How is remuneration paid under an agency agreement?

According to Art. 1005 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under an agency agreement, one party (agent) undertakes, for a fee, to perform legal and other actions on behalf of the other party (principal) on its own behalf, but at the expense of the principal or on behalf and at the expense of the principal; an agency agreement can be concluded for a specific period or without specifying its validity period.

The agency agreement is consensual, compensated, bilaterally binding. The parties to the contract are the agent and the principal. The subject of the agency agreement is the commission of legal and other, that is, non-legal (actual) actions on behalf of the principal.

Differences between an agency agreement with an individual entrepreneur and a commission and assignment agreement

If the agent acts on behalf of the principal, then the agency agreement with the individual entrepreneur will be similar to the commission agreement, and when the agent acts on his own behalf, there will be similarities to the commission agreement.

Despite the similarity of the agency agreement with individual entrepreneurs with commission and assignment agreements, it has specific differences from them:

• subject: an agency agreement may include not only the commission of legally significant actions, but also allows the agent to be charged with the commission of actions of an actual nature;
• the possibility of limiting the rights of the principal and agent to enter into similar agreements;
• an agency agreement is designed for long-term actions, rather than a mandate agreement, which is concluded to perform certain legal actions provided for in the document and specified in the power of attorney, or a commission agreement, which is concluded to complete one or more transactions;
• This document also differs from an agency agreement in that the agent executes the order personally. Reassignment is possible only if there is appropriate authority to do so, which is separately specified in the power of attorney, or when the agent is forced to do this in the interests of the principal.
• Under an agency agreement, as well as under a commission agreement, it is possible to involve third parties. Therefore, if the individual entrepreneur wants to limit the possibility of subagency, this is immediately spelled out when concluding an agency agreement.

Advantages:

1. The employee is not bound by a specific schedule for performing a job function and can plan his own working time, is not subject to labor discipline, and does not have a job description within which he performs his functions. Thus, the principal does not have administrative authority over the agent, despite the ability of the principal to give instructions to him.

2. In any case, remuneration depends on the volume of work performed or services provided, which encourages more active work;

3. An agent can form his own client base, which may be important for him in the future;

4. The ability to combine activities with work under an employment contract without restrictions on the number of working hours;

5. Lack of financial liability based on Ch. 37 39 Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

Termination of an agency agreement with an individual entrepreneur

Agency contractual relations between individual entrepreneurs can be terminated by mutual consent of both parties, or if one of the individual entrepreneurs refuses to fulfill his duties (in this case, penalties are imposed on him).

Termination also occurs under the following conditions:

• if the agent has died;
• recognition of an agent by the court as completely incompetent or partially capable
• the agent is declared missing by the court;
• declaring the agent bankrupt.

Which contract to choose when working through an intermediary

Before deciding on the type of intermediary agreement (agency, commission, assignment), you need to get answers to a number of questions:

