situation may also arise with the supplier if the actual delivery of goods to buyers is carried out not by the transport company with which he has concluded an agreement, but by its counterparties. Here, the supplier has a risk that the tax authorities may refuse to deduct VAT on invoices presented by the transport company for transportation.

This situation is considered in the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District dated July 1, 2009 No. А54-3828/2008С8. In order to ensure the delivery of goods to buyers, a transport expedition agreement was concluded between the plant and the transport company. Under its terms, the transport company assumed obligations to organize the delivery of the plant's products to customers. In some cases, the delivery of goods was carried out by railway by Russian Railways OJSC, with which the transport company signed an agreement. For such transportation, invoices were issued to the plant, where the transport company was listed as the seller of transport services. The tax authorities denied the plant a VAT deduction on these invoices, since the transport services were actually provided by Russian Railways, and not by the transport company. However, the court pointed out that for the purposes of the VAT refund, it does not matter whether the transportation services were provided by the transport company personally, or were entrusted to it and actually performed by a third party. The supplier has the full right to accept such VAT for deduction.

In our opinion, the arguments of the tax authorities are absolutely unfounded. Article 805 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation expressly provides that the freight forwarder has the right to involve other persons in the performance of his duties, unless this is prohibited by the contract. Under the freight forwarding agreement, the freight forwarder undertakes, for a fee and at the expense of the other party (the client - the consignor or consignee), to perform or organize the performance defined by the agreement forwarding services related to the carriage of goods (clause 1, article 801 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). That is, in fact, the forwarder provides the customer with intermediary services. The Ministry of Finance of Russia agrees with this. Thus, in a letter dated 01.11.2012 No. 03-07-09/148, the specialists of the financial department indicated that freight forwarders can issue invoices for third-party services to the customer in the manner prescribed for commission agents (agents). So, not later than five calendar days, counting from the day the service was provided by the forwarder, he must issue an invoice to the client, in which it is necessary to separate into independent positions the types of services purchased by the forwarder from third parties on the basis of their invoices. Copies of invoices received by the freight forwarder from organizations providing services to the freight forwarder, as well as copies of the relevant primary documents, should be attached to such an invoice.

So, in order to reduce the risk of tax claims, with the transport company that will organize the delivery of goods to buyers, the supplier needs to conclude a transport expedition agreement and directly indicate in it that the forwarder has the right to involve other persons in the performance of his duties.

Delivery by own forces

If the supplier has his own or rented transport, he can organize the delivery of goods to buyers on his own. In addition, the purchased goods can be picked up from the warehouse of the supplier by the buyer himself. However, there may be problems with self-delivery.

Delivery - separate view activity?

When a supplier organizes the delivery of goods to buyers on his own, and UTII has been introduced in the region where he works, the following problem may lie in wait for him: should delivery be considered as an independent type of activity (provision of motor transport services) and apply UTII for it? Recall that activities for the provision of motor transport services can be transferred to UTII, provided that the organization ( individual entrepreneur) owns no more than 20 vehicles(signature 5, clause 2, article 346.26 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

The Ministry of Finance of Russia considers that delivery is not a separate type of activity when the following conditions are simultaneously met:

• the supply contract provides for the seller's obligation to deliver the goods to the buyer;
• Shipping costs are included in the price of the item being sold.

If they are observed, the delivery of the sold goods to the buyer (by own or rented transport) is integral part activities of the seller in the sale of goods (letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 03-11-11/76 dated March 7, 2012, No. 03-11-06/3/45 dated April 13, 2011 and No. 03-11-09/13 dated January 22, 2009) . If, in the supply contracts, the cost of delivery is allocated separately and is not included in the cost of goods sold, or if delivery is carried out according to separate agreement, it can be recognized as an independent type of entrepreneurial activity (letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated 03/07/2012 No. 03-11-11 / 76 and dated 01/31/2008 No. 03-11-04 / 3/33).

An analysis of arbitration practice shows that local tax authorities do not share the position of financiers. They believe that if the delivery is carried out by the supplier under the supply contract, it cannot be considered as a separate activity, regardless of whether the cost of delivery is allocated separately or not.

The courts are not unanimous on this point. Thus, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the East Siberian District, in its resolution No. A78-4149/2012 dated August 21, 2012, came to the conclusion that the execution of separate documents (invoices and acts) for delivery and separate indication in the supply contract of the cost of goods and delivery is a sufficient basis for separation of transportation into a separate type of activity. A similar position is contained in the resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the East Siberian District dated March 05, 2012 No. A78-5193 / 2011 and the North-Western District dated January 12, 2011 No. A44-1665 / 2010.

