Responsibility for violation of cash discipline - 2.5. Failure to receive money to the cash desk - Cash discipline in cash payments - Cash payments taking into account the latest and

The concept of cash discipline

The rules for conducting cash transactions in an organization are enshrined in the instructions of the Central Bank of Russia No. 3210-U.
The regulatory document provides for the procedure for handling cash in an institution. For any deviation from the established requirements, liability is provided for violation of the procedure for conducting cash transactions. But this is not the only standard for working with cash. All organizations and individual entrepreneurs that accept cash payment for services and work provided or goods sold from individuals are required to use online cash registers. It is prohibited to work without a new generation cash register (Law No. 54-FZ and Law No. 290-FZ). If a company or merchant carries out a transaction “bypassing the cash register”, then fines cannot be avoided.

The key rules for organizing work with cash transactions are in the article New in cash discipline: how to avoid fines.”

What is the fine for not having a cash register?

If entrepreneurs or companies required to record sales through the cash register do not comply with this requirement and continue to conceal revenue, the Federal Tax Service has the right to apply a fine to them for failure to use cash registers:

for individual entrepreneurs and self-employed persons - up to half of the unaccounted profit, but not less than 10 thousand rubles;
for organizations - up to 100% of the amount of unaccounted sales, but not less than 30 thousand rubles.

In case of a repeated offense with unaccounted revenue of more than 1 million rubles, the entrepreneur faces tougher sanctions:

for authorized persons - removal from office for up to 2 years;
for individual entrepreneurs and enterprises - a ban on conducting activities for up to 3 months.

Let's look at the use of sanctions using a specific example. A cosmetics store registered as an LLC sells products without cash registers. Over the entire period of activity, cosmetics worth 500,000 rubles were sold. If a violation is detected, the Federal Tax Service inspector may impose a fine on the LLC for operating without a cash register in the amount of up to half a million rubles. If the store does not supply a cash register, the next violation may result in the business being suspended for 90 days. The fine for the absence of a cash register for individual entrepreneurs will be no more than 250,000 rubles. Sanctions apply even if the cash register is already registered with the Federal Tax Service, but for some reason is not used in trade.

Cash registers for all areas of business. Delivery throughout Russia.

Leave a request and receive a consultation within 5 minutes.

Procedure for organizing a cash register

To comply with established standards, an institution needs to complete five key steps:

Appoint a responsible employee for conducting cash transactions. Familiarize the employee with the provisions of instructions No. 3210-U and Law No. 54-FZ in the latest edition against signature.
Ensure the safety of the cash register and documentation. It is necessary to equip the office with a safe in which to store money, orders, cash books and a checkbook.
Set a limit on the cash balance in the cash register. This amount is calculated by calculation, based on receipts or departures from the cash register. Do not exceed the limit at the end of a work shift or day, otherwise penalties for violation of cash discipline are guaranteed. Deposit the surplus into the company's bank account. On paydays the balance may be greater than the limit.
Record all transactions using special cash documents. For incoming transactions, write out an incoming order, and for expenses, write out an outgoing order. Record transactions in the cash book. If you accept cash payment for goods, work, services, use online cash register.
Spend proceeds only for permitted purposes. The list of approved expenses is given in the instructions of the Bank of Russia dated October 7, 2013 No. 3073-U.

Cash disputes in court decisions

During audits, tax officials are often held accountable for violations of cash discipline. The fines are considerable. Based on an analysis of the existing judicial practice on “cash” disputes, we will tell you in what cases they are held administratively liable.

Responsibility for violation of the procedure for working with cash and the procedure for conducting cash transactions is established in Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. For officials - a fine from 4,000 to 5,000 rubles, for legal entities - from 40,000 to 50,000 rubles.

It is possible to bring administrative liability under this article only in case of non-compliance with the procedure for storing available funds, making cash settlements with other organizations in excess of the established amounts, non-receipt (incomplete receipt) of cash to the cash desk, or when cash accumulates in the cash register in excess of the established limits.

