Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"The sharp increase in oil price automatically will benefit the oil producer, in Indonesia they are production sharing contractor. They receive excess profit from the high sales price in access of increasing oil price. The excess profit usually called as windfall profit, which is an unearned, unanticipated gain in income through no additional effort. This favourable condition on the contrary cause unequal income distribution, where the fairness rationale was strongly influenced by impact of higher energy prices on poorer consumers, where there will be more money on energy expenditure. This condition indicates the declining of government's ability to do their duty in giving transfer payment for citizen, especially petroleum subsidy.This condition had ever hapenned in Indonesia in 1974, when arising oil prices generated windfall profits for the oil company. The political climate at that time dictated that if there was a windfall, then most of that windfall should benefit the government. In order to comply it, negotiations were started through New Deal Agreement. In another country, this happened in United States of America in 1980, where the Federal Government enacted a special federal excise tax called the crude oil windfall profit tax. The tax was enacted basically to recoup much of the large increase in oil industry profits that was anticipated from the decontrol of oil price. The tax was imposed on the difference between the market price of oil, which was called as removal price and the base price that was adjusted quaterly for inflation and state severance tax.Since the fourth generation of Production Sharing Contract in Indonesia, there has not been regulation yet accomodated windfall profit, also in the section of contract. By looking at the history and taking a look at nowaday's sitiuation, the government of Indonesia can consider to enact regulation about windfall profit received by production sharing contractor. This research try to study the windfall profit received by production sharing contractor observed from income tax regulations, especially the concept of income. This research uses qualitative approach descriptive type by using literature, in depth interview, and historical analysis. After all, it shows that windfall profit is excess income received because of the increasing of oil price. So naturally windfall profit is a kind of income according to income concept contempelated by Schainz, Haig, and Simon (SHS Concept) which also adopted by section about Income in Indonesian Income Tax Regulation. By looking at the history, it is recommended for the government of Indonesia to give special treatment in calculating the windfall profit as part of production sharing contractor's income. To calculate windfall profit, it depends on the government regulation regarding how to define windfall profit. What kind of price or threshold price will be used as the base price in determining profit which generates windfall profit.For now, windfall profit can be resulted from the difference between realized market price and Indonesian Crude Price (ICP) multiplied by contractor share. It is caused by ICP which supposed to be a market price of Indonesian oil can not reflect it, because the fact is the ICP always stand below the realized market price, like market price determined by OPEC. This will generate loss potention for Indonesia, where the contractor pay the tax with ICP meanwhile they sell their oil from Indonesia based on realized market price. This recommended formula also to reflect the tax payment of contractor is according to arm's length price. If the windfall profit included in part of contractor's income and multiplied with 44% which is the tax rate applied for contractor, it will raise the change in production sharing, which in favor of government of Indonesia. This thing need the government's attention, calculation, and consideration about this recommended formula. Another several things needed to be considered by the government of Indonesia is the economic, law, and political aspects. So if this policy will be applied, it will reflect the equity between government of Indonesia and the contractor as foreign investor. And Indonesia will not be harmed any more by the condition of the sharp increase in oil price so it will help to enhance the prosperity of Indonesian citizen."

