BUSINESS INFORM JOURNAL.

УКР

ENG

Search:

REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE

KV #19905-9705 PR dated 02.04.2013.

FOUNDERS

RESEARCH CENTRE FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROBLEMS of NAS of Ukraine (KHARKIV, UKRAINE)

ROR

EDRPOU 05481984

According to the decision No. 802 of the National Council of Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine dated 14.03.2024, is registered as a subject in the field of print media.
ID R30-03156

PUBLISHER

Liburkina L. M.

CATALOG

The Current Issues in Taxation of Court Fees Reimbursed to an Individual by Court Decision
Kluban M. V., Vitovshchyk T. S.

Kluban, Mariia V., and Vitovshchyk, Tetiana S. (2026) “The Current Issues in Taxation of Court Fees Reimbursed to an Individual by Court Decision.” Business Inform 2:282–289.
https://doi.org/10.32983/2222-4459-2026-2-282-289

Section: Finance, Money Circulation and Credit

Article is written in Ukrainian
Downloads/views: 0

Download article (pdf) -

UDC 336.226:347.9

Abstract:
The article provides a comprehensive scientific and legal analysis of the legal nature of court fees reimbursed to an individual by court decision, through the lens of their potential taxation under personal income tax and military tax. The relevance of the study is due to the persistent legal uncertainty and contradictory law enforcement practice, where compensatory payments, by their nature, are often classified by tax authorities as taxable income or an «additional benefit» for the taxpayer. The study examines the provisions of the Tax Code of Ukraine regulating the concepts of income, additional benefit, and taxable object, as well as provisions of civil, commercial, and administrative procedural law that define court fees as part of court costs and establish the mechanism for their allocation and reimbursement. It is substantiated that, by its legal nature, a court fee constitutes a compulsory financial loss borne by a person in order to exercise the constitutional right to judicial protection, and its subsequent reimbursement is purely compensatory and aimed at restoring the party’s prior financial position (restitutio in integrum). Special attention is paid to a critical analysis of the positions of the State Tax Service of Ukraine, set out in letters and individual tax consultations, in which reimbursed court fees are included in the general taxable income of an individual. It is demonstrated that such approaches are inconsistent with both the economic essence of income as an increase in assets and the civil law understanding of losses and their compensation, and also create discriminatory consequences depending on the source of reimbursement for legal costs. A significant part of the article is devoted to the analysis of current judicial practice, in particular the legal positions of the Supreme Court, which consistently holds that reimbursement of court costs, including the court fee, is not the income of the taxpayer, since it does not lead to an increase in their property assets, and, therefore, does not form the object of personal income tax and military levy. Based on the results of the study, a scientifically grounded conclusion was formulated regarding the inadmissibility of a fiscal interpretation of amounts reimbursed as court fees as income or an additional benefit. Directions for improving the tax legislation of Ukraine are proposed by clarifying the relevant provisions in order to eliminate their ambiguous interpretation and ensure the principles of legal certainty, fair taxation, and efficient access to justice.

Keywords: taxation of court fees, additional benefit, personal income tax, military levy.

Bibl.: 18.

Kluban Mariia V. – Candidate of Sciences (Law), Associate Professor, Associate Professor, Department of Law and Economic and Financial Security, Academy of Recreation Technologies and Law (2 Karbysheva Str., Lutsk, Volyn region, 43023, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]
Vitovshchyk Tetiana S. – Candidate of Sciences (Economics), Associate Professor, Department of Law and Economic and Financial Security, Academy of Recreation Technologies and Law (2 Karbysheva Str., Lutsk, Volyn region, 43023, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]