At the same time, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District, in its resolution dated February 12, 2010 No. A32-18385 / 2008-19 / 278, noted that the organization's activities for the delivery of finished products to the customer may be subject to UTII only if these services are carried out separately drawn up contract for the carriage of goods.

In our opinion, the delivery of goods, due to the obligations of the supplier under the supply contract, is an integral part of trade and should not be singled out as a separate type of activity, regardless of the definition of its value (separately or in the price of the goods). To avoid such a controversial situation, we recommend that you do not highlight the cost of delivery in the documents as a separate line, but include it in the cost of goods.

Pickup problems

If the goods are taken from the warehouse by the buyer himself, the supplier issues their release with an invoice in the form of TORG-12 and does not issue any transport documents. But the buyer may have problems with this. The fact is that in order to take into account expenses when calculating income tax, they must be documented.

In practice, there are cases when the tax authorities require confirmation of the costs of delivery of goods upon self-delivery of the consignment note (form No. 1-T, approved by the Decree of the State Statistics Committee of Russia of November 28, 1997 No. However, the courts do not share this opinion (decisions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Urals District dated 04.23.2012 No. F09-2412 / 12, the East Siberian District dated 13.01.2011 No. A19-3787 / 2010, the Central District dated 02.11.2011 No. A68-4748 / 08- 108/13 and the North Caucasus District dated 03/02/2010 No. A53-2634 / 2009). Thus, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District in its resolution dated 13.05.2010 No. A55-14780/2008 indicated that the consignor has the obligation to issue consignment notes only if goods are transported by the forces of a motor transport organization under a contract for the carriage of goods. If the delivery of goods is carried out by the buyer's transport (self-delivery) without the involvement of a transport organization, the preparation of waybills is not required.

The Ministry of Finance of Russia also believes that neither a waybill nor a consignment note is needed for self-pickup. After all, transportation services are not provided to the buyer. The cost of transporting goods at self-delivery and the fact of its transportation are confirmed by the waybill (letters No. 03-03-10/123 dated December 22, 2011, No. 03-03-06/1/540 dated September 2, 2011 and No. 03- 03-06/1/500). Note that the absence of a waybill in such a situation cannot serve as a basis for refusing to accept the VAT amounts for the purchased goods for deduction (letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated October 30, 2012 No. 03-07-11 / 461).

We fully agree that there is no need to issue a consignment note for self-delivery. After all, from the instructions for filling out the form No. 1-T, it follows that the waybill is intended to account for the movement of inventory items and payments for their transportation by car. It is compiled by the consignor for each consignee and defines the relationship of consignors, carriers and consignees. In the case of self-delivery of goods, the buyer transports his own own goods. That is, he himself is the consignor, and the carrier, and the consignee. Therefore, drawing up a consignment note does not make any sense. And even if the tax authorities insist on the opposite, there is every chance to defend their position in court.

According to research by American marketers, for 59% of online store buyers, the price of delivery affects the purchase decision, and 44% refuse to buy anything at all because of the high price of delivery. Statistics show that most shopping carts are abandoned at the checkout stage, when delivery is added to the cost of the goods. Having reached this point, the buyer begins to doubt whether he really needs this product so much. If the delivery is free, then most likely there will be no doubt. But not everyone can afford to deliver goods for free. And although this option is most attractive to the buyer, even large market players take money for delivery.

Boris Lepinskikh, director of e96.ru online store

“There are two important factors that affect shipping costs. The first is the cost of shipping. We know exactly how much the last mile costs for us in each city. The second is the market. We look at how much it costs to deliver similar products from our main competitors in the category (for example, furniture or large household appliances) and stand “not above the market”.
In general, when setting the shipping price, different situations are possible:
a) the cost of delivery in the price and the margin is enough - the coolest situation;
b) the cost of delivery separately and then it practically covers our cost for delivery - also good;
in) various situations"subsidizing the last mile", when we are forced to reduce the cost of delivery "to the market" in order not to lose sales.

There are only three shipping cost strategies: free, shareware, and unconditionally paid. And each has its pros and cons.

Free shipping

The most beloved by buyers and the most disadvantageous, at first glance, option for the seller. But since the love of freebies is indestructible among mankind, free shipping significantly increases sales.

According to statistics, 84% of online store visitors will choose a site with free shipping to purchase.

Of course, sometimes it happens that the cost of the order is lower than the price for delivery, but the total sales allow the company to survive such cases painlessly.

Dmitry Pokataev, head of the Stoletti Kitchens online store:

“It all depends on the income of the store, if the margin allows, then you should not scare away customers with an additional markup for delivery. Although sometimes it happens that they order one stool, it costs more to bring it to the buyer than it does. Of course, it’s a shame to pay for such an order out of your own pocket, but we always put up with it.”

