Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Globalisasi ekonomi, bisnis, dan Investasi mempersubur tumbuh dan berkembangnya perusahaan multinasional. Kemajuan pesat secara serentak yang berlangsung di bidang teknologi informasi, komunikasi, dan transportasi mengakibatkan arus perdagangan barang, modal, dan tenaga kerja di dunia melampaui batas-batas negara dan mendorong meningkatnya transaksi lintas batas (cross border transaction) antar negara. Peningkatan volume transaksi internasional oleh perusahaan multinasional menyebabkan transfer pricing untuk tujuan perpajakan teiab dan akan menjadi salah satu isu perpajakan yang sangat penting. Dalam era perekonomian yang teiah mendunia. transfer pricing telah menjadi isu penting baik bagi Wajib Pajak maupun otoritas pajak.Ilmu pengetahuan telah menjadi faktor kunci dalam memacu pertumbuhan ekonomi di suatu negara. Wujud dari keberadaan ilmu pengetahuan tersebut dalam faktor-faktor produksi adalah teknologi. Teknologi dalam konteks transfer pricing berupa pemikiran, penelitian. dan pengembangan yang berkembang dalam sebuah operasi, proses, atau produk. Output dari pemikiran, penelitian, dan pengembangan inilah yang kemudian didefinisikan sebagai "intangible property" of a company. Teknologi sebagai media transfer pricing memberikan kesempatan pada perusahaan multinasional untuk me-manage arus kas dan tarif pajak efektif.Mengingat globatisasi, aktifitas perusahaan multinasional dan Indonesia yang menganut sistem ekonomi terbuka mengakibatkan transaksi tidak hanya ditinjau sebagai hubungan antar subjek ekonomi tetapi juga interaksi antar Negara yang berkepentingan. Dalam praktik di Indonesia sehari-hari, walau diyakini penerapan transfer pricing banyak dilakukan, dipastikan kepatuhan pada ketentuan yang berlaku belum memadai. Dalam kaitannya dengan transfer pricing, belum ada aturan yang bersifat khusus dalam mempertimbangkan adanya transfer intangible asset.Karya akhir inl bertujuan untuk menganalisis apakah pernturan perpajakan Indonesia mampu mengidentifikasikan dan menentukan kepemilikan atas intangible property, dampak transfer pricing of intangible property terhadap Indonesia sebagai negara berkembang dan apa kemungkinan dampak yang ditimbulkan praktik tersebut terhadap penerimaan pajak negara serta bagaimana pelaksanaan transfer pricing rule di Indonesia dafam transaksi yang melibatkantechnology intangible asset.Transfer pricing of technology merupakan masalah yang kompleks dan membutuhkan pertimbangan yang seksama. Di negara-negara maju misalnya Amerika Serikat maupun Kanada ataupun di beberapa negara berkembang seperti China dan Argentina, masalah ini sudah mendapatkan perhatian khusus dengan diterbitkannya beberapa kebijakan perpajakan terkait dengan masalah tersebut Sedangkan di Indonesia, regulasi yang mengatur tentang transfer pricing. intangible property maupun mengenai technology intangible asset masih sangat kurang. Hal ini bukan saja melepaskan potensi pajak yang scharusnya bisa dioptimalkan tetapi juga tidak memberikan kepastian hukum kepada Wajib Pajak karena memberikan peluang penafsiran yang sangat Juas kepada otoritas pajak berkaitan dengan regulasi tersebut.Pemerintah Indonesia dalam hat ini Direktorat Jenderal Pajak seharusnya mengambil langkah kungkret dengan melakukan penguatan atas ketentuan-ketentuan yang berlaku saat ini termasuk diantaranya dengan menegaskan dan menjabarkan secara lebih rinci beberapa konsep dasar dalam transfer pricing termasuk mengenai transfer pricing of technology intangible asset sehingga dapat meningkatkan pemahaman mengenai transfor pricing dan bisa memberikan kepastian hukum bagi Wajib Pajak serta menjaga kepentingan Indonesia sendiri dari kemungkinan penghindaran atau penggelapan pajak melalui skema transfer pricing baik yang bersifat cross-border maupum domestik.

