Buying a refrigerator from a budget organization. Expenses for ensuring normal working conditions: accounting and taxation

The organization purchases a refrigerator, kettle, TV, etc. property. How to take it into account in accounting? Should the cost of these objects be included in the property tax base? Can depreciation on such property be taken into account when calculating income tax? These are the questions that accountants inevitably ask.

The position of the Russian Ministry of Finance on all these issues is as follows. These objects are not used by the organization in carrying out income-generating activities, therefore, on the basis of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, the costs of their acquisition cannot be taken into account for profit tax purposes (including by calculating depreciation). The letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated September 4, 2006 No. 03-03-04/2/199 explains that an organization has the right to acquire such property at the expense of profit after paying income tax, since this property is used to meet the social and living needs of employees (see also letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated January 17, 2006 No. 03-03-04/2/9).

At the same time, in accounting, based on the requirements of the priority of content over form, such “non-productive” property should be accounted for on account 01 (meaning property valued above the value limit established by the accounting policy) and, accordingly, included in the tax base for property tax ( letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 21, 2005 No. 03-06-01-04/209).

Taking into account the above position of the Russian Ministry of Finance, the inclusion of costs for a kettle (refrigerator, TV, etc.) as part of expenses that reduce the tax base for income tax will almost certainly lead to a dispute with the tax authority. If you are not ready for a dispute, then follow the recommendations of the Russian Ministry of Finance and do not take into account the costs of acquiring such “non-production” objects when determining tax base on income tax. At the same time, if a dispute with the tax authorities does not frighten you much, then it will be useful for you to know that judges in such disputes, as a rule, side with taxpayers.

To have a good chance of winning in court, the organization must have documents confirming that the expenses incurred meet the criteria listed in Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. This may be a collective agreement, which stipulates the employer’s obligation to provide employees with appropriate working and rest conditions; order of the manager, which indicates the purpose of acquiring the relevant property; memos, etc. documentation.

For example, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District recognized the legality of reducing the tax base for income tax on the cost of upholstered furniture, a refrigerator, washing machine and other equipment that were purchased for equipping apartments owned by the organization, used to accommodate employees while on a business trip (on shift) (resolutions dated April 13, 2009 No. F04-2173/2009(4387-A81-26) and dated October 30, 2006 No. F04-7281/2006(28055-A75-40)).

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District recognized the legality of including in expenses the costs of purchasing household appliances, interior items, and a television. At the same time, the court was satisfied with the internal notes and primary documents, from which it followed that the specified property was acquired in order to create a favorable image of the organization for external visitors and ensure a normal work process and was used in the organization’s building operated for production purposes (Resolution dated December 25, 2006, December 27, 2006) .2006 No. KA-A40/12681-06). In another dispute, the same court found it legitimate to include in expenses the costs of purchasing four refrigerators “in order to ensure a normal working day” (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated July 6, 2009 No. KA-A41/6316-09).

The Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District supported the taxpayer, who included in expenses the costs of purchasing electric heaters, oil radiators, fans, air heaters (justification - necessary to create favorable temperature conditions), vacuum cleaners (to maintain cleanliness in the premises), electric kettles, coffee makers, microwave ovens and refrigerators (the company’s collective agreement provides for the obligation to provide workers with hot meals and drinking water). The judges considered that this property was necessary for the organization to provide employees normal conditions labor (Resolution dated April 21, 2006 No. A56-7747/2005).

FAS Central District made a decision in favor of the organization, which included in the depreciable property refrigerators installed in the administrative and managerial personnel departments of the plant management. The tax inspectorate considered such actions unlawful, since, in its opinion, these refrigerators are not used in the production activities of the organization, but for the personal purposes of employees. However, the judges did not agree with this approach, pointing out that in this case the use of refrigerators can be qualified as the use of fixed assets for the purposes of managing an organization and to ensure normal working conditions (subclause 18 and 7 clause 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation), since in accordance with Articles 108, 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer is obliged to provide employees with the opportunity to eat food in work time at the workplace or in places equipped for this purpose (Resolution dated January 12, 2006 No. A62-817/2005).

A similar decision was made by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District, confirming the legality of accounting for expenses for the purchase of refrigerators, kitchen sets, coffee makers, juicers, and mini-kitchens (Resolution No. KA-A40/2214-08 dated March 27, 2008).

It happens that an organization purchases household appliances, dishes, furniture, etc. property for use in management purposes, for example, in representative offices (for holding receptions, equipping rooms for negotiations, etc.). In this case, there should be no problems with including the cost of such property as expenses that reduce taxable profit.

If the acquired object has an initial cost exceeding 20,000 rubles, then it is included in the depreciable property. In this case, accrued depreciation is taken into account as expenses under the item “representation expenses”. If the cost of the purchased object does not exceed 20,000 rubles, then the full amount is included in the expenses at the time of commissioning (again under the item “representation expenses”) (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated 06/09/2008 No. A05-12045 /2007). At the same time, it would not be amiss to recall that entertainment expenses are taken into account for profit tax purposes in an amount not exceeding 4% of the amount of labor costs (clause 2 of Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

Based on materials from the book

To comply with legal requirements, companies equip premises for eating. Accounting for expenses for such purposes has a number of its own features. We recommend that the accountant familiarize himself with the main ones and be prepared for possible consequences.

Companies often provide free meals for their employees as a social package. To do this, business entities organize their own canteens, order lunches to the office, or simply pay compensation for food. But this rule is more applicable for large companies. For small companies, it would be more advisable to equip a small room for meals. Many people do this. The organization of such places for eating raises many questions. Is it possible to take into account the amounts for equipping rooms for meals as part of the costs? How do tax authorities treat such expenses? What are the requirements for such premises? Let's try to figure it out.

Legal requirements

According to the provisions of Article 163 of the Labor Code, the employer is obliged to provide employees with normal working conditions. These, in particular, include working conditions that meet labor protection and production safety requirements. Moreover, Article 223 of the Labor Code determines that the provision of sanitary, medical and preventive services for workers in accordance with labor protection requirements is the responsibility of the employer. In connection with this management, companies are equipped according to established standards with:

• sanitary facilities;
• premises for eating;
• premises for providing medical care;
• rooms for rest during working hours and psychological relief;
• sanitary posts with first aid kits equipped with medicines and drugs for first aid; and also devices (devices) are installed to provide workers in hot shops and areas with carbonated salt water, etc.

