30 Astrakhan region

Head of the Department of the Federal Tax Service of Russia for the Astrakhan Region

State Councilor of the Russian Federation 3rd class

Date and place of birth: January 2, 1977, p. Nikolaevka, Narimanovsky district, Astrakhan region.

Education: Higher. In 1999 he graduated with honors from the Astrakhan State Technical University, in 2001 from the State University - Higher School of Economics.

Labor path:

Since 2000, in the public service in the tax authorities - state tax inspector, senior state tax inspector of the Inspectorate of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Taxes and Duties No. 17 for the North-Eastern Administrative District of Moscow; senior state tax inspector, chief state tax inspector, head of field inspection department No. 1, deputy head of the Interdistrict Inspectorate of the Federal Tax Service No. 49 for Moscow; from September 18, 2014 to May 16, 2016 – head of the control department of the Federal Tax Service in Moscow.

By Order of the Ministry of Finance of the Russian Federation dated May 17, 2016 No. 652 l/s “On the appointment of M.S. Gadzhiev” from May 17, 2016, Gadzhiev Mansur Salikhovich was appointed head of the Department of the Federal Tax Service for the Astrakhan Region.

In 2008, he was awarded the distinction “Excellence in the Federal Tax Service of Russia,” and in 2015, the anniversary medal of the Federal Tax Service “25 years of the tax authorities of Russia.”

Directly coordinates and controls activities:

General Department;

Human Resources Department;

Finance department;

Economic department;

Security Department;

Department for Control of Tax Authorities (regarding issues of internal financial audit and departmental control in the field of procurement to meet federal needs);

Information Technology Department (regarding issues of ensuring information security of the Department).

Married, has a daughter and son.

Today, October 30, a regular hearing was held in the case of young Dagestani workers Magomedkhabib Gadzhiev and Nurlan Makhsudov, accused of preparing terrorist attacks in Moscow.

The process essentially began without any publicity. He received resonance after lawyer Timur Idalov, who himself intervened in the case, was unreasonably sentenced to 12 days of arrest for allegedly driving without a license, having been detained directly near the court. There is no evidence that he was driving.

Human rights activists attribute the fact of illegal persecution of the lawyer to the fact that he took into account Gadzhiev’s statement about torture, namely, beating him for many hours and applying electric shock to him. According to Gadzhiev’s testimony, after torture, he was taken to his work quarters, where explosive components were “confiscated” from under his cell, and a mock arrest was carried out. An attempt to renounce the extracted testimony made in the temporary detention center resulted in new torture. The same applies to Nurlan Makhsudov. Only in the pre-trial detention center were the defendants able to refute the forced self-incrimination.

The photographs of Gadzhiev available in the case are striking - there are obvious signs of beatings on his face, which the court previously did not want to pay attention to. The entry into the case of lawyer Idalov and the NGO “For Human Rights” changed the situation. The head of the “ZHR” Lev Ponomarev turned to the Human Rights Center “Memorial” for help, thanks to which another lawyer, Ivan Novikov, appeared in the case. ZHR expert Petr Kuryanov, who initially served as a press representative, entered the case as a public defender. Thus, the process became public knowledge.

Today, Gadzhiev’s mother and grandmother, who came from Dagestan, were present at the meeting. While waiting in the corridor, they said that Mukhamedhabib came to Moscow to earn money; to save money, he bought the simplest phones in order to choose the most suitable one and sell his own. These phones, according to the investigation, were supposed to serve as explosive devices (the defense had the opportunity to familiarize themselves with them at the end of the hearing). The women said that the entire village was ready to vouch for Mukhamedhabib’s innocence; 130 signatures had been collected in his support.

The defendants themselves were present at the hearing in glass “glasses.” The defense was represented by lawyers I. Novikov, V. Sidorov, and public defender P. Kuryanov. Judges - E. Borisov, O. Belousov, V. Madrin, prosecutor - E. Zotchik.

Throughout the hearing, the defense filed motions to demand certain evidence. Lawyer Novikov recalled Article 86 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, according to which the court can also, on its own initiative, request evidence in favor of the innocence of the accused. In particular, they were talking about video recording of the detention of workers (according to Gadzhiev, fictitious), where there were traces of torture.

Judge Borisov asked why the defense itself did not request this evidence.

To this, lawyer Novikov noted that the defense had repeatedly submitted requests to familiarize itself with the material evidence, which had been refused. The circumstances of the detention became known to the defense at the last stage of the process. In addition, a lawyer’s request can receive a response within a month, while a judge has the authority to demand a response to his request within the time limit he has appointed.

