【新唐人2011年11月3日讯】中国知名异见艺术家艾未未，收到北京地税局送来税单，要求他公司补交上千万元人民币的税款和罚金。公司法人、艾末未妻子路青表示，处罚依据不清，拒绝签收，而税务人员声称不得拒收。艾未未指当局是在威胁他，要他屈服和收声。港媒认为，中共当权者为打压维权、异议人士，已撕下法治的遮羞布。
11月1号，北京地税局的几名工作人员，来到北京草场地258号艾未未“发课工作室”所在地，送来一张税务通知单，要求“发课公司”在15天内补交1522万元人民币的税款和罚金。
公司法人、艾未未妻子路青表示，公司账本被当局带走至今下落不明，处罚依据不清，拒绝签收。但税务人员以“留置送达、不签收也生效”为由，硬将税单留下。
发课公司律师浦志强：“我们现在正在分析这个税单和罚单，因为有些科目我们还搞不清楚。他们那个处罚金那上面说的也不清楚。听证的过程中也没有看到账薄的原件，所以，现在不知该怎么应对。”
艾未未在推特上连续发表推文透露，“发课公司”至今没有见过帐，会计和经理受到威胁、不许见面，不容沟通。北京税务局给他15天期限补缴税款，他不会交款，因为当局至今没有拿出“发课公司”偷漏税的证据。
浦志强律师说，疑惑的是，税务局明确承认没有“发课公司”的帐薄原件，那么，税务局是根据什么来定税的？
浦志强：“作为介入律师来讲，没有任何一个人看到财务帐薄资料，我们也不清楚它（发课公司）这个经营的情况，这个税务处罚的情况到底是依据什么？因为税务局明确承认账本不在他们那儿。他们也没看到原件。”
艾未未提到，公安威胁他说：“国家说你偷税，你就偷了。国家会改口吗？你就自认倒楣，你绝望就是了！”
艾未未母亲高瑛认为，当局这样做，不是单纯的一个偷税漏税的问题。
高瑛：“ 整个都是莫名其妙，现在这个罚款呢，它也没有把人家那个发课公司，原始会计用的那些账本也不给人家，据说是复印件，给了一点复印件。现在就是路青，她已经找了律师。律师没法介入啊！人家拿不到原件，你账本是怎么回事，人家看不到啊。”
高瑛认为，税务局也有问题。她强调，当局玩什么把戏谁也不知道，如果“发课公司”真的有问题，当局就应该开门见山的，把这些人都召集到一起，在桌面上，把账本拿出来，一项项说清楚，找出偷税、漏税的根据。
对于这件事情，艾未未指出，当局一直把他当成煽动颠覆者。“发课公司”的法人代表是他的妻子，他只负责艺术创作和监制，税务部门在通知中称他为“发课公司”的“实际控制人”，是对他打压的又一举措。
艾末未对香港《苹果日报》表示，如果当局仅因为艺术家有不同观点，表达不同意见，就蛮不讲理，恶意报复，这样只会削弱法治，给社会作出坏榜样。他希望当局不要靠威胁来维持。
北京学者莫之许表示，中共对政治异己的打击报复竟然可以毫无顾忌、无所不用其极，连法律遮羞布都不要，活在这样的国度，让人如陷深渊、冰冷绝望！
《法国国际广播电台》报导，人权组织认为这是北京当局对异见人士刁难打压的具体体现。
新唐人记者秦雪、唐睿、郭敬采访报导。
Ai Weiwei Receives a $2.4 Million Tax Bill
Chinese dissident artist, Ai Weiwei, received a tax bill
demanding that he pay over a 1,000 yuan (US$157) plus a penalty.
Ai’s wife, Lu Qing, the company corporate legal advisor,
said that the penalty wasn’t clear and she wasn’t going to sign it.
The tax officers stated that
she should simply accept the tax claim.
Ai pointed out that the authorities are threatening him,
demanding that he give in and sign the bill.
Hong Kong media reported that the
Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ignores the law to suppress dissidents.
On November 1, Beijing local tax authorities paid a visit to Ai
and delivered a tax notification
demanding that Ai pay a RMB15.22 million yuan (US$2.4million)
tax bill within 15 days.
Ai’s wife, Lu Qing, the company’s corporate legal advisor
said that she refused to sign the bill
because the penalties were unclear and the company books
were taken away by the authorities and had not been returned.
The tax officers left the bill with her and threatened to put
a lien on their property, adding that they could process the tax claim without her signature.
“Ai’s company lawyer, Pu Zhiqiang: “We are reviewing the bill
and the penalty, because some of the items are unclear.
The reason for the penalty isn’t clearly stated.
During the hearings, we didn’t see the original company books,
so now I do not know how to deal with it."
Ai’s Twitter posts said his company didn’t see the books,
and the accountant and managers were threatened.
He said that there is no communication with the tax authorities
and they aren’t allowed to make an appointment with them.
Beijing authorities demanded that he pay the bill within 15 days,
Ai is refusing to pay, as there is no paper work to support the charges.
When the tax office admitted that they don’t have a copy
of the original paper work; Lawyer Pu Zhiqiang doubted their words, saying, “Then what is the tax based on?"
Pu Zhiqiang: “None of the lawyers saw the books,
thus we are not clear on the company’s operation circumstances, so what does the penalty refer to?
The tax office said they don’t have the account books
and neither have they seen the original books."
Ai said that the police was threatening him:
“The state says that you are a tax dodger
and that you have been charged with tax dodging.
Will it possible for the state to change its position?
You just have a case of bad luck; there is no hope for you!"
Ai’s mother, Gao Ying, believes that the authority did this to Ai,
It is not simply an issue of tax dodging.
Gao Ying: “It is unreasonable that they presented us with
a tax bill but didn’t return our accounting books.
They only gave us back a few pages.
Although Lu Qing found a lawyer,
the lawyer can’t investigate anything further because no one presented him with the original books."
Gao Ying believes that the tax office has a problem.
She emphasised that no one knows what games the authorities play.
If Ai’s company really has a problem,
the authorities should directly point that out
by calling everyone together and showing the accounting books,
thus clearly pointing out the ‘tax dodging evidence.’"
Ai pointed out that the authorities have treated him
as if he was inciting insurgents.
The company’s corporate legal person is his wife.
He is only responsible for artistic creation and production.
The tax office claims that Ai is in charge of the company.
Ai said it is another way to suppress him.
Ai told Hong Kong Apple Daily that because artists
have different views and express different opinions,
the authorities seek malicious revenge on them,
which will only undermine the law.
This provides a bad example to the community.
Ai hopes that the authorities won’t rely on threats
to maintain the so-called stability.
Beijing scholar, Mo Zhixu, stated that the CCP
suppresses dissidents without even bothering to cover up their deeds.
Living in this country is truly depressing.
Radio France Internationale reported that human rights
groups believe that Ai’s tax case is a reflection of Beijing authorities suppressing dissidents.
NTD reporters Qin Xue, Tang Rui and Gui Jing.
