预算义务的重组。关于这个司法机构的一般考虑

IF 0.9 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2022-11-10 DOI:10.2478/jles-2022-0016
Cristina Oneț
{"title":"预算义务的重组。关于这个司法机构的一般考虑","authors":"Cristina Oneț","doi":"10.2478/jles-2022-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In 2019, the Romanian legislator regulated for the first time, in the content of O.G. no. 6/2019, the legal institution of the restructuring of budgetary claims on the establishment of fiscal facilities. After that, a series of successive normative acts were adopted, meant to prolong the effects of the initial normative act, but also to bring new and necessary clarifications to the content of this legal institution and the procedure for its development from the moment of initiation until the final extinguishment of its effects on the public budget and the patrimony of the involved budgetary debtor. As we have already shown in the content of the present paper, the analysis of the way in which the restructuring of budgetary claims is regulated has allowed us to draw a series of conclusions concerning this legal institution: a. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is a relatively new legal institution that has been adopted through a normative act other than the Fiscal Procedure Code, which it does not, directly and explicitly, amend or supplement, but indirectly by the fact that it can interfere in the conduct of the fiscal procedure, as well as by the fact that it refers to fiscal law institutions regulated by the Fiscal Procedure Code and which thus bears substantial changes; b. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is essentially different from the other forms of financial support established by the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code and in particular from the payment facilities designed to provide the budgetary debtor with a grace period in order to obtain the funds necessary to extinguish by payment his obligations to the public budgets. It is also different from the cancellation of tax claims established by the Fiscal Procedure Code because it becomes applicable when the collection of tax receivables becomes useless, inefficient, or impossible. c. although it differs from the rescheduling and adjournment of payment, or the cancellation of tax claims, however, in regulating the restructuring of budgetary claims, the legislator appeals to them themselves, in the form in which they were established in the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code.d. the local tax authorities have the right to decide (they are not obliged by law to do so) if they use this legal institution, in the process of collecting the debts due to the budgets they manage;e. in terms of content, the restructuring refers to any kind of budgetary claim (due to the general consolidated budget), in connection with which enforceable titles have also been issued (i.e. the claim has become certain and demandable).","PeriodicalId":47756,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"53 1","pages":"65 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Reorganization of Budgetary Obligations. General Considerations About this Juridical Institution\",\"authors\":\"Cristina Oneț\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jles-2022-0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In 2019, the Romanian legislator regulated for the first time, in the content of O.G. no. 6/2019, the legal institution of the restructuring of budgetary claims on the establishment of fiscal facilities. After that, a series of successive normative acts were adopted, meant to prolong the effects of the initial normative act, but also to bring new and necessary clarifications to the content of this legal institution and the procedure for its development from the moment of initiation until the final extinguishment of its effects on the public budget and the patrimony of the involved budgetary debtor. As we have already shown in the content of the present paper, the analysis of the way in which the restructuring of budgetary claims is regulated has allowed us to draw a series of conclusions concerning this legal institution: a. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is a relatively new legal institution that has been adopted through a normative act other than the Fiscal Procedure Code, which it does not, directly and explicitly, amend or supplement, but indirectly by the fact that it can interfere in the conduct of the fiscal procedure, as well as by the fact that it refers to fiscal law institutions regulated by the Fiscal Procedure Code and which thus bears substantial changes; b. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is essentially different from the other forms of financial support established by the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code and in particular from the payment facilities designed to provide the budgetary debtor with a grace period in order to obtain the funds necessary to extinguish by payment his obligations to the public budgets. It is also different from the cancellation of tax claims established by the Fiscal Procedure Code because it becomes applicable when the collection of tax receivables becomes useless, inefficient, or impossible. c. although it differs from the rescheduling and adjournment of payment, or the cancellation of tax claims, however, in regulating the restructuring of budgetary claims, the legislator appeals to them themselves, in the form in which they were established in the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code.d. the local tax authorities have the right to decide (they are not obliged by law to do so) if they use this legal institution, in the process of collecting the debts due to the budgets they manage;e. in terms of content, the restructuring refers to any kind of budgetary claim (due to the general consolidated budget), in connection with which enforceable titles have also been issued (i.e. the claim has become certain and demandable).