A free shipping strategy for everyone can be beneficial for a company that specializes in selling small and light items and for businesses with a high number of repeat sales, such as groceries, prepared food, water. Since there is no need to spend money on attracting new customers, they can be redistributed to pay for shipping to existing ones.

Conditionally free delivery

Strategy 1: check

Most often, free shipping has some conditions and restrictions. One of them - minimum order value. As a rule, people tend to get goods up to the right amount in order to get free shipping. Here psychology works: for the same price I will get more items. Moreover, the cost of purchased additional goods is often higher than the price for delivery. If the minimum purchase price is 1.5 thousand rubles, in the basket of goods for 1 thousand, and the delivery costs 250-300 rubles, then the majority will prefer to buy something else for 500 rubles.

Income: 600х30=18000 rubles

Gross profit: 18000 -(600x0.8x30)=3600

Shipping costs: 150x30=4500

Net profit: 3600-4500= -900 rubles

It turns out that by offering free shipping on a purchase of 600 rubles, the company is operating at a loss of 900 rubles. By simple calculations, we get that the company goes to zero with an order amount of 750 rubles:

Net profit will be zero with gross profit equal to shipping costs. We calculate income. Revenue \u003d gross profit x 100 / profit per order (4500x100 / 20 \u003d 22500)

Order amount = income / number of orders (22500/30=750)

That is, it will be profitable for the company to deliver orders more expensive than 750 rubles for free.

Yakov Grinemayer, GIANT-DVERI.Ru online store:

“In the GIANT-DOORS.Ru project, we decided to make free delivery for orders over a certain amount. For clients, this is a pleasant surprise and one of the markers of our care. From such pleasant trifles, a general positive impression of working with us is formed. It is important for us that the buyer is satisfied and shares his pleasant experience with friends, writes a review. When the volume of the order does not allow for free delivery at the planned volume contribution margin, then we charge a shipping fee. We build pricing “from the market”, so that our delivery conditions are “usual”, and do not scare away the buyer. Often, the cost of delivery is higher than the price for the client, so the margin of the goods should make it possible to compensate for these costs.

Strategy 2: from the product

Free shipping "for selected products" perfect if you need to get rid of surplus stale goods, for example, t-shirts of an unpopular color or shoes that are slow-moving. You can offer free shipping when buying multiple items, this will encourage customers to leave in your store more money. You can limit the promotion with free shipping by time.

Strategy 3: From Profit

Another free shipping option is "only for...". Club card holders or those who pay for the purchase in a certain way (only in cash or only with a card of a certain bank). Shipping costs in this case are offset by some benefit to the seller.

When paying online, an online store kills two birds with one stone: it instantly receives “live” money to its account and insures against non-repurchase of goods.

Strategy 4: from remoteness

Many local companies limit free shipping to one city or a few areas. This is due to the fact that delivery geography significantly affects its value. Time, as you know, is money. One courier can deliver several orders in one area in an hour, but it will take half a day to travel to a neighboring city, from where they ordered the notorious stool. AT monetary terms Shipping costs will vary greatly.

“There is free delivery, but only when buying from a certain amount and only in the city of Chelyabinsk. For intercity delivery, we deliver to the terminal of the transport company at our own expense. Initially, they took care of the delivery, since it was then ours competitive advantage, and now it is a mandatory requirement of the market.”

5 Ways Free Shipping Works for You

Before you offer your customers free shipping, think about whether it will break you.

7 ways to ruin an online store

1. Offer free shipping for oversized items. If the pizza can be delivered by a courier on a bicycle, then the cabinet or refrigerator must be loaded into a truck, taken to the place, lifted to the apartment. That is, in addition to transportation costs, you will have to pay for the work of at least two loaders.
2. Free delivery by courier service. Professional deliveries calculate the cost of their services based on distances and the weight or volume of the package. If your client buys a chair and needs to take it to a neighboring city, then free shipping will not only eat up the profit from the order, but also take the store into the red.
3. If the store often returns goods or refuses to redeem the order, then free shipping will only bring losses.
4. When trading low-margin goods, it is unprofitable to do free shipping. Online stores selling everyday goods, household chemicals, products for children it makes sense to offer free shipping for a minimum order amount.
5. If the delivery is more expensive than the purchased goods, then the seller will not be able to pay for it.
6. Free shipping with a limited selection of shipping methods. This is faced by online stores selling throughout Russia. For example, in remote regions, you can send an order only by Russian Post.
7. Complicated delivery. If there are 2 or more links in the product delivery chain, then making it free is unprofitable. For example, pick up the goods in the warehouse and take them to the railway terminal, transport them in a container to another city, deliver them to the destination.