---

Economic globalization, business and lnvestment prospered the growth and development of multinational businesses. Quick simultaneous development happening at the information technology field. communication and transportation resulted in a flow of trade, capital and labor in the world, passing through countries border and pushing the increase of cross border transactions. The increase of international transactions volume by multinational companies causing transfer pricing for tax purposes. has been and will be one of a very important tax issue. In a global economy era, transfer pricing became an important issue for the taxpayer as well as for the tax authorities.

Science has become a key factor in accelerating the economy growth in a country, The substance of said science presence in production factors is techology. Technology in the context of transfer pricing is the thought, research and development in an operation, process or produce The output of thoughts, research and development is later on defined as "intangible property of a company", Technology through the medium of transfer pricing provides considerable opportunities for a multinational company to manage its cash flow and global effective tax rates.

Regarding globalization, activities of multinational companies and Indonesian, which very much practices the open economy system, causes the transaction not only to be seen as a relation between economical subjects but also as an interaction between the countries concerned. In daily practice in Indonesia, although assured that transfer pricing is often done, it is certain that obeying the valid provisions are not yet adequate. 1n its connection to transfer pricing, there are not yet special rules for taking into consideration the transfer intangible asset

This thesis is aimed at analyzing whether the Indonesian tax system will be able to identify and determine the ownership of intangible property, the lmpact of transfer pricing of intangible property towards Indonesia as a developing country and what are the possibilities of the impact resulting from said practice to the country's revenues and how will be the execution of transfer pricing rule in Indonesia in transactions involving technology intangible asset.

Transfer pricing of technology became a complicated problem, needing meticulous consideration. In developed countries, for example, the United States of America or Canada or sorae developing countries like China and Argentina, this problem has already got special attention through the establishing of a few tax policies connected to the problem.

While in Indonesia the regulations regulating transfer pricing intangible property as well as technology tangible asset is still insufficient. This fuct not only decreases the tax potentials which should be optimal. but also doesn't give judicial certainty to the taxpayer, because it gives an opportunity for a very broad interpretation to the tax authorities concerned with this regulations.

The Indonesian Government, in this case the Directorate General of Taxes should take concrete steps by strengthening the provisions valid at present, including clarifying and describing in more detail a few basic concepts in transfer pricing including the transfer pricing of technology intangible asset, so that a understanding of transfer pricing can be increased and the taxpayer obtains a judicial certainty while taking care of the well-being of Indonesia from the possibility of evasion and embezzlement of taxes through good transfer pricing schemes either cross border or domestic."

"Praktik transfer pricing di Indonesia semakin berkembang beriringan dengan perkembangan perusahaan multinasional. Berkaitan dengan hal ini, baik DJP maupun Wajib Pajak harus memenuhi peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku dalam menerapkan Prinsip Kewajaran dan Kelaziman Usaha pada praktik transfer pricing. Namun, tidak jarang bahwa baik wajib pajak maupun DJP belum dapat mengimplementasikan ketentuan-ketentuan tersebut, yang kemudian mengarah kepada terjadinya sengketa pajak, salah satunya terjadi pada sengketa yang dibahas dalam penelitian ini. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis penetapan harga transfer PT ABC atas pembelian dari pihak afiliasi serta koreksi yang dilakukan oleh DJP atas pembelian tersebut sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan dan ketentuan lainnya yang berlaku di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan berupa pendekatan kualitatif dengan melakukan studi literatur dan studi lapangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa PT ABC belum memenuhi ketentuan perpajakan dalam praktik penetapan harga transfer dengan pihak yang memiliki hubungan istimewa dikarenakan pembuatan dokumentasi Transfer Pricing yang tidak lengkap. Disamping itu, penetapan koreksi dianggap keliru karena belum ada peraturan rigid terkait constructive dividend serta tahapan pemeriksaan yang dilakukan oleh DJP juga masih belum sesuai dengan ketentuan yang berlaku dikarenakan DJP tidak turut mempertimbangkan latar belakang dan kondisi PT ABC dalam melakukan analisis kesebandingan.