Violation of the procedure for storing funds

The procedure for conducting cash transactions, approved by the Bank of Russia on September 22, 1993 No. 40 (hereinafter referred to as the Procedure for conducting cash transactions), stipulates that the organization must be equipped with a cash desk - an isolated room intended for receiving, issuing and temporary storage of cash (clause 29) . Uniform requirements for technical strengthening and equipment of alarm systems in cash register premises of enterprises are given in Appendix No. 3 to the Procedure for conducting cash transactions.

It must be said that these requirements are difficult to meet. Therefore, among tax authorities, failure to comply with the procedure for storing available funds is a favorite basis for bringing organizations to liability under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

In particular, the cash register premises must meet the following requirements:

be isolated from other service and utility rooms;
located on intermediate floors of multi-story buildings. In two-story buildings, ticket offices are located on the upper floors. In one-story buildings, the windows of the cash register are equipped with internal shutters;
have solid walls, solid floor and ceiling ceilings, reliable internal walls and partitions;
close with two doors: an external one, opening outwards, and an internal one, made in the form of a steel lattice, opening towards the internal location of the cash register;
be equipped with a special window for issuing money;
have a safe (metal cabinet) for storing money and valuables, which must be firmly attached to the building structures of the floor and wall with steel pipes;
Have a working fire extinguisher.

Some courts, if an organization fails to comply with certain provisions of the Procedure for Conducting Cash Operations for the technical strengthening of cash registers, satisfy the demands of tax authorities and hold the organization accountable under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District dated January 18, 2011 No. A63-6264/2010 (Decision of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated March 29, 2011 No. VAS-3365/11 refused to transfer the case for review), the Fifteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated March 2, 2011 No. 15AP-795/2011). Thus, the organization was held accountable for the absence of a second lock on the front door of the cash register, a metal grill on the door and a metal grill on the window for issuing money (resolution of the Fifth Arbitration Court of Appeal dated June 4, 2009 No. 05AP-901/2009).

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District, by resolution dated 02/07/2011 No. A52-2365/2010, held the organization liable for storing funds in a safe that was not attached to the building structures of the floor and wall, and also for the fact that the safe was not sealed with a seal at the end of the working day cashier.

Other courts, for similar violations of the Procedure for Conducting Cash Transactions, refuse to allow tax authorities to hold the organization accountable under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, recognizing such violations as insignificant.

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the East Siberian District, by resolution dated July 14, 2010 No. A19-1295/10, recognized the offense as minor and released the organization from liability for failure to comply with the procedure for storing available funds, which resulted in the fact that the premises in which the company stored funds and made cash payments It was closed with one wooden door, there was no window for issuing money, and the metal safe was not attached to the floor and wall structures. Recognizing the administrative offense committed by the company as insignificant, the court took into account that the funds kept in the company's cash register at the time of the inspection were insignificant, the company was brought to administrative responsibility for the first time, it fully admitted its guilt, and it complied with other requirements for cash registers, including including a working fire extinguisher and alarm system, the room was separate.

Carrying out cash transactions in a non-isolated room, equipped only with a wooden door without a window for issuing money, with two workplaces belonging to different organizations, was also recognized on the basis of Art. 2.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation is a minor administrative offense. The court concluded that the offense did not create a significant threat to protected public relations and did not cause harm to the interests of citizens, society and the state.

The reason for recognizing such offenses as insignificant may be the fact that the company carries out payments mainly in non-cash form, the funds available in the cash register are intended to meet its current needs, the amount of funds remaining in the cash register is insignificant, and the receipts presented by the company indicate the regular delivery of cash to the bank (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated October 18, 2010 No. A27-2965/2010).

So, to bring the organization to justice under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation for non-compliance with the procedure for storing free cash is possible in case of any deviation of the state of the cash register premises from the Unified requirements for technical strengthening and alarm equipment of cash register premises of enterprises, given in Appendix No. 3 to the Procedure for conducting cash transactions. You can avoid liability only if you can convince the judges of the insignificance of this offense. However, it must be taken into account that the qualification of an offense as insignificant occurs only in exceptional cases and the application by the court of provisions on insignificance must be motivated (clause 18.1 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated June 2, 2004 No. 10).

