Import from Kazakhstan to Russia: Legal & Customs Guide

 

March 31, 2023

BRACE Law Firm ©

 

When importing goods from Kazakhstan into Russia, it is necessary to consider the membership of these states in the Eurasian Economic Union (the "Union" or "EAEU"). The Union was established by the Treaty on the EAEU, under which member states ensure the implementation of coordinated, harmonized, and unified policies in economic sectors, as well as the freedom of movement of goods, services, capital, and labor.

To classify goods for the purposes of applying customs and tariff regulation measures, export customs duties, prohibitions and restrictions, internal market protection measures, and maintaining customs statistics, the Unified Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Eurasian Economic Union was adopted, which serves as a system for describing and coding goods. The international basis for the Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity consists of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System of the World Customs Organization and the Unified Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Commonwealth of Independent States.

Regulatory Framework for Trade Between Russia and Kazakhstan

A foreign trade contract must comply with the laws of the partner countries while adhering to the norms of international agreements and conventions ratified by the countries of the foreign partners. For interaction between Russian and Kazakh partners, the following apply:

• The Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union;
• The Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union;
• The Convention Between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 18, 1996, On the Elimination of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Tax Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and Capital;
• The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties;
• The Agreement Between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated September 30, 1998, On Cooperation and Mutual Assistance on Issues of Compliance with Tax Legislation;
• The Agreement Between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 9, 2000, On the Principles of Levying Indirect Taxes in Mutual Trade;
• The Agreement Between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 20, 1995, On a Unified Procedure for Regulating Foreign Economic Activity;
• The Agreement Between the Government of the Russian Federation, the Government of the Republic of Belarus, and the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated October 28, 2003, On a Unified Procedure for Export Control of Member States of the Eurasian Economic Community. In relations between EAEU member states that are parties to this Agreement, the Agreement applies to the extent that it does not conflict with the Treaty on the EAEU dated May 29, 2014.

Most issues outlined in the agreements between Russia and Kazakhstan have been reflected in the regulatory documents of the Eurasian Economic Union and are applied to the extent they do not contradict EAEU documents.

TN VED and Product Classification in Imports from Kazakhstan to Russia

The Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity was approved by Resolution of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 80 dated September 14, 2021, On the Approval of the Unified Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Common Customs Tariff of the Eurasian Economic Union, as Well as on Amending and Recognizing Certain Decisions of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission as Void (the "Resolution No. 80"). Explanatory notes to the Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity were adopted by Recommendation of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 21 dated November 7, 2017, On Explanatory Notes to the Unified Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Eurasian Economic Union (the "Recommendations"). Since January 1, 2022, the Recommendations apply to the extent they do not conflict with the new edition of the TN VED EAEU approved by Resolution No. 80. The Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity is used for product taxation and other purposes provided for by international treaties and acts constituting the law of the Union and/or the laws of member states.

Product classification in accordance with the Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity is carried out during customs declaration and in cases where a product code is declared to the customs authority in accordance with international treaties and acts in the field of customs regulation. To justify the correctness of the chosen product classification variant, foreign trade participants and customs authorities may also refer to the international practice of classifying imported goods in countries using the Harmonized System. In confirmation of this, they may present to the court classification decisions adopted by the customs authorities of other countries and international organizations containing classification arguments and other similar evidence. At the same time, such evidence does not have pre-established force for the court and is subject to evaluation in conjunction with other evidence justifying the correctness of the product classification in accordance with the TN VED.

The customs authority carries out product classification in the following cases:

• Identification of incorrect classification by the customs authority both before and after the release of goods during customs declaration;
• Calculation of customs duties, taxes, special, anti-dumping, and countervailing duties payable in the event of illegal movement of goods across the customs border, failure to file a declaration within established timeframes, etc.;
• Violation of the established deadline for filing a declaration for goods;
• Other cases provided for by the Customs Code of the EAEU.

