Reasons for the formation of a tax glossary due to the terms of other branches of legislation

It is determined that the formation of the system of tax terms involves the inclusion of not only concepts that have an exclusively tax-legal nature. Yes, there are concepts that have cross-industry, general legal significance, character and consequences. It is clear that a certain number of concepts have an established meaning, the meaning of which does not differ in individual industry regulatory regimes. Moreover, some provisions are generally understood and defined on the border of scientific fields. And there are concepts that are borrowed without changes from other branches of legislation. Several groups of categories have been identified, which have a different industry orientation: a) civil-legal (economic-legal) definition has a number of concepts, the content of which is not subject to tax-legal regulation. It is even more surprising to find among the norms that should regulate the basic principles of tax regulation mere mechanical references to legislative prescriptions of other industries. It was noted that the groundlessness of such references is related to the provision of the use of those provisions that should be used even without such an emphasis. If there are no industry-specific features of this or that concept in the sense of the peculiarities of the tax regulation regime, then there is no need to refer to it in this way; b) the definition of concepts that personify the land legal meaning of individual categories also seems redundant. Thus, when determining the owners of land plots, we are talking about legal entities and individuals (residents and non-residents) who, in accordance with the law, have acquired ownership rights to land in Ukraine, as well as territorial communities and the state regarding communal and state-owned lands, respectively; b) superficial duplication of the provisions of Art. 14 of the Tax Code of Ukraine with norms of budget legislation. It is clear that both tax and budget regulation are carried out on the same, identical financial and legal basis. But, it is unlikely that this gives reason to mix the norms of individual sub-sector codified acts. The considered strange construction of artificial aggregates of some concepts in the understanding of a separate section of the Tax Code of Ukraine are concepts that have a non-principled meaning, a certain derivative character, or are generally meaningless. It is unlikely that constructions detailing only certain aspects of the administration of special taxes and fees should be included in the systematic grouping of defining, fundamental concepts for tax regulation. It is concluded that the system vision of the main categories of tax regulation formed today is characterized by several features. First, the existence of such a glossary is positive for tax regulation, because before 2011 there was nothing like it. Secondly, the content of Art. 14 of the Tax Code of Ukraine, which covers these categories, is expressed in a very contradictory, imperfect form. This concerns both the explanation of the meaning of the terms and the reasons for including them in this list. Thirdly, the tax glossary should consist of concepts that are exclusively of a tax nature. In the extreme case, it may also be about the inclusion of terms that are used by other sub-sector or branch legislation, but with the mandatory condition of fixing the peculiarities of their content, which gives them a role in tax relations.