---

Transfer pricing practices in Indonesia are growing in tandem with the development of multinational companies. In this regard, both DGT and Taxpayers must comply with the prevailing laws and regulations in applying the Arm’s Length Principle in transfer pricing practices. However, it is not uncommon that both taxpayers and the DGT have not been able to implement these provisions, which then leads to disputes, one of which is the dispute discussed in this study. This study aims to determine the transfer price of PT ABC for purchases from third parties as well as correction made by the DGT for these purchases in accordance with the laws and regulations and other provisions in force in Indonesia. The research method used is an approach by conducting literature studies and field studies. The results of the study indicate that PT ABC has not complied with the tax provisions in the application of transfer pricing with related parties due to incomplete transfer price documentation. In addition, the determination of the correction is considered wrong because there are no rigid regulations regarding constructive dividends and the stages of inspection carried out by the DGT are also not in accordance with the applicable regulations because the DGT does not take into account the background and condition of PT ABC in conducting a comparability analysis.

"

"[ABSTRAKTransfer pricing bagi Indonesia merupakan tantangan besar untuk memaksimalkan penerimaan negara, karena tercatat oleh otoritas pajak Indonesia bahwa setiap tahunnya Indonesia dirugikan 1300 Trilliun Rupiah karena praktik transfer pricing ini. Bagi Jepang perhatian khusus diberikan untuk penanganan transfer pricing karena tumpuan penerimaan negara Jepang berada pada sektor perpajakan. Tantangan baru dalam hal transfer pricing adalah adanya praktik transfer pricing atas aspek intangible property yang ternyata banyak dilakukan oleh MNC yang saat ini rata-rata basis usahanya adalah intangible property. Penelitian ini ditujukan untuk mengetahui cara penindakan abuse of Transfer pricing dan cara penindakan praktek transfer pricing atas intangible property di Indonesia dan Jepang, serta untuk mengetahui apa sajakah yang menjadi kesulitan DJP Indonesia dan NTA Jepang dalam menangani praktik transfer pricing atas intangible property. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, dan hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa penindakan transfer pricing di Indonesia berpedoman pada PER DJP Nomor PER-22/PJ/2013 dan SE DJP Nomor SE-50/PJ/2013, sedangkan Jepang berpedoman pada Special Measures Tax Law 1986 yang diikuti NTA Administrative Guidelines, dan Indonesia belum memiliki aturan khusus penindakan transfer pricing atas intelectual property, sedangkan Jepang telah memiliki referensi khusus untuk menindak transfer pricing atas intelectual property, serta diketahui bahwa kesulitan yang dihadapi DJP dan NTA dalam mengatasi transfer pricing atas intangible property sama yaitu kesulitan dalam