"Under Law of the Republic of Indonesia No 22 of 2001 on Oil & Gas, upstream producers had a domestic market obligation (DMO), which required them to sell a specified portion of their product into the Indonesian domestic market, which is 25% of all oil and gas production. Contractors are obligated to fulfill domestic requirement from the date of commercial operation, at the first contractors are entitled to a 60-month holiday from the date of commercial operation before the DMO must be fulfilled and the prices are same to market price (ICP). The problem is, after 60-month DMO the cost for domestic oil reduce from 10% to 25% market price (ICP) depends on contract. Because the fee below the market price. For that, need to clear how the income tax treatment on the fee from DMO received by the contractors. Is the assignment considered as transaction and how to determine the price for DMO oil as the tax base.The research method that used by researcher is descriptive. It means that the research is described accurately using facts, spoken or written words, actions, and visual images. The approach used in this research is qualitative approach. The main issue in this research is to find out that fee from domestic market requirement which is paid below the Market price are match with accretion concept and the definition of income in income tax law, so DMO fee can describe as taxable income. The data collection technique used in this research is by reading the literature which focuses on the research, and interview. The interview was done with oil and gas expert, cooperation contractor, government institution, and tax expert.The result of this research are the tax on DMO fee which received by joint cooperation contractor has been right, because the taxation of DMO fee had been meet all general act definition of income refer to article 4 (2) Income Tax Law and accretion concept which adopted by income tax system to describe ability-to-pay. DMO fee cannot be considered as a loss, but its difference price can be reduced contractor's taxable income. DMO fee as the income tax object cannot be taxed separately from the contractor's income but it must counted as the whole accretion on contractor income and taxable at specified tariff based on contract rate."

"Skripsi ini membahas implikasi pengenaan kebijakan diferensiasi tarif pajak penghasilan bagi karyawan yang tidak mempunyai NPWP. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan desain deskriptif. Hasil dari penelitian ini memperlihatkan pemerintah dalam mengeluarkan kebijakan diferensiasi tarif pajak penghasilan tidak didasari teori yang kuat. Hukum materiil dengan hukum formal bercampur karena unsur sanksi yang seharusnya terdapat dalam Undang-undang KUP, terdapat dalam tarif Undang-undang Pajak Penghasilan. Pemberlakuan diferensiasi tarif pajak penghasilan bertentangan dengan prinsip ability to pay. Bagi karyawan yang mempunyai penghasilan yang sama besarnya mendapat perlakuan yang berbeda. Hal ini menimbulkan ketidak adilan horizontal. Hendaknya dalam menaikkan penerimaan negara pemerintah hendaknya mengeluarkan kebijakan dengan tidak mengorbankan keadilan bagi masyarakat.

---

The focus of this study is implication of outcome differential tariff income tax policy for employee who don't have Tax Payer Number. This research is qualitative research with descriptive design. The result of this research showed that the goverment policy on Differential tariff income tax didn't have strong theory based. Material law with formal law is mixed because there is penalty element that should have been included in general rule tax law in fact included in income tax law.

The aplication of differential tariff is against with the ability to pay principle. For employee who has same income get different treatment. This situation makes horizontal disequity. In raising country income government should made new policy which don't sacrifice people's equity."

"Government needed more income to raise the national budget. They issued instruments to collect income from citizen through debt and foreign currency. Government released Governmental Bonds for domestic market, which sold in retail (ORI) and for international market in foreign currency. Government also presented a law execution regulation to give certainty for the consumers or the taxpayers.Governmental Regulation Number 6 which published in 2002 distinguished the tax procedure for the bonds which imposed only on transactions tradable and reportable to the stock exchange. Income derived or taken from obligation transaction should be based on a global taxation. While, for the international bonds were given the facilities by the government. We would assume that there was an inequality between the bonds for domestic market and for international market. In global taxation, we should not differentiate the income by the source.This research used a quantitative descriptive as the research method. The type and data collection techniques used (1) literature research including on various taxation regulations and another related documents and (2) field research using interviews with such related parties as tax academicians, government as issuer and regulator. They gave several opinion which created differences in equity perspective.Government figured the debt as the best instrument to raise government income. They considered that attracting foreign investor by giving them tax facility was necessary to raise the budget. They named their policy as their budgeting and regulating function. But, we should notice that domestic investor might think the inequality of the tax burden.Therefore, it was suggested to make a comprehensive and equal policy. Based on tax principle, that tax should be fair and equal. It became fair that tax imposed on the income earned from the same source (instrument) equally. If one of them was given the facility, so the other should be given the same facility."