Requirements for creating rooms for meals have been established sanitary standards. They are contained in paragraphs 5.48–5.51 of the Code of Rules SP 44.13330.2011 “Administrative and domestic buildings. Updated version of SNiP 2.09.04-87”, approved by order of the Ministry of Regional Development of Russia dated December 27, 2010 No. 782 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). What requirements do the Rules impose on catering at work?

Thus, the Rules stipulate that when designing manufacturing enterprises Canteens should be provided, designed to provide all workers with general, dietary, and in some cases, therapeutic and preventive nutrition.

When there are hundreds of mines with more than 200 people per shift, it is necessary to provide a canteen that operates on semi-finished products, and when there are up to 200 people, a canteen-distributing area must be provided. When the number of workers in the largest shift is up to 30 people, a room for meals should be equipped.

In accordance with paragraph 2.52 of these Rules, the eating area must have a washbasin, a stationary boiler, an electric stove and a refrigerator. We believe that the boiler can be replaced with an electric kettle, and the electric stove with a microwave oven.

If the company employs up to 10 people per shift, then instead of a meal room, an additional space of 6 square meters should be provided in the dressing room. m with the installation of a table for eating.

Tax accounting

Is it possible to take into account the costs associated with equipment and maintenance of dining rooms in the income tax base? Financial department officials have repeatedly expressed their point of view on this matter. For example, in letter No. 03-03-06/2/149 dated September 26, 2011, it is noted that the costs associated with equipment and maintenance of premises for eating are included in the taxpayer’s expenses for ensuring normal working conditions. In support of their position, they point out that subparagraph 7 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 Tax Code Other costs associated with production and sales include the costs of ensuring normal conditions and safety measures for employees. This means that the costs associated with equipment and maintenance of food premises can be recognized as such.

It is important

In case of purchasing property worth more than 40,000 rubles. and a useful life of more than 12 months, depreciation must be charged on it.

Subclause 7 of clause 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code does not spell out what exactly should be understood as normal working conditions. We believe that these expenses include the costs of purchasing a refrigerator, microwave oven and other electrical household goods. A similar situation was discussed in the letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated July 14, 2011 No. 03-03-06/2/112. In it, the taxpayer asks whether it is possible to take into account in the income tax base the costs of an organization’s acquisition of refrigerators, microwave ovens, dishes, tables, chairs, kettles for a room for meals, provided that such premises are equipped in accordance with the requirements of labor legislation.

Officials believe that the company has the right to take such costs into account when calculating income tax. Since the eating room is not an object of service production, its creation is associated with ensuring normal working conditions. Consequently, expenses for the arrangement of such rooms can be taken into account in the income tax base on the basis of subparagraph 48 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code. This provision of the law notes that other costs (related to production and sales) include costs associated with the maintenance of premises of public catering facilities serving labor collectives, including the amount of accrued depreciation, costs of repairing premises, costs of lighting, heating , water supply, electricity supply, as well as fuel for cooking.

The fact that the costs of maintaining a kitchen, dining room, distribution room, and washing room can be taken into account in the income tax base is stated in the letter of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for Moscow dated March 24, 2006 No. 20-12/22759.

If the cost of purchased equipment is more than 40,000 rubles, and its useful life exceeds 12 months, depreciation must be calculated on it (clause 1 of Article 256 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated September 26, 2011 No. 03-03-06/2 /149).

The resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated January 26, 2009 No. KA-A40/13294-08 considered the situation when, during tax audit The tax authority excluded from expenses the amount of accrued depreciation on such fixed assets as equipment for storing food, preparing and eating food, including: coffee point cabinets, coffee point partitions, ice maker, dishwashers, kitchenettes, microwave ovens, electric stoves, refrigerated display cases, bar counters, juicers, coffee machines. But the judges did not agree with this decision and indicated that the acquisition of the specified property was economically justified and aimed at ensuring normal and healthy working conditions for the company’s employees.

In earlier letters from the Russian Ministry of Finance, officials took the opposite opinion and noted that household appliances used for the needs of employees are not recognized as depreciable property (letter dated May 6, 2005 No. 03-06-01-04/246). To substantiate their position, they pointed out that such property is not used as tools of labor and therefore is not depreciated. There are court decisions confirming this point of view, for example, resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated March 27, 2008 No. KA-A40/2214-08.

Attention

If some costs with equal grounds can be attributed simultaneously to several groups of expenses, the company has the right to independently determine which group it will attribute such costs to (Clause 4 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

This means that when equipping a room for eating and purchasing electrical appliances for it (refrigerators, microwaves, etc.), such expenses can be taken into account on the basis of either subparagraph 7 or subparagraph 48 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code.

The same position is confirmed by arbitration practice. Thus, the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated December 26, 2005 No. A44-2051/2005-9 states that the company rightfully took into account as part of its expenses the costs of purchasing electric kettles, refrigerators, water heaters, floor fans, and fan heaters. Since they are produced for the proper work and rest regime for workers engaged in hazardous work.

And in the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated April 2, 2007 No. F04-1822/2007, the arbitrators confirmed that the organization reasonably included in its income tax expenses the costs of purchasing inventory items such as a refrigerator, kettle, microwave oven , freezer, electric stove, vacuum cleaner, dining table, heaters, TV, stand, table lamp, speakerphone, stand with microphone, mirrors. The judges recognized that these goods were purchased by the company in accordance with the director’s order “On Production Needs” and were used to provide hot meals for employees during public hours, since there is no canteen. In addition, the expenses incurred are justified and aimed at ensuring normal working conditions.

In order to avoid any claims from tax authorities, it is necessary to make such expenses consistent with the principles of Article 252 of the Tax Code, namely: they must be justified and documented, and also made for activities aimed at generating income.

Documenting

As for the justification of the expenses incurred, the costs of equipping the premises for eating were duly documented. First of all, this rule should be enshrined in labor or collective agreements with employees. A reference should be made to the requirements of the Rules and it should be stated that the employer is obliged to create normal working conditions, as well as provide employees with a room for eating, create conditions for storing food, preparing and heating food. The same formulation can be used to account for napkins, towels, soap, etc.

One more no less important document is an order from the manager that a room for meals will be equipped, as well as the purchase of household appliances necessary for it. Of course, advance reports, invoices, receipts and other documents must be available to confirm the purchase of this property.

Cleaning and detergents

Organizing the meal process is impossible without putting the room in order. This means that companies are forced to buy detergents and cleaning products.