When goods are moved across the customs border in violation of the rules established by the EAEU Customs Code, the customs authority has the right to carry out product classification. Often, after such classification, the documents submitted to the customs authority are subject to adjustment. The form of the decision on product classification, and the procedure and timeframe for its adoption are established in accordance with the laws of member states on customs regulation.

At the same time, in accordance with Article 23, Clause 3 of the EAEU Customs Code, a preliminary decision on product classification is adopted by the customs authority of the member state in which the goods will be released under a customs procedure, with the exception of the customs transit procedure. The preliminary decision on product classification is adopted by the customs authority based on an application from a person filed as an electronic document or a paper document. The application form for these purposes was approved by the corresponding order of the FTS.

Product classification when crossing the customs border can significantly affect the customs value of imported goods and customs payments; for this reason, judicial disputes arise between customs authorities and entrepreneurs. Examples of such cases include:

• The decision of the Arbitration Court of the Primorsky Territory dated July 9, 2020, in Case No. A51-19319/2018, On Declaring Unlawful and Vacating the Decision of the Nakhodka Customs;
• The decision of the Arbitration Court of the Krasnodar Territory dated December 6, 2022, in Case No. A32-53847/2020, On Compelling the Refund of Excessively Collected Customs Payments and Penalties from the Date the Court Decision Enters into Legal Force;
• The decision of the Arbitration Court of the Smolensk Territory dated March 10, 2022, in Case No. A62-8178/2021, On Declaring Unlawful the Customs Authority’s Refusal to Amend Information Specified in the Goods Declaration (DT).

Country of Origin in Supplies from Kazakhstan to Russia

For the purposes of applying customs and tariff regulation measures, applying non-tariff regulation measures and internal market protection, establishing requirements for marking the origin of goods, carrying out state (municipal) procurement, and maintaining foreign trade statistics, rules for determining the origin of goods imported into the customs territory of the Union apply. These rules are established by the EEC Commission. In accordance with these rules, goods are recognized as originating from a country if they are:

• Wholly obtained or produced in the country;
• Subject to sufficient processing in the country.

The country of origin of goods is confirmed in all cases where the application of customs and tariff regulation measures, prohibitions and restrictions, and internal market protection measures depends on the origin of the goods.

Taxation of Imports from Kazakhstan

In accordance with Article 146, Clause 1, Subclause 4 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the import of goods into the territory of Russia is recognized as an object of taxation for value-added tax. In accordance with Article 46 of the EAEU Customs Code, value-added tax levied upon the import of goods into the customs territory of the EAEU is classified as a customs payment. At the same time, value-added tax is paid in the EAEU member state whose customs authority releases the goods, with the exception of goods released in accordance with the customs transit procedure.

The tax is paid by the legal entity to which ownership of the product passes. At the same time, "import" VAT must be paid even if the company receives the goods free of charge.

However, VAT does not need to be paid upon import from the EAEU in the following cases:

• The import of goods is exempt from tax in accordance with Article 150 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation;
• The sale of goods is exempt from VAT according to Article 149 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation;
• The goods are placed under the customs procedures of a free customs zone or a free warehouse;
• The goods are transferred from one structural unit of an organization to another;
• The seller and the buyer of the goods are Russian persons;
• Goods that were exported are returned due to substandard quality or incomplete sets;
• The goods were lost during transportation (stolen) before being recognized on the books;
• Conditions established by Article 12 of Federal Law No. 443-FZ dated November 21, 2022, are met upon import.

The tax base is determined on the date the acquired goods were recognized on the books. As a general rule, the tax base is the value of the goods under the contract.

In accordance with the Treaty on the EAEU, when importing goods, an indirect tax declaration for imports from the EAEU, an import application, and other documents confirming the import of goods and the payment of VAT are submitted to the tax inspectorate.

The import application is prepared in accordance with the Protocol dated December 11, 2009, On the Exchange of Information in Electronic Form Between the Tax Authorities of the Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union Regarding the Amounts of Indirect Taxes Paid.