---

ABSTRACTTransfer pricing for Indonesia is a big challenge to maximize revenues, as recorded by the Indonesian tax authorities that each year 1300 Trillion Indonesian Rupiah harmed because of this transfer pricing practices. For Japan special attention is given to the handling of transfer pricing as the foundation of Japan's revenues are in the taxation sector. New challenges in terms of transfer pricing is the practice of transfer pricing aspects of intangible property, on which there are many MNCs are currently performed because the average base of their business is intangible property. This study aimed to determine how enforcement abuse of transfer pricing and how enforcement of transfer pricing practices on intangible property in Indonesia and Japan, as well as to know what are some difficulties Directorate General Of Tax Indonesia and National Tax Agency Japan dealing with transfer pricing practices on intangible property. This study uses normative legal research methods, and the results of this study indicate that the transfer pricing enforcement in Indonesia based on the PER DGT No. PER-22 / PJ / 2013 and SE DGT No. SE-50 / PJ / 2013, while Japan based on the Special Measures tax Law in 1986 which followed by the NTA Administrative Guidelines, and Indonesia does not have specific rules on transfer pricing enforcement on intelectual property, while Japan has had special reference to crack down transfer pricing on intelectual property aspect, and it is known that the difficulties faced by the Directorate General of Tax and National Tax Agency in dealing with transfer pricing on intangible property aspect is the same, and that is the difficulty in determining a reasonable price and the difficulty in finding a reasonable comparison. ;Transfer pricing for Indonesia is a big challenge to maximize revenues, as recorded by the Indonesian tax authorities that each year 1300 Trillion Indonesian Rupiah harmed because of this transfer pricing practices. For Japan special attention is given to the handling of transfer pricing as the foundation of Japan's revenues are in the taxation sector. New challenges in terms of transfer pricing is the practice of transfer pricing aspects of intangible property, on which there are many MNCs are currently performed because the average base of their business is intangible property. This study aimed to determine how enforcement abuse of transfer pricing and how enforcement of transfer pricing practices on intangible property in Indonesia and Japan, as well as to know what are some difficulties Directorate General Of Tax Indonesia and National Tax Agency Japan dealing with transfer pricing practices on intangible property. This study uses normative legal research methods, and the results of this study indicate that the transfer pricing enforcement in Indonesia based on the PER DGT No. PER-22 / PJ / 2013 and SE DGT No. SE-50 / PJ / 2013, while Japan based on the Special Measures tax Law in 1986 which followed by the NTA Administrative Guidelines, and Indonesia does not have specific rules on transfer pricing enforcement on intelectual property, while Japan has had special reference to crack down transfer pricing on intelectual property aspect, and it is known that the difficulties faced by the Directorate General of Tax and National Tax Agency in dealing with transfer pricing on intangible property aspect is the same, and that is the difficulty in determining a reasonable price and the difficulty in finding a reasonable comparison. ;Transfer pricing for Indonesia is a big challenge to maximize revenues, as recorded by the Indonesian tax authorities that each year 1300 Trillion Indonesian Rupiah harmed because of this transfer pricing practices. For Japan special attention is given to the handling of transfer pricing as the foundation of Japan's revenues are in the taxation sector. New challenges in terms of transfer pricing is the practice of transfer pricing aspects of intangible property, on which there are many MNCs are currently performed because the average base of their business is intangible property. This study aimed to determine how enforcement abuse of transfer pricing and how enforcement of transfer pricing practices on intangible property in Indonesia and Japan, as well as to know what are some difficulties Directorate General Of Tax Indonesia and National Tax Agency Japan dealing with transfer pricing practices on intangible property. This study uses normative legal research methods, and the results of this study indicate that the transfer pricing enforcement in Indonesia based on the PER DGT No. PER-22 / PJ / 2013 and SE DGT No. SE-50 / PJ / 2013, while Japan based on the Special Measures tax Law in 1986 which followed by the NTA Administrative Guidelines, and Indonesia does not have specific rules on transfer pricing enforcement on intelectual property, while Japan has had special reference to crack down transfer pricing on intelectual property aspect, and it is known that the difficulties faced by the Directorate General of Tax and National Tax Agency in dealing with transfer pricing on intangible property aspect is the same, and that is the difficulty in determining a reasonable price and the difficulty in finding a reasonable comparison. ;Transfer pricing for Indonesia is a big challenge to maximize revenues, as recorded by the Indonesian tax authorities that each year 1300 Trillion Indonesian Rupiah harmed because of this transfer pricing practices. For Japan special attention is given to the handling of transfer pricing as the foundation of Japan's revenues are in the taxation sector. New challenges in terms of transfer pricing is the practice of transfer pricing aspects of intangible property, on which there are many MNCs are currently performed because the average base of their business is intangible property. This study aimed to determine how enforcement abuse of transfer pricing and how enforcement of transfer pricing practices on intangible property in Indonesia and Japan, as well as to know what are some difficulties Directorate General Of Tax Indonesia and National Tax Agency Japan dealing with transfer pricing practices on intangible property. This study uses normative legal research methods, and the results of this study indicate that the transfer pricing enforcement in Indonesia based on the PER DGT No. PER-22 / PJ / 2013 and SE DGT No. SE-50 / PJ / 2013, while Japan based on the Special Measures tax Law in 1986 which followed by the NTA Administrative Guidelines, and Indonesia does not have specific rules on transfer pricing enforcement on intelectual property, while Japan has had special reference to crack down transfer pricing on intelectual property aspect, and it is known that the difficulties faced by the Directorate General of Tax and National Tax Agency in dealing with transfer pricing on intangible property aspect is the same, and that is the difficulty in determining a reasonable price and the difficulty in finding a reasonable comparison. , Transfer pricing for Indonesia is a big challenge to maximize revenues, as recorded by the Indonesian tax authorities that each year 1300 Trillion Indonesian Rupiah harmed because of this transfer pricing practices. For Japan special attention is given to the handling of transfer pricing as the foundation of Japan's revenues are in the taxation sector. New challenges in terms of transfer pricing is the practice of transfer pricing aspects of intangible property, on which there are many MNCs are currently performed because the average base of their business is intangible property. This study aimed to determine how enforcement abuse of transfer pricing and how enforcement of transfer pricing practices on intangible property in Indonesia and Japan, as well as to know what are some difficulties Directorate General Of Tax Indonesia and National Tax Agency Japan dealing with transfer pricing practices on intangible property. This study uses normative legal research methods, and the results of this study indicate that the transfer pricing enforcement in Indonesia based on the PER DGT No. PER-22 / PJ / 2013 and SE DGT No. SE-50 / PJ / 2013, while Japan based on the Special Measures tax Law in 1986 which followed by the NTA Administrative Guidelines, and Indonesia does not have specific rules on transfer pricing enforcement on intelectual property, while Japan has had special reference to crack down transfer pricing on intelectual property aspect, and it is known that the difficulties faced by the Directorate General of Tax and National Tax Agency in dealing with transfer pricing on intangible property aspect is the same, and that is the difficulty in determining a reasonable price and the difficulty in finding a reasonable comparison. ]"