1. What actions should and may the intermediary take? If a one-time transaction is made through an intermediary, then it is best to conclude a commission or commission agreement. Moreover, if it is assumed that the intermediary will have to perform, in addition to the transaction, some legal actions (collect a debt, represent the client in court, etc.), then the commission agreement will not be suitable, because The commission agent has the right to make only transactions. An agency agreement allows the agent to perform a wide range of actions in the interests of the client. It is recommended to conclude such an agreement when, in addition to the transaction itself, the agent has other responsibilities (for example, conducting marketing research, organizing advertising, finding a buyer).
2. What rights and obligations do parties to transactions have? The intermediary can act on his own behalf (a commission agreement or an agency agreement concluded under the commission agreement model) or on behalf of the client (a commission agreement or an agency agreement concluded under the agency agreement model). Here is an example of a situation that often arises: a manufacturer sells its goods through an intermediary. Suppose that the goods turned out to be of poor quality or for some reason were not delivered to the buyer after receiving the advance payment, then the buyer will file a claim with the intermediary. Please note that if the intermediary acted under a commission agreement, then he, and not the manufacturer, is responsible to the buyer. Thus, if the intermediary does not want to bear such responsibility, then he should not enter into a commission agreement.
3. What is the responsibility of the intermediary to the client? If we talk about the interests of the intermediary, then it is more profitable for him to conclude an agency agreement using the assignment model, because then he will be responsible only for the performance of his duties and will not be liable for failure to fulfill the transaction by a third party. But for the client, an agreement based on the commission model is beneficial, because In this case, the agent must also exercise caution when choosing a counterparty. Additionally, under such an agreement, the parties can indicate a condition on del credere (Article 993 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). In this case, the agent is responsible not only for his actions, but also for the execution of the transaction by a third party, and in case of non-fulfillment, the client has the right to make a claim to the agent for compensation for losses.
4. Possibility of additional benefits for the agent. We are talking about a situation where the agent concluded a deal on more favorable terms. Suppose a client instructed an agent to enter into a contract for the supply of materials at agreed prices, and the agent was able to do this at a lower price. Can the agent receive this difference in price as an additional benefit for himself? Yes, it can, if the agency agreement is concluded on a commission model. Moreover, as a general rule, this benefit should be divided equally between the agent and the client, but the parties can agree on a different proportion of distribution.
5. In what cases can an intermediary refuse to fulfill a contract? The possibility of unilateral refusal of the intermediary from the agreement is possible under a contract of agency, as well as under a commission agreement or an agency agreement, which does not indicate its validity period. At the same time, the parties cannot agree to prohibit unilateral refusal, because this norm is imperative. An intermediary cannot unilaterally renounce his duties if a commission agreement or agency agreement is concluded for a certain period and the text does not contain conditions on such a right.
6. In what cases can a client cancel his order to an intermediary? Let’s assume that the client entered into an agreement with an intermediary to search for buyers, but found a profitable option on his own, so he no longer needs intermediary services. If the intermediary does not want to terminate the contract by agreement of the parties, then the client can do this unilaterally. By law, the client is obliged to inform the intermediary about his unilateral refusal of the contract in advance (no later than 30 days) only in two cases: when canceling the agency agreement concluded with a commercial representative, and if an open-ended commission agreement was concluded. In this case, the client must:

• reimburse the intermediary for the expenses incurred in the transaction and pay remuneration for the work already done (if an open-ended commission agreement or an agency agreement on the commission model or an agency agreement on the commission model were concluded, under which the intermediary does not act as a commercial representative);
• compensate the intermediary for all losses, including lost profits, resulting from the cancellation of the order (if it is a fixed-term commission or commission agreement or an agency agreement based on the order model, under which the intermediary is a commercial representative).

Structure and content of a standard agency agreement with an individual entrepreneur.

1. Date and place of conclusion of the agreement.
2. Name of the parties. In this case, the parties are individual entrepreneurs (IP) - individuals registered in accordance with the procedure established by law and carrying out entrepreneurial activities without forming a legal entity.
3. Subject of the agreement. It is necessary to define the actions that the agent must perform. These can be legal services, services for the purchase and sale of goods, real estate transactions, etc.
4. Contract time. The document can be concluded for a specific period or without specifying a validity period.
5. Rights and obligations of the parties. Contractual relations may limit the rights of both one and the other party (for example, non-disclosure, prohibition on concluding similar documents for a given transaction).
6. Deadlines for executing agency orders.
7. Submission of the Agent's report. The agent is responsible for his actions. It should be specified in what form and within what time frame the agency report will be provided.
8. Agent's remuneration and payment procedure. The remuneration can be paid after the agent performs certain actions or after the entire agreement is fulfilled.
9. Responsibility of the parties.
10. Grounds and procedure for termination of the contract. Termination is regulated by the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
11. Dispute resolution.
12. Force Majeure.
13. Other conditions.
14. List of applications.
15. Addresses and details of the parties.
16. Signatures of the parties.

Accounting

Documentation and correspondence of accounts for transactions between the agent and the principal take into account not only the terms of payment of agency fees in general, but also such nuances as:

• whether the agent works on his own behalf or on behalf of the customer;
• whether the agent receives remuneration from the amounts of goods sold to a third party (transfers from the value of contracts concluded by him) or whether the customer makes payment in a separate amount;
• whether the goods the agent is working with are stored in his warehouse or not, etc.

There may be several options for accounting schemes, the main ones are given below.

Transactions with the agent, if he acts on behalf of the customer

An agent working on behalf of a customer is not the owner of the goods and materials with which he works. Consequently, he has neither income nor expenses related directly to these values ​​(PBU 9/99).