The declaration with supporting documents is filed even when importing goods that are exempt from VAT. The form of the indirect tax declaration for imports from the EAEU was approved by Order of the FNS of Russia No. SA-7-3/765@ dated September 27, 2017, On the Approval of the Form and Format for Submitting the Tax Declaration for Indirect Taxes (Value Added Tax and Excises) When Importing Goods into the Territory of the Russian Federation from the Territory of EAEU Member States in Electronic Form and the Procedure for Filling It Out. This same document outlines the procedure for filling out this form.

The declaration can be submitted as a paper document or in electronic form. However, if the average headcount of the company’s employees for the previous year exceeded 100 people, the declaration must be submitted only in electronic form. Largest taxpayers must also submit the declaration only in electronic form.

The following documents are provided along with the declaration:

• An application for the import of goods and payment of indirect taxes;
• A bank statement confirming the transfer of VAT and excises for the imported goods to the budget;
• Transport (shipping) and other documents confirming the movement of goods from an EAEU country into the territory of the Russian Federation;
• VAT invoices issued by the seller;
• Contracts for the purchase of goods (supply, leasing, commodity credit, etc.), as well as intermediary agreements if the import of goods was carried out with the involvement of intermediaries;
• An information notification is necessary in cases where, for example, goods were purchased from a seller in Kyrgyzstan but will be imported from Kazakhstan.

Calculate VAT for imports from Kazakhstan at rates of 10% or 20%. As a general rule, a 20% rate applies. At the same time, a 10% rate applies to food, children's, medical, and other socially significant goods. Specific names and codes for types of goods subject to the 10% rate are contained in lists approved by the Government of Russia.

Upon import from Kazakhstan, VAT on imported goods is included in the taxpayer's aggregate liability and is paid as part of the Unified Tax Payment. The deadline for paying VAT upon the import of goods is established as no later than the 20th day of the month following the month in which the imported goods were recognized on the books.

Taxation at a 0 percent rate is used for the sale of goods, works, and services designated in Article 164, Clause 1 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Furthermore, the zero VAT rate applies to the transportation of goods from the Republic of Kazakhstan into the Russian Federation upon presentation to the tax authority of copies of transport, shipping, and (or) other documents indicating the place of loading (departure station) in the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the place of unloading (destination station) in the territory of the Russian Federation.

Importing Sanctioned Goods from Kazakhstan

Political and economic circumstances in the world have led to the need to deliver goods from European countries through other countries, such as Kazakhstan. However, the scheme for importing goods into Russia via parallel import is not entirely simple. Considering that many countries do not interact directly with Russian entrepreneurs, restrictions may also affect countries that allow sanctioned goods to be imported into the RF.

Nevertheless, entrepreneurs deliberately take such a risk for the purpose of profit. At the same time, Kazakhstan represents an opportunity for entry into the Russian market by bypassing imposed sanctions.

Despite the fact that Kazakhstan has already announced a possible suspension of the supply of sanctioned goods to Russia through its territory, this has not yet been codified in legislation.

Reporting on Imports from Kazakhstan

Statistics on mutual trade in goods of the Russian Federation with EAEU member states are maintained based on information specified in the statistical form for recording the movement of goods and other information sources. The rules for maintaining mutual trade statistics and the statistical form were approved by a Resolution of the Government.

The rules apply to goods subject to accounting in mutual trade statistics in accordance with the Methodology for Maintaining Statistics on Mutual Trade in Goods of the EAEU Member States.

The statistical form is submitted to the customs authority as an electronic document signed with an Enhanced Qualified Electronic Signature (UK(E)P) through the personal account, no later than the 10th business day of the calendar month following the calendar month in which the shipment or receipt of goods took place.

