Joint Report on EUROFISC Cooperative Audit

Report ID: 255

Since 2011, EU Member States have implemented EUROFISC, an early warning system, which enables them to share information on suspected companies and their customers. EUROFISC increases the chances of national administrations to detect fraudsters in due time. The quality of data, IT support, response times and response rates of the Member States, however, need to be enhanced to effectively combat VAT fraud within the EU.

The current value added tax (VAT) system in the European Union (EU) provides opportunities for intra–Community fraud that all Member States have to deal with. This is sufficient reason for the Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) of the EU to address this topic. Due to its European dimension, the SAIs considered it necessary to cooperate in their audit activities. Consequently, a number of coordinated audits were conducted during the last years within the EU.

The SAIs of Austria, Germany and Hungary carried out a coordinated audit in 2013 and 2014 by each SAI in its territory and according to its own mandate. Their audit activities resulted in national reports for each of the three participating countries, and a joint report. The joint report presents the overall and synthesized conclusions and recommendations supported by the relevant audit observations of the participating SAIS. The audit period covered the years 2011 to 2013.

Report on the Results of the Parallel Audit of the Administration of Value Added Tax in the Czech Republic and in the Federal Republic of Germany

Report ID: 275

Based on an agreement between the SAIs of Czech Republic and Germany, both SAIs conducted a parallel audit on the administration of value added tax (VAT). Besides the main point – exchange of information based on the Council Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 and the Commission Regulation (EC) No 1925/2004 – the audit covered other topics as for instance the registration of taxpayers,

VAT returns and recapitulative statements that are closely linked with it. Additionally, the legal situation in terms of international bus transportation of passengers and the comparison of certain statistical data were part of the audit.

In Czech Republic, the objective of the audit was to review the procedure used by financial authorities in administrating value added tax following integration of the Czech Republic into the common internal market of the European Community (hereinafter “EC”), connected with free movement of goods and services, and to review the use of the VIES1, particularly monitoring the exercise of the right to exempt intra- Community deliveries from value added tax.

In Germany, the objective of the audit was to review the system of intra- Community VAT control with a special focus on administrative cooperation in the field of VAT according to the above mentioned regulations. As a result of this, weaknesses should be reported and recommendations be developed to address the problems stated.

Source: https://www.nku.cz/en/audit/coordinated-audits/

Report on the Coordinated Audit Tax and subsidy support for climate and energy policy in the Czech and Slovak Republics

Report ID: 296

On the basis of a Cooperation Agreement between the Supreme Audit Office of the Slovak Republic and the Supreme Audit Office of the Czech Republic, both SAIs carried out a coordinated audit on tax and subsidy support for climate and energy policy in their respective countries.

The aim of the audits was to verify whether the support in the Czech and Slovak Republic is set up to contribute effectively to the fulfilment of objectives in selected areas of climate-energy policy while maintaining the long-term sustainability of public revenues. Selected areas were the transport sector and photovoltaic support.

 The theme of coordinated audits has been selected on the basis of the fact that both Member States, based on common European legislation, apply different support systems at national level in selected areas of climate and energy policy, aiming to meet the basic climate and energy objectives of the European Union  by 2020.

The EU has set ambitious climate-energy policy objectives, the successful enforcement of which includes a set of measures, including various financial instruments. Each EU Member State can choose its own procedures and tools to achieve the objectives. This gives space for comparing the effectiveness and efficiency of the instruments chosen between the individual countries. Based on the achieved indicator values, the Supreme Audit Institutions compared the quality parameters of the support and evaluated their impacts on the achievement of the EU and national targets. The coordinated audit of the SAO CR and the SAO SR again proves that both institutions attach great importance to international comparisons.

For comparison purposes, financial values and indicators were compared in euros. Amounts in Czech crowns were converted into euros at the exchange rate of the CNB as at 17 September 2019, i.e., according to the CNB € 1 = CZK 25.88.

Source: https://www.nku.gov.sk/documents/10272/1542112/2020+-+Tax+and+subsidy+support+for+climate+and+energy+policy+in+the+Czech+and+Slovak+Republics.pdf

Gemeinsamer Bericht über die Prüfung von EUROFISC – ein multilaterales Frühwarnsystem der Mitgliedstaaten zur Bekämpfung des Mehrwertsteuerbetrugs

Report ID: 319

Das derzeitige Mehrwertsteuersystem in der Europäischen Union (EU) ist betrugsanfällig. Davon sind alle EU-Mitgliedstaaten (Mitgliedstaaten) betroffen. Für die Rechnungshöfe der EU besteht daher ausreichend Grund, sich mit diesem Thema zu befassen. Wegen der  uropäischen Dimension dieses Betrugs halten die Rechnungshöfe außerdem eine Zusammenarbeit bei ihren Prüfungen für erforderlich. Dementsprechend wurde in den letzten Jahren eine Reihe koordinierter Prüfungen durchgeführt.

