The invoice arrives in a risk category and the VAT credit fails
The tax was paid to the supplier as part of the price, yet it cannot be credited and lands on your margin. On regular purchases the quarterly amount adds up to something comparable to your profit.
Typical mistake: People assume that once an invoice is issued and signed the credit is guaranteed. From 1 January 2026 part two of article 267 of the Tax Code prohibits crediting VAT on an invoice assigned to the high-risk category, except where the tax is paid under the procedure of article 266-1.
The tax authority disallows the costs a year later and there is nothing to prove the check
Additional tax on the entire amount disallowed plus late-payment interest for the whole period. A commercial loss on the deal turns into a tax loss and doubles.
Typical mistake: The check was done verbally. A due diligence file has to be written and dated the day the transaction was concluded, not the day the audit arrived.
The supplier's certificate is cancelled and your credit falls away too
A retrospective adjustment for periods already closed: additional VAT and interest. The goods are sold, the money is spent, and recovering the tax from the supplier is practically impossible.
Typical mistake: The counterparty was checked once, when the framework contract was signed. Yet on suspension, termination or cancellation of the certificate the tax is not credited at that supplier's buyers either — the status has to be checked for every delivery.
The advance has been paid and there is nothing at the supplier's address
The advance is lost in full, and your own obligations to your customer are missed. Enforcing against an empty company takes years and usually ends at zero.
Typical mistake: Only the fact of registration and the taxpayer number (STIR) were checked. The law also requires looking at production facilities and staff, financial standing and the ability to perform — none of which appears in any extract, and all of which calls for requesting documents and checking the facts on the ground.
The contract was signed by someone without authority
The counterparty claims the transaction does not bind it, money or goods are stuck, and enforcement runs into a dispute about whether the contract is valid at all.
Typical mistake: Nobody verified, as at the signing date, who the acting director was and whether liquidation had already started. Registration data on a legal entity is issued by taxpayer number free of charge and automatically, yet people usually look it up after the problem has happened.
Disqualified from a tender because of a subcontractor
The loss of that particular contract plus a reputational trace in the public procurement system that follows you into future tenders.
Typical mistake: The counterparty was checked as a supplier — taxes and registration — but its public procurement record was not. The register of unfair contractors is open, yet it is not on the accounting department's checklist.
A foreign company enters the market and looks for the tools it is used to
Either the deal stalls, or worse, it goes ahead with a false sense of security based on logic borrowed from another jurisdiction.
Typical mistake: People look for an equivalent of Russia's unified state register with a full extract, a Transparent Business service and an open case docket. The set of sources in Uzbekistan is different and noticeably narrower, and part of the data is issued only by taxpayer number and without financial indicators.