Paid delivery

This strategy also has several options. All of them are based on average calculations, that is, some of the buyers pay more than the service actually costs, and some pay less. Sometimes the company pays part of the shipping costs itself.

Ivan Bazdrin, online store of goods for sleep "Sonata":

“In our store, the cost of delivery, if it is paid, covers no more than 50% of the costs. We have bulky goods and need delivery to the door, and this is a plus for movers. We pay for their work ourselves.

Strategy 1: one price

One of the shipping options setting a single price. When calculating, it is necessary to take into account many factors: in addition to the average check, revenue and profit, we need data on geography, the share of returns, prices courier services, if you use third-party resources, or the cost of maintaining your own couriers.

See an example of a calculation formula single tariff for delivery of one order

At the same time, the optimal price should allow not only to work at a loss, but also not to scare away customers. To calculate the cost of delivery, you will need to equate it either to the weight of the ordered goods, or to their quantity.

Most companies set fixed prices for delivery depending on the amount of the order, volumes, geography or some other parameters.

Usually one rule works here: the more the buyer pays for the goods, the less he pays for shipping.

Delivery of a toaster worth 500 rubles and an external drive worth 5 thousand rubles (we take goods that are approximately the same in weight and dimensions) will cost the same, say, 150 rubles. But the store's revenue from these two purchases differs by 10 times. So it is quite logical to redistribute the cost of delivery depending on the price: take 200 rubles for the delivery of a toaster, and 100 rubles for the delivery of a disc.

Strategy 2: real costs

In each specific case, depending on what they buy, how much they buy and where it all needs to be transported, their own price for delivery is formed. Online stores that have chosen this delivery payment option install a special calculator on their website that makes calculations for each order.

Another option is to allow the buyer to choose for himself who will deliver the goods to him. Usually in this case, a list of enterprises and companies is indicated on the page with the terms of delivery.

Which shipping payment option should I choose?

It is worth offering the buyer several delivery options to choose from, especially since the number of delivery methods also affects sales.

According to Parcel international shipping service, to to increase the number of orders by 10%, it is enough to add more delivery options to the site.

The British company Hermes conducted a similar study and found that 25% of purchases did not take place due to a limited choice of delivery methods.

In order not to miscalculate, carefully analyze everything.

• Don't make shipping free just because customers like it. Such a step should be economically justified.

Vera Frolova, online clothing store didriknaurale.ru

We don't have free shipping. There is no it because we work with the whole country, and the cost of delivery can range from 90 to 900 rubles and even higher.It is unprofitable for us to compensate the client for even part of the delivery, and working for the sake of work is also not interesting. There are orders that are easier to refuse than to fulfill them. In addition, we work with a category that, although it has a high margin during the season, also has off-season sales, when the margin level simply does not allow offering free shipping to the client. There is a sale on our website all the time.
We are a small business, and the issue of profitability and costs is acute for us - we do not have the opportunity to endlessly invest in a business just for the sake of turnover and expecting profit sometime later. And according to the latest trends, even among major competitors, free delivery has become a promotion, and not a mandatory option. At one time we had a pickup point, we cooperated with Ozon and Boxberry as a pickup point. And could estimate the share of free deliveries from largest stores(for most it was paid), as well as to see the percentage of orders abandoned, we know how many customers do not come to redeem the goods. This information allowed us to determine our delivery policy and, after evaluating the delivery services, make the choice of our service provider.
The price for delivery is formed simply: we have chosen for ourselves the optimal courier service provider in terms of price-quality-delivery speed. We also offer an alternative delivery method - the ubiquitous mail of Russia, it will take you even to Kamchatka. And in some regions, delivery by Mail is much cheaper. For the nearby cities of Chelyabinsk, Tyumen, Perm, etc. delivery can happen the very next day and people love it. Delivery to Moscow takes 2-3 days on average, which is also very fast. In Yekaterinburg, we deliver to the points of issue of SDEC or our own home delivery. When delivery is carried out by Mail, we do not use cash on delivery. Firstly, we have repeatedly encountered delivery delays and, as a result, customer refusal to receive an order and huge costs for an unsecured service. Once we had a delay of 30 days by AIR delivery in Yar-Sale. The total cost was equal to the cost of the order that the customer did not redeem due to a delay. By the way, no one compensated us for anything. Secondly, when paying by cash on delivery, a commission is charged from the client. Calculating the cash on delivery amount so that the client does not pay a commission is a difficult process and must be done manually each time. Therefore, now, if the client wants delivery by Russian Post, then we offer him to make an advance payment for the order.

• It is worth comparing the profit from the sale of different products and setting shipping rates depending on the profit.