Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Krisis ekonomi yang diawali dengan adanya krisis moneter pada pertengahan tahun 1997, telah mengakibatkan perseroan-perseroan yang beroperasi di Indonesia mengalami kesulitan keuangan yang sedemikian berat. Sudah menjadi kesepakatan umum di antara pemerintah, ekonom dan pelaku bisnis, bahwa reorganisasi akuisitif yang berupa penggabungan, peleburan dan pengambilalihan serta reorganisasi divisif yang berupa spin-off, split-off dan split-up merupakan suatu solusi terbaik bagi perseroan-perseroan untuk memecahkan problem kesulitan keuangan tersebut. Adanya berbagai bentuk reorganisasi akuisitif dan divisif seperti tersebut di atas, hendaknya diantisipasi oleh para pembuat kebijakan perpajakan dengan merumuskan bagaimana seharusnya perlakuan Pajak Penghasilan atas reorganisasi akuisitif dan divisif. Kebijakan perlakuan Pajak Penghasilan atas reorganisasi tersebut hendaknya mengacu kepada substansi ekonominya, sehingga dapat menimbulkan keadilan dan kepastian hukum bagi Wajib Pajak serta tidak digunakan sebagai alat penghindaran pajak (tax avoidance). Metode penelitian dilakukan melalui wawancara dengan beberapa pejabat pajak, Wajib Pajak dan konsultan pajak. Penelitian atas dokumen dilakukan berdasarkan hasil karya ilmiah dan ketentuan-ketentuan perpajakan baik berdasarkan Undang-undang dan ketentuan pelaksanaannya. Berdasarkan analisis yang dilakukan, dapat disimpulkan bahwa ketentuan PPh yang mengatur tentang reorganisasi perseroan belum mengatur secara lengkap dan menyeluruh bentuk-bentuk dari reorganisasi akuisitif dan divisif, demikian juga perlakuan-perlakuan Pajak Penghasilannya belum didasarkan atas substansi ekonomi dari reorganisasi tersebut. Oleh karena itu, disarankan untuk dilakukan kaji ulang guna menyusun ketentuan yang mengatur secara lengkap dan menyeluruh perlakuan Pajak Penghasilan atas reorganisasi akuisitif dan divisif yang didasarkan atas substansi ekonomi masing-masing bentuk reorganisasi. "

"Khusus untuk Bentuk Usaha Tetap (BUT) di Indonesia dikenakan pajak atas sisa laba setelah pajak yang diatur dalam UU PPh Pasal 26 ayat (4) atau biasa disebut dengan Branch Profit Tax (BPT). Menjadi pertanyaan bagaimana penghitungan BPT untuk BUT yang atas penghasilannya dikenakan final, salah satunya adalah yang menjalankan usaha konstruksi. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana penghitungan Pajak Penghasilan (PPh) Badan dan BPT atas BUT yang menjalankan usaha jasa konstruksi. Dari studi kasus terhadap beberapa Putusan Pengadilan Pajak terkait sengketa penghitungan BPT sehubungan dengan penghitungan dasar pengenaan pajaknya, terdapat perbedaan pendapat antara Direktorat Jenderal Pajak (DJP) di satu sisi dengan Wajib Pajak dan Majelis Hakim di sisi lain. DJP berpendapat bahwa penghitungan BPT untuk BUT yang menjalankan usaha jasa konstruksi adalah berdasarkan Penghasilan Kena Pajak menurut pembukuan setelah dikoreksi fiskal dikurangi PPh Final, sedangkan Wajib Pajak dan Majelis Hakim beranggapan bahwa penghitungan Penghasilan Kena Pajak adalah menggunakan Norma Penghasilan Neto dikurangi PPh Final. Analisis perlakuan perpajakan atas penghitungan BPT tersebut dilakukan dengan menganalisis pendapat yang dikemukakan masing-masing pihak pada tiga contoh kasus yang diambil dalam penulisan ini. Dari hasil analisis menunjukkan atas PPh Badan dari BUT yang menjalankan usaha jasa konstruksi adalah dikenakan final menurut PPh Pasal 4 ayat (2) dan untuk penghitungan BPT adalah dengan menggunakan Norma Penghasilan Neto sesuai dengan Pasal 26 ayat (4) UU PPh dikurangi PPh Final.

---

Permanent Establishment (PE) in Indonesia is imposed tax for the income after tax that regulated in the Income Tax Act Article 26 Paragraph (4) or commonly called the Branch Profit Tax (BPT). The question is how the BPT calculations for PE on income subjected to the final tax, one of which is running business of the construction services. The purpose of this study was to determine how the calculations of the Corporate Income Tax and the BPT of PE which runs business of construction services are. From the case studies of several Tax Court Decisions related dispute of BPT calculation with respect to the calculation of its taxable base, there are differences of opinions between the Directorate General of Taxation (DGT) on one side with the Taxpayers and the Judges on the other side. DGT found that the taxable income for BPT calculation for PE which running business of construction services is based on the bookkeeping after fiscal correction and deducted by Final Income Tax, while the Taxpayers and the Judges argued that the calculation of taxable income is using deemed profit deducted by Final Income Tax. Analysis of the tax treatment on BPT calculation is done by analyzing the opinions expressed on each side of three case examples taken in this research. The results from the analysis indicate that the Corporate Income Tax of PE which runs business of construction services is subjected to Final Income Tax under Income Tax Act Article 4 paragraph (2) and for the calculation of BPT is using deemed profit deducted by Final Income Tax in accordance with Article 26, paragraph (4) of Income Tax Act."

