本站原创美国海关与边境保护局近期将通过修改规章来填补统计抽样在稽查应用中的法律空白.在2009年10月美国联邦公告上刊登的立法提案中,美国海关为海关稽查中应用的统计抽样设定了参数,制定了在稽查过程中要求进行抵销的程序,并授权在预先披露环节进行抽样.目前美国海关还没有公布法规的最终版本,但最终很可能将遵循此做法.
提案规定统计抽样可以由海关或是进口商自己来执行,后者使用自我测试的方法.无论是谁来执行,都要按照抽样计划进行,且一旦海关认可了计划的具体细节,被稽查人就必须放弃相关的质疑权,除非是抽样过程中的计算机或书写错误.
提案希望允许统计抽样在预先披露使用,抽样计划及其实施需得到海关的批准.不论抽样由谁来执行,统计抽样都必须满足以下特性:(1)海关对统计抽样的运用享有唯一的裁量权,(2)抽样程序必须与普遍接受的抽样方法相一致,(3)抽样计划必须被正式接受,包括上述放弃质疑权的后果,(4)如果认为必要,海关保留实行完全稽查的权力.
提案更改了一些规章以适应2002年国会考虑到抵销问题而对海关法进行的修改.联邦政府公告评价指出:修正后的法律纠正了海关可以不退还多收的税款、但却能够多征额外税款的明显不公.抵销程序本身也存在着局限.多缴税款的抵销只有在货物已清关或属于稽查的时限及范围内才会被确认.此外,以违法为目的的多缴税款和计算错误造成的少缴税款是不能被抵销的.海关还应明确,进口商因没能及时提交特惠证明而缴付的全额税款不算作上述的多付款项.退款是一个特殊的情况.规章确定进口商不应期望稽查程序自身来退还多付的款项,当多缴的税款项高于少缴的税款产生净差额时才能要求退款.
提案表示抵销可能会依据审计领域中统计抽样的外推法.由外推法所得的结果对海关和进口商有着同样的约束力.海关不能脱离通关或交易的实际抽样来确定其他的少缴税款和低报行为,进口商对超出样本计划或样本推断的抵销也是不被允许的.
CustomsAuditNotes:NextStepsInStatisticalSamplingAndOffsetProcedures
CBPhasproposedtoamendtheregulationstofillthegapthatneitherthestatutenortheregulationsreferstostatisticalsamplinginaudits.Initsnoticeofproposedrulemaking,CBPsetouttheparameterortheuseofstatisticalsamplinginauditsandtheproceduresthatshouldbeusedinoffsetclaimsthataremadeinthecourseofanaudit,andsanctionedsamplingforpriordisclosures.CBPhadnotyetpublishedtherulesinfinalform.Butitislikelythatthefinalrulewillcloselytrackit.
TheproposalmakesthecasethatstatisticalsamplingmaybeconductedbyCBPorbytheimporterhimself.Ineithersituation,wherethesamplingisconductedpursuanttoasamplingplan,onceCBPhasapprovedthespecificsoftheplan,theauditedpersonmustwaiveanychallengeofit.Challengeswillbelimitedtoputationalorclericalerroradeinthecourseofthesampling.
Theproposalisweleforsanctioningtheiruseinpriordisclosures,thesamplingplananditsexecutionmustbeapprovedbyCBP.Thestatisticalsamplingmustsharethefollowingcharacteristics:(1)CBPhassolediscretionaboutuseofstatisticalsampling,(2)samplingprocedureustbeconsistentwithgenerallyacceptedsamplingapproaches,(3)thesamplingplanmustbeformallyaccepted,withwaiverconsequencesasnotedabove,and(4)CBPalwaysreservestherighttoconductafullentry-by-entryauditifdeemedappropriate.
Theproposedruleschangetheregulationstocatchuptothe2002changeinthecustomslaw.TheFederalRegisternoticementedthatthechangeinthelawcorrectedtheobviousinequityinCBPnotgrantingcreditforoverpaymentsbutbeingabletochargeforadditionalduties.Offsettingoverpaymentswillberecognizedonlyiftheyrelatetoliquidatedentries,andiftheyfallwithintheaudittimeperiodandscope.Moreover,nooffsetwillbeallowediftheoverpaymentwaadeforthepurposeofviolatinganylawandcannotbeusedtooffsetanyunderpaymentthatwaadefraudulently.CBPalsomakesitclearthatthepaymentoffulldutyonanentrywheretheimporterhadfailedtotimelyfileforapreferenceisnotanoverpaymentforthesepurposes.Refundsareaspecialcase.Theregulationakeitclearthattheimportershouldnotlooktotheauditprocessitselfforrefunds,therighttowhichcouldarisewhentheoverpaymentsarelargerthantheunderpaymentsonabasis.
Anoffsetmaybebasedontheextrapolationtotheaudituniverseofastatisticalsample.TheresultsofthatextrapolationareequallybindingonbothCBPandtheimporter.CBPwillnotgooutsidetheentries/transactionsactuallysampledtoidentifyotherunderpaymentsorunderdeclarations,andtheimporterwillnotbeallowedanoffsetbeyondthatwhichwasderivedfromthe"projection"or"extrapolation"ofthesample.
来源:JournalofInternationalTaxation,Mar2010,21,3,ABI/INFORMGlobalP25
作者:MarkKNeville加利福尼亚大学伯克利分校哈斯商学院副教授,是海关与贸易杂志的通讯记者和顾问委员会成员.