Violation of the cash payment limit

The cash settlement limit is established by Bank of Russia Directive No. 1843-U dated June 20, 2007. It says that cash payments in the Russian Federation between legal entities, as well as between a legal entity and an individual entrepreneur, between individual entrepreneurs related to their business activities, within the framework of one agreement concluded between these persons, can be carried out in an amount not exceeding 100,000 rubles.

Meanwhile, from a literal reading of Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, we can conclude that responsibility for carrying out cash payments in excess of the established amounts arises only when they are carried out between organizations.

Judicial practice on this issue is contradictory. Some courts believe that for failure to comply with the limit on cash settlements with an individual entrepreneur, prosecution under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation is impossible (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated December 11, 2009 No. F03-7241/2009 and the Northwestern District dated May 8, 2007 No. A05-12170/2006). Others believe that fines under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, it is also possible for above-limit settlements with an individual entrepreneur (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District dated 02/18/2010 No. A28-16681/2009 and the Ural District dated 01/18/2008 No. F09-11294/07-S1).

Since a unified approach to resolving this issue has not been developed in arbitration practice, we recommend that when making cash payments with individual entrepreneurs not to exceed the limit of 100,000 rubles. under one contract.

When making cash payments between organizations, the correct execution of cash documents and contracts within the framework of which settlements are carried out is important. Thus, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District in its resolution dated October 13, 2010 No. A03-1460/2010) did not recognize cash payments between organizations, the total amount of which exceeded 100,000 rubles, as above the limit. The organization presented documents, including agreements on termination of contracts, from which it followed that settlements were carried out under different contracts, and the validity period of one contract did not overlap with the validity period of the other.

In the case considered by the FAS of the East Siberian District (resolution No. A78-4550/2010 dated October 26, 2010), the company presented eight supply contracts with the same counterparty, for which cash settlements were made in the amount of 625,000 rubles. The court came to the conclusion that from the documents presented (invoices, delivery notes, cash receipt orders) it follows that the cash payment for each agreement did not exceed 100,000 rubles, and refused to allow the tax authorities to hold the company accountable.

At the same time, in another case, the court found: although three supply agreements were concluded between the organizations, the invoices, invoices, and cash receipts available in the case materials confirmed that all cash payments for the goods supplied were made within the framework of one agreement. As a result, a fine of 40,000 rubles was imposed on the organization. At the same time, the court noted that the conclusion of new supply contracts did not automatically entail the termination of the old supply contract (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District dated November 30, 2010 No. A28-2959/2010).

Non-receipt (incomplete receipt) of cash to the cash desk

By non-receipt (incomplete receipt) of cash to the cash desk, the courts understand the organization’s failure to comply with the totality of actions performed when registering cash, including the reflection of all transactions for the receipt and expenditure of cash in the enterprise’s cash book.

According to many courts, the failure to reflect revenue in the cash book on the day of receipt indicates that it was not received (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated January 18, 2010 No. F03-8062/2009 and the East Siberian District dated November 10, 2009 No. A33-441/2009).

However, in some court decisions, untimely recording of revenue in the cash book with a delay of several days is not recognized as non-receipt of cash (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the East Siberian District dated June 17, 2010 No. A19-25794/09 and the Northwestern District dated December 10, 2009 No. A56 -13469/2009).

Thus, if revenue is reflected in the cash book, albeit late, the organization has a chance to be exempt from fines.

If an organization makes payments using cash registers, the discrepancy between the cash register readings and the organization's cash book is recognized by the courts as one of the evidence of non-receipt of cash (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated 08.26.2010 No. A13-1936/2010, Volga-Vyatka District dated 08.23.2010 No. A79 -1256/2010 and the North Caucasus District dated 02/11/2010 No. A53-22859/2009).

Meanwhile, as follows from the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga Region dated June 21, 2010 No. A12-3454/2010, if such a discrepancy is caused by the erroneous entry of a cash register receipt without drawing up an act in the KM-3 form on the return of money to buyers (clients) for unused cash receipts, composition of an administrative offense under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation is missing. Failure to reflect the issue of change funds in the cash book, although it is a violation of the Procedure for conducting cash transactions, constitutes an administrative offense under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, also does not form (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated June 28, 2010 No. A56-58858/2009).