"Berlakunya Peraturan Pemerintah (PP) No. 46 Tahun 2013 membuat Norma Penghitungan Penghasilan Neto yang diatur di Pasal 14 Undang ? Undang Pajak Penghasilan (UU PPh) tidak lagi berlaku bagi Wajib Pajak Orang Pribadi yang menjalankan kegiatan usaha dengan peredaran bruto dibawah Rp. 4,8 miliar setahun. Kebijakan tersebut dalam rangka penyederhanaan pelaksanaan kewajiban perpajakan bagi WP Orang Pribadi. Penelitian kuantitatif, dengan survey dan wawancara mendalam bertujuan membandingkan penggunaan Norma Penghitungan Penghasilan Neto dan Pajak Penghasilan Final 1% dalam pemenuhan kewajiban Pajak Penghasilan Orang Pribadi ditinjau dari asas simplicity. Ketentuan Norma Penghitungan Penghasilan Neto dan Pajak Penghasilan Final 1% bagi Wajib Pajak Orang Pribadi telah memenuhi asas simplicity.

---

Government Regulation No. 46 Year 2013 made Deemed Profit which is regulated in Article 14 of Income Tax Act is no longer applied to the Individual Taxpayer who is carrying on business activities with a gross turnover of less than Rp. 4.8 billion a year. This quantitative approach used survey and in-depth interview as collection data technique. The research focused to compare the use of Deemed Profit and Final Income Tax 1% in the fulfillment of Personal Income Tax liability in terms of simplicity. As a result, simplicity has been felt by Individual Taxpayer who used Deemed Profit and Final Income Tax 1%."