According to the financial department, expenses for the purchase of household goods and household chemicals (disposable paper towels, napkins, cleaning products, etc.) are classified as expenses for household needs and reduce the tax base for income tax as part of material expenses, subject to their compliance requirements of Article 252 of the Tax Code (subclause 2 of clause 1 of Article 254 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 11, 2007 No. 03-03-06/1/229).

An organization can deduct the amount of VAT on purchased goods after they have been registered and have an invoice. Such actions can be carried out on the basis of subparagraph 1 of paragraph 2 of Article 171, paragraph 1 of Article 172 of the Tax Code.

However, tax authorities often refuse deductions because they believe that they are not economically justified and are not related to production activities. Judicial practice is different, and judges allow VAT to be deducted on goods for furnishing rooms for eating (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated October 15, 2007 No. F09-8348/07-S2, Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District dated January 31, 2007 No. A08-13527/05-7, FAS Volga District dated October 28, 2008 No. A55-865/08).

The organization, by decision of the manager, purchased an electric kettle worth 2,500 rubles, including VAT of 382 rubles.

An electric kettle should be classified as inventory (PBU 5/01 “On approval of the Regulations on accounting""Accounting material and production reserves """, approved. by order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated June 9, 2001 No. 44n).

The company's accountant must record the acquisition of such property with the following entries:

DEBIT 60 “Settlements with suppliers and contractors” CREDIT 51 “Current account”

– 2500 rub. – payment has been made to the supplier;

DEBIT 10 “Materials” CREDIT 60 “Settlements with suppliers and contractors”

– 2118 rub. – the purchase of an electric kettle is reflected;

DEBIT 19 “Value added tax on purchased assets” CREDIT 60 “Settlements with suppliers and contractors”

– 382 rub. – VAT reflected;

DEBIT 68 “Calculations for taxes and fees” CREDIT 19

“Value added tax on acquired assets”

– 382 rub. – the amount of VAT is accepted for deduction;

DEBIT 26 “General expenses” CREDIT 10

"Materials"

– 2118 rub. – the cost of the kettle is written off as general business expenses.

Yu.L. Ternovka, expert editor "Practical Accounting"

• HR Policy, Corporate Culture, HR Strategies

The offices of many organizations have electric kettles, coffee makers, microwave ovens, refrigerators, televisions and other household appliances and electronics. Companies often buy drinking water for their employees, as well as detergents, cleaning products and cleaning equipment. How to justify expenses for household appliances, interior items, etc. in tax accounting? What decisions do arbitration courts make on this issue?

Responsibilities for ensuring safe working conditions rest with the employer. This is stated in Article 212 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Moreover, the employer must not only ensure the safety of employees when performing their work duties, but also provide sanitary, medical and preventive services in accordance with labor protection requirements. In this case we are talking about (Article 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation):
on equipment for workers with sanitary facilities, premises for eating, providing medical care, rest rooms during working hours and psychological relief;
on the installation of devices to provide workers in hot shops and areas with carbonated salt water;
on the creation of sanitary posts with first aid kits stocked with a set of medicines and preparations for first aid, etc.

Subparagraph 7 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation states that expenses for ensuring normal working conditions and safety measures provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation are included in other expenses and reduce taxable profit. However, neither the said subclause nor the other norms of Chapter 25 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation specify which costs are included in the costs of ensuring normal working conditions.

Such clarifications are not contained in the letters of the Russian Ministry of Finance. Therefore, before recognizing certain expenses for improving working conditions or taking household appliances into account, it is advisable, firstly, to draw up documents that will help confirm these expenses, and, secondly, to analyze how arbitration practice develops in similar cases.
Recommended package of documents

So, the employer is obliged to create normal (safe) working conditions for employees. This is stated in articles 22, 163 and 212 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. The list of activities, the implementation of which ensures normal working conditions in a particular organization, should be enshrined in a local regulatory document, for example, in the regulations on labor protection, internal labor regulations, instructions on labor protection and safety, an order or directive from the manager. Depending on the specifics of the organization’s activities, the employer’s obligations to create acceptable working conditions can be divided into two groups:
ensuring normal working conditions in the workplace, including equipping the workroom with air conditioners, fans, heaters, air ionizers, curtains, blinds, comfortable furniture, etc.;
creation of sanitary conditions for rest and nutrition of employees during the working day (equipment of premises for eating and rest, purchase of electric kettles, coffee makers, microwave ovens, refrigerators, water coolers and drinking water itself, kitchen furniture and utensils).

If, in addition to employment contracts, a collective agreement has also been concluded between employees and the employer, it is advisable to include measures to create normal working conditions in this document. In organizations that do not have a collective agreement, these activities can be listed directly in the employment contracts concluded with employees, or a reference can be made in the employment contracts to the relevant local regulatory act in which these activities are spelled out in detail.

Let us note that, according to Article 8 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, a collective agreement may provide for the need to coordinate the adopted local normative act with a trade union organization or other representative body of the labor collective. The procedure for taking into account the opinion of a trade union organization is set out in Article 372 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation.

Requirements for ensuring safe working conditions for workers are established by sanitary rules and other regulatory legal acts of the Russian Federation. This is stated in paragraph 1 of Article 25 Federal Law dated March 30, 1999 No. 52-FZ “On the sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population.” This means that in a local regulatory document or the corresponding section of an employment (collective) agreement, the employer can refer to the sanitary and epidemiological rules and regulations (SanPiN) and construction norms and regulations (SNiP) currently in force in Russia.

For example, when equipping a place for eating, you should be guided by the requirements of SNiP 2.09.04-87. They indicate that the room for meals must be equipped with a washbasin, a stationary boiler, an electric stove, and a refrigerator. Securing in a collective agreement or local regulatory document the employer’s obligations to purchase an electric kettle, microwave oven and other household appliances for employees with reference to the above-mentioned SNiPs will serve as one of the weighty arguments for justifying the costs of this equipment.

You can also use recommendations on the approximate content of the section of obligations of the employer and employee regarding labor conditions and safety in an employment (collective) agreement. These recommendations were developed by the Russian Ministry of Labor and brought to the attention of organizations by letter dated January 23, 1996 No. 38-11. In addition, the employer must take into account the Recommendations for planning occupational safety measures, approved by Resolution of the Ministry of Labor of Russia dated February 27, 1995 No. 11.

