English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The article analyses preventive measures employed by tax authorities to secure payment of taxes. The development in this field reflects general trends in public law, which now is aimed at prevention of threat (in this case, the loss of tax revenue in consequence of taxpayer acts) instead of fighting the consequences of it. The author compares summary assessment models regulated in the United States Internal Revenue Code to the model provided in the Estonian Taxation Act. Since this is the only tax-related fundamental right regulated expressis verbis by the European Convention on Human Rights (Protocol 1, Article 1), some cases heard by the European Court of Human Rights are discussed in addition. The author proposes certain standards that could be followed in the design of such preventive measures, following the minimum standards outlined by said court and some best-practice ideas arising from the comparison between Estonian and US regulations.

juridica international

The Concept of Preventive Actions Securing the Enforcement of Tax Liability to be Determined in the Future: Prosperity under the Principle of Prevention in Tax Law