@baodientuvov: Triệt phá đường dây hóa đơn thuế VAT cực lớn #baodientuvov #tiktoknews #tiktokviral #tintuc #tinphapluat

BÁO ĐT TIẾNG NÓI VIỆT NAM
BÁO ĐT TIẾNG NÓI VIỆT NAM
Open In TikTok:
Region: VN
Tuesday 12 May 2026 01:46:31 GMT
275592
3000
93
1246

Music

Download

Comments

vuminhphat128
Vũ Minh Phát :
Các công ty mua hoá đơn nhân công của công ty này cũng mệt luôn
2026-05-13 07:22:44
39
ak47headshot
M1911 :
Họ vẫn đóng thuế vat đầy đủ mà
2026-05-13 08:21:13
3
huong.bi_95
Hương Bi :
Cty vẫn đóng thuế mà vớ phải đầu vào lỗi cái cty lại khổ. Rủi ro nhiều quá
2026-05-13 23:53:00
3
nguyenhuydung86
Nguyễn Huy Dũng :
Hơn 1000 tỉ hoa Hồng 3% -5% thì ăn đủ
2026-05-13 11:56:08
2
mecathoivu
Mê cá :
Có bài báo mới nhất từ bộ công an ngày 13/5 rồi đấy bạn, vào cập nhật thông tin và đính chính bài đăng đi không họ lại kiện cho tội đưa thông tin sai sự thật
2026-05-14 04:03:36
0
tamhoa90
Tâm Hoà :
bảo sao dạo này trong nhóm kế toán đăng tuyển liên tọi
2026-05-13 17:14:19
1
kencoi1214
Anh tuấn :
Còn nhiều lắm
2026-06-15 05:09:01
0
baoan1118
Binh An :
Thế này bảo sao rủi ro thế này doanh nghiệp không tuyển được kế toán
2026-05-13 10:38:54
5
bamboo_vn
Nguyễn Khương :
sao bảo giầu nhanh thế
2026-05-13 15:29:50
0
sandy_pham268
Sandy Phạm :
654 DN??? Kinh khủng thâth
2026-05-15 13:58:59
0
tamthucchualanh
🪬tâm thức 🕉️ chữa lành🔥 :
Tham có tham nổi đâu
2026-05-14 16:34:41
0
anan670504153
Dương Hoàng Mai AN :
thu được thì lại phải chi trả cho công ty khác Samsung ... hơn một nghìn tỷ .... 🤭
2026-05-13 08:14:07
2
ngamdoi54
ngamdoi :
ngành thuế
2026-05-13 06:40:20
0
nguyenhuuthai199x
Anh Thái Lái Xe 🚍🚍💪💪💪 :
Hay lắm😆
2026-05-14 02:54:43
0
anhchannuoi1991
Điện Nước Kim Khí Thắng Quỳnh :
tốn kế toán nhỉ
2026-05-24 01:12:49
0
strongaluminum
Mạnh Nhôm :
Công an giờ làm thuế luôn cần gì thuế nữa xuất gia là đóng thuế rồi
2026-05-12 09:34:48
11
quynhnhuhoang88
cô cô Quỳnh Như. Nấm lùn :
Hơn một nghìn tỉ
2026-05-13 06:24:43
2
blue.sea.99
Thích nghe nhạc 🎧 :
Kế toán cty này có bị đi ko ah
2026-05-13 07:30:44
0
baoan1118
Binh An :
Kế toán 654 doanh nghiệp lại chuẩn bị hồ sơ giải trình
2026-05-13 10:32:26
0
anh.phm6144
Anh Phạm :
Chỗ tao đi tù về vẫn giàu
2026-05-13 11:49:42
0
t_blackk98
T_Black :
Ngay chỗ tao vừa rồi lượm 1 đống 🤣🤣🤣 mỗi ngày noa rửa vài chục tỷ kiếm 10% hoá đơn
2026-05-15 04:25:26
1
thanhphat1234
Thành Phát✅ :
Về châu khê thiếu gì
2026-05-13 05:30:54
1
tuanvantaicoteno
tuanvantai :
vô đn cho thuê LĐ quá
2026-05-15 03:55:44
0
idrd6789
радиоэлектронная :
Mấy bố tập đoàn khoáng sản ở Hải phòng , kinh môn , thủy nguyên , hoành Bồ quảng ninh , thanh hóa , ninh bình ….( đá vôi , than , vôi xuất khẩu …. Cứ sờ vào thì biết ) bố nào cũng vài chục nghìn tỷ …. Ở đâu ra …?????
2026-05-27 17:15:10
0
tuh._hwgz
tuh._hwgz :
Cty ưuen que
2026-05-14 11:38:26
0
To see more videos from user @baodientuvov, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

The GOAT || Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form a^{b^{c^{\cdot^{\cdot^{\cdot}}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is \bm{g_{64}} where \bm{g_n} { 3 \bm{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} 3 if n 1 and 3 \bm{\uparrow^{g_{n-1}}} 3 if n \bm{\geq} 2. \bm{{\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid.#bouhlel #TCD #actor #rampage #treanding
The GOAT || Graham's number is an immense number that arose as an upper bound on the answer of a problem in the mathematical field of Ramsey theory. It is much larger than many other large numbers introduced as effective bounds in mathematics, such as Skewes's bound, which in turn is much larger than a googolplex. Graham's number is so large that the observable universe is far too small to contain its ordinary digital representation, assuming that each digit occupies one Planck volume. But even the number of digits in this digital representation of Graham's number would itself be a number so large that its digital representation cannot be represented in the observable universe. Nor even can the number of digits of that number—and so forth, for a number of times far exceeding the total number of Planck volumes in the observable universe. Thus, Graham's number cannot be expressed even by physical universe-scale power towers of the form a^{b^{c^{\cdot^{\cdot^{\cdot}}}}}}, even though Graham's number is indeed a power of three. However, Graham's number can be explicitly given by computable recursive formulas using Knuth's up-arrow notation or equivalent, as was done by Ronald Graham, the number's namesake. As there is a recursive formula to define it, it is much smaller than typical busy beaver numbers, the sequence of which grows faster than any computable sequence. Though too large to ever be computed in full, the sequence of digits of Graham's number can be computed explicitly via simple algorithms; the last 10 digits of Graham's number are ...2464195387. Using Knuth's up-arrow notation, Graham's number is \bm{g_{64}} where \bm{g_n} { 3 \bm{\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow\uparrow} 3 if n 1 and 3 \bm{\uparrow^{g_{n-1}}} 3 if n \bm{\geq} 2. \bm{{\displaystyle g_{n}={\begin{cases}3\uparrow \uparrow \uparrow \uparrow 3,&{\text{if }}n=1{\text{ and}}\\3\uparrow ^{g_{n-1}}3,&{\text{if }}n\geq 2.\end{cases}}}} Graham's number was used by Graham in conversations with popular science writer Martin Gardner as a simplified explanation of the upper bounds of the problem he was working on. In 1977, Gardner described the number in Scientific American, introducing it to the general public. At the time of its introduction, it was the largest specific positive integer ever to have been used in a published mathematical proof. The number was described in the 1980 Guinness Book of World Records, adding to its popular interest. Other specific integers (such as TREE(3)) known to be far larger than Graham's number have since appeared in many serious mathematical proofs, for example in connection with Harvey Friedman's various finite forms of Kruskal's theorem. Additionally, smaller upper bounds on the Ramsey theory problem from which Graham's number was derived have since been proven to be valid.#bouhlel #TCD #actor #rampage #treanding

About