"Salah satu strategi manajemen perpajakan yang umumnya dilakukan antar intra grup perusahaan multinasional adalah transfer pricing, tetapi seringkali memiliki konotasi negatif karena erat kaitannya dengan penghindaran pajak. Perkembangan teknologi dan industri berbasis know-how juga mendorong peningkatan transaksi yang berupa intangible asset dan jasa. Kedua jenis transaksi tersebut seringkali menimbulkan sengketa antara Wajib Pajak dan Direktorat Jenderal Pajak sehingga dapat menimbulkan koreksi atas pelaporan pajak perusahaan dan mendorong Wajib Pajak untuk mengajukan keberatan dan kemudian permohonan banding ke Pengadilan Pajak. Penulisan karya ilmiah ini menganalisis kasus banding transfer pricing atas intangible property dan jasa intra grup untuk menemukan faktor penyebab sengketa dan kemudian mendeskripsikan kajian yang dilakukan Majelis Hakim dalam memutus sengketa. Pendekatan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah pendekatan kualitatif-deskriptif melalui analisis 7 (tujuh) kasus banding tahun 2005-2012. Setelah dilakukan analisis terhadap kasus-kasus tersebut, Penulis menemukan bahwa terdapat beberapa faktor penyebab sengketa, yaitu perbedaan data, perbedaan interpretasi data, dan perbedaan interpretasi hukum. Selain itu, ditemukan pula bahwa terdapat beberapa aspek yang menjadi pertimbangan Majelis Hakim dalam memutus sengketa, yaitu kelengkapan dan kualitas dokumen pendukung, keterangan dari tiap pihak, dan pengetahuan Hakim.

---

One of the strategies commonly practiced by MNC groups internally is transfer pricing, which primary purpose is to enhance the efficiency of business process. However, this method often causes negative impression since it is closely related to tax avoidance issue. The rapid growth of technology and know-how based industry also boost transactions involving intangible assets and services. Disputes between Tax Payer and Directorate General of Tax (DGT) may arise when determining the nature of those transactions. Corrections made by DGT may lead to objection by Tax Payer and will be proceeded to Tax Court if remains unsatisfied with the result.

This study examines 7 (seven) appeals of transfer pricing case from 2005-2012 related to intangible property and intra-group service to find the factors causing the dispute and describe considerations taken by Judges to make the decision by using qualitative-descriptive approach.

The result shows that using different data and having different interpretation on data and law may have caused the disputes. Apart from that, there are several aspects that may affect Judges consideration, such as the completeness and quality of proof documents, arguments from each party, and Judges knowledge."

"Penelitian ini berfokus kepada analisis implikasi dari pengimplementasian konsep identifikasi fungsi dalam harta tidak berwujud yang dibahas dalam Action 8-10, dikenal sebagai DEMPE, dalam peraturan transfer pricing di Indonesia. Metode penelitian ini adalah penelitian deskriptif dengan menggunakan wawancara mendalam sebagai sumber data primernya. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah terdapat relevansi untuk menerapkan BEPS Action Plan 8-10 di Indonesia, konsep DEMPE dapat diterapkan secara efektif di Indonesia untuk mengatasi berbagai permasalahan, dan pengimplementasiannya hanya membutuhkan penyesuaian yang tidak terlalu signifikan karena secara tersirat konsep DEMPE tersebut sudah diaplikasikan terutama sebagai dasar pemeriksaan. Pengimplementasiannya dalam peraturan transfer pricing di Indonesia dapat menciptakan peraturan baru yang secara umum dijelaskan dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan PMK dan rinciannya dijelaskan kedalam Peraturan Dirjen Pajak PER dengan disesuaikan dengan relevansi di Indonesia yang memungkinkan ditambahkan fungsi marketing dalam konsep DEMPE tersebut. Implementasi ini diharapkan mampu mendekatkan pandangan setiap stakeholders terkait tata cara pengidentifikasian harta tidak berwujud yang menekankan pada analisis economic ownership.