"Setiap pihak yang berinvestasi dalam saham mengharapkan dividen dan atau capital gains. Perseroan dalam membagi dividen kepada pemegang sahamnya mempunyai dua cara yaitu secara tunai dan non tunai. Metode non tunai yang terkenal adalah share buy back. Perlakuan pajak atas penghasilan dari transaksi share buy back dapat dikenakan sebagai dividen atau capital gains. Perlakuan sebagai dividen atau capital gains menjadi rumit di lapangan karena adanya beberapa bentuk dan kondisi share buy back yang berbeda. Adanya beberapa bentuk dan kondisi share buy back yang berbeda perlu dipelajari dan dicermati secara baik oleh pembuat kebijakan perpajakan untuk merumuskan bagaimana seharusnya perlakuan perpajakan terhadap penghasilan dari transaksi share buy back yang diterima atau diperoleh pemegang saham. Kebijakan perpajakan diharapkan mengacu kepada hakekat ekonomi yang terjadi dalam setiap Janis transaksi share buy back Dengan demikian asas keadilan, netralitas dan kepastian hukum bagi Wajib Pajak dapat diterapkan dengan baik.Pokok permasalahan tesis ini adalah bagaimana penentuan obyek pajak atau penentuan dasar pengenaan pajak atas penghasilan dari transaksi share buy back yang diterima atau diperoleh pemegang saham. Penghasilan tersebut diperlakukan sebagai dividen ataukah sebagai capital gains.Setiap pembagian laba ditahan kepada pemegang saham arahnya menuju ke bentuk-bentuk distribusi dividen termasuk dengan cara share buy back. Untuk itu setiap pengenaan pajak harus didasarkan pada hakekat ekonomi atas transaksi yang sebenarnya. Sehingga tambahan kemampuan ekonomi yang dinikmati wajib pajak yang terlibat dalam transaksi dapat terukur dengan baik. Di dalam Undang-undang PPh disebutkan: setiap tambahan kemampuan ekonomis yang diterima atau diperoleh wajib pajak (realized income), baik yang berasal dari Indonesia maupun dari luar Indonesia (world wide income), yang dapat dipakai untuk konsumsi atau untuk menambah kekayaan wajib pajak yang bersangkutan dengan nama dan dalam bentuk apapun (substance over form principle). Konsep tersebut akan dapat terwujud apabila asas keadilan horisontal dan keadilan vertikal diterapkan dalam tahap pembuatan peraturan sampai tahap implementasinya.Metode penelitian yang dipakai adalah metode penelitian dokumen dan lapangan. Penelitian dokumen dilakukan dengan meneliti hasil karya ilmiah dan ketentuan perudang-undangan di bidang perpajakan, perseroan terbatas, pasar modal, termasuk peraturan pelaksanaannya serta prospektus Wajib Pajak terkait. Metode penelitian lapangan dilakukan melalui wawancara kepada analis sekuritas, konsultan pajak, pejabat Bapepam dan pejabat Ditjen Pajak. Sedangkan teknik penelitian yang digunakan dalam penulisan tesis ini adalah deskriptif analitis.Berdasarkan analisis yang dilakukan, dapat disimpulkan bahwa belum ada ketentuan Pajak Penghasilan yang mengatur secara lengkap, jelas dan menyeluruh tentang perlakuan perpajakan atas penghasilan dari transaksi share buy back. Oleh karena itu disarankan agar segera dikaji secara seksama semua bentuk transaksi share buy back dengan mempertimbangkan ketentuan-ketentuan Undang-undang Perseroan Terbatas, Undang-undang Pasar Modal dan Tax Treaties sehingga dapat dikeluarkan peraturan Pajak Penghasilan yang mengatur secara lengkap, jelas dan menyeluruh tentang perlakuan perpajakan atas penghasilan dari transaksi share buy back.Pokok-pokok yang perlu diatur antara lain: menegaskan bahwa sumber dana share buy back dari laba ditahan merupakan pembagian dividen; dasar pengenaan dividen dari share buy back proporsional adalah atas seluruh pembayaran tetapi jika non proporsional atas selisih harga jual dan beli saja; pada saat menerima/memperoleh penghasilan share buy back tetap sebagai pemegang saham diperlakukan sebagai dividen tetapi jika bukan pemegang saham lagi penghasilan tersebut diperlakukan sebagai capital gains; kepemilikan saham secara efektif tidak berubah setelah share buy back merupakan dividen atas seluruh pembayaran tetapi jika berubah pengenaan dividen hanya atas selisih harga jual dan beli.Untuk mempertahankan prinsip keadilan dan netralitas sebaiknya tarif pajak atas dividen dari berbagai bentuk transaksi share buy back mengacu pada Pasal 23 UU PPh yaitu 15% dan memperhatikan realisasi penghasilan yang sesungguhnya. Atas penghasilan tersebut digabungkan dengan penghasilan lain (global income/global taxation) dan dikenakan satu macam tarif progressif yaitu tarif Pasal 17 UU PPh dengan memperhitungkan pajak yang telah dipotong sesuai definisi penghasilan yang diamanatkan dalam Pasal 4 ayat (1) UU PPh."

"Skripsi ini membahas perlakuan Undang-undang pajak penghasilan terhadap wajib pajak orang pribadi wanita yang bekerja hanya pada satu pemberi kerja pada tahun 2008. Undang-undang PPH Indonesia memandang laki-laki sebagai pencari penghasilan karena itu bila wanita telah menikah maka wanita tidak berhak memperoleh Penghasilan Tidak Kena Pajak, yang mendapatkannya adalah laki-laki sebagai suami. Pemberian PTKP ini menentukan besarnya PPh yang harus dibayar yang berarti juga mempengaruhi besar take home pay yang diperoleh. Bila wanita dan suami dalam suatu perkawinan sama-sama bekerja dan tidak pisah harta ataupun pisah harta, yang berhak memperoleh PTKP kawin dan tanggungan adalah suami. Begitupula bila telah hidup berpisah. Jika seorang wanita pekerja dan suaminya pengangguran maka untuk mendapatkan PTKP tanggungan suami, wanita tersebut harus mendapatkan keterangan dari Pemerintah Daerah setempat dan hal ini tidak berlaku untuk kebalikannya, yaitu bila wanita tidak bekerja maka suami tidak perlu mendapatkan keterangan apapun dari Pemerintah Daerah setempat.

