Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Studi ini dilakukan untuk menemukan faktor-faktor yang menjadi penyebab kekalahan DJP di Pengadilan Pajak Indonesia. Belum ditemukan studi ekonomi yang menganalisis secara komprehensif determinan dari kekalahan DJP di Pengadilan Pajak Indonesia yaitu dengan menggunakan data pembuktian, waktu penyelesaian sengketa pajak, nilai awal, jenis pajak, jenis kelamin hakim, jumlah anggota kepaniteraan, keterbukaan perusahaan, kehadiran Wajib Pajak, perwakilan Wajib Pajak, dan jumlah Fiskus yang hadir di persidangan. Dalam penentuan determinan dan tingkat signifikansi masing-masing indikator terhadap probabilitas kekalahan DJP, penelitian ini menggunakan 2 (dua) model estimasi yakni persamaan regresi logistik dan linier probability model (LPM). Hasil estimasi menunjukan bahwa bukti yang diserahkan Wajib Pajak di pemeriksaan/keberatan secara tidak langsung berpengaruh negatif terhadap kekalahan DJP, bukti yang diserahkan Wajib Pajak di persidangan berpengaruh positif terhadap kekalahan DJP, jenis pajak berpengaruh positif terhadap kekalahan DJP, dan jumlah Fiskus berpengaruh positif terhadap kekalahan DJP. Hasil estimasi juga menunjukkan bahwa waktu penyelesaian sengketa pada putusan banding yang mana Wajib Pajak menyerahkan bukti di pemeriksaan dan keberatan secara tidak langsung berpengaruh positif terhadap kekalahan DJP.

---

This study aims at finding the factors that become the reason for tax administration's loss in Court Indonesian Tax. There has not been found an economic study that analyzes comprehensively the determinants of the loss of the DGT in the Indonesian Tax Court, namely by using evidence data, tax dispute settlement time, initial value, type of tax, gender of judge, number of clerks, company disclosure, presence of taxpayers, representatives Taxpayers, and the number of Fiskus present at the trial. In determining the determinants and significance level of each indicator on the probability of DGT's loss, this study uses 2 (two) estimation models, namely the logistic regression equation and the linear probability model (LPM). The estimation results show that the evidence submitted by the Taxpayer at the audit/objection indirectly has a negative effect on the loss of the DGT, the evidence submitted by the Taxpayer at the trial has a positive effect on the loss of the DGT, the type of tax has a positive effect on the loss of the DGT, and the number of tax authorities has a positive effect on the loss of the DGT. The estimation results also show that the dispute resolution time in the appeal decision in which the Taxpayer submits evidence at the audit and objections indirectly has a positive effect the loss of the DGT."

"Trend jumlah sengketa pajak yang masuk ke Pengadilan Pajak meningkat setiap tahun. Peningkatan salah satunya disebabkan oleh sengketa berulang sejenis yang sebelumnya sudah terdapat Putusan Pengadilan Pajak. Sengketa berulang ini merugikan Otoritas Pajak dan Wajib Pajak dari segi waktu dan biaya. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk memberikan gambaran kondisi harmonisasi atas sengketa berulang sejenis, peraturan yang belum dilakukan harmonisasi, dan pengaruh disharmonisasi peraturan.Penelitian ini merupakan studi kasus dengan menggunakan metode kualitatif. Data yang digunakan adalah Putusan Pengadilan Pajak tahun 2017 s.d 2019 sebanyak 1858 putusan dan wawancara kepada Praktisi Pajak dan DJP. Pengolahan data menggunakan analisis konten dan deskriptif. Hasil analisis konten putusan menunjukkan terdapat sengketa akibat disharmonisasi peraturan, yaitu: sengketa kegiatan usaha terpadu (Integrated), sengketa penerbitan Surat Ketetapan Pajak hasil Verifikasi, sengketa Tanggal Pemberitahuan Faktur Pajak Mendahului Nomor Seri Faktur Pajak (NSFP), dan sengketa penjualan barang jaminan gadai. Dari keempat sengketa tersebut merupakan sengketa berulang dan sudah ada Putusan Pengadilan Pajak dan Putusan Peninjauan Kembali.Hasil analisis pengolahan data dan wawancara diketahui disharmonisasi peraturan disebabkan kurangnya pemahaman mengenai filosofi perpajakan dan orientasi kepada peningkatan penerimaan. Fakta lainnya, harmonisasi peraturan baru dilakuan apabila sudah terbit Putusan Uji Materiil. Selain itu, ada peningkatan peningkatan jumlah sengketa, biaya, dan waktu akibat tidak dilakukannya harmonisasi peraturan atas sengketa berulang sejenis.Dari hasil pembahasan diperoleh kesimpulan Putusan Pengadilan Pajak belum dijadikan dasar untuk melakukan harmonisasi peraturan, begitu juga yang sudah diperkuat dengan Putusan Peninjauan Kembali. Subdirektorat Harmonisasi Peraturan belum melakukan perbaikan peraturan yang menjadi sengketa berulang sejenis. Terakhir, disharmonisasi peraturan merugikan Otoritas Pajak dan Wajib Pajak dari segi peningkatan jumlah sengketa, biaya, dan waktu.

