It is important to understand that the supply of equipment not meeting the criteria of own production is not included in the List of Priority Activities in the ICT sector. This means that as a participant of Astana Hub, you cannot count on tax incentives. However, in the case of production and sale of goods by technopark participants, such goods must meet the criteria of own production.

In accordance with the order of the Minister of Digital Development, Defense and Aerospace Industry of the Republic of Kazakhstan, own production is defined by the presence of a certificate of origin of goods form "ST-KZ" or an industrial certificate. If the equipment already contains your software and has one of the above certificates, this is not a violation.

However, when a client requests the installation of turnkey software using the provided equipment, it is important to comply with laws and norms. Providing services for installing software using equipment as part of an indivisible software-hardware complex does not violate legislation. The conclusion of a contract for the supply of a hardware-software complex and the provision of services must comply with existing norms and rules of own production.

Thus, Astana Hub participants must monitor compliance with the rules of own production and ensure adherence to legislation when concluding and fulfilling the terms of contracts with clients.

As examples, let's consider a few cases where participants made errors in supplying equipment and components not meeting the criteria of own production. A participant concluded a contract for the installation and configuration of software. At the same time, at the customer's request, the participant simultaneously enters into a separate contract for the supply of equipment and components by a manufacturer, which they are not. Such contracts violate the conditions of participation in the technopark in terms of deriving income exclusively from priority activities in the field of ICT.

In the second example, a participant concluded a contract for the supply of a software-hardware complex, which includes the supply of indivisible software and technical means. In this case, there is no violation of the conditions of participation in the technopark. However, during the execution of the contract, the need arose for the supply of component parts and repair work. Thus, the participant began to enter into contracts for the supply of components and spare parts, not meeting the criteria of own production. The participant also enters into a separate contract for the provision of related services such as cable laying, connection, commissioning, and subsequent technical maintenance. In this case, the supply of components and the provision of related services go beyond the list of priority activities in the field of ICT.

In summary, a technopark participant, obliged to derive income exclusively from priority activities in the field of ICT, cannot keep separate accounts of revenues, therefore, in the case of the need to sell equipment not meeting the criteria of own production, it is recommended to carry out such sales through another legal entity.