Let’s say that due to production (work) conditions, it is impossible to provide workers with breaks for rest and food. In this case, the employer must provide employees with the opportunity to rest and eat during working hours (Article 108 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). The list of such production (work) and places for rest and eating must be recorded in the internal labor regulations or other local normative act. The more detailed this document describes what furniture, household appliances, dishes and electronics (for example, a TV, stereo, DVD player) the organization undertakes to purchase for the rest room and meals, the more likely the company is to prove the validity of the costs for equipment and maintenance of such premises.

Additional documents confirming the need to purchase household appliances for the office may include job descriptions of employees, which provide for continuous work (without a meal break) during the day or irregular working hours or round-the-clock duty.

Often, organizations purchase one or another household appliances and electronics in order to use them not to satisfy the sanitary needs of employees, but directly in the production process. For example, Insurance companies record damage to the insured property using cameras and video cameras. Organizations involved in construction and carrying out overhaul, also actively use photographic equipment to record the volume and control the quality of work performed. VCRs and stereo systems can be used to instruct and train personnel on industrial safety rules.

In such situations, in order to justify the costs of purchasing household appliances and electronics, it is advisable to indicate, when transferring them into operation, in which departments and for what purposes they will be used. Such information is usually reflected in the act of acceptance and transfer of fixed assets (form No. OS-111), materials accounting card (form No. M-1722), order or instruction of the manager. If an organization describes a technological or management process in detail, that is, there are technological maps, regulations on quality control of products (work performed, services provided) and other similar documents, the procedure for using household appliances and electronics for production purposes must be fixed in these documents.

At the same time, the employing organization should be prepared for the fact that even if the listed documents are available, its right to have expenses on household appliances and electronics recognized in tax accounting will most likely have to be defended in court. Of course, the more detailed the employer’s obligations to create normal working conditions for employees are spelled out in labor (collective) agreements and local regulations, the greater the likelihood of proving in court the legality of accounting for income tax purposes for expenses on household appliances and electronics.

Arbitration practice in similar disputes shows that an organization has a set of interrelated documents (consisting, for example, of a collective agreement, job descriptions, internal labor regulations, orders and directives of the manager) allows you to include in expenses the cost of almost any type of household appliances and electronics.

Of course, a small business is unlikely to waste time on drawing up these documents for the sake of one electric kettle. Easier costs its acquisition is not taken into account for tax purposes. But for a large or even medium-sized enterprise that has a significant number of similar objects on its balance sheet, the execution of the specified package of documents will certainly help to defend its position in court.
note

The organization has the right to decide for itself what costs it needs to conduct its activities.
The Constitutional Court, in Ruling No. 320-O-P dated June 4, 2007, indicated that the validity of expenses that reduce income received for profit tax purposes cannot be assessed from the point of view of their expediency, rationality, efficiency or the result obtained. Due to the principle of freedom of economic activity enshrined in Article 8 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the taxpayer conducts activities independently at his own risk and only he has the right to assess its effectiveness and expediency.

Judicial control is not intended to check the economic feasibility of decisions made by business entities. This is noted in the resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated February 24, 2004 No. 3-P. The Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation adheres to a similar position. Thus, in paragraph 1 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated October 12, 2006 No. 53, it is stated that arbitrage practice resolution of tax disputes is based on the presumption of good faith of taxpayers and other participants in legal relations in the economic sphere. In this regard, it is assumed that the actions of the taxpayer, resulting in the receipt of a tax benefit (legal reduction in the amount of tax liability), are economically justified, and the information contained in the tax return and financial statements, reliable. Thus, the burden of proving the unjustification of certain expenses of the organization and the unjustification of their accounting for profit tax purposes rests with the tax authorities.
Tax accounting of expenses for ensuring normal working conditions

The organization's expenses for ensuring normal working conditions are included in other expenses that reduce taxable profit on the basis of subparagraph 7 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code. But if the company bought household appliances or equipment, the cost of which exceeds 20,000 rubles. (until 2008 - 10,000 rubles), and confirmed the need for such an acquisition, she does not have the right to recognize expenses for the acquisition of these objects at a time. After all, such assets are depreciable property. That is, their cost will be included in expenses gradually as depreciation is calculated.

Let us formulate arguments that will help organizations that care about their employees justify, for tax purposes, expenses for the purchase of certain types of household appliances, electronics and interior items. In addition, we will give examples from arbitration practice.
Air conditioners, fans, heaters

To confirm the need for expenses for the purchase and installation of heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems in office and industrial premises, the organization needs to refer to the relevant SanPiN and SNiP. After all, every employer is obliged to comply with the requirements contained in these documents (clause 2 of article 25 of the Federal Law of March 30, 1999 No. 52-FZ).

Hygienic requirements for the microclimate of industrial premises are established by SanPiN 2.2.4.548-96, which were approved and put into effect by Decree of the State Committee for Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision of Russia dated 01.10.96 No. 21. This document contains tables with optimal and permissible values ​​of microclimate indicators at workplaces in industrial premises. In summer, the air temperature in the room should not exceed 25 ° C with a relative air humidity in the range of 40-60%. These standards are optimal and provide workers with a feeling of thermal comfort during the working day and contribute to high level performance.

If we are talking about office premises, references to the following documents will help justify the costs of purchasing air conditioners, split systems, fans and various heaters:
SNiP 2.09.04—87 “Administrative and domestic buildings.” These standards contain General requirements for ventilation and air conditioning in administrative premises for various purposes;
SanPiN 2.2.2/2.4.1340-03 “Hygienic requirements for personal electronic computers and organization of work”, put into effect by Decree of the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of Russia dated 06/03/2003 No. 118. Paragraph 4.4 of this document states that in the premises in which computers are installed, it is necessary to carry out systematic ventilation after every hour of working on the computer;
SanPiN 2.2.2.1332-03 “Hygienic requirements for the organization of work on copying and duplicating equipment”, put into effect by Decree of the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of Russia dated May 30, 2003 No. 107. Paragraph 5.1 of the said document states that the room in which copying equipment operates , must be equipped with heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems.

Let's turn to arbitration practice. In a resolution dated July 26, 2006 in case No. A55-32558/2005, the Volga Region Federal Antimonopoly Service supported an organization that, when calculating income tax, recognized expenses for the purchase of air conditioners. After all, air conditioners were installed and used by the company in its administrative premises, and thanks to their work, normal working conditions were created for employees. In other words, air conditioners were indirectly used in income-generating activities. This means that the organization had the right to include the costs of their acquisition in expenses that reduce taxable profit.