Postings:

• D51 (or 52) K76 - funds were received from the principal to secure the transaction, including VAT and remuneration.
• D76 K90.1 - agent remuneration.
• D90.3 K68.2 - VAT on the remuneration amount.
• D60 K51 - transferred to the supplier for goods and materials for the principal.
• D76 K60 - reimbursable agency expenses are recorded in accounting, including VAT.

Goods received for the customer are taken into account on the balance sheet, D002 (the goods are not the property of the agent). After the goods are shipped from the agent’s warehouse to the customer, they are written off from K002.

Transactions with the agent if he acts as an intermediary

• D62 K76 - revenue under the contract.
• D51 (or 52) K62 - the buyer made the payment.
• D76 K51 (or 52) - transfer of funds for goods and materials sold to the principal (minus remuneration amounts).
• D62 K90.1 - agent remuneration taken into account.
• D90.3 K68.2 - VAT has been accrued on the remuneration.
• D76 K62 - agent’s remuneration to be credited.

Similar to the previous option, off-balance sheet accounting of assets is maintained: D004 – capitalization of inventory items for sale, K004 – written off inventory items sold.

The principal's accounting is similar to that of settlements with suppliers, but one should take into account working with them through a third party - an agent.

Postings of the customer in case the agent acts on his behalf

• D76 K51 - transfer of money to the agent for purchases, remuneration, reimbursement of his expenses.
• D41 K76 - the purchase of goods through an agent is taken into account (a similar entry in the cost of goods takes into account the agency fee and delivery costs).
• D 19 K76 - VAT on the purchase of goods (a similar entry takes into account VAT on remuneration and delivery costs).
• D68.2 K19 - for VAT deduction.

Postings of the customer in case the agent acts as an intermediary

• D51 K62 - funds received from the agent, received by him from buyers.
• D62 K90.1 - revenue from the agent is recorded according to his report.
• D90.3 K68.2 - VAT on the proceeds.
• D20 (or 44, 26) K76 - the agent’s remuneration is fixed.
• D19 K76 - VAT on remuneration.
• D 68.2 K19 - for VAT deduction.
• D90.2 K20 (or 26, 44) - write-off of costs for agent services.
• D76 K62 - agent’s remuneration to be credited.

What needs to be taken into account when creating agency schemes?

It is necessary to take into account the requirements put forward by the tax service to companies involved in agency schemes and the agency scheme as a whole. Failure to comply with these requirements may lead to the recognition of the principal’s income as income of the company (agent) and corresponding taxation.

1. Companies must have completely independent business structures. There must be no connection between the agency company and the principal that could compromise the independence of the agent. That is, the principal cannot be a shareholder of the company, the director of the principal and the director cannot be the same person, the principal and the shareholder of the company must not have the same address, etc.
2. The provision of agency services must be the main and “ordinary” activity of the company and the agency services must be provided on an ongoing and independent basis. Those. a company cannot provide agency services to only one principal, as this may be considered a violation of the conditions of “ordinary” activities on an ongoing and independent basis and as evidence of the company’s dependence on the principal. Therefore, we recommend using several principals instead of one principal and dividing the agency scheme into several schemes, where different principals participate, to whom agency services are provided by one English company.
3. Agency agreements must be concluded and signed between the principals and the onshore company, which clearly states to whom and for the sales of which goods agency services will be provided. Transactions can be carried out only with those companies and for such goods that are specified in agency agreements.

When choosing the country of registration of an agency company, in addition to the main criteria described at the beginning of the article, you should also take into account factors such as the cost of registering and maintaining a company, reporting and auditing, and the possibility of obtaining nominee service.

Requirement for an agency scheme

The onshore company must meet a number of requirements that ultimately determine the “workability” of the scheme. The essence of these is as follows:

• firstly, the jurisdiction from which the agency company originates must, in any case, be absent from the official list of offshore zones approved by Decree of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine No. 106-r dated March 1, 2000;
• secondly, it is desirable to have a double taxation avoidance agreement concluded between the agent’s country and Ukraine;
• thirdly, the country’s legislation should allow the conclusion of direct contracts with offshore companies without compromising the tax status of the agency company (for example, in Estonia an offshore list similar to the Ukrainian one was adopted, which put an end to the active use of local companies as intermediaries in “agency schemes”) .