---

This script is explains about the income tax treatment applied to women's individual taxpayer that only works for one employer in 2008. Viewed by the income tax treatment, man is the one who looking for money, so, married women not entitled to earn personal's exemption, the one who earn it is man as the husband. This giving of personal exemption determine how much tax income that must be paid which also determine how much take home pay that we earned. If women and husband in a marriage work together and do not split the property or split it, the one that entitled to earn the personal exemption for married status and dependents is the husband. Also the same if divorced. If a women is worker and her husband is unemployment, so, to earn a dependent husband of personal exemption, that women must get a detail from local government and this is not applicable to its reverse, such as if women is unemployment, so, husband doesn't need to get any detail from local government."

"The currency or foreign exchange (FX) market is the largest financial market in the world, with trading volumes surpassing $1,9 trillion a day. Although primarily dominated by a worldwide network of interbank traders, a new era of internet-base communication technologies has recently allowed individual investors to gain direct access to this popular and profitable market. Trading in the foreign exchange market is an alternative tool for investment other than investing in stock market.The tax issues on gain from foreign exchange trading tend to be disorienting since there are no tax circular that regulates the implementation of foreign exchange trading in Indonesia. Since the absence of specific income tax law on gain from forex trading, this research attempts to explain the nature of foreign exchange trading itself, then it will describe the difference between the US Income tax treatment and the Indonesian income tax treatment on gain on forex trading followed by the conclusion to propose the right alternative tax treatment to be implemented in Indonesia. This research uses qualitative approach with descriptive technique. Library study, field study and benchmarking are chosen to gather the information. The field study is executed by interviewing tax officers, brokers, and academic scholar. While as the benchmarking is being executed by comparing with tax rule in the United State of America to propose the right tax treatment to be implemented in Indonesia.Forex trading is traded in the Over the Counter Market where there are no centralized exchanges. The nature of forex trading is to speculate in buying or selling foreign currency contract in the spot market. According to the Indonesian income tax regulation article 4(1) leter l stated that gain on foreign exchange are treated as an taxable object whilst loss on foreign exchange principally could be recognized as deductible expense. Since the absence of specific regulation relating to the tax treatment on forex trading therefore the general rule may apply, the general rule stated forex trading falls under business income category and that all increase in economic capability originating from Indonesia as well as from offshore shall be accumulated and taxed according to article 17 tax rate.Differ from the Indonesia tax law, the US tax law on profit from the fluctuation in foreign exchange rates are treated differently from foreign exchange trading. The fluctuation in foreign exchange rate as as part of their normal course of business fall under IRC Section 988. Gains and losses from foreign exchange (such as buying and selling of foreign goods) are treated as interest income or expense and get taxed accordingly. Since forex traders are also exposed to daily exchange rate fluctuations, their trading activity falls under the provisions of Section 988. These daily fluctuations can be considered part of a currency trader's assets in the normal course of his business; the IRS gives the trader the option of rejecting (opting out) of Section 988 and electing that the gains be taxed under the favorable 60/40 split of IRC Section 1256. Under IRC Section 1256, forex traders can have a significant advantage over stock traders. Forex traders are allowed to split their capital gains using a 60% / 40% split. This means that 60% of the capital gains are taxed at the lower, long-term capital gains rate (currently 15%) and the remaining 40% at the ordinary or short-term capital gains rate, which depends on the tax bracket the trader falls under (as high as 35%). This results in an average rate of 23%, which is 12% less than the regular (short-term) rate.From the comparative study between the US tax laws on foreign exchange trading, this research propose an alternative tax policy on forex trading in Indonesia. One of the alternative is only net gain are calculated and tax. The second alternative to be implemented in the form of withholding final tax payment from every realize transaction."