In later decisions of the same court, but in other cases, the legality of recognizing, for profit tax purposes, expenses for the purchase of a heater, a household air conditioner (decision dated August 21, 2007 in case No. A57-10229/06-33) and a fan (resolution dated October 28, 2008 in case No. A55-865/08). Arguments of taxpayers: expenses for the purchase of these objects (including through depreciation) fall under Article 22 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, which states that the employer is obliged to ensure labor safety and conditions that meet the requirements of labor protection and occupational health, which is also enshrined in collective agreements contracts An additional argument in the case of the fan was a reference to clause 4.4 of SanPiN 2.2.2/2.4.1340-03, according to which rooms with operating computers must be ventilated every hour. Since installing the fan ensures normal operation computer equipment, the costs of its acquisition are of a production nature and can be taken into account when calculating income tax.

There are other examples of court decisions in which arbitration courts supported taxpayers who reduced taxable profits for the costs of purchasing air conditioners, fans and other similar equipment (including through depreciation). We are talking about the decisions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated November 28, 2006 in case No. A56

34718/2005, FAS Moscow District dated March 13, 2008 No. KA-A40/1415-08 in case No. A40-33923/07-127-185 and FAS Ural District dated May 14, 2008 No. F09-3355/08-C3 in case No. A07-15074/07.
Refrigerators, kettles, coffee makers, kitchen furniture, dishes and equipment for eating areas

If a company allocates a special room for rest and meals for employees, then it is not difficult to justify the costs of purchasing electric kettles, coffee makers, microwave ovens, refrigerators and other household appliances. After all, by doing so, the organization fulfills the requirements established in Article 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Let us recall that this article provides for the obligation of the employer to equip premises for eating and rooms for psychological relief and rest during working hours in accordance with current standards.

The standards by which canteens and rooms for eating should be equipped are established in paragraphs 2.48-2.52 of SNiP 2.09.04-87. Thus, if there are more than 200 people working per shift, the organization must have a canteen, and if there are up to 200 people, there must be a canteen or canteen-dispensing area. If the number of workers is less than 30 people per shift, instead of a canteen you can equip a room for meals.

The area of ​​the specified room is determined on the basis of one square meter for each visitor and must be at least 12 square meters. m. It is necessary to install a washbasin, a stationary boiler (electric kettle), an electric stove (microwave oven) and a refrigerator. In small organizations in which the number of employees does not exceed ten people per shift, instead of a room for meals, it is allowed to allocate additional space in the dressing room (locker room) with an area of ​​at least 6 square meters. m to install a table for eating.

So, in order to justify the costs of allocating premises for a dining room or a room for meals and equipping this premises with the necessary household appliances, kitchen furniture and utensils, it is advisable to include in a collective agreement or local regulatory act (for example, in internal labor regulations) a condition on providing employees of this room. In these documents you need to make a reference to Article 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation and SNiP 2.09.04-87. With this documentation courts, as a rule, confirm the right of taxpayers to recognize such expenses for income tax purposes. Here are some examples of similar court decisions:
Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated March 27, 2008 No. KA-A40/2214-08 in case No. A40-42333/07-109-150. The court indicated that the costs of purchasing household appliances (refrigerator, juicer, kitchenette, coffee maker, etc.) were made to ensure a normal working day and are associated with the fulfillment of the duties assigned to the employer, which contributes to the achievement of the ultimate goal of the organization’s activities - generating income. Thus, the organization had the right to include in expenses the amount of depreciation accrued on the specified fixed assets;
Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District dated October 28, 2008 in case No. A55-865/08, in which the court, on the basis of subparagraph 49 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, recognized the costs of purchasing a refrigerator and microwave oven as legitimate. After all, they are necessary for equipping the room in which food is eaten, and therefore provide normal working conditions;
Determination of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 27, 2007 No. 9080/07 in case No. A27-11993/2006-2. It states that the costs of purchasing refrigerators, kettles, microwave ovens, a freezer, an electric stove, a dining table, a TV and other objects are associated with the arrangement of rooms for lunch and rest and are necessary for organizing normal working conditions for workers, that is, they are economically justified and aimed at generating income.

Let's say the organization has neither a canteen nor a special room for meals. The absence of a separate room for eating does not relieve the employer of the obligation to provide normal working conditions. In such a situation, workers should be given the opportunity to have lunch directly at their workplaces (Article 108 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation). Consequently, the costs of purchasing refrigerators (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Central District dated January 12, 2006 No. A62-817/2005), a microwave oven (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga Region dated September 4, 2007 in case No. A65-19675/2006-SA1-19), coffee makers ( resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated December 18, 2007 No. KA-A40/13151-07 in case No. A40-192/07-4-2), electric kettles (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Northwestern District dated April 21, 2006 in case No. A56-7747/2005 ) and other household appliances can be qualified as expenses for creating normal working conditions and taken into account when calculating income tax.
Bottled drinking water and coolers

Many organizations purchase not only various household appliances for their employees, but also provide them with clean drinking water. The Russian Ministry of Finance believes that expenses for the purchase of drinking water and rental of a cooler can be recognized for profit tax purposes only if, according to the conclusion of the sanitary and epidemiological service, the water in the water supply is not suitable for drinking (letter dated December 2, 2005 No. 03-03-04 /1/408). However, recently, arbitration courts usually do not agree with this position. In their decisions, judges note that the cost of purchasing a cooler and drinking water reduces taxable income, regardless of whether the tap water is suitable for consumption or not. After all, such costs are integral part expenses for ensuring normal working conditions, and the tax legislation does not contain a requirement to submit a document on the quality of tap water (resolutions of the FAS of the Volga District dated 03/20/2008 in case No. A55-9669/07-3 and FAS of the Moscow District dated 05/05/2009 No. KA- A40/3335-09 in case No. A40-47054/08-108-151).

At the same time, there is an example of a court decision in which the court found the costs of purchasing drinking water and paying for auxiliary equipment for its consumption to be unreasonable in the presence of a centralized water supply (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated September 5, 2006 No. F09-7846/06-S7 in case No. A60-41504/05).

Naturally, the results of an analysis of tap water, indicating its low quality, the presence of rust, sediment, and mechanical impurities in the water, will be an additional and quite significant argument for including the cost of purchasing drinking bottled water in expenses. Hygienic requirements and water quality standards in centralized systems drinking water supply are given in SanPiN 2.1.4.1074-01, put into effect by Decree of the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of Russia dated September 26, 2001 No. 24.
TVs, DVD players, VCRs, stereos, radios

Unlike household appliances (electric kettles, coffee makers, refrigerators), the costs of purchasing televisions, stereo systems, DVD players and other equipment are much more difficult to justify. The Russian Ministry of Finance has repeatedly spoken out categorically against the inclusion of televisions in depreciable property (letters dated January 17, 2006 No. 03-03-04/2/9 and dated September 4, 2006 No. 03-03-04/2/199). According to the financial department, such property is of a non-productive nature, even if the organization uses televisions to obtain operational information of an economic nature.