A number of European jurisdictions meet these criteria, but two of them are the most popular among Ukrainian entrepreneurs - Great Britain, the Czech Republic, and Cyprus.

Blog about taxes by Vladimir Turov

Quite often there are “schemes”, formalities, fictitiousness... These scum entrepreneurs do not sleep for days and nights thinking about how to warm up the state... What is this: the biased attitude of tax officials or the realities of Russian business? The unfortunate experience of those who wanted to cheat and thought: “I’m smarter than the tax authorities,” affects respectable taxpayers. Of course, fiscal service employees will fit everyone into the mold of dishonesty and sniff out bad signs. And businessmen, once disappointed in their partner, will begin to treat others with distrust and caution.

This article will talk about intermediary relationships: from fake ones to real ones. A short review of attempts to tarnish the “honest name of the intermediary”... Or maybe just annoying misunderstandings. And the successful experience of “noble” cooperation, which they wanted to label as a “scheme”.

When the agent is completely dependent on the principal

The agent must be absolutely independent, independent and free, otherwise he is recognized as a “puppet” that belongs to the principal and cannot say a word without his command. For example, in the Resolution of the Volga Region Autonomous District No. F06-12733/2016 dated May 25, 2017. in case No. A12-18080/2016, employees of the fiscal service discovered that the principal and the attorney worked as a single unit. Common area, entrances and exits, sign, cash line, corporate identity. The staff worked here and there. As a result, the agency agreement was recognized as formal and additional accrual was made.

Maria Morozova

Lawyer and tax consultant at Turov and Partners:

Nothing surprising. Each person must have signs of independence and integrity; there must be separate premises and assets. Employees must clearly understand who employs them. In addition, there must be a business purpose for each transaction and an economic justification. After all, everyone is a commercial organization and has a single goal - making a profit. Today it is not enough to sign an agreement and establish a minimum document flow: it is necessary that the legal side of the relationship corresponds to reality.

When an agent purchases goods through “gray” companies

In the Resolution of the Administrative Court of the North Caucasus District in case No. A32-33124/2016 dated July 18, 2017. the agent entered into a contract for the supply of seeds. Tax officials did not delve into the intricacies of agency relationships. They immediately turned their attention to the intermediary's counterparties. Quite suspicious “personalities”:

• Basic and transportation facilities are missing;
• There are no material and labor resources;
• Tax deductions for VAT are 97-99%.

Plus, there are discrepancies in the quantity and cost of products under contracts with reality. As a result, everything secret became clear: the tax authorities found out that the goods were still purchased, but directly from manufacturers working under special regimes. And “gray” counterparties were included in the chain for creating VAT.

When an agent duplicates the functions of the principal's employees

In the Resolution of the Court of Justice of the West Siberian District in case No. A45-10722/2016 dated July 12, 2017. the agents and the principal made a lot of mistakes. The feeling that you have concocted an agency agreement and do whatever your heart desires, without paying attention to the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Maybe it'll take a ride...

• Agents were created literally a week before the conclusion of the agency agreement;
• The founder and director of one of the agents was a former employee of the principal;
• The agents did not have the necessary material, technical and labor resources to fulfill their obligations under agency agreements;
• We did not bear the costs of conducting real business activities: there were no utility and rental payments;
• The principal and agents are interdependent persons, located at the same address;
• Common counterparties: the principal's buyers were also the agents' suppliers;
• The principal had employees who performed the functions of agents;
• The agents did not provide similar services to other companies;
• The accounting and tax reporting of the agents was carried out by the principal's accountant;
• Instructions, reports, and work completion certificates were drawn up on the same day.

In addition, tax officials found fault with the lack of competitive sheets. The principal did not prove competitive selection of suppliers. Three competitive lists were not enough to prove the “attractiveness” of the agents. And even the principal’s indignation on the topic “competition sheets are not accounting report documents” was considered unconvincing by the court: all documents are important to prove reality.