Public defender Kuryanov indirectly reminded the court that his interests should include a fair trial. Supporting Novikov, he stated that he was asking the court for assistance in obtaining evidence that would affect the course of the entire case. He also stated that the court’s refusal to provide such assistance would delay the process.

Approximately the same story was repeated with other petitions, some of which were nevertheless granted. A petition was also submitted for access to the list of materials submitted for verification to the Investigative Committee.

As the details were clarified, the court was interested in how the defense knew that the interrogation protocol, where the accused testified to torture, belongs to the documents transferred to the Investigative Committee, to which Pyotr Kuryanov replied that he made these conclusions based on the presumption of good faith of the court, which is simply obliged to do this .

Finally, the court granted the defense's request to postpone the hearing for the defense to request evidence, which takes time. This is an understandable decision, given that the investigation by the Investigative Committee of documents on torture should take at least a month. Thus, the continuation of the process has been postponed indefinitely. Participants will be notified separately about the next meeting.

Let us remind you that Magomedhabib Gadzhiev was born in 1995. and Nurlan Makhsudov, born in 1994. were taken into custody on October 2, 2017 by decision of the Meshchansky Court on suspicion of terrorist activities. They are accused of several articles at once, including participation in the activities of a terrorist organization (Article 205 of the Criminal Code) and illegal storage and acquisition of weapons (Article 222 of the Criminal Code). The defendants gave confessions, which they retracted, alleging torture used against them. This statement is also supported by photographs from the case materials, where bruises and abrasions are visible on Gadzhiev’s face.

At the end of October 2018, the court granted the prosecutor’s request to read out the defendants’ initial confessions. However, the interrogation of Gadzhiev by the defense, in particular, by the public defender from the NGO “For Human Rights” Petr Kuryanov, during which the accused again spoke about torture, forced the court to send materials about the use of torture for verification to the Investigative Committee.

Find out what income your tax authorities received over the past year. UNP has compiled a rating of the wealthiest heads of the tax service - 2017.

The Federal Tax Service annually publishes information on employee income on the website nalog.ru in the “Anti-corruption” section > “Information on income, expenses...”. The service also reflects data on the income of spouses and children of tax officials.

UNP has compiled a list of the richest and most modest heads of the Federal Tax Service. Tax authorities' income was reduced compared to last year. In 2016, the average income of a tax officer from the top 5 was approximately 15.7 million rubles, and in 2017 this figure decreased to 12.2 million rubles.

Mikhail Mishustin, the head of the department, remains in the top five. In second place in terms of income is the head of the Oryol department, Sergei Markevich. He can be called the “breakthrough of the year”, because two years before that he occupied places in the ranking of the lowest-income tax workers.

In the rating, we took into account only the leadership of the Federal Tax Service, but there were heads of inspectorates who receive more than the highest ranks of the tax service. The most wealthy in 2017 was the head of the Federal Tax Service No. 15 in Moscow, Svetoslav Dolzhikov. He declared 70.6 million rubles. For 2016, the taxman reflected only 6.8 million rubles. Then he headed MIFNS No. 45 in Moscow.

The second among the richest tax officials last year was Artur Ayubov. Even though he was not the boss, but only the deputy head of the Federal Tax Service for the Sovetsky district of Makhachkala, he reflected an income of 30.8 million rubles. In the previous year, income was 20 times less - 1.5 million rubles. In addition to his main income, Artur Ayubov received a car as a gift in 2017.

The top three wealthiest is rounded out by another deputy chief, Ruslan Mirzemagamedov. His place of work is the Department of the Federal Tax Service for the Republic of Dagestan. In 2017, the official earned 21.2 million rubles. This is a multiple jump in income compared to last year, when the taxman reflected 1.1 million rubles.

The greatest income in the declaration of all those involved in the Federal Tax Service was shown not by the tax officers themselves, but by their husbands and wives. The husband of the head of the Federal Tax Service for the Leninsky district of Saratov became the absolute leader. He declared income of 1.2 billion rubles. for 2017.

This year, Mikhail Mishustin’s wife took last place in the top 5 richest tax spouses. She reflected 68.5 million in income. At the same time, the remaining places were taken by the wives of the deputy heads of the Federal Tax Service Inspectorate No. 45 and No. 30 for Moscow and the husband of the deputy head of the Federal Tax Service Inspectorate No. 3 for the Republic of Bashkortostan. They reflected 115, 85 and 76 million rubles. income.

The wealthiest tax leaders in Russia

Mikhail Mishustin
Head of the Federal Tax Service, born in 1966.