As with other “cash” violations, the court’s recognition of this offense as insignificant can help to be released from liability for failure to post cash to the cash register, in particular when the offense did not contain a significant threat to protected public relations and did not cause harm to the interests of citizens, society and the state (FAS decisions East Siberian District dated 07/08/2010 No. A19-428/10, Volga-Vyatka District dated 12/18/2009 No. A82-8103/2009 and Far Eastern District dated 10/09/2009 No. F03-5330/2009).

Exceeding the cash balance limit

Enterprises may have cash in their cash registers within the limits established by banks in agreement with the heads of enterprises (clause 5 of the Procedure for conducting cash transactions). If such a limit is not established, all cash available at the cash desk is considered above the limit (clause 2.5 of the Regulations on the rules for organizing cash circulation on the territory of the Russian Federation dated January 5, 1998 No. 14-P).

At the same time, the presence of money in the cash register in excess of the established limit does not always entail liability under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. Suppose the bank is closed on Saturday and Sunday. Then the cash accumulated at the cash desk over the weekend is not recognized as a limit (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated March 4, 2010 No. A03-13992/2009).

In addition, the procedure and terms for depositing cash are established by bank service institutions. Therefore, if the bank has established the frequency of cash deposits, say, once every five days, the accumulation of money in the cash register in excess of the established limit during these five days is not considered to be exceeding the limit (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated August 18, 2009 No. F04-4939/2009 (12817-A03-31).

Courts may exempt an enterprise from liability for exceeding the cash balance limit due to the insignificance of the offense, in particular when the offense did not pose a significant threat to protected public relations (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga-Vyatka District dated February 18, 2010 No. A28-17847/2009).

Responsibility of an individual entrepreneur

Until recently, the situation with holding individual entrepreneurs accountable for violating the procedure for conducting cash transactions remained controversial. The fact is that the Procedure for Conducting Cash Transactions states that it is used by enterprises. Not a word about individual entrepreneurs. However, in 2006, the Bank of Russia issued letter No. 08-17/2540 dated July 17, 2006, in which it indicated that the Procedure for conducting cash transactions also applies to individual entrepreneurs.

Tax officials immediately sent out this letter for use in their work (letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia dated August 30, 2006 No. MM-6-06 / [email protected] ) and began to hold entrepreneurs accountable under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation added fuel to the fire, which also recognized that the Procedure for conducting cash transactions also applies to individual entrepreneurs (decision dated September 15, 2008 No. GKPI08-1000).

At the same time, arbitration courts in their decisions, as a rule, came to the conclusion that the Procedure for conducting cash transactions in relation to individual entrepreneurs does not apply (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated May 20, 2009 No. KA-A40/4232-09, dated April 6, 2009 No. KA-A40/2422-09, Far Eastern District dated December 24, 2009 No. F03-7692/2009, East Siberian District dated February 25, 2010 No. A33-16175/2009 and Volga-Vyatka District dated April 20, 2010 No. A29-11206/ 2009).

True, some courts supported tax authorities and held entrepreneurs accountable (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District dated May 19, 2010 No. A53-26668/2009 and No. A53-25864/2009 dated April 13, 2010).

The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation put an end to the issue. He admitted that the current legislation does not provide for the obligation of individual entrepreneurs to post cash to the cash desk and comply with the procedure for storing available funds. This means that there are no legal grounds for bringing them to administrative responsibility under Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (resolution of the Presidium of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated June 29, 2010 No. 1411/10).

From this moment on, even those courts that previously adhered to the position of tax authorities refuse to hold entrepreneurs accountable for violating the Procedure for conducting cash transactions (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North Caucasus District dated December 28, 2010 No. A53-10888/2010, dated December 20, 2010 No. A53 -7283/2010, dated October 22, 2010 No. A53-5106/2010, dated September 21, 2010 No. A53-5428/2010 and dated September 17, 2010 No. A53-3136/2010).