Maria Morozova

Lawyer and tax consultant at Turov and Partners:

In 2008, the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation came to the conclusion that the taxpayer’s expenses are economically justified, even if he has departments on his staff that perform similar functions ( Resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated March 18, 2008 No. 14616/07 ). Currently, the main reason companies lose in court is the lack of evidence that the company duplicating the functions of in-house personnel actually did their job. This was precisely the decisive argument in this case. If you use an agent, they should actually be involved in closing the deals. In addition, if you are using the services of the principal’s accountant, then there must be a corresponding agreement. Of course, it is better to outsource an accountant.

When an agent doesn’t bother with documents and pays minimal taxes

It has been said and written hundreds of thousands of times: the more documents, the better. And it’s even better if the documents are drawn up in as much detail as possible, describing the details. But companies continue to step on the rake with a disregard for papers and “it will do.” For example, in the Resolution of the AS of the West Siberian District in case No. A03-16153/2016 dated 07/03/2017. both sides of the mediation relationship decided not to bother with paperwork. They concluded a commission agreement, but forgot to fulfill the “documentary” terms of the agreement:

• There were no documents confirming the transfer of goods;
• Letters of approval of expenses necessary for the execution of contracts were missing;
• There were also no weekly reports on work completed.

In addition, the amounts indicated in the commission agent's reports did not coincide with the receipts of the current account. The parties' employees are not aware of each other's existence. By the way, this fact is quite logical, because the principal, again, had the signs of a nominal structure...

When intermediaries are controlled by relatives and work for thanks

In the complicated case No. A21-2133/2016 , there is more than enough evidence not in favor of agency relations... The story is really complicated, a tangle of interdependence, control and confusion... There was an individual entrepreneur, engaged in wholesale and retail trade. Five individual entrepreneurs collaborated with him, who were also principals for the principal’s supplier.

• Interdependence is everywhere and everywhere. There are family ties all around... The head of the supplier is the spouse of the individual entrepreneur. The principals worked for the supplier at various times;
• Accounts are opened in one bank;
• Income from the activities of the principals was actually equal to expenses. Taxes are minimal;
• The commission agent controlled the activities of intermediaries. There was not the slightest hint of independence: “the assortment, quantity, price of purchase and sale of goods, suppliers and buyers of goods were not determined by the committents, they did not manage funds, and they did not make management decisions. They did not exercise control over the acquisition and sale of goods, were unable to explain the circumstances of their economic activity, and did not carry out independent activities”;
• The principals were physically unable to carry out entrepreneurial activities, because lived in another city, worked in other companies;
• Accounting and tax accounting for the entire “group” was carried out by one accountant;
• The warehouse did not have separate areas for each consignor. The warehouse premises were used as a single whole, the goods of the commission agent and the principals were not separated;
• The commission agent's reports were drawn up unilaterally and were signed on behalf of the principals by the commission agent's authorized representative;
• In the book of income and expenses, the commission agent kept records of goods not in the context of the principals, as should have been the case for conscientious financial and economic activity, but in the context of the assortment of goods. At the same time, the commission agent's reports were compiled in the context of each committent, in order to confirm by the committents that they did not exceed the income established by the simplified tax system;
• The commission agent's debt to principals over 3 years amounted to almost 600 million rubles. At the same time, the principals continued to cooperate and did not take any actions aimed at collecting debts. And during the interrogation they could not answer whether the commission agent owed them anything or not, i.e. they simply did not know about the existence of the debt.

As a result, the court, on the basis of the Ruling of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation No. 307-KG17-10232 dated 08/09/2017. decided that “commission trading organized by an entrepreneur with the participation of interdependent and controlled counterparties who did not conduct independent commercial activities was aimed at minimizing his tax obligations.”

When only the principal knows about the agency relationship

In the Resolution of the Volga Region District Court No. F06-23644/2017 in case No. A55-21937/2016 dated September 12, 2017 . the act of work performed by the agent did not contain an exact list of services. What exactly the intermediary did, how he participated in the negotiations is unknown... The tax authorities decided that the agreement was fictitious and began searching for evidence. And for good reason:

• The legal, postal address, telephone number of the agent completely coincides with the contact information of the principal;
• There are no fixed assets;
• No personal income tax or insurance premiums were paid;
• There are no payments for hiring staff and outsourcing services;
• The agent's former supervisor works for the principal.

