THE BURDEN OF HIGH TAXATION ON ADVOCATES' FEES: A COMPREHENSIVE COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF UZBEKISTAN, CIS, EUROPEAN, AND US PRACTICE AND LEGISLATIVE REFORMS

• Boltabaev Jakhongir

  Attorney at “LEXICON” Law Firm

Objective: This article provides a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the heavy tax burden imposed on advocates' fees in the Republic of Uzbekistan (totaling 24% from personal income and social taxes) and the resulting challenges of the shadow economy and informal cash transactions. Method: A deep comparative study of the taxation of legal services across CIS countries (Russia, Kazakhstan), Europe (Germany, United Kingdom), and the United States is conducted. Results: Based on the findings, concrete theoretical and legislative proposals are developed to amend the Law "On Advocacy" and the Tax Code to introduce a specialized simplified tax regime and a system of professional tax deductions for advocates. Novelty: The novelty of this article lies in integrating a comparative analysis of advocates’ taxation across CIS countries, Europe, and the United States with the specific problem of the 24% tax burden on advocates’ fees in Uzbekistan. The study goes beyond identifying the tax burden by linking it to the risks of shadow economic activity and informal cash transactions and translating the comparative findings into concrete legislative proposals. In particular, the proposed specialized simplified tax regime and professional tax deduction system provide a specific legal and fiscal framework tailored to advocates in Uzbekistan.

[1] International Bar Association, ‘IBA Standards for the Independence of the Legal Profession’, International Bar Association, London, U.K., IBA Global Policy Report, 2018.

[2] S. Mayson, ‘Independent Review of Legal Services Regulation’, Centre for Ethics and Law, University College London, London, U.K., 2020.

[3] A. Paterson, Lawyers and the Public Good: Democracy in Action. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

[4] A. V. Smirnov and I. V. Yartsev, ‘Pravovaya priroda gonorara advokata: publichno-pravovye i nalogovye aspekty’, Evraziiskii Yuridicheskii Zhurnal, vol. 5, no. 11, pp. 45–52, 2021.

[5] Russian Federation, ‘Federal Law “On Advocacy and the Bar in the Russian Federation”’, no. 63-FZ. May 31, 2002.

[6] Russian Federation, ‘Tax Code of the Russian Federation (Part Two)’, no. 117-FZ. Aug. 05, 2000.

[7] Republic of Kazakhstan, ‘Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)”’, no. 120–VI. Dec. 25, 2017.

[8] Republic of Kazakhstan, ‘Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Taxes and Other Obligatory Payments to the Budget (Tax Code)”’, no. 120–VI. Dec. 25, 2017.

[9] Federal Republic of Germany, ‘Bundesrechtsanwaltsordnung (BRAO) [Federal Lawyers’ Act]’, BGBl. I. p. 565, Aug. 01, 1959.

[10] Federal Republic of Germany, ‘Einkommensteuergesetz (EStG) [Income Tax Act]’, BGBl. I. p. 3366, Oct. 08, 2009.

[11] M. Kilian, Anwaltsrecht: Ein Studienbuch. Munich, Germany: C.H. Beck, 2019.

[12] HM Revenue & Customs, ‘BIM60000 – Specific trades: Barristers and advocates: Income tax and VAT’. London, U.K., 2023.

[13] C. Hodges and S. Vogenauer, Costs and Funding of Civil Litigation: A Comparative Perspective. Oxford, U.K.: Hart Publishing, 2017.

[14] United States Government Publishing Office, ‘Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. S 162: Trade or Business Expenses’. Washington, DC, USA, 2023.

[15] Republic of Uzbekistan, ‘Tax Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan’, no. ZRU-599. Dec. 30, 2019.

[16] Republic of Uzbekistan, ‘Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan “On Advocacy”’, no. 349–I. Dec. 27, 1996.

• View Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.