The place of submission of the statistical form is the customs authority that carried out the electronic registration of the statistical form. The date of submission is the date the statistical form was sent to the customs authority through the personal account. A statistical form is considered to contain unreliable information if it is filled out in violation of the Rules for Filling Out the Statistical Form for Recording the Movement of Goods.

If a customs official identifies signs of unreliable information in a submitted form, additional information is requested from the applicant through the personal account. In the event of disagreement with the customs authority's conclusions regarding unreliable information, the applicant has the right to submit documents through the personal account confirming the accuracy of the information declared in the statistical form.

Failure to submit or late submission of the statistical form to the customs authority, or the submission of a form containing unreliable information, entails liability provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses. Sanctions for violating administrative legislation are provided in the form of an administrative fine:

• On officials: in the amount of 10,000 to 15,000 rubles;
• On legal entities: from 20,000 to 50,000 rubles.

Article 19.7.13 of the CAO RF does not provide for administrative punishment in the form of a warning for such an offense. However, if the organization is a small or medium-sized enterprise, the fine is subject to replacement with a warning if the circumstances provided for by Article 3.4, Clause 2 of the CAO RF are present.

Liability for Violation of Customs Legislation in Imports from the Republic of Kazakhstan

For violation of customs legislation when importing goods from the Republic of Kazakhstan, foreign trade participants may be held liable on various grounds. In the Code of Administrative Offenses, Chapter 16, Administrative Offenses in the Field of Customs Affairs (Violation of Customs Rules), is dedicated to violations of customs legislation. An example of such liability is the Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 24, 2022, in Case No. A27-12875/2020, On Vacating Judicial Acts on Holding Liable for Administrative Responsibility Under Art. 16.2, Clause 2 of the CAO RF for Failure to Declare or Unreliable Declaration of Goods. As a result of the case consideration, the claims were denied because the elements of the offense were proven, procedures and timeframes for administrative liability were not violated, and the punishment was assigned within established limits.

Furthermore, the illegal use of someone else's trademark, service mark, or designation of origin is quite common in entrepreneurship. Consequently, liability for such an offense is also found in judicial practice. For example, the decision of the Arbitration Court of the Orenburg Region dated October 5, 2021, in Case No. A47-4809/2021, On Holding Liable for Administrative Responsibility Under Art. 14.10 of the CAO RF (Illegal Use of Means of Individualization of Goods (Works, Services)). In justification of the claims, the administrative body indicated that a customs inspection established the import into the RF of goods marked with designations confusingly similar to the trademarks of "Disney Enterprises, Inc.," for which the limited liability company is not the rightsholder. As a result of the case consideration, the customs authority's claim was granted.

Despite the fact that submitting statistical forms is an entrepreneur's duty, compliance with legislation is not always carried out in good faith. When such a fact is established, the customs authority rightfully turns to judicial bodies to hold the party liable for violating the requirements of current legal norms. An example of such liability is the decree of the Arbitration Court of the Volga District dated February 4, 2022, in Case No. A57-12724/2021, On Vacating a Decree on Holding Liable Under Art. 19.7.13, Clause 1 of the CAO RF for Failure to Submit Statistical Forms for Recording the Movement of Goods to the Customs Authority. As a result of the case consideration, the claim was denied because the presence of the elements of the administrative offense in the company’s actions was confirmed, and the procedure and statute of limitations for administrative liability were observed.

Litigation Regarding the Export of Goods from Kazakhstan

Considering the inevitability of judicial cases arising on various issues when importing goods from the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation periodically provides its clarifications to ensure the unity of practice in the application of customs legislation by courts under the functioning of the Eurasian Economic Union.

