Jingwei Tang

Tax Crime and Corporate Tax Defense in Beijing

Jingwei Tang defends companies and executives in Beijing on tax crime charges, with emphasis on sentencing thresholds, dual punishment for unit offenses, and early intervention while a tax audit is still open.

Mr. Tang practices at Beijing Zhongheng Law Firm in Chaoyang District. He graduated from China University of Political Science and Law and was admitted to the bar in 2012. His practice covers tax crime defense, administrative tax disputes and corporate tax compliance. He has advised manufacturing, trading and service companies—including headquarters functions located in Beijing—on criminal risks that arise from invoicing irregularities, inaccurate filings, and internal control failures that only become visible when a large examination begins.

Beijing matters often involve national tax risk models, industry campaigns, and coordination between local tax bureaus and public security. That means timing, document discipline and internal communication matter as much as black-letter rules. Mr. Tang's role is to give management a staged plan: what must be preserved, what may safely be corrected, who should speak to investigators, and how corporate and individual exposure interact under the dual-punishment framework.

Headquarters companies in Chaoyang and elsewhere in Beijing also face group-level questions: which affiliate bears tax loss, how to brief boards and overseas investors, and whether internal investigations should run in parallel with external defense. Mr. Tang helps sequence those workstreams so that document production remains consistent across entities.

Thresholds That Separate Audit Findings from Criminal Files

Mr. Tang advises clients on the thresholds that separate administrative tax violations from criminal tax offenses. Under Article 201 of the Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, a taxpayer who evades tax by deceptive means or by failing to file, where the amount is relatively large and accounts for more than ten percent of the tax payable, may face up to three years' imprisonment or criminal detention and a fine. Where the amount is huge and accounts for more than thirty percent of the tax payable, the range rises to three to seven years' imprisonment and a fine. Exact application depends on the facts, judicial interpretations and charging choices in the particular case.

"Where a taxpayer has, after the tax authority lawfully issues a demand for payment, paid the tax payable, paid the overdue fine and accepted administrative punishment, criminal liability shall not be pursued; except where the taxpayer has previously received criminal punishment for tax evasion or has been given administrative punishment by the tax authority two or more times within five years." — Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China, Article 201

For false issuance of special VAT invoices, Article 205 and related provisions supply graduated sentences based on the tax amount involved. For unit crimes, dual punishment typically means the entity is fined while directly responsible managers and other liable persons face personal criminal exposure. Mr. Tang spends considerable time mapping who is "directly responsible" in practice—not only whose name appears on a chop, but who designed, approved or knowingly implemented the scheme.

Intervention Before and After Criminal Process Begins

In Mr. Tang's experience, outcomes are often shaped before a formal criminal case is filed. When a company receives an audit notice or a focused inquiry, he helps leadership assess whether the facts could support a finding of tax loss large enough to trigger criminal referral, prepares the documentary record, and works to keep the matter at the administrative level where that is still legally available. That work includes sequencing repayment and late fees, controlling internal email and WeChat discussions that may later be seized, and preparing employees for interviews without obstructing lawful investigation.

Where criminal investigation has already commenced, he advises on detention periods, applications for bail or non-arrest outcomes, and the evidence needed to support non-prosecution or mitigated charging. He coordinates with accountants and, where useful, independent forensic reviewers so that defense submissions rest on numbers the authorities can verify. He does not promise results; he commits to accurate legal analysis, disciplined evidence work and clear communication with the client about risk.

• Tax audit and investigation response in Beijing
• Defense in false invoice and tax evasion cases
• Sentencing analysis, dual-punishment mapping and mitigation planning
• Corporate tax compliance and internal control remediation after an incident

Communication and Next Steps for Inquiries

Mr. Tang provides regular updates on case progress and upcoming deadlines. Engagement terms and fees are confirmed at the outset. Clients outside Beijing, including overseas parent companies, can work by video conference with Chinese and English materials as needed. To use the contact form on this profile effectively, please state whether the matter is still at audit stage or already involves public security, the approximate tax periods and amounts under discussion, and any dates already set for interviews or document production. That information allows a focused first response rather than a generic reply.