List of references in article

Airey. (1979, October 9). Airey v. Ireland, 9 October 1979. Series A. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-57420%22]}
Anishchenko H. Yu. & Ivanova N. A. (2022). Dodatkove blaho, yak obiekt obliku ta audytu [Additional Benefit as an Object of Accounting and Auditing]. Efektyvna ekonomika, 9. http://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105.2022.9.26
Anishchenko H. Yu. (2022). Problemy identyfikatsii ta vidobrazhennia u bukhhalterskomu obliku dodatkovoho blaha [Problems of Identification and Reflection in Accounting of Additional Benefit]. Aspekty stabilnoho rozvytku ekonomiky v umovakh rynkovykh vidnosyn: materialy KhVII Mizhnarodnoi naukovo-praktychnoi konferentsii [Aspects of Stable Economic Development in Market Relations: Materials of the XVII International Scientific and Practical Conference] (pp. 145–147). Uman.
Derzhavna podatkova sluzhba Ukrainy. (2024, March 19). Indyvidualna podatkova konsultatsiia. Lyst DPS Ukrainy vid 19.03.2024 r. № 1460/IPK/99-00-24-03-03 IPK [Individual Tax Consultation. Letter of the State Tax Service of Ukraine dated March 19, 2024 No. 1460/IPK/99-00-24-03-03 IPK]. https://subscribe.vobu.ua/view/34164-1460-IPK-99-00-24-03-03-IPK
Derzhavna podatkova sluzhba Ukrainy. (2024, September 2). Indyvidualna podatkova konsultatsiia. Lyst DPS Ukrainy vid 02.09.2024 r. № 4283/IPK/99-00-24-03-03 IPK [Individual Tax Consultation. Letter of the State Tax Service of Ukraine dated September 2, 2024 No. 4283/IPK/99-00-24-03-03 IPK]. https://ipk.vobu.ua/view/35884-4283-IPK-99-00-24-03-03-IPK
Hospodarskyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy vid 6 lystopada 1991 r. № 1798-XII [Economic Procedure Code of Ukraine of November 6, 1991 No. 1798-XII] (1991, November 6). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1798-12#Text
Kobak M. V. (2021). Problemni pytannia spravliannia sudovoho zboru pry vyrishenni sudom zaiav, poviazanykh iz vykonanniam sudovykh rishen v administratyvnykh spravakh [Problematic Issues of Collecting Court Fees when the Court Resolves Applications Related to the Execution of Court Decisions in Administrative Cases]. Yurysprudentsiia sohodni: mizh apolohiieiu i kreatyvnistiu. Pamiati prof. Yu. M. Oborotova: mater. Mizhnar. nauk.-prakt. konf. [Jurisprudence Today: Between Apology and Creativity. In Memory of Prof. Yu. M. Oborotov: Materials of the International Scientific and Practical Conference] (pp. 228–232). Odesa: Feniks.
Kodeks administratyvnoho sudochynstva Ukrainy vid 6 lypnia 2005 r. № 2747-IV [Code of Administrative Court Proceedings of Ukraine of July 6, 2005 No. 2747-IV] (2005, July 6). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2747-15#Text
Kreuz. (2001). Kreuz v. Poland, no. 28249/95, ECHR 2001-VI. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-125771%22]}
Podatkovyi kodeks Ukrainy vid 2 hrudnia 2010 r. № 2755-VI [Tax Code of Ukraine of December 2, 2010 No. 2755-VI] (2010, December 2). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2755-17#Text
Sakara N. Yu. (2015). Instytut sudovoho zboru v praktytsi Yevropeiskoho sudu z prav liudyny [Institute of Court Fees in the Practice of the European Court of Human Rights]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia «Pravo», 35 (II)(I), 197–201. https://dspace.uzhnu.edu.ua/server/api/core/bitstreams/511f61be-dcb3-4092-b4c8-c6b61a5ccf14/content
Shpomer A. I. & Kostiuchenko N. D. (2023). Poniattia, vydy ta sklad sudovykh vytrat v hospodarskomu protsesi [Concept, Types, and Composition of Court Costs in Economic Proceedings]. Kyivskyi chasopys prava, 4, 26–31. https://doi.org/10.32782/klj/2023.4.4
Stankov. (2001). Stankov v. Bulgaria, no. 68490/01, ECHR 2001-IX. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-81606%22]}
Tolstoy Miloslavsky. (1995). Tolstoy Miloslavsky v. United Kingdom, no. 18139/91. Series A. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-57947%22]}
Tsyvilnyi kodeks Ukrainy vid 16 sichnia 2003 r. № 435-IV [Civil Code of Ukraine of January 16, 2003 No. 435-IV] (2003, January 16). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/435-15#Text
Tsyvilnyi protsesualnyi kodeks Ukrainy vid 18 bereznia 2004 r. № 1618-IV [Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine of March 18, 2004 No. 1618-IV] (2004, March 18). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1618-15#Text
Verkhovnyi Sud. (2024, March 25). Postanova Verkhovnoho Sudu vid 25 bereznia 2024 r. u spravi № 461/2729/22 [Resolution of the Supreme Court of March 25, 2024 in case No. 461/2729/22]. https://reyestr.court.gov.ua/Review/119168337
Zakon Ukrainy «Pro sudovyi zbir» vid 8 lypnia 2011 r. № 3674-VI [Law of Ukraine 'On Court Fees' of July 8, 2011 No. 3674-VI] (2011, July 8). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/3674-17#Text