\",\"PeriodicalId\":47756,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"53 1\",\"pages\":\"65 - 77\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jles-2022-0016\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jles-2022-0016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2019年,罗马尼亚立法机构首次规定,在O.G. no。6/2019,建立财政设施重组预算债权的法律制度。在那之后,通过了一系列连续的规范性法案,旨在延长最初的规范性法案的效力,但也对这一法律制度的内容及其从启动之时起直至其对公共预算和有关预算债务人遗产的影响最终消失的发展程序进行了新的和必要的澄清。正如我们在本文件的内容中已经表明的那样,对调整预算索偿要求方式的分析使我们能够得出关于这一法律机构的一系列结论:a.预算索偿权的重组是一种相对较新的法律制度,是通过《财政程序法》以外的规范性行为而采用的,它不直接和明确地修改或补充《财政程序法》,而是通过它可以干预财政程序的实施,以及它涉及《财政程序法》规定的财政法律机构,从而发生实质性变化,从而间接地加以采用;b.预算索偿的结构调整与《财政程序法》规定的其他形式的财政支助,特别是与旨在给预算债务人提供宽限期以获得必要资金以偿还其对公共预算的义务的支付便利有本质区别。它也不同于《财政程序法典》所规定的取消税收索赔,因为它适用于应收税款的征收变得无用、低效或不可能的情况。c.虽然它不同于重新安排和推迟付款,或取消税收要求,但是,在调整预算要求的结构方面,立法者以《财政程序法》规定的形式向它们本身提出呼吁。(五)地方税务机关在征收其管理的预算债务的过程中,有权决定是否使用这一法定机构(法律没有规定地方税务机关必须这样做);就内容而言,结构调整是指任何类型的预算索赔(由于一般合并预算),与之相关的可执行所有权也已颁发(即索赔已成为确定的和可要求的)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Reorganization of Budgetary Obligations. General Considerations About this Juridical Institution
Abstract In 2019, the Romanian legislator regulated for the first time, in the content of O.G. no. 6/2019, the legal institution of the restructuring of budgetary claims on the establishment of fiscal facilities. After that, a series of successive normative acts were adopted, meant to prolong the effects of the initial normative act, but also to bring new and necessary clarifications to the content of this legal institution and the procedure for its development from the moment of initiation until the final extinguishment of its effects on the public budget and the patrimony of the involved budgetary debtor. As we have already shown in the content of the present paper, the analysis of the way in which the restructuring of budgetary claims is regulated has allowed us to draw a series of conclusions concerning this legal institution: a. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is a relatively new legal institution that has been adopted through a normative act other than the Fiscal Procedure Code, which it does not, directly and explicitly, amend or supplement, but indirectly by the fact that it can interfere in the conduct of the fiscal procedure, as well as by the fact that it refers to fiscal law institutions regulated by the Fiscal Procedure Code and which thus bears substantial changes; b. the restructuring of the budgetary claims is essentially different from the other forms of financial support established by the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code and in particular from the payment facilities designed to provide the budgetary debtor with a grace period in order to obtain the funds necessary to extinguish by payment his obligations to the public budgets. It is also different from the cancellation of tax claims established by the Fiscal Procedure Code because it becomes applicable when the collection of tax receivables becomes useless, inefficient, or impossible. c. although it differs from the rescheduling and adjournment of payment, or the cancellation of tax claims, however, in regulating the restructuring of budgetary claims, the legislator appeals to them themselves, in the form in which they were established in the provisions of the Fiscal Procedure Code.d. the local tax authorities have the right to decide (they are not obliged by law to do so) if they use this legal institution, in the process of collecting the debts due to the budgets they manage;e. in terms of content, the restructuring refers to any kind of budgetary claim (due to the general consolidated budget), in connection with which enforceable titles have also been issued (i.e. the claim has become certain and demandable).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
10.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Legal Studies is a journal of interdisciplinary academic research into law and legal institutions. It emphasizes social science approaches, especially those of economics, political science, and psychology, but it also publishes the work of historians, philosophers, and others who are interested in legal theory. The JLS was founded in 1972.
期刊最新文献
Forensic Science Integration in Legal Education: A Paradigm Shift for Strengthening Legal Expertise in Pakistan QUO Quadis Romanian Education? Brief Introspection Tax Evasion Between Tax Optimization at the Border of Legality, Tax Burden and Voluntary Compliance Genesis of Legal Regulation of Pre-Trial Detention in Sweden and Ukraine: Comparative Analysis Oligarchic Politics in the Context of a Democratic Rule of Law in Relation to the Principle of Expediency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1