During the interrogation of the former director of the intermediary, employees of the fiscal service found out that he knew nothing about the agency relations of those years. He is not the only one: as it turned out, the counterparties with whom the intermediary entered into contracts are not aware of his existence. The court came to the conclusion that the services under the agency agreement were fictitious.

When the agents are the real ones

If the intermediary actually spins like a squirrel in a wheel, not forgetting about clarity in papers, freedom and business, then nothing threatens a fruitful relationship. And now, positive stories.

In the Resolution of the AC of the North-Western District in case No. A13-6063/2015 dated 09/07/2017. The tax authorities were confused by the interdependence of the principal and the commission agents and the “murky” condition of the contract: “the obligation of the principal to provide the commission agents with computers and office equipment for carrying out trade with the incurrence of expenses for their maintenance, carrying out activities to promote the goods sold by the commission agents, reimbursement of expenses incurred by the commission agents that are necessary for the execution instructions from the committent." Taxpayers turned out to be stronger and proved that there is a real relationship between them:

• Firstly, commission agents were registered as legal entities long before the start of intermediary relations with the principal;
• Secondly, intermediaries have the necessary staff and material resources to conduct their activities;
• Thirdly, each participant in transactions meets all the signs of independence and good faith: “independently fulfills obligations within the framework of statutory activities, independently keeps records of its income and expenses, calculates taxes and submits tax reports”;
• Fourthly, the reports are made in detail, specific services provided by the commission agents are described in detail: “information about the cost of the goods received from the principal and shipped to customers, the dates of shipment and invoice numbers are indicated, as well as the amount of money transferred to the principal for the goods”;
• Fifthly, the commission agreement describes all the important aspects of the relationship, including the responsibilities of the parties and penalties.

The inspection found no evidence that the goods were supplied to end consumers directly from the consignor, bypassing intermediaries. However, the inspection was also unable to prove how interdependence affected the results of the transactions. As a result, the court indicated that “the company’s involvement in the sale of goods to end customers as commission agents of interdependent organizations is not evidence that the taxpayer received an unjustified tax benefit, but may have legal significance for the purposes of tax control only if it is established that the transactions were not actually completed, were not actually fulfilled and were not due to reasonable economic or other reasons.”

Maria Morozova

Lawyer and tax consultant at Turov and Partners:

Interdependence in itself is not a reason to recognize transactions as fictitious; it is the reality of the transactions that is important. Now this is also spelled out in the Tax Code of the Russian Federation in Article 54.1 . Tax authorities are no longer allowed to charge additional taxes on formal grounds.

The principal can compensate the agent for the agent's expenses related to the execution of the principal's instructions, such as: transport, advertising, warehouse rental. It is very interesting that there is a letter from the Ministry of Finance stating that it is possible to compensate an agent for his expenses for office rent, employee salaries, tax expenses and similar payments. From the point of view of the law, this is true: the law allows the agent to be compensated and even these expenses of the agent to be written off as expenses. But as you understand, it is absolutely contrary to logic and generally accepted signs of independence. Of course, this is not the first position of the Ministry of Finance with which it did not immediately decide.

If everything is smooth, realistic and detailed, there is nothing to worry about. Empty quibbles on the part of tax officials - there were, there are and there will be. For example, in the Determination of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation No. 308-KG17-5821 dated May 18, 2017. In case No. A20-3019/2015, tax officials thought and thought about what to complain about in an ideal agency relationship... and they came up with the idea of ​​irrationality and inefficiency of the agent. The court explained to the employees of the fiscal service that assessing the effectiveness of the intermediary is not their business.

In the Resolution of the Central District Court in case No. A48-2818/2016 dated September 12, 2017 . The tax authorities found the signatures in the agency agreement and documentation suspicious. The agreement was signed by one director of the principal, and the transaction documents were signed by others; therefore, the transaction is unrealistic. In addition, the witnesses listed in the client transfer acts did not confirm the relationship with the agent. It would seem like a failure... However, well-executed documents were enough to defend reality. The agent provided an agreement, additional agreements, acts of transfer of clients, acts of provision of services, payment documents for payment of services, invoices.

Regarding the fact that clients do not know the agent, the court indicated that “this circumstance does not refute the fact of the provision of agency services, because by virtue of Article 1005 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, agency actions can be performed by an agent both on his own behalf, but at the expense of the principal, and on behalf and at the expense of the principal, and under the terms of the agency agreement, agency services in the form of market analysis and provision of information about potential buyers, providing assistance when concluding contracts between potential buyers and the principal, they were to be made by the agent on behalf of the principal.”