---

The trend of the number of tax disputes submitted to the Tax Court is increasing every year. One of the increases was caused by recurring disputes of the same type for which there had previously been a Tax Court Decision. This recurring dispute is detrimental to the Tax Authorities and Taxpayers in terms of time and cost. The purpose of this study is to provide an overview of the harmonization conditions for recurring disputes of the same type, regulations that have not been harmonized, and the effect of regulatory disharmony.

This research is a case study using qualitative methods. The data used are 1858 decisions and interviews with Tax Practitioners and DGT for 2017 to 2019. Data processing using content analysis and descriptive. The results of the analysis of the content of the verdict show that there are disputes due to regulatory disharmony, namely integrated business activity disputes, disputes on the issuance of Verification Tax Assessment, disputes on Tax Invoice Notification Date Preceding Tax Invoice Serial Number (NSFP), and disputes on the sale of pledged collateral. Of the four disputes are recurring disputes, and there are already Tax Court Decisions and Judgment on Reconsideration.

Data processing analysis and interviews show that regulatory disharmony is due to a lack of understanding of taxation philosophy and orientation towards increasing revenue. Another fact is that the harmonization of new regulations takes effect when a Judicial Review Decision has been issued. Besides, there is an increase in the number of disputes, costs, and time due to not harmonizing the regulations on recurring disputes of this kind.

From the discussion results, it is concluded that the Tax Court Decision has not been used as a basis for harmonizing regulations, as has been strengthened by the Judgment on Reconsideration. The Sub-directorate of Regulatory Harmonization has not made any improvements to regulations that become recurring disputes of the same type. Finally, disharmony of regulations is detrimental to the Tax Authorities and Taxpayers in increasing the number of disputes, costs, and time"

"Skripsi ini membahas tentangAnalisis Persyaratan Formal Pembayaran Lima Puluh Persen Pajak Terutang Dalam Upaya Hukum Banding di Pengadilan Pajak Ditinjau Dari Prinsip Good Governance.Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan desain deskriptif. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah:telah terjadi suatu perubahan ketentuan terkait persyaratan formal pembayaran lima puluh persen pajak terutang saat mengajukan banding ke Pengadilan Pajak. Ketentuan dalam Pasal 36 ayat (4) masih berlaku aktif namun formulasi pajak terutang dalam ketentuan tersebut menjadi berubah, yakni dari jumlah yang disetujui Wajib Pajak pada saat pembahasan hasil akhir pemeriksaan. Manakala atas jumlah yang disetujui tersebut telah dibayarkan, maka Wajib Pajak tidak lagi dianggap memiliki hutang pajak saat mengajukan banding. Perubahan ini dirasa membantu untuk mewujudkan keadilan dan kepastian hukum sehingga mencerminkan terpenuhinya prinsip Good Governance yang membantu Pengadilan Pajak dalam upaya mewujudkan Pengadilan Pajak yang berasas cepat, murah, dan sederhana.

---

This thesis discusses about the Formal Requirements Analysis of Fifty Percent Tax Payment Within The Submission of An Appeal in the Tax Court Seen From Good Governance Principle. The study used descriptive qualitative research design. The results of this study is: there has been a change in the formal requirements of the relevant provisions of fifty percent of the tax payment owed when submitting an appeal to the Tax Court. The provisions in Article 36 paragraph (4) is still valid, but the formulation of tax payable in such provisions has changed to be the approved amount of the taxpayer at the end of the closing conference. When the agreed amount was paid, the taxpayer is no longer considered to have a tax liability when submitting the appeal. This change was felt to help the realization the tax system that adheres to equity and legal certainty principle and also increasingly realized the fulfillment of good governance principle and reflect and helps the Tax Court to realize it?sfundamental of a fast, inexpensive, and simple court."

"

Nama : Reysena Widya Lestari

Program Studi : Ilmu Hukum

Judul : Analisis Pengenaan Pajak Pertambahan Nilai atas Selisih antara Nilai Asuransi yang Dibayarkan Konsumen dan yang Disetorkan kepada Perusahaan Asuransi oleh Perusahaan Pembiayaan (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Pajak Nomor PUT-116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB Tahun 2018)

Jasa Pembiayaan Konsumen merupakan jasa yang tidak dikenakan pajak pertambahan nilai, sebagaimana diatur dalam ketentuan Pasal 4A ayat (3) huruf d Undang-Undang No. 42 Tahun 2009 tentang Pajak Pertambahan Nilai Barang dan Jasa. Dalam melakukan kegiatan usahanya, perusahaan pembiayaan konsumen dihadapkan pada risiko hilang atau rusaknya barang yang menjadi objek perjanjian pembiayaan, dan untuk menanggulangi kerugian akibat timbul nya risiko tersebut, perusahaan pembiayaan konsumen mengalihkannya kepada perusahaan asuransi umum dengan membuat perjanjian asuransi kendaraan bermotor. Sebagai pengguna jasa asuransi kendaraan bermotor dalam melakukan kegiatan usahanya, perusahaan pembiayaan konsumen seringkali mendapatkan diskon premi asuransi. Terkait hal tersebut terdapat Putusan Pengadilan Pajak Nomor PUT116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB Tahun 2018 yang mempermasalahkan diskon premi asuransi yang merupakan selisih antara nilai premi yang dibayarkan konsumen dengan yang disetorkan kepada perusahaan asuransi yang menurut Direktur Jenderal Pajak merupakan Imbal Jasa atas jasa keperantaraan. Metode penelitian dalam penulisan skripsi ini adalah penelitian yuridis-normatif dengan pendekatan kualitatif, dan menggunakan bahanbahan kepustakaan. Selisih nilai premi antara yang dibayarkan konsumen dengan yang disetorkan kepada perusahaan asuransi merupakan diskon premi asuransi yang tidak dapat dikenakan PPN. Oleh karena Putusan Pengadilan Pajak Nomor PUT116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB Tahun 2018 menolak Banding dari PT Suzuki Finance Indonesia, maka PT Suzuki Finance Indonesia tetap berkewajiban membayar PPN terhutang.

---

Name : Reysena Widya Lestari

Study Program : Law

Title :Analysis of Value Added Tax Imposition on the Difference between The Value of Insurance Received from Consumers and The Value of Insurance Paid to Insurance Company by the Financing Company (Study Tax Court Decision Number PUT-116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB Tahun 2018)

Consumer Financing Services are services that are not subject to value added tax, as regulated in the provisions of Article 4A paragraph (3) letter d of Law No. 42 of 2009 concerning Value Added Tax on Goods and Services. In carrying out its business activities, consumer finance companies are faced with the risk of loss or damage to goods that are the object of the financing agreement, and to overcome losses due to those risks, consumer finance companies transfer them to general insurance companies by entering into vehicle insurance agreements. As users of vehicle insurance services in conducting their business activities, consumer finance companies often get insurance premium discounts. Related to this, there is a Tax Court Decision Number PUT116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB of 2018 that disputes the insurance premium discount which is the difference between the value of the premium paid by consumers and those paid to insurance companies according to the Director General of Taxes are intermediary services. The research method in writing this thesis is juridical-normative research with qualitative approach, and using library materials. The difference in premium value between the consumer pays and the value of insurance paid to the insurance company is a discount on insurance premiums that is not subject to VAT. Because the Decision of the Tax Court Number PUT116285.16/2012/PP/M.IIIB of 2018 rejected the appeal from PT Suzuki Finance Indonesia, PT Suzuki Finance Indonesia is still obliged to pay the outstanding VAT.

"

"Dalam pelaksanaannya, proses pemungutan pajak oleh Fiskus tidak selamanya berlangsung mulus, adakalanya proses pemungutan tersebut bergejolak sehingga menimbulkan sengketa antara Fiskus dengan Wajib Pajak. Keberadaan dan kedudukan Pengadilan Pajak dalam Undang-undang adalah untuk melaksanakan kekuasaan kehakiman, melakukan pemeriksaan, dan memutus sengketa pajak bagi Wajib Pajak yang mencari keadilan. Pengadilan Pajak berfungsi sebagai peredam gejolak sekaligus sebagai pengawal proses pemungutan pajak sehingga jumlah penerimaan pajak yang masuk ke kas negara merupakan jumlah yang neto atau jumlah yang bersih dari sengketa. Berdasarkan data yang ada diketahui bahwa Wajib Pajak lebih banyak memenangkan persengketaan pajak di Pengadilan Pajak dibandingkan Fiskus.Penelitian ini mengkaji tentang penyebab permohonan banding Wajib Pajak dimenangkan di Pengadilan Pajak yang artinya Wajib Pajak memenangkan persengketaan di Pengadilan pajak dan upaya-upaya DJP untuk meminimalisir hal tersebut. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan desain deskriptif.Hasil penelitian menyarankan agar DJP meningkatkan kualitas hasil pemeriksaan dan penelitian keberatannya dengan mengimplementasikan prinsip reward and punishment dimana DJP tidak perlu lagi menggunakan realisasi penerimaan dari hasil pemeriksaan sebagai alat ukur kinerja, DJP melakukan pertemuan rutin secara periodik dengan Pengadilan Pajak sehingga terbentuk kesepahaman yang sama tentang suatu ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan perpajakan, DJP langsung menggunakan hasil evaluasi Putusan Pengadilan Pajak untuk merevisi suatu peraturan yang dianggap tidak adil dan membuat peraturan terhadap suatu proses bisnis yang belum diatur, dan DJP melakukan pembahasan dengan Pengadilan pajak untuk menciptakan sinergi mengenai penilaian pembuktian.In practice, the process of tax collection by the tax authorities do not always go smoothly, sometimes the process of collecting is volatile, giving rise to disputes between tax authorities and taxpayers. The existence and position of the Tax Court in the Law is to implement the judicial authorities, conduct, and decide tax disputes for taxpayers who seek justice. Tax court serves as a dampening volatility as well as the guardian of the tax collection process so that the amount of tax revenue coming into the state treasury is the net amount or the amount exclude the dispute. Based on existing data, more taxpayers wins tax dispute in the Tax Court than the tax authorities.

This research examine the causes of Taxpayers appeals won in Tax Court which means taxpayers won the dispute in Tax Court and DJP efforts to minimize that. This research is a qualitative research with descriptive design.

Result of the research suggest DJP improve the quality of the tax audit or verification result and objection settlement by implementing the rewards and punishment principle where DJP no longer necessity to use actual revenues from the tax audit or verification results as a performance measurement tool, DJP periodically conduct regular meetings with the Tax Court to form a same understanding of tax regulations, DJP immediately tap the evaluation result of Tax Court Decision to revise a regulation that are considered not fair and make new regulation against a business process which not yet regulated, and DJP make a discussion with Tax Court to create synergy about assessment of the evidence."

"Task and responsibility tax representative and tax authority in fulfilling tax obligation is sometimes alike with tax representative which is represented or the one that authorized. The main problem of research in interrogative sentence form, namely, is : How big is the influence of responsibility between representative and tax authority in fulfilling lax obligation? The objective is to know main problem of research hypothesis, namely : First : Is it predicted that responsibility of representative and tax authority has positive influence in fulfilling tax obligation of tax payer? Second : ls it predicted that there is a significant correlation between representative responsibility and tax authority in fulfilling tax obligation of tax payer?Tax law or fiscal law is formulated as : A whole of rules that covering government authority to withdraw someone?s wealth and return to public through government cash office, so that, it becomes a part of public law that regulates connection of law between country (government) and people (public) and institutions (of law) that has obligation to pay tax. Obligation is a must to take a certain steps, pay tax, lbr example, and obey the rules to respect other people. Personal responsibility and in-line of tax obedience is able to be meant as an individual obligation in-line on behalf of him/herself in fulfilling the tax obligation according to tax rules and regulation, as a consequency of rights? got to that person individually of subject and object of tax.Appearance of representative is might be born by an agreement and might be born by regulation Giving authority can be made specific as one purpose only or more and giving authority in general as an arrangement activity only. The representative meant here is covering representative based on regulation as parents or relative according to regulation representing children under their authority.The research used qualitative method. Qualitative method with analysis descriptive approach covering theoretical analysis and bibliography study. Research population are PT. Jasprim Dinamika Global and Indonesia tax consultant. Research variable are tax representative and tax consultant as independent variable. Tax obligation fulfilling of tax payer as dependent variable. Data collecting technique to test hypothesis by simple regression formula and correlation coefficient and determinant coefficient.Calculation result of correlation coefficient is 07338. This correlation coefficient calculation value means the responsibility of representative and tax authority in doing tax obligation of tax payer has a strong positive correlation in fulfilling tax obligation of tax payer. Mentioning of having a strong correlation is because of correlation coefficient value is in coefficient interval of 0.60 to 0.1799. Determinant coefficient of this correlation coefficient is KD = r2 x 100 or 53,85%. The size of representative responsibility and tax authority in fulfilling tax obligation of tax payer which is represented and authorized is 53,85%. The rest is influenced by other factors except the responsibility of representative and tax authority. This case is authomatically as a prove of first hypothesis.Fcounting8 is actually more, if compared with Ftable therefore a whole variable influence is significant. The second hypothesis of this research can be accepted, in another words that there is a significant correlation between representative and tax authority in fulfilling tax obligation of tax payer. This research globally proves that representative and tax authority has a positive influence in fulfilling tax obligation through the using methods.Tax authority in doing its working always refers to valid tax regulation. Letter of statement from tax consultant which should be sent/reported at every time accepting tax authority from tax payer, should not be per tax item enclosure, but just enough in once enclosing of copied enclosure at the time of accepting authority from tax payer of each tax service office."

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai bagaimana perbedaan implementasi kebijakan penyanderaan gijzeling dalam Hukum Pajak dan Hukum Perdata. Adapun parameter yang digunakan diambil dari Teori Implementasi Kebijakan Van Meter dan Van Horn yaitu ukuran dan tujuan kebijakan sumber kebijakan komunikasi antar organisasi terkait ciri ciri atau sifat instansi pelaksana sikap para pelaksana dan lingkungan ekonomi sosial dan politik. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian deskriptif dengan metode kuantitatif. Hasil penelitian ini menujukkan bahwa implementasi penyanderaan dalam hukum pajak maupun dalam hukum perdata sudah cukup baik jika dinilai dari parameter yang digunakan Van Meter dan Van Horn Meskipun demikian terdapat beberapa perbedaan diantaranya adalah sarana yang digunakan dalam proses pelaksanaan penyanderaan gijzeling yaitu sarana yang digunakan dalam hukum pajak belum sepenuhnya sesuai dengan Undang Undang.

---

This research isaimed to examinethe differences between implementation of gijzeling policy in Tax Law and in Civil Law. This research uses the parameters of Implementation Policy Theory from Van Meter and Van Horn which is standards and purpouse of policy source of policy communication between related organization charateristic of implementor behaviour of impolementor and economic social and politic environtment. This is a descriptive research with quantitative method. The result of this research is the implementaionof the policy both in the tax law and in civil law is good viewed from Van Meter and Van Horn parameter. Eventhough there are several differences between both policy such as facilities that used in the implementation process The facilities used in Tax Policy is has not been entirely in accordance with the Tax Law."