Thus, entrepreneurs are not obliged to comply with the requirements of the Procedure for conducting cash transactions and for this they cannot be held accountable under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

What violations are allowed

Controlled organizations are required to understand and understand what cash violations are fined for, and under what conditions penalties are unacceptable. In total, there are five categories of offenses for which administrative liability is provided:

The essence of the offense	Explanations
For cash payments over the limit	If the organization has paid in cash in the amount of more than 100,000 rubles within the framework of one contract.
Misuse of cash proceeds	If the company spent cash proceeds for purposes not provided for by instructions No. 3073-U. For example, paid wages or transferred insurance premiums.
Exceeding cash limit	If at the end of the working day there is more money left in the organization’s cash register than the approved balance limit. With the exception of days of payment of salaries, benefits and scholarships.
Non-receipt of cash proceeds	If the proceeds received at the cash desk are not capitalized in the prescribed manner. That is, cash documentation (PKO, fiscal receipt or BSO) has not been drawn up.
Violation of the procedure for maintaining an online cash register	If the company deviates from the rules for maintaining online cash registers according to Law No. 54-FZ. For example, I did not capitalize a purchase through an online cash register.

IMPORTANT!
The imposition of administrative liability measures provides for a statute of limitations for violations of cash discipline - only two months from the date of the offense. For example, the cash balance limit was exceeded on 01/10/2019. The institution will be punished only if the misconduct is revealed before March 10, 2019. It is unlawful to apply penalties later.

The exception is ongoing crimes. This is a category of offenses in terms of violations of the provisions of Law No. 54-FZ. For example, if an organization does not switch to an online cash register for a long time.

Arbitration practice. Responsibility for non-receipt of revenue

Situation

The tax inspectorate conducted an audit of the organization's compliance with the rules for using cash registers, as a result of which it was established that it did not capitalize part of the proceeds.
This conclusion was made on the basis that the amounts indicated in the cash book and recorded in the fiscal memory of the cash register (control tapes) did not match. For this, the organization was fined in accordance with paragraph 9 of Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated May 23, 1994 No. 1006 (hereinafter referred to as Decree No. 1006). The amount of the sanction is equal to three times the amount of revenue not received at the cash desk. The company refused to pay the fine voluntarily. Therefore, the tax inspectorate filed a lawsuit to collect it. The court of first instance rejected the claim. He pointed out that the tax inspectorate did not provide sufficient evidence of the fact that the organization did not receive funds to the cash desk. The case was not considered by the appellate court. The tax inspectorate filed a cassation appeal. In it, she asked to satisfy the claim in full, citing the incorrect application of substantive law by the court of first instance. Decision
The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District reviewed the case materials and in its resolution dated February 27, 2002 No. 5641 stated the following. Information about all amounts received by the organization's cash desk must be reflected in the cash book. This follows from Article 34 of the Federal Law of December 2, 1990 No. 394-1 “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)” and paragraph 22 of the Procedure for Conducting Cash Operations in the Russian Federation, which was approved by the decision of the Board of Directors of the Bank of Russia No. 40 of September 22, 1993. However, the verifiable the organization violated these rules. She did not take into account in the cash book the cash receipts, the receipt of which was recorded by the fiscal memory of the cash register and cash receipt orders. Responsibility for such an offense is provided for in paragraph 9 of Decree No. 1006. The organization is subject to a fine of three times the amount not received. In this case, the argument of unintentional errors cannot be taken into account. Let us recall that in accordance with Article 12 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the RSFSR, an administrative offense can also be committed through negligence. The cassation court noted that the tax inspectorate did not violate the procedure for bringing an organization to administrative responsibility. The amount of the fine is determined in accordance with the data of cash receipt orders, cash receipts and the cash book and is not disputed by the violating enterprise. The decision to hold the organization accountable was made within two months from the date of the offense. Based on the above, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District satisfied the cassation appeal of the tax inspectorate. The decision of the court of first instance was overturned.

