QUALIFICATION OF CRIMES IN THE CUSTOMS FIELD: ISSUES OF THEIR MUTUAL DIFFERENTIATION

Abstract

This article examines the issues of their mutual differentiation in the qualification of crimes in the customs sphere. At the same time, when qualifying crimes in this sphere, attention is paid to the mutual differences of the crimes provided for in Articles 130, 1301, 182, 184, 2443, 2444, 246 and 2501 of the Criminal Code. In this regard, the most important issue of distinguishing between these crimes is their immediate object. Also, another important issue of differentiating between these crimes is their subject. In this regard, the need for further improvement of criminal legislation is justified. As a result of the study, it was proposed to supplement the Criminal Code with a new Article 1821 entitled “Economic Smuggling” and provide for liability for the illegal movement of the following items across the customs border: 1) goods or vehicles, the export and import of which is prohibited and restricted; 2) goods or vehicles subject to value-added tax, excise tax, protective measures, anti-dumping or compensation duties; 3) currency assets; 4) non-ferrous metals, their scrap and scrap; 5) other items causing serious damage to the economy. In addition, the article recommends dividing actions related to the illegal movement of items across the customs border, taking into account their subject, into the following three categories: ordinary smuggling, economic smuggling, and special smuggling. The article also proposes supplementing the Criminal Code with Article 1842 entitled “Failure to pay customs duties” in order to resolve the problem of distinguishing between the crimes of violating customs legislation and evading customs duties.