"Hadirnya Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2008 merupakan perubahan baru bagi Wajib Pajak khususnya Wajib Pajak badan. Salah satu perubahan yang terdapat dalam undang-undang tersebut adalah pemberian fasilitas pengurangan tarif Pajak Penghasilan (PPh) bagi Wajib Pajak badan Usaha Mikro Kecil Menengah (UMKM). Pengurangan tarif tersebut dikarenakan adanya perubahan tarif pada Pasal 17 yaitu tarif umum PPh bagi Wajib Pajak badan. Kebijakan tersebut sangat menarik, karena fasilitas yang diberikan kepada Wajib Pajak berdasarkan peredaran bruto. Peredaran bruto yang dimiliki oleh sebuah UMKM dapat mempengaruhi pajak yang terhutang. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kebijakan pengurangan tarif PPh badan melalui Pasal 31E Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2008 ditinjau dari sisi keadilan pemungutan pajak. Konsep utama yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah konsep fasilitas atau insentif pajak dan konsep keadilan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu melalui pendekatan kuantitatif dengan analisis data kualitatif. Data kualitatif diperoleh melalui studi literatur dan wawancara mendalam. Berdasarkan penelitian yang dilakukan maka dihasilkan kesimpulan bahwa kebijakan yang dikeluarkan oleh pemerintah melalui Pasal 31E Undang-Undang Nomor 36 Tahun 2008, tidak mencerminkan keadilan baik dari segi keadilan horizontal maupun keadilan vertikal. Dalam mencapai suatu keadilan sebaiknya perumus kebijakan memberikan batasan fasilitas tersebut berdasarkan Penghasilan Kena Pajak dan bukan peredaran bruto.

---

The presence of Tax Laws No. 36/2008 is a new change for taxpayers, especially company taxpayers. One of the changes in the law is the reduction policy of taxon-revenue of micro-small-intermediate company taxpayer. The reduction is given due to the change of rate in the Article 17, which is general tax-on-revenue rate of company taxpayers. The policy is so interesting because the facility given to taxpayer is based on bruto circulation. Bruto circulation of a micro-smallintermediate company can influence the tax liability. This research aims to analyze the reduction policy of tax-on-revenue of micro-small-intermediate company taxpayer through Article 31E of Tax Laws No.36/2008 observed from equity principle in taxation. The main concepts used in this research are concept of facility or tax incentive and concept of equity principles. Research method used in quantitive approach with qualitative data analysis. Qualitative data is obtained from literature study and in-depth interview. The result is that the policy issued by the government through Article 31E in Tax Laws No.36/2008 does not reflect equity, both from horizontal and vertical equity principle. In achieving equity, the policy maker should give limitations of the facility, based on taxable revenue instead of bruto circulation."

"Tesis ini bertujuan untuk menganalisa pengenaan pajak penghasilan atas transaksi pengalihan participating interest oleh kontraktor minyak dan gas bumi sebagaimana diatur dalam Peraturan Pemerintah No. 79 Tahun 2010 dalam kerangka peraturan perundang-undangan perpajakan yang berlaku termasuk di dalamnya Perjanjian Penghindaran Pajak Berganda. Penelitian ini juga dimaksudkan untuk menjadi bahan masukan bagi pemegang otoritas di pemerintahan dalam usaha pemungutan pajak atas transaksi pengalihan tersebut sehingga dapat memberikan kepastian hukum bagi kedua belah pihak agar iklim usaha di bidang minyak dan gas bumi tetap kondusif untuk investasi.

---

This thesis is aimed to analyse the of the income tax imposition on participating interest transfer by an oil and gas contractor under Government Regulation No. 79 in 2010 within the applicable tax law and regulation framework including the application of tax treaty, as well as the relevant domestic tax regulation. This thesis was also intended to be an input for the Relevant Government Authority for tax collection on the transfer of participating interest in order to provide legal certainty for both parties, therefore the business of oil and gas industry remains conducive to investment."