Mit der jetzigen Prüfung zu EUROFISC setzen die Rechnungshöfe von Österreich, Deutschland und Ungarn die Tradition der Zusammenarbeit bei der Prüfung der öffentlichen Einnahmen fort. Die koordinierte Prüfung wurde in den Jahren 2013 und 2014 von jedem Rechnungshof im eigenen Land und gemäß seinem eigenen Mandat durchgeführt.

Jeder Rechnungshof hat auf der Grundlage seiner Prüfungserkenntnisse einen nationalen Bericht verfasst. Darüber hinaus haben alle drei Rechnungshöfe den vorliegenden Bericht3 gefertigt, der – gestützt auf die Prüfungsfeststellungen – die gemeinsamen Schlussfolgerungen und Empfehlungen enthält.4 Der Prüfungszeitraum umfasste die Jahre 2011 bis 2013.

Die beteiligten Rechnungshöfe prüften nicht das Netzwerk EUROFISC als solches. Ihr Prüfungsziel bestand darin, zu klären, wie EUROFISC in ihrem jeweiligen Mitgliedstaat umgesetzt worden war, und zu untersuchen, welche Verbesserungsmöglichkeiten auf EU-Ebene bestehen. Die drei Rechnungshöfe arbeiteten eine Reihe von Fragen aus, die unter anderem statistische und Evaluierungsaspekte umfassten. Auf dieser Grundlage führten sie die Prüfung durch. Anhand der Antworten der Verwaltungen identifizierten die Rechnungshöfe Probleme, die sowohl auf nationaler Ebene als auch auf EU-Ebene angegangen werden müssen.

Quelle:ttps://www.bundesrechnungshof.de/en/veroeffentlichungen/products/sonderberichte/pdf-ab-2015/2015-sonderbericht-eurofisc-ein-multilaterales-fruehwarnsystem-der-mitgliedstaaten-zur-bekaempfung-des-mehrwertsteuerbetrugs-1

Joint Report on the Results of Parallel Audits of Excise Duty Administration in the Slovak Republic and in the Czech Republic

Report ID: 344

Legislation in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia on excise duty and its administration complies with EU legislation and exceeds EU requirements substantially. Differences have been discovered between Slovak and Czech excise duty regulations: in the Czech Republic, verification of the economic stability of applicants for permits and mandatory labelling and dyeing of several mineral and some other oils contribute to effective excise duty administration; in Slovakia, the distribution of excise stamps is simpler than in the Czech Republic and less of a burden on excise duty administrators. In the fight against excise duty evasion, supervising the movement of raw tobacco or tobacco materials, the implementation of the institute of a transport fuel distributor, and keeping a registry of merchants of consumer packaged alcohol appear to be a good practice in the fight against excise duty evasion. Excise duty revenues in the Czech Republic and in Slovakia grow more slowly than other tax revenues

In August 2015, The Supreme Audit Institutions of  Czech Republic and Slovakia agreed to conduct parallel audits aimed primarily at excise duty administration an signed an Agreement for this purpose. The topic of the parallel audits was chosen because both EU Member States follow common European legislation on this matter, thereby providing an opportunity to ascertain how European legislation is applied on a national level, how the excise duty administration system is set up, and how the system in Slovakia and the system in the Czech Republic differ.

The audit questions on which the parallel audits were based were agreed jointly. The parallel audits aimed to compare the performance of the excise duty administrators while taking into account qualitative and quantitative indicators and identifying weaknesses in the excise duty administration process. Answers to the following audit questions in particular should have been sought:

- Have excise duty administrators in the Czech Republic and Slovakia been attaining comparable values of qualitative indicators while incurring comparable costs?

- Has implementation of the EMCS1 resulted in more effective excise duty administration and has been spending on its implementation effective?

- The joint final report on the audit results was drawn up in accordance with ISSAI 300 - Fundamental Principles of Performance Auditing

Source: https://www.nku.cz/assets/publikace-a-dokumenty/ostatni-publikace/spolecna-zprava-kontrola-spotrebni-dane-cr-sr_en_1.pdf