---

This study is focusing to analyze the implications of implementing the concept of function identification in the intangible asset that is discussed in Action 8 10, known as DEMPE, in the Indonesia rsquo s transfer pricing regulations. This research method is descriptive research with more priority to in depth interview as primary data source. The result of this research is that there is relevance to apply BEPS Action Plan 8 10 in Indonesia, DEMPE concept can be applied effectively in Indonesia to overcome various problems, and its implementation only requires less significant adjustment because implicitly DEMPE concept has been applied mainly as basic inspection. Implementation in Indonesia 39 s pricing transfer rules can create new regulations that are generally described in PMK and the details will be explained in PER by adjusting to the relevance in Indonesia that allows added ldquo marketing rdquo function in the DEMPE concept. This implementation is expected to be able to get closer to each stakeholder 39 s perspective regarding to the procedure of identifying intangible assets that emphasizes the analysis of economic ownership. "

"Skripsi ini bertujuan menganalisis implementasi kebijakan dokumentasi transfer pricing berdasarkan ketentuan terbaru di Indonesia sebagaimana diatur dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan No. 213/PMK.03/2016 dan permasalahan-permasalahan yang dihadapi pihak Wajib Pajak dan pihak pemerintah dalam mengimplementasikan kebijakan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif dengan teknik pengumpulan data melalui studi kepustakaan dan studi lapangan. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa implementasi kebijakan ini ditentukan oleh dua hal yaitu isi kebijakan dan lingkungan implementasi yang jika dilihat dari keduanya belum secara keseluruhan terpenuhi sehingga terdapat masalah-masalah yang timbul dalam pengimplementasiannya. Permasalahan-permasalahan yang dihadapi oleh Wajib Pajak dan pemerintah antara lain adalah keterbatasan sumber daya, kurangnya kepastian hukum hingga tingginya biaya-biaya yang dikeluarkan.

---

This thesis aims to analyze the implementation of the latest transfer pricing documentation policy in Indonesia as stipulated in Regulation of the Minister of Finance No. 213/PMK.03/2016 and the problems faced by the Taxpayer and the government in implementing the policy. The research method used in this study is qualitative method with data collection technique through literature study and field study. This research indicates that the implementation of this policy is determined by two things which are content of the policy and context of implementation which if seen from both has not been fully fulfilled, resulting problems arise in the implementation. The problems faced by both Taxpayer and government includes limited human resources, the lack of legal certainty also the high cost incurred"

"Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisis pentingnya pembahasan terkait dengan harta tidak berwujud sehingga hal ini tercakup dalam pembahasan mengenai Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) Report yang dipublikasikan oleh OECD. Selain itu, tujuan penelitian ini juga untuk membahas mengenai rencana aksi kedelapan yang dikeluarkan oleh OECD terkait dengan isu mengenai harta tidak berwujud. Untuk kemudian, akan dihubungkan kedua hal tersebut dengan aturan perpajakan dan permasalahan yang ada di Indonesia. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode analisis deskriptif. Dalam melakukan penelitian ini digunakan berbagai literatur seperti putusan Pengadilan Pajak, OECD Guidelines, jurnal ilmiah serta buku untuk mendapatkan pembahasan atas permasalahan yang terdapat dalam tesis ini. Selain itu juga melakukan wawancara dengan informan untuk mendapatkan penjelasan yang lebih mendalam mengenai permasalahan yang ada. Hasil dari analisis ini menunjukkan bahwa transaksi atas pemanfaatan atau penggunaan harta tidak berwujud menjadi isu penting dalam kelompok perusahaan multinasional karena sifat dari harta tidak berwujud tersebut sebagai driver atas penciptaan nilai (value creation) suatu perusahaan dan sifatnya yang mudah dipindahtangankan. Selain itu, empat isu utama yang terdapat dalam rencana aksi kedelapan yang dibuat oleh OECD terkait dengan harta tidak berwujud juga penting untuk diperhatikan, hal ini untuk mendapatkan kepastian yang lebih jelas mengenai definisi dari harta tidak berwujud, penentuan alokasi laba yang telah sesuai dengan value creation, pengembangan aturan yang lebih lengkap dan lebih spesifik terkait dengan harta tidak berwujud yang sulit untuk diukur nilainya, serta pembaruan atas pedoman yang terkait dengan aplikasi kesepakatan kontribusi biaya (cost contribution arrangements).