Income RUB 19.3 million

Compared to previous periods, income has stabilized. Previously, the amount in declarations was reduced, but in 2017 the chief tax officer showed an increase of 0.4 million rubles. There is no housing or land in the property.

Sergei Markevich
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Oryol Region, born in 1969.

Income RUB 13.9 million

Natalia Voronova
Head of the tax authorities control department of the Federal Tax Service, b. unknown

Income RUB 11.9 million

In 2016, she received half as much - 5.3 million rubles. income. Until last year, she owned a modest plot of 10 acres. If an extra zero did not creep into the report, then in 2017 the land plot increased to 1 hectare.

Tatiana Vorobyova
Advisor to the head of the Federal Tax Service, born in 1952.

Income 8 million rub.

In 2017, she became an adviser to the chief tax officer and immediately entered the ranking of the richest employees of the service. At the same time, the composition of the property has not changed - two apartments, a plot of 10 acres and a small building of 90 square meters. m.

Tatyana Matveeva
Head of the Information Technology Department of the Federal Tax Service, born in 1976.

Income 7.8 million rubles.

An apartment of 79.8 square meters disappeared from the property. m, but received housing of 133.7 sq. m. for use. m. The husband also doubled his income. In 2016, it reflected 6.2 million rubles, and in 2017 already 13.2 million rubles. income.

Tax executives who earn the least

Mansur Gadzhiev
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Astrakhan Region, born in 1977.

Income 1.3 million rubles.

He has only been in the position of chief for two years. Before that, he was the head of the control department at the Federal Tax Service in Moscow. Last year was a lean year for the official; in 2016, his income was 3.6 million rubles.

Sergey Voronin
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Belgorod Region, born in 1979.

Income 1.3 million rubles.

He headed the department towards the end of 2017. Before that, he worked as a chief at the Federal Tax Service for the city of Belgorod. The new position increased the taxman’s income from 961 thousand rubles. in 2016 to the current figure.

Victor Bolshakov
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Nizhny Novgorod Region, born in 1973.

Income 1.4 million rubles.

He took up the position of manager in March 2018. Before that he was one of the deputies. The family owns two apartments, a plot of 20 acres and a house of 172 square meters. m. In addition, it has two cars and three parking spaces.

Denis Smekhov
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Kirov Region, born in 1979.

Income 1.5 million rubles.

He became a manager only in March 2018. Income compared to last year increased by only 330 thousand rubles. Together with his wife, he owns an apartment and uses two more apartments and a plot of land.

Khazret Nirov
Head of the Federal Tax Service for the Karachay-Cherkess Republic, born in 1977.

Income 1.5 million rubles.

Returned to the list of the most modest tax specialists after last year's break. The taxman’s wife earns less than 200 thousand rubles for the second year in a row. The manager of the property has 6 acres and a house of 137 sq. m. m.

The fight against corruption and tax evasion has long been a state fixed idea. This is evidenced by the high-profile corruption cases that are breaking out all over Russia one after another. The editors have at their disposal documents revealing an extortion scheme at the very top of the capital's department of the Federal Tax Service.

In the center of this corruption web, woven from tax audits, fines, lawyers and bribes, sat the head of the control department of the Federal Tax Service for Moscow, Mansur Salikhovich Gadzhiev.

In 2011, speaking to tax consultants, the head of the Federal Tax Service Mikhail Mishustin I noticed that the Federal Tax Service is, first of all, a service company. “Our main task is to monitor compliance with the law. But this must be done as comfortably as possible for taxpayers,” he emphasized. And some of the employees of the Federal Tax Service in Moscow took this wish of the management too literally.

The editors have at their disposal copies of statements sent to the Prosecutor General's Office, the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation, the FSB and deputy Alexander Khinshtein. The authors of the letters - victims of these additional services - describe in detail the extortion scheme by an employee of the capital's Federal Tax Service. In a history where a bribe implies development, and following the letter of the law means bankruptcy, Moscow businessmen chose corruption.

In the fall of 2014, a certain Mansur Gadzhiev became the head of the control department of the Federal Tax Service in Moscow; according to the management, he was a young and thoughtful employee. He jumped to this position from the post of deputy head of interdistrict inspection No. 49 for Moscow. Commenting on such a rapid career leap of their colleague, tax officers used exclusively chess terms: from pawns to queens.