Adviсe

Let us note that inspectors of operational control departments, who check organizations’ compliance with the rules for using cash registers, have recently focused specifically on checking the completeness of receipt of revenue to the cash register. In fact, now failure to reflect it is the only basis on which a fine can be imposed on an organization. Let us recall that fines for non-use of cash registers were imposed in accordance with Article 7 of the Law of the Russian Federation dated June 18, 1993 No. 5215-1 “On the use of cash registers when making cash settlements with the population.” However, at the end of last year they were removed from this article by Federal Law of December 30, 2001 No. 196-FZ. Checks for the completeness of receipt of revenue are usually carried out according to the following algorithm. 1. Complete fiscal reports are taken from the cash register for the period under review (month, quarter, etc.). 2. The data from these reports is verified with the cashier-operator’s journals, cash receipt orders, Z-reports (KKM reports for each day of work) and the organization’s cash book. 3. The correctness of registration of returns and erroneously entered amounts is checked. During the audit, discrepancies may be discovered (for example, more entries have been entered into the cash register than have been recorded in the cash book) and undocumented returns or erroneously entered amounts. In this case, the inspectors draw up an act and protocol on the administrative violation. To avoid such troubles, the accountant must carefully ensure that all amounts from Z-reports for all cash registers for each day of work are reflected in the cash receipt orders and the cash book. In addition, returns and erroneously entered amounts should be processed correctly. To do this, you need to draw up an act in the KM-3 form, approved by Decree of the State Statistics Committee of Russia dated December 25, 1998 No. 132. The act is drawn up in one copy. It is signed by members of the commission, which usually includes the head of the department (section), senior cashier, and cashier-operator. Checks that are returned by buyers (wrongly punched) must be canceled, pasted on a piece of paper and, together with the act, submitted to the accounting department. Amounts paid on returned checks are recorded in the cashier's journal. They reduce the revenue for the corresponding day. Let us note that not only the organization, but also its manager can be fined for not posting revenue to the cash register. In accordance with paragraph 9 of Decree No. 1006, he will have to pay 5,000 rubles.

M.V. Skorokhodov, expert of AG "RADA"

Stay up to date with the latest changes in accounting and taxation! Subscribe to Our news in Yandex Zen!

Types of penalties for violations

For violations of cash discipline, the violator will face administrative liability. Part 1 art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation and letter of the Federal Tax Service dated 07/09/2014 No. ED-4-2/13338 provide for the following types of penalties:

warning;
a fine against the responsible employee (manager or other employee of the organization);
fine against the offending company.

With regard to offenses in terms of compliance with law 54-FZ (Article 14.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation), the penalties are as follows:

warning;
fine on the responsible person;
fine for the organization;
disqualification of an official;
suspension of company activities (up to 90 days).

Fines and punishments for violations of cash discipline

Let us present in the form of a table what fines are provided for violation of cash discipline. In accordance with Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, violators will be punished:

The essence of the offense	Fines for officials and individual entrepreneurs	Fines for legal entities	Fines for emergency services
For violations of cash discipline (instructions 3210-U):
cash payments over the limit; misuse of cash proceeds; exceeding the cash limit; non-receipt of cash proceeds.	From 4000 to 5000 rubles.	From 40,000 to 50,000 rubles.	For a first-time violation - a warning. For a repeated offense - a fine, depending on the legal status of the emergency service.
Violation of the procedure for maintaining online cash registers (Law No. 54-FZ):
Acceptance of cash proceeds via online cash register.	From 25% to 50% of the settlement amount without cash register, but not less than 10,000 rubles.	From 75% to 100% of the settlement amount without cash register, but not less than RUB 30,000.	The fine may be replaced with a warning if the offense is detected for the first time.
Repeated non-use of cash registers if the amount of revenue transferred past the cash register was 1 million or more.	Disqualification of an official from one to two years. For individual entrepreneurs - suspension of activities for up to 90 days.	Suspension of the organization's activities for up to 90 days.	Suspension of activities for up to 920 days.
The online cash register does not meet the established requirements or the procedure for using the cash register is violated.	Warning or fine from 1500 to 3000 rubles.	Warning or fine from 5,000 to 10,000 rubles.	Warning or fine.
Documents related to the use of cash registers were not provided to the Federal Tax Service upon request.	Warning or fine from 1500 to 3000 rubles.	Warning or fine from 5,000 to 10,000 rubles.	Warning or fine.
The receipt or BSO was not issued to the buyer.	A warning or an administrative fine in the amount of RUB 2,000.	A warning or an administrative fine in the amount of RUB 10,000.	A warning or an administrative fine in the amount of RUB 10,000.