The most frequent type of judicial disputes in the framework of importing goods from Kazakhstan are cases where decisions of the customs authority are challenged:

• The Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated December 29, 2022, in Case No. A32-13043/2021, On Recognizing a Customs Authority Decision as Invalid. The customs authority refused to release goods due to the company's failure to provide documents confirming the compliance of the disputed product with the requirements of the Technical Regulation of the Customs Union On the Safety of Products Intended for Children and Adolescents. As a result of the court's consideration, the claim was granted because the goods declared were imported into the RF and sold as sports equipment, which allows them to be classified as exceptions to the technical regulation.
• The Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated November 1, 2022, in Case No. A56-35206/2021, On Recognizing as Invalid a Customs Authority Decision to Refuse the Release of Goods Declared in the Goods Declaration and Compelling the Refund of Excessively Collected Customs Fees for Customs Operations Related to the Release of Goods. The refusal was motivated by the company's failure to observe the conditions for placing goods under a customs procedure. During the case consideration, the claim was denied because the absence of a portion of information (marking) during declaration would make it impossible to identify the product during customs control and compare the information declared by the company with the information in the declaration of conformity.
• The Ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Economic Disputes of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated September 20, 2017, in Case No. A40-32818/2016, On Recognizing Preliminary Customs Authority Decisions as Invalid. Following the consideration of the company’s applications, preliminary decisions on product classification according to the Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Eurasian Economic Union were adopted. As a result of the case consideration, the claim was granted because, in violation of Art. 200, Clause 5 of the APC RF, the customs authority did not rebut the relevance and validity of the product classification approach recommended by the World Customs Organization and did not prove the correctness of its decisions on preliminary product classification.

Judicial disputes arise for various reasons; however, not all judicial cases involve disputes with customs authorities. Disputes directly between participants of foreign trade contracts are also considered in court. For example, the decree of the Ninth Arbitration Appeals Court dated November 29, 2019, in Case No. A40-52564/2019, On Compelling the Provision of VAT Invoices Prepared in Accordance with the Requirements of the Tax Code of the RF. The plaintiff indicated that the defendant unlawfully applied the laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the VAT rate for the transportation of empty railcars from a station in Kazakhstan, as the place of service implementation is the RF; services were rendered by a branch of a Russian organization registered with the Kazakh tax authority and acting as a taxpayer in the Republic of Kazakhstan. As a result of the case consideration, the plaintiff's claim was denied.

Furthermore, foreign trade participants challenge not only the decisions of customs authorities but also tax authorities. Such disputes are related to taxation. For example, the decree of the Arbitration Court of the Volga-Vyatka District dated October 13, 2020, in Case No. A31-12016/2019, On Recognizing as Unlawful the Actions of a Tax Authority that Refused to Certify the Payment of Indirect Taxes (VAT and Excises) and Its Adopted Decision. The taxpayer was denied certification of tax payment upon the import of goods into the territory of the RF. Having identified that he unlawfully applied VAT deductions for tax paid during import, the tax authority assessed him VAT, penalties, and a fine. During the case consideration, the court concluded that the claims were denied because the late certification of the payment did not violate the taxpayer's right to a deduction, as he paid the VAT in the next tax period and thus could realize his right to a VAT deduction only in that period.

Import transactions with Kazakh partners play a significant role in modern conditions in forming the Russian goods market, including allowing for the import of goods from European countries that have fallen under sanction restrictions. However, despite the high demand for goods from the Republic of Kazakhstan, it is important for entrepreneurs to comply with current legislative requirements, track changes, and apply them in practice when importing goods into Russia. The primary aspect of such interaction is the legality of actions related to delivering goods from one country to another.

Legal support for foreign trade contracts when importing goods from Kazakhstan allows for:

• Accounting for all the subtleties of interaction with foreign partners from the Republic of Kazakhstan;
• Reflecting all necessary conditions for the parties of an international transaction in the contract, considering EAEU legislation and the internal laws of the transaction participants;
• Accounting for the requirements of current legislation applicable to the legal relations of the parties, including at the time of the foreign trade contract's conclusion;
• Preparing all documentation for the foreign trade contract in accordance with legislative requirements, including for tax and customs authorities and counterparties.