In his “royal post,” the former middle peasant launched an unexpectedly vigorous activity. Management of the control department of the Moscow Federal Tax Service involves supervising all interdistrict inspections and monitoring the conduct of on-site tax audits. It is noteworthy that among the main activities of this department there is a clause on “identifying forms, methods and “schemes” of tax evasion.” By combining two guiding messages: about a service company and identifying new tax evasion schemes, Gadzhiev probably developed a simple but trouble-free service for managers of Moscow companies: either pay taxes with the maximum possible fines, or pay me, and then in three times less. As the main assistant and intermediary in transferring money, Gadzhiev recruited a lawyer he knew from the days of his “turbulent” youth.

The scheme turned out to be simple and convenient. As a result of any scheduled audits of large enterprises, one can find tax inconsistencies, accounting errors, and even the use of “gray” schemes with shell companies. It was the “sign checks” that interested the corrupt official. Using information about violations identified by subordinate inspectorates, he launched a mechanism for solving problems with the help of a lawyer.

Some time after the audit, a lawyer appeared at the company, offering his services to reduce the amount of additional tax charges and fines. The documents and figures with which he operated, in addition to the company management, could only be known to representatives of the tax service. For 10-30% of the amount, the lawyer guaranteed the cancellation or significant reduction in the amount of claims from the tax office without transferring the case to the level of pre-trial audit. According to the lawyer, Mansur Gadzhiev himself, the “gray eminence of the tax service,” was involved in solving the problem, so there was no need to worry about a “happy outcome.” As an additional argument, he cited the example of the recent history of the inspection by the 3rd Tax Inspectorate of the construction company MSM-1. The company refused to cooperate and decided to seek a reduction in fines through the courts. As a result, the company incurred large legal costs, lost the trial, paid fines, and today suspended its activities in Moscow. According to posts on job review forums, the company has suspended wages since November last year.

Recently, a similar situation arose in the well-known construction company Krost, whose management is made up of former employees of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the FSB. The amount of tax claims was more than 100 million rubles. In May 2015, a lawyer came with a proposal to reduce the amount by three times, but the company’s management found the claims unconvincing and the lawyer’s arguments weak. With the help of old connections from their previous work, the management of Krost fought off tax attacks, and Mansurov’s bribe was never paid.

More than once, entrepreneurs tried to put pressure on the head of the control department, Mansur Gadzhiev, using connections in federal circles. Such attempts were stopped by a call from the curator of the Moscow Federal Tax Service from the APS (the apparatus of seconded employees) of the Federal Security Service, Andrei Vladimirovich Kononenko. In one of the conversations, the “curator” flaunted the names of high FSB officials: Oleg “Ficus” Feoktistov and Ivan Ivanovich Tkachev. Sonorous surnames made the position of Gadzhiev and Kononenko practically untouchable. Andrei Kononenko has repeatedly stated that he “decides selfishness” for the current “fighters” of the FSB through his man at the tax office, meaning Mansur Gadzhiev.

Another interesting story happened with the owner of the Yashma Gold group of companies, Igor Rakhimovich Mavlyanov. He had to pay compensation in the amount of more than a billion rubles. The intermediary who took the money assured that Mansur Gadzhiev would give a third of the amount to Marina Viktorovna Tretyakova, the head of the Federal Tax Service of Russia in Moscow.

By the way, the owners of one of the construction companies that became a victim of the new “service” tried to bargain with Gadzhiev, threatening him with exposure in the face of the head of the Federal Tax Service for the city of Moscow, Marina Tretyakova. But, as it turned out, Tretyakova, who is working her last year before retirement, has no influence on her subordinate, as Mansur Gadzhiev himself admitted more than once in behind-the-scenes conversations.

According to information from inspection No. 49, which inspects the company ALLA LTD. LLC (purchase and sale of real estate), Mansur Salikhovich is resolving the issue of minimum charges, despite serious multimillion-dollar violations.

Currently, the “gray eminence” is undergoing another operation, successful for him, but disastrous for the budget. The inspection of large enterprises in the sugar industry, carried out by Gadzhiev’s people, once again, in our opinion, enriched the “thoughtful worker.”

“Today, there is practically no doubt that if the story with the new corrupt “service” does not resonate, Mansur Gadzhiev will become the new head of the Moscow Federal Tax Service,” says a source in the Russian Federal Tax Service. This possibility was brought to the attention of the General Prosecutor's Office and the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation and the author of the letter, a copy of which is at the disposal of the editors. In this case, there is no doubt that the “price list” of the capital’s Federal Tax Service may soon include a new set of additional “services” for Moscow entrepreneurs. But it is unlikely that these services will be as comfortable for them as Mikhail Mishustin once assured.