The most common violations that are identified during the audit of cash transactions are:

– absence of primary cash documents or their execution in violation of established requirements;

– payments to accountable persons on the basis of documents confirming expenses, without preparing advance reports;

– failure to comply with the established limit for cash payments between legal entities;

– arithmetic errors when calculating turnover and balances in accounting registers during manual accounting;

– incomplete posting of cash proceeds, expressed in the fact that cashiers leave a small amount of money in the organization’s cash desks for “change.”

Liability for violation of cash discipline is regulated by the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation. In accordance with Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, violation of the procedure for working with cash and the procedure for conducting cash transactions, expressed in cash settlements with other organizations in excess of the established amounts, non-receipt (incomplete receipt) of cash to the cash desk, non-compliance with the procedure for storing free cash, as well as accumulation in the cash register cash in excess of established limits entails the imposition of an administrative fine on officials in the amount of 40 to 50 minimum wages, on legal entities - from 400 to 500 minimum wages.

Thus, an organization that violates the established limit for cash payments may be fined up to 50,000 rubles. For the same violation, an administrative fine in the amount of 4,000 to 5,000 rubles may be imposed on the head of the organization.

Previously, liability for the above offenses was also provided for in Art. 9 of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of May 23, 1994 No. 1006 “On the implementation of comprehensive measures for the timely and full payment of taxes and other obligatory payments to the budget.” However, since July 25, 2003, this Decree has lost force.

Banks and tax inspectorates monitor compliance with cash transactions. Which of them has the right to come with an inspection, and which of them has the right to fine? Legislation regarding this issue is ambiguous.

Some judges believe that tax officials can fine people for violation of cash transactions only on the basis of information received from banks. Other judges believe that Law No. 54-FZ allows tax authorities to control the completeness of revenue accounting, which means that inspectors have the right to fine a company for failure to receive money to the cash register based on the results of an on-site tax audit or a cash register audit.

The rest of the cash violations are detected by banks. And at least once every two years. This is stated in paragraph 2.14 of the Regulations of the Bank of Russia dated January 5, 1998 No. 14-P. If tax authorities discover these violations on their own, they must first inform the bank about it. The bank will conduct an inspection, reflect the violations in the certificate and send it to the tax office. And only then can the inspectorate fine the organization.

In practice, tax authorities often violate this procedure and impose fines based on the materials of their audits.

If an organization did not pay (or did not fully pay) the tax due to the fact that it did not capitalize the proceeds to the cash desk, the tax authorities can fine it only under one of two possible articles: under Art. 122 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (non-payment or incomplete payment of tax) or under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation (non-receipt of money to the cash desk). The judges believe that preference should be given to Art. 122 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (resolution of the Federal Arbitration Court of the North-Western District of November 20, 2001 No. A56-17507/01). According to paragraph 1 of Art. 50 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation it is impossible to bring to both tax and administrative liability for the same violation.

However, there are situations when tax inspectors can apply articles from two codes simultaneously: if different violators are held accountable. For example, an organization - under Art. 122 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, and its manager or chief accountant - under Art. 15.1 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

Please note: inspectors cannot fine the cashier because he is not an official of the company.

Having received a certificate from the bank about identified violations, tax authorities must draw up a protocol. Without this document, they have no right to fine the company (Article 28.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation). This is confirmed by judicial practice.

The right of tax authorities to control the cash limit is not enshrined in any of the regulations, so they cannot conduct such checks. This is confirmed by the letter of the Department of Tax Administration for Moscow dated December 18, 2003 No. 11-24/69763.

Administrative liability for failure to comply with the procedure for storing available funds, as well as the accumulation of cash in the cash register in excess of the established limits, provided for in Art. 15.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, a company can only be attracted by police officers (Article 23.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation) and the tax inspectorate (Article 23.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation), i.e. bank employees can check the cash balance limit, and if they find violations, they are obliged to reflect them in the certificate and send it to the tax office. And only after this the inspection can fine the company 40-50 thousand rubles, and the manager, chief accountant and cashier - 4-5 thousand rubles.

