The development of a systemic crisis in the economy changes the market attractiveness of certain products, and legal services are not an exception. The market is shrinking, competition is increasing. The paradox, but with the general contraction of the market, the revenues of the leaders of the rating of law firms "Kommersant" basically grew. Ability to feel the conjuncture, adaptation, use of the situation on the market in its favor cause professional envy of less successful market participants. Correspondents of Kommersant researched key factors of successes and failures of law firms in Russia in the past year and learned whether the legal business has a hope for the future.
Partner of the law firm "Mitra" Soslan Kairov suggests colleagues to plan the main expenses of the company and introduce a projected financial accounting. "It is especially difficult," said Mr. Kairov, "to keep project accounting of client projects where there is a fee for success." The expert believes that such an accounting will allow to concentrate the resources and efforts of the team on the most profitable products of the firm or practice. In projects with fixed fees, it is important to manage your own resources and customer expectations in terms of the volume of services. Otherwise, the marginality of such projects will be significantly lower than projects with hourly pay or a fee for success.
Tax authority against «Kavminstklo”
A large producer of glass containers "Kavminsteklo" appealed to the arbitration court with a lawsuit against the tax authority on the cancellation of the decision on additional charge of VAT in amount of 30 million rubles, as well as penalties and fines. The tax authority in its decision considered that the company wrongly attributed the spoiled products when stored it in open warehouses to a production rejects and wrote off the costs of income tax. In addition, having established the discrepancy between the primary documents, by which the company identified and registered the fact of the production rejects, to the requirements of Article 252 of the Tax Code, he came to the conclusion that there were grounds for adding additional VAT to the total amount of the production rejects.
The court of first instance refused to satisfy the claims of the enterprise. In the appellate instance, the enterprise managed to defend its position and the decision of the tax authority was canceled. According with the words of the representative of "Kavminsteklo" partner of the law firm “Mitra” Soslan Kairov. Now this case is in the court of cassation.
Materials were taken from “Kommersant”
