When a new exception to EGRUL
The government is once again trying to "tighten the screws" against "unfair" of participants of civil turnover reporting at the state registration of invalid information or in a timely manner didn't change it. In order from 01 September 2017 shall be enforced "mechanism" removing the legal entity from the register when there are entries about the unreliability of information about it. The government is once again trying to "tighten the screws" against "unfair" of participants of civil turnover reporting at the state registration of invalid information or in a timely manner didn't change it. In order from 01 September 2017 shall be enforced "mechanism" removing the legal entity from the register when there are entries about the unreliability of information about it. Will deal in detail with legal problems of the realization of the innovations in life. Provides that the tax authorities are entitled to make a decision about the upcoming removal of the company from the register in the presence of simultaneously the following conditions: a) it has a "tick" on the "defect data" about the organization; b) the time interval of finding this record in the EGRUL is more than 6 months. At first glance everything seems clear and understandable, not having any pitfalls. However, in our opinion, the legislator did not take into account individual moments. For example, the possibility of inclusion in the register of a mark about the dubious nature of the information on the legal entity existed prior to the amendments, the Federal law of 28.12.2016, No. 488 – FZ. The latter actually entered, only the "design" of the disposal organization from the register in the presence of such benchmarks. As a General rule, enshrined in article 4 of the civil code, the provisions of the law are not retroactive and cannot be applied to relations arising before its entry into effect, unless otherwise expressly provided by this act. The law in question does not contain reservations about the permissibility of the distribution of its provisions to previously existing relations. In addition, it is directed toward weighting the provisions of unscrupulous organizations. It seems reasonable to conclude that at risk forced the termination of the activity are those companies with a record of unreliable information which will be entered in the register after 01.09.2017, and dates its emergence to expire more than six months. The organizations that received the label on the disparity data fact, until September of this year, in fact, are in a stale state. It is unlikely that the legislator wished to protect them from "forced end" activities. It would be reasonable to equate those, and other, giving the latter six-month period, calculated not from the date of putting a "tick" in the incorporation of incorrect information about the firm, and since entry into force of the relevant norms of the above law. What a way to elect litigation, time will tell. However, definitely we can expect that the tax authorities will not take into account such nuances, and will first proceed with the implementation of this order in relation to "become familiar" companies. In some cases, however, incorporation records are included on the "defect information" about legal entities and who may initiate committing such actions? The legislation calls a closed list of such situations. So, the tag is added in the case of individuals containing the message about the infidelity mentioned about it data in the registry. Along with this, the recording can appear as a result of the initiative of the tax authority presented information about the company at its correspondence to reality (for example, in the case of receipt on the documents for entering in the register the address information of the legal entity on which the registration was made five or more firms). In addition, the marker may arise from the adoption by the registering body of a written rebuttal of the stakeholders regarding the impending state registration of amendments of the articles of organization or entering information into the registry. What is awaiting the company designated in the act on of the impending exclusion from the register? Did she have any chances of survival? The answers to these questions are in close relationship with the elected legislator by way of bringing to the General public messages about the impending "deliverance from dishonest organization." As the sole source of the publication of such information is the journal "Bulletin of state registration". At the same time it clarifies that the notice must contain a "quick guide" to the action in the direction of motivated statements exclude the legal entity, its creditors or other persons whose rights and lawful interests may be affected as a result of implementation of this procedure. We think this method of notification is a big minus. In everyday life, only a small percentage of participants of civil turnover periodically monitors placed in the aforementioned publication information. Therefore, the very "unfair" the company and the other persons too late can learn about upcoming or already completed the process of exclusion of the company from the register and will not be able to take timely measures for their protection. Courts in similar disputes concerning missing deadlines for providing the reasoned objection to the exclusion of inactive legal entity does not support the position "of the victim" (Definition of the RF armed forces 13.06.2017, № 310 – KG 17 – 5981 in case number A08-4492/2016).The most optimal variant is the "placement" of such information to entities in a separate section, as for example, in case of liquidation. As stated above, the law provides for the right of the company, its creditors or other persons whose rights (interests) may be affected due to the termination of its activities, to submit reasoned statements. With these documents, the decision to exclude a legal entity from the register is not accepted. Accordingly, organizations wanting to avoid the removal of it from the registry, or enough to prepare a reasonable objection, or to create a "mass attack" — "find" creditors or other interested parties who are not indifferent to its fate. It is not excluded that these can be employees or former employees of the company. Thus, introduce a legal mechanism for getting rid of "unworthy" companies has some failures, the knowledge of which could materially hinder its implementation, as the saying goes: "Forewarned is forearmed".