Errors in the primary data: information about the company and the counterparty

Consequences of errors in a payment document

The execution of payment orders for payment of tax payments should be treated with the utmost care.
How to correctly fill out a payment order Filling out a payment order in 2022 - 2022 - sample Main fields of a payment order in 2022 - 2022 (sample) Basic details of a payment order

Errors made in a payment order can lead to the following undesirable financial consequences for the taxpayer:

• the tax may not go to the required budget;
• the tax may be declared unpaid;
• the tax may be recognized as paid in violation of the deadline.

This entails at least the payment of a penalty, but can also lead to the payment of a fine and re-payment of tax (clause 2 of Article 57, Article 75, clause 1 of Article 122, Article 123 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). In addition, lengthy proceedings with the tax office are likely.

Filling rules

Appendix No. 1 of Regulation No. 383-P explains that in the case of transfers of money to the budget, each “Checkpoint” field in the payment order must be correctly filled out.

In particular, you must enter the following data:

• purpose and purpose of payment;
• information about the payer who is transferring the money, along with his checkpoint;
• the addressee who will receive the corresponding amounts, with his checkpoint displayed on the payment slip.

These same positions must be filled when money is transferred to private companies. That is, which are not related to the budget system of the Russian Federation.

Also see “Checkpoint of a separate unit: how to find out and receive.”

What can result from an error in the checkpoint in a payment order? It is important to note that fields 102 and 103 of this document are filled out in strict compliance with the registration reason code assigned to the sender and recipient of the money. Other information in these fields that does not reflect reality indicates erroneous data in the payment.

In such a situation, the Ministry of Finance of Russia indicates that an erroneous or missing checkpoint of the recipient in the payment order gives grounds to classify the entire transfer amount as a group of unknown receipts (based on clause 14 of the Procedure approved on December 18, 2013 No. 125n).

Thus, the answer to the question about the obligatory checkpoint in the payment becomes clear. Yes! Otherwise, the money simply won’t arrive. The sender must indicate it if:

• transfers funds to the budget system (writes his reason code in field 103 of this payment order);
• the money is addressed to a person not from the public sector (the law still obliges him to enter his checkpoint on the payment form).

When is tax considered unpaid?

In accordance with sub. 4 p. 4 art. 45 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, if the recipient’s account and (or) the name of the bank of the Federal Treasury Department (UFK) is incorrectly indicated in the payment order, the payment is not received into the budget of the Russian Federation or is not credited to the corresponding account of the Federal Treasury. In this case, the taxpayer’s obligation to pay the tax is considered not fulfilled, and it must be transferred again. You must also pay penalties for late payment of taxes. This is the position of the tax department, set out in letters of the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated 09/04/2015 No. ZN-4-1/ [email protected] , dated 03/31/2015 No. ZN-4-1/ [email protected] , dated 09/06/2013 No. ZN-3 -1/3228 and dated 09/12/2011 No. ЗН-4-1/ [email protected]

The obligation to transfer tax will not be recognized as fulfilled also in the case where errors in indicating the name of the bank or UFC account in the payment order were made due to the fault of the bank. Penalties will be presented to the taxpayer (letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated September 2, 2013 No. ZN-2-1/ [email protected] ). But in such a situation, the taxpayer may demand compensation from the bank for losses incurred (paragraph 9, article 12, article 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

At the same time, some courts recognize the tax paid if the UFK account is incorrectly indicated in the payment order. For example, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District, in Resolution No. A40-42830/11-99-191 dated 04/03/2012, recognized that the tax was received into the budget, despite the presence in the payment order of an error in indicating the UFK account.

By the way, the ability to clarify an incorrect account of the Federal Tax Service is directly enshrined in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation .

Note! From 05/01/2021, be sure to fill out field 15 “Current account number”; the Treasury account and the name of the bank have also changed. For all the details, see our material. And from 10/01/2021, fill out fields 101, 106, 108 and 109 in your payments in a new way.

EXAMPLE, when the payment cannot be clarified, from ConsultantPlus An organization has a property tax arrears of 100,000 rubles. She pays VAT in the amount of 150,000 rubles, but by mistake indicates on the payment slip... Read the continuation of the example in the K+ legal reference system. Trial access to the system is provided free of charge.

Other errors in the payment order

Other errors in the payment order, such as incorrectly indicated KBK, OKATO, INN, KPP and the name of the tax authority, do not prevent the receipt of tax to the budget (subclause 4, clause 4, article 45 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation). If such errors are made, then the tax is considered paid, but, in accordance with the norm of paragraph. 2 clause 7 art. 45 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, it is required to submit an application to clarify the payment (letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated January 19, 2017 No. 03-02-07/1/2145, dated July 16, 2012 No. 03-02-07/1-176, dated March 29, 2012 No. 03 -02-08/31, Federal Tax Service of Russia dated October 10, 2016 No. SA-4-7/19125, dated December 24, 2013 No. SA-4-7/23263).

For information on how to draw up such an application, read the material “ Sample application for clarification of tax payment (error in the KBK) ” .

If, as a result of an error, the tax was received by another BCC (for example, an inactive one), the taxpayer can apply for a tax offset. Penalties should not be accrued (letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated July 17, 2013 No. 03-02-07/2/27977, dated August 1, 2012 No. 02-04-12/3002).

Why checkpoint must be indicated in the payment order

If the checkpoint is incorrectly indicated in the payment order, the paying company may not have problems making the payment at the bank. Troubles may arise when the payment is credited to the recipient's bank, and their scale depends on the type of payment and the category of the recipient.