---

The purpose of this study is to analyze the importance of the discussion related to the intangible assets so that it is covered in the discussion of the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) report, published by OECD. In addition, the purpose of this study is also to discuss the action plan number eight published by OECD related to the issue of intangible asset. Furthermore, both of issue will be linked with the tax regulation and the problems arise in Indonesia. These studies use the descriptive analysis method. In performing this analysis, used a variety of literature such as the Tax Court’s decision, the OECD Guidelines, journal and books to get the discussion and solve the problem in this thesis. To complete it, also conducted interviews with informants to get a more in-depth explanation of the existing problems. The results of this analysis show that the transaction over the transfer and use of intangible assets becomes an important issue in the multinational company due to the nature of intangible asset such as a driver on the value creation of the company and it is easily transferable (highly mobile). In addition, the four key issues, contained in the action plan number eight prepared by OECD related to the intangible is also important to note, this is to get more clear certainty regarding the definition of intangible asset, to ensuring that profits associated with the transfer and use of intangibles are appropriately allocated in accordance with value creation, developing transfer pricing rules or special measures for transfers of hard-to value intangibles, and updating the guidance on cost contribution arrangement."

"Sengketa transfer pricing terhadap pembayaran royalti atas pemanfaatan harta tidak berwujud dan know-how tidak hanya berfokus pada penentuan harga transfer atas royalti. Sebelum menguji kewajaran dan kelaziman pembayaran royalti, terlebih dahulu harus dibuktikan eksistensi dan kepemilikan harta tidak berwujud dan manfaat ekonomis atas pembayaran royalti. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pertimbangan Hakim dalam memutus sengketa pajak berdasarkan koreksi Otoritas Pajak (DJP) dan argumentasi Wajib Pajak yang didasarkan pada 5 (lima) putusan pengadilan pajak, serta memperoleh lesson learned berupa faktor-faktor substansial dalam transaksi pembayaran royalti kepada pihak yang dipengaruhi oleh hubungan istimewa. Metode penelitian yang digunakan berupa pendekatan kualitatif dengan melakukan studi literatur dan studi lapangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertimbangan Hakim dalam memutus sengketa didasari oleh pembuktian atas eksistensi dan kepemilikan, manfaat ekonomis, dan kewajaran harga royalti dari masing-masing pihak yang bersengketa dalam mempertahankan argumentasinya serta kesesuaian bukti dengan regulasi yang berlaku. Tax planning, penerapan prinsip kewajaran dan kelaziman usaha yang baik dan benar, kolaborasi dalam perumusan regulasi, dan standarisasi pemeriksaan menjadi solusi untuk meminimalisir jumlah sengketa transfer pricing atas pembayaran royalti.

---

Transfer pricing disputes concerning royalty payments for the use of intangible assets and know-how do not solely focus on determining the transfer price of royalties. Before assessing the fairness and reasonableness of royalty payments, the existence and ownership of the intangible assets and the economic benefits of the royalty payments must first be proven. This research aims to analyze the judges' considerations in resolving tax disputes based on corrections by the Tax Authority (DJP) and the taxpayer's arguments, as reflected in five tax court rulings. Additionally, the research seeks to derive lessons learned regarding the substantial factors in royalty payment transactions involving related parties. The research method used is a qualitative approach, involving literature review and field studies. The findings indicate that the judges' considerations in resolving disputes are based on the proof of existence and ownership, economic benefits, and the fairness of royalty prices from each disputing party in defending their arguments, as well as the conformity of evidence with applicable regulations. Tax planning, the application of proper and accurate arm's length principles, collaboration in regulatory formulation, and standardized audits are proposed as solutions to minimize the number of transfer pricing disputes over royalty payments."