There is a greater chance of confirming the need to purchase a TV and other equipment from those companies that, in accordance with Article 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, equip rest rooms and psychological relief for employees. Please note that it is not necessary to provide a separate room for workers to rest. For these purposes, you can allocate a place in the reception area, secretariat, meeting room or meeting room, or use the room for meals. The employer’s obligation to equip such premises must be enshrined in a collective agreement, local regulation or other similar document.

Let's turn to arbitration practice. In a resolution dated November 13, 2006 in case No. A56-51313/2004, the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District confirmed that the purchase of a TV for the rest room is related to production activities and is included in the costs of ensuring normal working conditions.

Another example is the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated April 2, 2007 No. F04-1822/2007 (32980-A27-40) in case No. A27-11993/2006-2. In it, the court recognized that the costs of purchasing a TV and various household appliances (refrigerators, kettles, microwave ovens, freezers, electric stoves, etc.) are associated with the arrangement of rooms for lunch and rest and are necessary for organizing normal working conditions for workers. In other words, such expenses are economically justified, aimed at generating income and, therefore, taken into account for tax purposes.

Let's say a TV, VCR, video camera, camera or other equipment is used in the production process, for example, for conducting instructions, training or presentations, recording damage or the volume of work performed. As already mentioned, the procedure for their use should be specified in the local regulatory document (description technological process, order or instruction of the manager). In the presence of such evidence, the courts usually support taxpayers and recognize the legality of accounting for expenses (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated 04/21/2006 in case No. A56-7747/2005 and the FAS Ural District dated 09.24.2007 No. Ф09-7797/07-С3 in the case No. A60-36582/06).
Vacuum cleaners and other cleaning equipment, detergents and cleaning products

Currently, the cost of purchasing detergents and cleaning products, disposable paper towels, toilet paper, napkins, as well as vacuum cleaners and other cleaning equipment are the least controversial. The fact is that meeting the sanitary needs of employees is one of the responsibilities of the employer (Article 223 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation).

These costs relate to expenses for economic needs and are reflected as part of material expenses on the basis of subparagraph 2 of paragraph 1 of Article 254 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Similar explanations are given in the letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated April 11, 2007 No. 03-03-06/1/229.

It is advisable that the amount of sanitary and hygienic products used corresponds to the area of ​​the premises and the number of employees. Otherwise, such expenses may be considered economically unjustified.

Arbitration courts, as a rule, confirm that the purchase of dishwashing liquid, washing powder, toilet paper, and other cleaning and detergents is due to the need to comply with sanitary and hygienic requirements and allows maintaining production and administrative premises in proper condition (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga Region dated 03.07 .2007 in case No. A65-20634/06 and resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated December 25, 2006, December 27, 2006 No. KA-A40/12681-06 in case No. A40-20791/06-118-198).
Curtains, blinds, mirrors, aquariums, indoor flowers and other interior items

To justify the costs of purchasing curtains and blinds, you can use the Hygienic Requirements for Insolation 3 and Sun Protection of Residential and Public Buildings and Territories (SanPiN 2.2.1/2.1.1.1076-01), which were put into effect by the Decree of the Chief State Sanitary Doctor of Russia dated October 25 .2001 No. 29.

It is more difficult to confirm the validity of expenses for the purchase of mirrors, indoor flowers, aquariums and items for their care. The Russian Ministry of Finance clarified that stands and pots for indoor plants are intended for office interior decoration and are not expenses associated with the organization’s activities (letter dated May 25, 2007 No. 03-03-06/1/311). Such expenses cannot be taken into account when calculating income tax, since they do not meet the basic criteria established in paragraph 1 of Article 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. However, after analyzing arbitration practice, we can name several ways to justify the costs of purchasing and servicing interior items.

Method one. Prove that the interior was designed and created during the construction of the building and is an integral part of it. Therefore, the cost of creating the interior is included in the initial cost of the building and is included in expenses as depreciation is calculated. If the useful lives of the interior and the building itself do not coincide, the interior may be accounted for as a separate inventory item of fixed assets.

Thus, the FAS Moscow District, in resolution dated January 21, 2009 No. KA-A40/12910-08 in case No. A40-35465/08-139-123, noted that the installation of the aquarium system and decorative landscape composition was carried out simultaneously with the construction of the premises itself, that is Initially, a single design of the premises was assumed. In addition, the organization presented the results of a marketing study confirming that the use of these systems and compositions helps attract customers, increase the cost of renting premises and the efficiency of trading activities. Taking into account these arguments, the court found the costs of maintaining aquariums and decorative landscape compositions to be justified.

Method two. Confirm that decorating premises in a special style increases the attractiveness of the property for potential clients (buyers, tenants, etc.). After all, the costs of purchasing interior items are aimed at creating a favorable image of the taxpayer among external visitors, therefore they are of a production nature and reduce taxable profit. This option is suitable for those organizations that rent out premises or are engaged in trade, providing services, that is, they have sales or client rooms, showrooms, shops and other premises for servicing customers.

For example, the FAS Moscow District, in resolution dated October 10, 2008 No. KA-A40/8775-08 in case No. A40 3666/08-129-15, confirmed that the organization legally took into account for tax purposes the costs of purchasing artificial flowers for decorating the client room. In another case, the court also came to the conclusion that the costs of installing aquariums in premises in which workplaces are rented out can be recognized when calculating income tax (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated 09/07/2006, 09/11/2006 No. KA-A40/ 8421-06 in case No. A40 76012/05-116-623). The fact is that most of these rooms do not have windows, and the aquariums installed in them can significantly reduce the negative consequences of a lack of sunlight and natural lighting. In other words, aquariums increase the attractiveness of a given premises for potential tenants and, therefore, are used exclusively for production purposes. Similar conclusions are contained in the resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated June 16, 2009 No. KA-A40/5111-09 in case No. A40-73552/08-111-338.

