The case of Khodorkovskiy v Russia (No. 2) (ECHR – 25 July) follows from the earlier decision in OAO Neftyanaka Kompaniya Yukos v Russia (ECHR Case 14902/04) where the Russian tax authority formed the opinion that an oil company (N) had a large tax liability for 2000 and ordered it to pay tax arrears of more than €1bn and a penalty of more than €500m. N failed to pay and the Moscow City Commercial Court gave judgment for the tax authority. In 2003 one of N’s principal shareholders (K) was arrested charged with tax evasion and remanded in custody. He was convicted at a trial in May 2005 was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment and was imprisoned in Krasnokamensk. While in prison he took proceedings in the ECHR contending that his imprisonment had been a breach...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
The case of Khodorkovskiy v Russia (No. 2) (ECHR – 25 July) follows from the earlier decision in OAO Neftyanaka Kompaniya Yukos v Russia (ECHR Case 14902/04) where the Russian tax authority formed the opinion that an oil company (N) had a large tax liability for 2000 and ordered it to pay tax arrears of more than €1bn and a penalty of more than €500m. N failed to pay and the Moscow City Commercial Court gave judgment for the tax authority. In 2003 one of N’s principal shareholders (K) was arrested charged with tax evasion and remanded in custody. He was convicted at a trial in May 2005 was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment and was imprisoned in Krasnokamensk. While in prison he took proceedings in the ECHR contending that his imprisonment had been a breach...
If you or your firm subscribes to Taxjournal.com, please click the login box below:
If you do not subscribe but are a registered user, please enter your details in the following boxes:
