Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"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. "

"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."

"Perencanaan pajak secara agresif yang dilakukan oleh perusahaan multinasional merupakan permasalahan global. Sebagian besar dari transaksi lintas batas terjadi antar pihak yang memiliki hubungan istimewa dalam perusahaan multinasional. Adanya gaps dan celah dalam peraturan domestik dan internasional sering dimanfaatkan untuk mengalihkan laba/keuntungan dari satu negara ke negara lain dengan tujuan untuk mengurangi jumlah pajak yang dibayar. Sebagai langkah melawan praktik penghindaran pajak secara agresif, negara-negara yang tergabung dalam G20 bersama dengan Organization for Economic Corporation and Development (OECD) mendeklarasikan 15 Rencana Aksi yang berkaitan dengan Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). khususnya action plan ke-13 mengembangkan peraturan terkait dengan dokumentasi transfer pricing dengan tujuan untuk meningkatkan transparansi dalam administrasi pajak yaitu country reporting. Country-by-country reporting mengharuskan perusahaan multinasional untuk melaporkan pendapatan, pajak dibayar, dan ukuran aktifitas ekonomi di masing-masing yuridiksi dimana mereka melakukan usaha. Laporan tersebut menyediakan informasi kepada grup stakeholder yang akan berguna untuk mengawasi praktik korupsi, corporate governance, pembayaran pajak, dan arus perdagangan dunia. Country-by-country reporting juga dapat menguntungkan investor melalui pengungkapan perusahaan yang beroperasi di wilayah yang keadaan politiknya tidak stabil, tax havens, wilayah peperangan, dan area sensitif lainnya. Meskipun tidak dapat menghentikan semua tindakan penghindaran pajak, namun diharapkan hasil dari country-by-country reporting akan menjamin perusahaan membayar pajak sesuai dengan bagiannya di setiap negara mereka beroperasi, yang artinya menjamin lebih banyak pajak dibayar di negara berkembang. Dengan meningkatnya penerimaan pajak, negara berkembang dapat menciptakan kemandirian untuk mendanai penyediaan jasa dan belanja negara. Sehingga pada akhirnya pengungkapan informasi melalui country-by-country reporting dapat membangun kembali kepercayaan masyarakat kepada negara.

---

Aggressive tax planning by multinational company become a global problem. A major part of global cross-border transactions happen between related parties in multinational company. This type of transaction is susceptible to abuse gaps and loopholes in domestic and international tax law that allow profit shifting from country to country, with intention of reducing the tax paid. As a measure against aggressive tax planning, the countries incorporated in G20 together with Organization for Economic Corporation and Development (OECD) declare 15 Action Plans related to Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS). BEPS Action Plan, especially action plan 13th develop the regulation related to transfer pricing documentation to improve transparency in tax administration namely country-by-country reporting. Country-by-country reporting requires multinational company to report annualy income, tax paid and accrued, and measurement of economy activity in each jurisdiction where they perform the business. The report provides information to stakeholder that will be useful to oversees corruption practice, corporate governance, tax payment, and global trading. Country-by-country reporting also can be profitable for the investor through disclosure of company operating in the area with unstable political condition, tax havens, war area, and other sensitive area. Even though country-by-country reporting cannot prevent all of tax evasion, but the result of country-by-country reporting be expected will guarantee the company to pay the tax according to their part in every country where they operate, which means to guarantee more taxes being paid in developing country. With the improvement of tax revenue, developing country can create independence to fund the provision of state service and expenditure. So that, in the end the information disclosure through country-by-country reporting can re-build the trust of society to the state."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apakah koreksi Direktorat Jenderal Pajak terhadap Wajib Pajak terkait dengan royalti know-how dan trademark sudah sesuai dengan prinsip-prinsip arm's length principle dan analisis kesebandingan, serta menganalisis dasar dan pertimbangan majelis hakim terkait sengketa royalti know-how dan trademark. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini yaitu pendekatan kualitatif dengan jenis penelitian deskriptif. Hasil penelitian ini memperoleh kesimpulan bahwa terkait dengan penilaian kewajaran royalty know-how dan trademark yang meliputi eksistensi, duplikasi dan penilaian, maka: 1 koreksi pemeriksa belum mempertimbangkan peraturan terkait dengan dokumentasi transfer pricing yang ada di Indonesia; 2 Pemeriksa hanya menggunakan dasar dokumen perjanjian lisensi know-how dan trademark yang didapat untuk menyatakan bahwa tidak terdapat eksistensi dari penggunaan royalty know-how dan trademark; 3 terkait dengan duplikasi, maka Pemeriksa tidak melakukan karakteristik terhadap know-how yang dilakukan oleh Wajib Pajak; 4 beneficial owner atas IP adalah Friesland Brands BV, oleh karena itu economic ownership atas IP tersebut adalah Friesland Brands BV. Selain itu juga dalam melakukan pembuktiannya, majelis hakim hanya melihat berdasarkan dokumen perjanjian lisensi know-how dan trademark yang diberikan oleh pemohon banding. Majelis Hakim tidak menggunakan berbagai pengertian merek dagang untuk melakukan pembuktian keberadaan merek dagang tersebut. Majelis hakim tidak melakukan uji ldquo;benefit test rdquo; apakah hal-hal yang di atur dalam perjanjian PT XXX dengan Friesland Brands BV dapat dibuktikan dalam mendukung kegiatan proses pembuatan susu tersebut."

"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."

"Pemilihan metode harga transfer khususnya terkait harta tidak berwujud bukanlah hal yang mudah. Wajib Pajak dan Pemeriksa Pajak sering bersengketa mengenai penggunaan metode yang dipilih karena metode yang digunakan akan berpengaruh terhadap harga atau laba usaha wajar. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk menginvestigasi pertimbangan Pemeriksa Pajak dalam menentukan metode harga transfer yang digunakan dalam mengukur harga atau laba wajar terkait harta tidak berwujud. Penelitian yang dilakukan berupa pendekatan kualitatif dan analisis data menggunakan perangkat lunak (software) Nvivo 10.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pertimbangan pemilihan metode harga transfer harta tidak berwujud timbul dari regulasi yang tidak ketat dan detil, data yang diperoleh dari Wajib Pajak, metode yang digunakan Wajib Pajak, karakteristik transaksi, faktor kesebandingan, tingkat pemahaman Pemeriksa Pajak, pengalaman Pemeriksa Pajak, serta asistensi. Selain itu, penelitian ini menemukan bahwa kesulitan yang dihadapi oleh Pemeriksa Pajak berpengaruh terhadap pemilihan metode yang digunakan. Kesulitan yang dihadapi Pemeriksa Pajak dalam menangani pemeriksaan harga transfer harta tidak berwujud termasuk: keterbatasan waktu, overload pekerjaan, ruang diskusi yang minim bagi Pemeriksa Pajak, tingkat pemahaman Pemeriksa Pajak, pengalaman Pemeriksa Pajak, pola mutasi, data yang dibutuhkan dari Wajib Pajak, pencarian dan pemilihan pembanding, sifat/nature ilmu transfer pricing, keterbatasan referensi.

---

The selection of a transfer pricing method, especially related intangible assets is not easy. Taxpayers and tax auditors often dispute regarding of the method chosen because it will affect the reasonable price or operating profit. The purpose of this study is to investigate the tax auditor?s consideration in determining the transfer pricing methods used in measuring the arm?s length price related to intangible asset transaction. Research carried out in the form of a qualitative approach and data analysis using NVivo 10 software.

The results showed that the consideration of the selection method of transfer pricing of intangible assets arising from the regulations are not strict and detailed, data obtained from the taxpayers, the method used by taxpayers, transaction characteristics, comparability factor, the level of understanding of tax auditors, tax auditors experience, and assistance. In addition, the study found that the difficulties faced by the tax auditors influence on the selection method used. The difficulties faced by tax auditors in dealing with transfer pricing examination of intangible assets includes: time constraints, work overload, lack of space for the discussion of tax auditors, tax auditors level of understanding, tax auditors experience, patterns of mutation, the data required from the taxpayers, search and the selection of comparators, nature of transfer pricing science, limited reference."

"Transfer 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 menentukan harga yang wajar dankesulitan dalam mencari pembanding yang wajar.

---

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 membahas mengenai implikasi Aksi Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Nomor 13 dalam Regulasi Dokumentasi Transfer Pricing di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif deskriptif dengan teknik analisis data kualitatif. Implikasi Aksi BEPS 13 dalam regulasi dokumentasi transfer pricing sebagaimana diatur dalam PMK-213/2016, di antaranya adalah bertambahnya compliance cost yang harus ditanggung Wajib Pajak. Implikasi Aksi BEPS 13 dalam regulasi dokumentasi transfer pricing sebagaimana diatur dalam PMK-213/2016 juga terlihat dari pengadopsian beberapa ketentuan baru yaitu penggunaan dokumentasi tiga tingkat three-tiered documentation , penggunaan pendekatan arm's length price setting atau ex-ante basis, nilai threshold atau ambang batas yang baru, pengaturan kerangka waktu ketersediaan dokumentasi transfer pricing, dan penggunaan bahasa dalam dokumentasi transfer pricing. Untuk mengurangi cost of compliance yang harus ditanggung oleh Wajib Pajak, dibutuhkan simplification measures berupa safe harbors yang mengatur jenis-jenis transaksi afiliasi tertentu saja yang diwajibkan untuk menyelenggarakan dokumentasi transfer pricing seperti jenis transaksi afiliasi yang berpotensi melakukan penghindaran pajak.

---

This study focuses on the implications of Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Action Number 13 in transfer pricing documentation regulation in Indonesia. The research method used in this study is descriptive qualitative with qualitative data analysis technique. The implication of BEPS Action 13 in transfer pricing documentation regulation as stipulated in PMK 213 2016 is the increase of compliance cost that must be borne by Taxpayer. The other implication of BEPS Action 13 in transfer pricing documentation regulation as stipulated in PMK 213 2016 is the adoption of several new provisions, such as the use of three tiered documentation, the use of arm 39 s length price setting approach or ex ante basis, the use of new thresholds, the time frame of the availability of transfer pricing documentation, and the use of language in transfer pricing documentation. To reduce the cost of compliance that must be borne by Taxpayer, it is necessary to set out simplification measures in the form of safe harbors arranging certain types of affiliated transactions that are required to prepare transfer pricing documentation such as affiliated transaction that has the potential to do tax avoidance."