Method three. Provide evidence that specific interior items (for example, indoor flowers or curtains) were purchased to ensure normal working conditions for workers. It would seem that this method is the most obvious and natural. Here are a few examples of court decisions in which the courts agreed with the following arguments of organizations:
Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the West Siberian District dated April 2, 2008 No. F04-2260/2008(3201-A45-40) in case No. A45-10220/07-49/89. In it, the court indicated that the organization purchased indoor plants and care products for them in order to ensure normal working conditions, protect the health of employees in the premises where computers and office equipment work, and increase air humidity in these premises. Consequently, the company rightfully reduced taxable profit by the amount of expenses for the purchase of indoor flowers and care products;
resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated December 25, 2006, December 27, 2006 No. KA-A40/12681-06 in case No. A40-20791/06-118-198. Since the dishes and furnishings were purchased for use in the taxpayer's building, which was operated for industrial purposes, and ensured the normal work process, the court agreed to recognize the costs of acquiring this property for tax purposes.

At the same time, we note that arbitration courts do not always support taxpayers in such situations.
Value added tax

Based on the provisions of the Tax Code, the procedure for deducting VAT presented by the supplier of purchased property does not depend on how the organization takes this property into account when calculating income tax. An exception is regulated expenses (for example, entertainment, advertising). The amount of VAT on such expenses is subject to deduction in the amount corresponding to the standards for recognizing these expenses for profit tax purposes (clause 7 of Article 171 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

Consequently, if an organization carrying out activities subject to VAT has accepted household appliances (equipment, interior items, etc.) for accounting purposes and has correctly executed primary documents and an invoice for it, then it is entitled to “input” VAT on acquired assets deduct in general procedure. However, the Russian Ministry of Finance believes that VAT on non-productive property cannot be deducted (letter dated January 17, 2006 No. 03-03-04/2/9). The tax authorities are of a similar opinion. In the letter of the Ministry of Taxes and Taxes of Russia dated January 21, 2003 No. 03-1-08/204/26-B088 it was explained that the amounts of VAT on goods purchased for own needs property (teapot) are not accepted for deduction. In other words, the right to deduct VAT depends on whether the costs of acquiring this property are recognized for profit tax purposes or not. But the Tax Code does not contain such a requirement. Arbitration courts do not support this position either. They, as a rule, indicate that the norms of Chapter 21 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation do not establish the taxpayer’s right to use tax deduction depending on the production or non-production nature of the expenses incurred (resolutions of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Ural District dated April 24, 2006 No. Ф09-2909/06-С7 in case No. A60-35156/05, FAS Volga District dated July 1, 2008 in case No. A57-10917/07 and dated April 23, 2009 in case No. A55-9765/2008).

So, an organization has the right to deduct VAT amounts claimed on purchased household appliances and electronics, even if it does not have the right to recognize the costs of its acquisition (including through depreciation) when calculating income tax.

In a situation where expenses for the purchase of household appliances, interior items and other similar objects are recognized in tax accounting, problems with deducting VAT on them should not arise. This is confirmed by the decisions of the FAS Volga District dated August 28, 2007 in case No. A55-17548/06 and the FAS Far Eastern District dated February 6, 2009 No. F03-6187/2008 in case No. A59-603/2008-C24.
Accounting for household appliances and corporate property tax

To date, the issue of how to reflect in accounting records household appliances, electronics and equipment purchased to satisfy the sanitary needs of workers and create normal working conditions has not been resolved. But the amount of property tax that an organization must pay to the budget depends on the answer to it.

As already mentioned, tax authorities most often prohibit companies from reducing taxable profit by the amount of expenses for the purchase of household appliances, equipment, interior items and other similar objects. At the same time, they insist that property tax must be paid on these assets.

In addition to the above position of the tax authorities, there are two more points of view on this issue.

First opinion. Appliances and electronics cannot be included in current (materials, costs) or non-current (fixed assets, equipment for installation) assets. The cost of its acquisition, regardless of the amount, should be taken into account as other expenses and reflected in the debit of account 91 “Other expenses”, since the specified property is not directly related to the production process. In other words, household appliances are not subject to property tax.

Second opinion. Depending on the cost of acquisition, household appliances and electronics should be included in fixed assets or reflected as inventory. The fact is that in the Regulations on accounting and financial reporting in Russian Federation, approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated July 29, 1998 No. 34n, assets are not divided into production and non-production. That is, the same rules apply to any assets.

If household appliances meet the requirements listed in paragraph 4 of PBU 6/01, in accounting they should be included in fixed assets, the useful life should be determined and depreciation should be calculated during this period. To bring tax and accounting accounting closer together, it is advisable to establish equal useful lives for the named assets.

Fixed assets worth no more than 20,000 rubles. per unit can be reflected in accounting and reporting as part of inventories, that is, written off as expenses at a time after commissioning (clause 5 of PBU 6/01). Moreover, the organization can independently establish in accounting policy another limit on the value of such property, not exceeding 20,000 rubles. per unit, for example 18,000 rubles. In this case, it must ensure the safety of these objects and proper control over their movement. That is, keep cards and journals of accounting, issue or movement of objects, assign them to financially responsible persons, reflect them on off-balance sheet accounts, etc.

Most household appliances cost less than RUB 20,000. This means that in accounting their cost can be included in expenses immediately after commissioning. In this case, the cost of purchased household appliances is written off to the debit of cost accounting accounts (accounts 20, 23, 25, 26, 29 or 44) and does not participate in the calculation of property tax.

Expensive household appliances and equipment (costing more than 20,000 rubles per unit or over the limit established by the organization) are subject to depreciation over their useful life. Hence, residual value of these assets is included in the tax base for property tax.

The Russian Ministry of Finance shares a similar opinion. In a letter dated 04/21/2005 No. 03-06-01-04/209, he explained that when purchasing household appliances and other property to ensure normal working conditions for employees, the acquired assets are accepted for accounting as fixed assets and are subject to corporate property tax.