"Pada Maret 2020, Kementerian Keuangan mengeluarkan PMK-22/2020 yang mengatur tentang kesepakatan harga transfer seraya melaraskan peraturan APA Indonesia dengan Aksi BEPS 14 agar lebih memberikan kepastian hukum. Sebagai bentuk adopsi, PMK-22/2020 mengatur ketentuan baru seperti perluasan pengertian hubungan istimewa yang tidak diatur dalam Pasal 18 ayat 4 UU PPh. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini menganalisis implementasi kebijakan kesepakatan harga transfer dan faktor-faktor penghambat proses implementasi kebijakan kesepakatan harga transfer sebagaimana diatur dalam PMK-22/2020 dalam mencegah sengketa transfer pricing di Indonesia. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa implementasi kebijakan penentuan harga transfer di Indonesia sebagaimana diatur dalam PMK-22/2020 belum sepenuhnya memenuhi indikator content of policy. Indikator yang belum dipenuhi adalah indikator kelompok sasaran, dalam hal ini kebijakan APA yang seharusnya berlaku bagi Wajib Pajak yang ingin mengajukan APA namun juga diberlakukan bagi seluruh Wajib Pajak yang melakukan transaksi afiliasi meskipun tidak mengajukan APA. Di sisi lain, implementasi kebijakan kesepakatan harga transfer telah memenuhi seluruh indikator dalam context of policy yang terdiri dari kekuasaan, kepentingan, dan strategi, karakteristik lembaga dan penguasa, daya tanggap dan kepatuhan. Selanjutnya, faktor-faktor yang menghambat implementasi PMK-22/2020 dilihat dari sisi otoritas pajak, yaitu kompleksitas kasus dan transaksi Wajib Pajak, karakteristik negara yang ingin mempertahankan kepentingan negara masing-masing, komunikasi yang tidak lancar dengan otoritas pajak negara mitra, dan kesulitan dalam mengumpulkan dokumen pendukung dan kurangnya transparansi dari Wajib Pajak. Sedangkan, faktor-faktor yang menghambat implementasi PMK-22/2020, dilihat dari sisi Wajib Pajak adalah keraguan  Wajib Pajak terhadap otoritas pajak, interpretasi peraturan yang tidak jelas dan multitafsir, dan pengetahuan Wajib Pajak yang minim mengenai transfer pricing

---

In March 2020, the Ministry of Finance issued a PMK-22/2020 which stipulates the Advance Pricing Agreement whilst aligning the Indonesian advance pricing agreement regulation with BEPS Action 14 to provide more legal certainty. As a form of adoption, PMK-22/2020 stipulates new provisions such as extension of the definitions of special relationship which are not stipulated in Article 18 paragraph 4 of the Income Tax Law. Therefore, this study analyzed the implementation of the advance pricing agreement regulation and impediment factors of the implementation of the advance pricing agreement regulation as stipulated in PMK-22/2020 in preventing the transfer pricing disputes in Indonesia. The results of this study indicate that the implementation of the advance pricing agreement regulation in Indonesia as stipulated in PMK-22/2020 has not fully fulfilled the content of policy indicator. The indicator that has not been fulfilled is the target group indicator, in this case the advance pricing agreement regulation should have been applied limited to Taxpayers who want to apply for an advance pricing agreement, however it is also intended for all Taxpayers who conduct related party transactions even when the related party transactions are not in the context of advance pricing agreement. On the other hand, the implementation of the advance pricing agreement regulation has fulfilled all indicators in the context of implementation consisting of power, interests, and strategies, characteristics of institutions and rulers, responsiveness and compliance. Furthermore, the factors which impediment the implementation of PMK-22/2020 are seen in terms of tax authorities, namely the complexity of cases and Taxpayers’ transactions, the characteristics of countries who want to maintain their respective countries’ interests, communication that is not smooth with other tax authorities, and difficulties in collecting supporting documents and lack of transparency of taxpayers. Meanwhile, the factors that impediment the implementation of PMK-22/2020, in terms of taxpayers are doubts about taxpayers on tax authorities, interpretation of unclear regulations and multi-interpretation, and minimum knowledge about transfer pricing of the Taxpayer."