Agency scheme: how to implement and save as much as possible

At the online intensive “Agency scheme: how to implement and save as much as possible ,” which starts on December 1, Maria Morozova will talk about all the details of intermediary relations. The course consists of four lessons. You will learn absolutely everything: from theory to implementation and further relationship building, taking into account the latest judicial practice and new legislation.

Maria Morozova

Lawyer and tax consultant at Turov and Partners:

By using an agent in your business, you get many benefits such as:

• The main company is protected from claims of third parties and regulatory authorities regarding interaction with counterparties through an agent;
• The agent's remuneration is fully included in the costs of both the OSN and the simplified tax system;
• Using an individual entrepreneur or PC as an agent, you save insurance premiums;
• Individual Entrepreneur Agent completely legally withdraws cash;
• The agent, receiving a reward in the form of interest, is motivated to work better.

But in order to extract all the benefits listed above, you need to arrange everything correctly and take into account the nuances.

FIND OUT MORE AND SIGN UP FOR AN ONLINE INTENSIVE

(Visited 258 times, 1 visits today)

Natalia Nagornova

Editor-in-Chief of Vladimir Turov’s Tax Blog

Agency agreement: accounting with the principal

The principal has no relationship with the actual supplier or buyer of goods and services. In accounting, all settlements are reflected only with the commission agent. In the organization's accounting, the receipt of goods and services is reflected at the time of their actual receipt on the date of approval of the agent's report. When a commission agent acquires material assets in the interests of the company, the agent’s remuneration should be taken into account in their cost (clause 6 of PBU 5/01, clause 8 of PBU 6/01).

Agency agreement: transactions with the principal.

AD between LLC and individual entrepreneur

This LLC agreement is quite common in almost all areas of activity and may reflect a number of specific conditions. Each AD is concluded individually, taking into account all the necessary needs.

Is it possible not to pay VAT? If an individual entrepreneur submits an application for the simplified taxation system (STS), then he will be required to pay only 6% (tax rate). In this case, the customer will not take into account VAT and, according to the OSN tax system, will pay 18% of his income from AD.

Sample AD between individual entrepreneur and LLC

Related documents

• Sample. Agent agreement
• Agency agreement-2
• Agency agreement-3
• Agency agreement for the sale of goods
• Agency agreement for the sale of goods-2
• Dealer agreement on the sale of goods on the territory
• Agency agreement for legal actions
• Agency agreement for the purchase and sale of products
• Agreement for the provision of agency services for finding clients
• Agency agreement to attract clients to provide them with hotel accommodation services
• Agency agreement to attract clients for organizing hotel services
• Agency agreement to attract clients to organize legal services
• Agency agreement to attract clients to enter into contracts for the sale and purchase of residential premises
• Agency agreement to attract clients and promote tourism products
• Agency agreement to attract clients for mortgage lending
• Agency agreement to attract clients for the provision of vehicle evacuation services
• Agency agreement to attract organizations interested in accounting and auditing services
• Agency agreement for the sale of tourism products
• Agency agreement with an individual to attract clients to the resort
• Agency agreement with an individual to attract clients to conclude agreements with them for the provision of paid information services

Taxation

At its core, an agent acts as a freelance employee of the company. In accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code, the customer is obliged to pay taxes for it. This is covered in detail in the Tax Code (Clause 1, Article 226).

The cost of paying tax for an agent, as a rule, is set by the customer and is taken into account in the amount of other expenses of the company (clause 21, Article 255 of the Tax Code). When submitting reports to the tax office, this information must be displayed.

In addition to taxes, the customer is required to pay contributions to the pension fund. The agent, in turn, can decide on his own whether to pay to the social insurance fund (Clause 1, Article 5 of the Federal Law).

At the same time, when concluding an AD, it is not necessary to include a clause on taxation, since the customer must make the deductions himself.

Leave a comment on the document

Do you think the document is incorrect? Leave a comment and we will correct the shortcomings. Without a comment, the rating will not be taken into account!
Thank you, your rating has been taken into account. The quality of documents will increase from your activity.