Considering the multifaceted nature of import trade deals, the involvement of a qualified lawyer with experience in international contracts will significantly reduce the risk of unfavorable situations and liability for non-compliance with legislation.

_______________________________________

References

[1] Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Signed in Astana on May 29, 2014.

[2] Article 19 of the EAEU Customs Code.

[3] International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. Concluded in Brussels on June 14, 1983.

[4] Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Commonwealth of Independent States. Adopted on the basis of the CIS Agreement dated November 3, 1995.

[5] Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union. Signed in Astana on May 29, 2014.

[6] Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Concluded in Vienna on May 23, 1969.

[7] Clause 22 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF No. 49 dated November 26, 2019, On Certain Issues Arising in Judicial Practice in Connection with the Entry into Force of the Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union.

[8] Order of the FTS of Russia No. 205 dated February 7, 2019, On the Approval of Forms and Procedures for Filling Out Documents on Paper Used When Adopting a Preliminary Decision on the Classification of Goods in Accordance with the Unified Commodity Nomenclature of Foreign Economic Activity of the Eurasian Economic Union, When Revoking Such a Decision and Terminating Its Effect, as Well as the Form of Notification of the Need to Submit Additional Information.

[9] Resolution of the Council of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 49 dated July 13, 2018, On the Approval of the Rules for Determining the Origin of Goods Imported into the Customs Territory of the Eurasian Economic Union.

[10] Article 37, Clause 2 of the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union.

[11] Article 29, Clause 1 of the EAEU Customs Code.

[12] Article 61, Clause 1 of the EAEU Customs Code.

[13] Clause 13 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[14] Article 150, Clause 1 of the Tax Code of the RF.

[15] Clause 13 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[16] Article 72, Clause 6, Subclause 3 of the Treaty on the EAEU.

[17] Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 03-07-13/1/10895 dated February 26, 2016.

[18] Letters of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 03-07-13/1/56235 dated September 1, 2017, and No. 03-07-13/1/40899 dated June 28, 2017.

[19] Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 03-07-13/1/60883 dated October 19, 2016.

[20] Clause 14 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[21] Clause 17 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[22] Article 164, Clause 2 of the Tax Code of the RF.

[23] Resolution of the Government of the RF No. 908 dated December 31, 2004, On the Approval of Lists of Codes for Types of Food Products and Products for Children Subject to Value Added Tax at a Tax Rate of 10 Percent.

[24] Article 11.3, Clause 1 of the Tax Code of the RF and Clause 13 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[25] Clause 19 of the Protocol on the Levying of Indirect Taxes Within the EAEU (Annex No. 18 to the Treaty on the EAEU).

[26] Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia No. 03-07-13/1/71810 dated July 26, 2022.

[27] Article 278, Clause 1 of Federal Law No. 289-FZ dated August 3, 2018, On Customs Regulation in the Russian Federation and on Amending Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation.

[28] Resolution of the Government of the RF No. 891 dated June 19, 2020, On the Procedure for Maintaining Statistics of Mutual Trade in Goods of the Russian Federation with Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union and Recognizing the Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 1329 dated December 7, 2015, as Void.

[29] Decision of the Board of the Eurasian Economic Commission No. 210 dated December 25, 2018, On the Approval of the Methodology for Maintaining Statistics of Mutual Trade in Goods of the Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union and the Methodology for Maintaining Customs Statistics of Foreign Trade in Goods of the Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union.

[30] Annex No. 2 to the Resolution of the Government of the RF No. 891 dated June 19, 2020, On the Procedure for Maintaining Statistics of Mutual Trade in Goods of the Russian Federation with Member States of the Eurasian Economic Union.

[31] Article 19.7.13 of the CAO RF. Failure to Submit or Late Submission of a Statistical Form for Recording the Movement of Goods to the Customs Authority.

[32] Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the RF No. 49 dated November 26, 2019, On Certain Issues Arising in Judicial Practice in Connection with the Entry into Force of the Customs Code of the Eurasian Economic Union.