The question arises: how is the fine collected when the limit is violated - for each violation or once? The answer will depend on who exactly discovers these violations and when. The fact is that, according to Art. 4.4 of the Code of Administrative Offences, punishment is imposed for each administrative offense committed. Moreover, if cases of several violations are considered by the same body, then the punishment is imposed within the limits of only one sanction, and if by different bodies (or at different times), a fine will be collected for each violation.

Internal control

Full-time employees of the organization are authorized to conduct internal audits. For example, the chief accountant or the head of the organization has the right to conduct a sudden audit of the cash register.

The procedure for conducting an audit, as well as the list of authorized persons, should be established in the accounting policy of the institution. Or issue a separate order. Please note that a sudden audit of the cash register is carried out by a group of people. That is, a specially created commission.

A check of cash discipline in an organization should also be carried out when changing the cashier (the employee responsible for accepting and issuing cash and processing documents).

External control

External control of the cash register refers to checks and audits of compliance with cash discipline, which are carried out by government bodies, services and departments.

The Federal Tax Service is authorized to control representatives of commercial structures. The Inspectorate develops and approves special plans for on-site tax audits. In accordance with the plans, risks from violations of cash register operations are identified. The Federal Tax Service has the right to conduct an unscheduled audit. Please note that the absence of a company from the Federal Tax Service inspection plan is not a guarantee that inspectors will not come with an audit. The inspectorate is authorized to order unscheduled control in the presence of compelling reasons and even without them.

The budget sector is controlled not only by the Federal Tax Service. Cash desk audits have the right to be carried out by:

Accounts Chamber;
the audit department of the financial authority in which the institution is served;
Ministry of Internal Financial Control;
Ministry of Finance;
founder or relevant ministry and department;
bodies of the prosecutor's office and the investigative committee;
other representatives of government agencies.

State employees can be checked for violations in cash transactions at least every day, so large is the number of controllers and auditors.

When initiating an external audit of the cash register, the controller is required to provide:

controller's certificate;
order of the department that initiated the control event;
audit plan;
subject of inspection;
timing of the control event.

IMPORTANT!

The documents are certified by the signature and seal of the head of the department. If there are not enough papers or signatures or seals are missing, ask for correct documentation. Until then, do not allow the auditor to check.

Intermediary organizations and unaccounted revenue

When checking intermediary organizations, tax authorities try to find hidden income where there is none: when they impute the revenue of the counterparty. Inspectors found that the company was selling petroleum products for cash and had no revenue coming in. These amounts were recognized as hidden income, as a result of which the company received a demand for payment of arrears. The situation was considered by the Arbitration Court of the Volga District (resolution dated 07.07.09 No. A12-19285/2008). During the trial, it turned out that the organization was an intermediary. She entered into sales and purchase agreements, fulfilled obligations under them and supplied fuel and lubricants as an agent. All these actions were carried out on behalf of the principal, on the basis and in accordance with the agency agreement. The intermediary company transferred the funds received in full to the principal organization and received an agency fee from it. The courts supported the side of the intermediary company, since the tax base of the intermediary company is formed only from the amount of remuneration received under the terms of the agency agreement. And the amount of proceeds from the sale of products in the interests of the principal is subject to transfer to the principal, and is not income of the company.

How violations are recorded

Identified errors, deviations and misconduct are documented in a special act. Otherwise, it is impossible to bring the offender to justice. Check whether all required details are reflected in the report of violations when checking cash transactions. These include:

name of the document, date of preparation, number;
name of the controlled organization;
members of the commission (full name, position) - for internal verification;
position, full name auditor, name of the department - for an external form of control;
cashier or other materially responsible person (full name, position);
a list of valuables in the cash register at the beginning of the audit (this is not only cash, but also stamps, securities, strict reporting forms);
the amount of cash and the value of other valuables according to accounting data;
last numbers of incoming and outgoing orders (if available);
a detailed reflection of the fact and content of the violation.

Responsibility for failure to receive funds to the cash register