The checkpoint consists of 9 digits and is indicated only in relation to legal entities and budgetary institutions. The first 4 digits are the code of the tax office with which the taxpayer is currently registered, the next 2 digits are the registration code and the remaining 3 are the registration order number on the appropriate basis.

The checkpoint payment order indicates:

• for the sender of the payment - in field 102;
• for the payee - in field 103.

When sending a payment, individual entrepreneurs enter 0 in the sender’s checkpoint column or leave this field empty.

There are 2 main types of payment orders:

1. Payments for taxes, fees, etc. to the Federal Tax Service and funds, when the recipient is the Federal Treasury Department (UFK) in a particular region.
2. Payments to commercial and non-commercial companies, suppliers, buyers, other counterparties, including individuals.

For budget payments, additional fields are provided. Incorrectly indicating the checkpoint when generating budget payments is fraught with much greater trouble than when sending payments to other counterparties. Let's consider the consequences for each type of bank documents drawn up and the algorithm for subsequent actions.

The court's position regarding errors

Judicial practice confirms that the tax, as well as penalties and fines, are considered paid if the following errors are made in the payment order:

1. Incorrect KBK, regulations:

• AS of the Far Eastern District dated September 18, 2020 No. F03-2876/2020;
• AS of the Volga District dated 06.06.2018 No. F06-33882/2018;
• AS of the Far Eastern District dated November 19, 2015 No. F03-4782/2015;
• AS of the North Caucasus District dated December 4, 2014 No. F08-8670/2014;
• FAS East Siberian District dated May 14, 2013 No. A33-8935/2012;
• FAS North-Western District dated December 22, 2010 No. A42-2893/2010;
• FAS Moscow District dated January 23, 2013 No. A40-12057/12-90-57, dated December 8, 2011 No. A40-36137/11-140-159;
• FAS Central District dated January 31, 2013 No. A64-5684/2012;
• Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated June 30, 2011 No. A67-5567/2010;

Read about what the consequences of incorrectly indicating the KBK in the document for the payment of “accidental” insurance premiums transferred to the Social Insurance Fund may be in this article .

1. Incorrect TIN, checkpoint, name of the tax authority;
2. Incorrect OKATO;
3. Errors in the basis of payment, decisions:

• Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 23, 2013 No. 784/13;
• AS of the Moscow District dated May 14, 2018 No. F05-5361/18;
• AS of the North Caucasus District dated March 22, 2016 No. F08-1378/2016;
• AS of the Moscow District dated October 6, 2015 No. F05-13213/2015;
• FAS of the Ural District dated October 10, 2012 No. F09-9057/12;
• FAS of the East Siberian District dated December 6, 2011 No. A33-17476/2010, dated September 1, 2011 No. A33-3885/2010;
• FAS North-Western District dated 07/04/2011 No. A05-5601/2010;
• FAS of the West Siberian District dated 04/09/2010 No. A27-25035/2009;
• FAS Moscow District dated October 26, 2009 No. KA-A41/10427-09;
• FAS of the North Caucasus District dated 02/06/2008 No. F08-180/2008-68A.

To find out whether the error in the “Tax period” field is critical, read this article.

Results

Formation of a payment order for the payment of tax to the budget requires increased care. Errors made in indicating the recipient's bank and Federal Treasury account number lead to the fact that the tax is considered unpaid and will have to be paid again. And if the tax is repaid after the deadline for its payment has expired, then financial sanctions may also be imposed on the payer. Other errors in filling out a tax payment order do not entail financial losses and can be corrected by submitting an application to clarify the payment.

Sources: Order of the Ministry of Finance dated November 12, 2013 No. 107n

You can find more complete information on the topic in ConsultantPlus. Free trial access to the system for 2 days.

Incorrect checkpoint in the payment order for payment of taxes

If, when sending a tax payment to the bank, the checkpoint of the recipient or payer was incorrectly indicated, such an error is not considered critical, and the tax obligation is considered fulfilled. Significant errors entailing the accrual of financial sanctions in accordance with paragraphs. 4 p. 4 art. 45 of the Tax Code, only incorrect indication of the recipient's account (treasury) and the name of the bank are recognized - in this case, the payment is considered unfulfilled, it will have to be made again, and penalties must be transferred for failure to pay the tax or insurance premium on time.

In practice, if there is an error in field 102 (payer checkpoint), payments are credited to the Federal Tax Service and are considered executed, but an incorrect checkpoint does not allow you to accurately identify the recipient or sender of the budget payment - therefore, if the checkpoint is incorrectly indicated in field 103 or 102, the money will be classified as unidentified receipts. The taxpayer will need to write a letter to the Federal Tax Service to clarify the payment in any form and attach a payment order with a bank mark. Or write a request for payment, also attaching a payment receipt. Within 30 days, the inspector will find and update the payment with the date of debiting the funds. No penalties will be charged in this case.

Similar troubles arise when making payments to the Social Insurance Fund account: the fund will not be able to accurately determine the sender of the money, and the transfer will have to be clarified. When clarifying payments sent to the Social Insurance Fund, the application is written using a specially developed form posted on the Fund’s website, to which a copy of the payment slip is also attached.

Thus, an error when filling out the checkpoint in a payment order is not critical.
It is important to remember that while the payment is being processed for execution, everything can be easily corrected by sending a clarifying letter to the bank. The situation is more complicated with already executed erroneous payments, but in this case the problem can be solved. You can find more complete information on the topic in ConsultantPlus. Free trial access to the system for 2 days.