"Laporan ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi proses rekapitulasi PPh (Pajak Penghasilan) Pasal 23 yang harus disetorkan oleh PT J selaku pemotong. Hasil rekapitulasi PPh 23 memudahkan PT J dalam melakukan perhitungan dan penyetoran PPh 23 dan pelaporan SPT Masa PPh 23. Berdasarkan hasil evaluasi, proses rekapitulasi PPh 23 yang dilakukan oleh PT J telah sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perpajakan yang berlaku.

---

This report evaluates the recapitulation process of Article 23 Income Tax Payable, which should be settled by PT J as a collector. The result of recapitulation of Article 23 Income Tax Payable assist PT J in calculation and settle Article 23 Income Tax Payable and periodic tax return submission. Based on the result of evaluation, the recapitulation process performed by PT J has complied with the tax regulation."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis perbedaan dasar argumentasi Direktorat Jenderal Pajak bahwa piutang tak tertagih pada PT BNI, Tbk tidak dapat dikurangkan dari penghasilan bruto serta mengetahui upayaupaya yang dilakukan PT BNI, Tbk dalam menghadapi perbedaan pendapat dengan pihak DJP mengenai perlakuan perpajakan atas piutang tak tertagih.Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian analisis deskriptif. Data diperoleh dengan wawancara secara mendalam. Berdasarkan peraturanperaturan perpajakan yang berlaku saat ini dapat ditarik kesimpulan bahwa piutang yang nyata-nyata tidak dapat ditagih atau yang telah dihapus bukukan oleh PT BNI, Tbk dapat dibiayakan sepanjang piutang tersebut berasal dari transaksi bisnis wajar sesuai dengan usaha perbankan dan Bank telah melakukan upaya penagihan yang maksimal atau terakhir.

---

This thesis aims to identify and analyze difference arguments of Directorate General of Taxesthat the non-performing loans at PT BNI,Tbkcan not be expensed from gross incomeand to determine the efforts that will be undertaken by PT BNI,Tbk in the face of disagreements with the Directorate General of Taxes regarding the tax treatment of non-performing loans.

This research method is descriptive interpretive. The data are collected by means of deep interview. In conclusion, according to the applicable regulations of taxation, uncollectible loans or non-performing loans write off by PT BNI,Tbk can be recognized as long as the receivable are from fair transactions in accordance with banking business and Bank has made maximum and final efforts to collect the receivable."

"The role of taxpayers permitted to maintain their book keeping in US $ currency to government's revenue are increasing therefore such discriminatory policy needs a serious study to ensure the fairness and certainty in implementation. Minister of Finance Decree Number 533 Year 2000 specifying five types of business which are allowed to maintain the book keeping in US $ without a criterion as standardized in financial accounting standard (FAS), as a result arising issue in the effort of taxing foreign exchange difference. Accounting standard sees the non functional currency as a foreign currency. All monetary items and all transactions are denominated in foreign currency generate the foreign exchange difference. Prevailing implementation rules designed to rule the Rupiah book keeping which will become inequitable judicially if applied to the US $ books taxpayer. This thesis is addressed to analyze the foreign exchange difference treatment to the company permitted to maintain their bookkeeping in US $, base on license's granting criteria, exchange rate and foreign exchange rate difference, foreign exchange treatment in prevailing regulations, exchange rates and financial report items translation, and the improvement proposal to make the foreign exchange taxing will be in line with the basic law principles.

US $ bookkeeping is designed to respond the globalization demand and to provide the conducive climate of investments. Accountancy is an element of tax administration in providing information about tax object. Accounting information is expressed in monetary unit is so-called as an accounting currency. Accounting currency is functional currency, currency considered as non-functional be foreign currency. Exchange rates fluctuation is generating foreign exchange difference. Restatement of foreign currencies balance and transactions denominated in foreign currency within two different points of time will generate foreign exchange losses/gains which ultimately affecting the tax liability. S-H-S income concept assumes the foreign exchange rate difference as a part of capital gains or capital losses, which should be taxed or deducted at the realization date.

Type of research for this thesis has the character of analytical-descriptive. Data collecting conducted with research of documents and research of field. Research of documents conducted with research of bibliography and research of field. Research of bibliography cover research of literatures, expert's opinions, relevant taxation rules and financial data of PT X. Field research conducted by holding an interview with interested parties to the foreign exchange difference taxation case which studied-in is PT X case as according to Code of Foreign Capital.

The principle of book keeping rule in the law of General Provision and Taxation Procedure (referred as "KUP Law") mention that unless otherwise stipulated by tax laws, the book keeping must be executed by means or systems normally uses in Indonesia, like on the basis of Financial Accountancy Standards (FAS). The KUP Law gives authority to Minister of Finance to define the taxpayer which may allow to maintain book keeping in US $ without accompanied by criterion, therefore MOF has his own discretion to issue further book keeping rules which might possibly oppose the basic principles of basic rules. Every transaction carries out in the non US S currency will yield the foreign exchange difference. A foreign exchange gain is subject to tax and a foreign exchange loss will be deductible from the gross income. Prevailing implementation rules related to the foreign exchange difference do not itemize particular financial report post able to be translated by historical exchange rate and balance, which translated with current exchange rate. The tax authority's treatment and tax court's decision on the PT X case was derived from Gunadi's opinion in his book that there is no foreign exchange loss from the tax payables or receivables accounts since the taxes receivables/ payables account should be translated by historical exchange rate. From accounting point of view, the Gunadi's method of translation is a temporal method with dual transactions perspective which nor FAS neither prevailing tax laws does not adopted. FAS adopts the monetary and non monetary translation method as an accepted standard to report all foreign currency transactions.

It is recommended that the licensed taxpayer to apply the US $ book keeping has to rely on certain criteria in line with the other article within the same provision. The implementation provisions of forcij exchange difference need to update by inserting the detail of foreign exchange loss derived from which items allow as deduction and the detail of foreign exchange gain derived from which items treats as the income tax object."