If an organization’s purchase of a coffee machine is classified as an effort to improve working conditions and safety, then when calculating income tax, the costs of an organization’s additional service certificate must be included evenly as expenses over the period of its validity. If the purchase of a coffee machine is not included in measures to improve working conditions and safety, then the organization does not have the right to take into account the costs of the certificate when calculating the tax base for income tax. Rationale: According to Art. 163 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer is obliged to provide normal conditions for employees to fulfill production standards. Such conditions, in particular, include working conditions that meet labor protection and production safety requirements. The concept of working conditions is established by the provisions of Art. 209 Labor Code of the Russian Federation. Thus, working conditions should be understood as a set of factors in the working environment and the labor process that influence the performance and health of the employee. Based on Art. 22 of the Labor Code of the Russian Federation, the employer’s responsibilities, in particular, include: - ensure safety and working conditions that comply with state regulatory requirements labor protection; — provide for the everyday needs of employees related to the performance of their job duties. Thus, the employer’s obligation to create normal working conditions is enshrined in legislation. In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 252 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, expenses are recognized as justified and documented expenses (and in cases provided for in Article 265 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, losses) incurred (incurred) by the taxpayer. Justified expenses mean economically justified expenses, the assessment of which is expressed in monetary form. Order of the Ministry of Health and Social Development of Russia dated March 1, 2012 N 181n approved the Standard List of measures annually implemented by the employer to improve working conditions and safety and reduce levels of occupational risks. And the specific list of such events is determined by the organization itself, based on the specifics of its activities (Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated March 24, 2014 N 03-03-06/2/12697). Consequently, if the purchase of a coffee machine is included in the measures to improve conditions and labor protection by a local act of the organization, the costs, including the purchase of a certificate, can be taken into account in tax expenses (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated December 18, 2007 N KA-A40/13151- 07 in case No. A40-192/07-4-2). The general rules for recognizing expenses using the accrual method are reflected in paragraph 1 of Art. 272 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation. Thus, expenses are recognized in the reporting (tax) period in which they arise based on the terms of the transactions. If the transaction does not contain such conditions and the relationship between income and expenses cannot be clearly defined or is determined indirectly, the taxpayer distributes the expenses independently. Based on the provisions of Art. 272 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, expenses that relate to several reporting periods cannot be written off immediately. From the conditions of the issue under consideration, it follows that the purchased certificate gives the right to faster replacement or repair in the event of a breakdown within two years. In such a situation, the cost of additional service (the cost of the certificate) must be written off evenly over the period of its validity (Letter of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated October 15, 2008 N 03-03-05/132). In a situation where the purchase of a coffee maker is not included in measures to improve working conditions and labor safety, the organization does not have the right to take into account the costs of an additional service certificate when calculating the tax base for income tax. Thus, if the purchase of a coffee machine is classified as an effort to improve working conditions and safety, when calculating income tax, the costs of an organization’s additional service certificate must be included evenly as expenses over its validity period (two years). If the purchase of a coffee machine is not included in measures to improve working conditions and safety, then the organization does not have the right to take into account the costs of the certificate when calculating the tax base for income tax.

The organization purchased a coffee machine. The purchase documents reflect its cost and the cost of a certificate for additional warranty service. The certificate entitles you to faster replacement or repair in the event of a breakdown within two years. In what order should an organization reflect the costs of acquiring the specified certificate when calculating the tax base for income tax?

By general rule An asset is accepted for accounting as fixed assets if the following conditions are simultaneously met (clause 4 of PBU 6/01 “Accounting for fixed assets”, approved by order of the Ministry of Finance of Russia dated March 30, 2001 No. 26n):

• the object is intended for use in the production of products, when performing work or providing services, for the management needs of the organization, or to be provided by the organization for a fee for temporary possession and use or for temporary use;
• the object is intended to be used for a long time, i.e. a period of more than 12 months or a normal operating cycle if it exceeds 12 months;
• the organization does not intend the subsequent resale of this object;
• the object is capable of bringing economic benefits (income) to the organization in the future.

Thus, in relation to the coffee machine, all the conditions provided for in paragraph 4 of PBU 6/01 are simultaneously met, and it should be classified as an independent object of fixed assets.

Income tax

In order to tax accounting fixed assets are depreciable property:

• depreciable property is property that is owned by the taxpayer, used by him to generate income and the cost of which is repaid by calculating depreciation (clause 1 of Article 256 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation);
• depreciable property is property with a useful life of more than 12 months and original cost over 40,000 rubles (clause 1 of article 256 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation);
• the cost of property that is not depreciable property is included in material costs in full as it is put into operation (clause 3, clause 1, article 254 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation).

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Clause 7, Clause 1, Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation) allows the costs of ensuring normal working conditions to be taken into account, but does not specify which conditions are recognized as normal working conditions and which costs relate to such provision.

There are examples of court decisions, from which it follows that the costs of purchasing household appliances can be taken into account when taxing profits if this equipment is used in the activities of the organization, the result of which is the receipt of profit. Also, the purchase of household appliances may be necessary due to shift work or special temperature conditions. Costs are taken into account by inclusion in the costs of ensuring normal working conditions or by calculating depreciation (Resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Moscow District dated October 30, 2009 No. KA-A40/11455-09 in case No. A40-91919/08-87-457).

In another case, the court, on the basis of subparagraph 49 of paragraph 1 of Article 264 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation, recognized the expenses for the purchase of a refrigerator, microwave oven and fan as legitimate, indicating that they ensure normal working conditions: the refrigerator and microwave oven are necessary for the meal room, and the fan is necessary for ensuring functioning of computer equipment (resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Volga District dated October 28, 2008 in case No. A55-865/08).

Thus, you can take into account the costs of purchasing a coffee machine when calculating your tax base, but in this case you should be prepared to defend your position in court.

VAT

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation does not contain a direct answer to the question of whether a taxpayer has the right to deduct VAT amounts presented to him by suppliers when purchasing goods, works, and services for non-productive purposes.

There are a number of court decisions according to which the taxpayer has such a right (decrees of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the North-Western District dated December 28, 2011 in case No. A05-3367/2011, FAS West Siberian District dated December 27, 2011 in case No. A70-2504/2011, FAS Moscow District dated September 14, 2011 in case No. A40-129734/10-127-747, FAS Volga District dated July 1, 2008 in case No. A57-10917/07, FAS Moscow District dated March 17, 2011 No. KA-A40/17564- 10 in case No. A40-95355/09-112-687 and others).

On the other hand, there is a resolution of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of the Far Eastern District dated January 24, 2008 No. F03-A51/07-2/6147 in case No. A51-15303/2006-8-381/17, according to which the taxpayer does not have the right to deduct VAT amounts in the event non-productive nature of the corresponding costs.

Thus, you can accept the corresponding amounts for deduction - then conflicts with the tax office are possible. If you prefer to exclude any possibility of tax authorities making claims against you, then you can take into account the amount of VAT claimed as part of the cost of the acquired property, which is not taken into account when calculating income tax.

You can get even more information about accounting and tax accounting, including in 1C programs, in the “Accounting and Tax Accounting” section in the ITS IS