Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pengadilan Pajak merupakan lembaga yang memiliki kewenangan dalam memutus perkara terkait sengketa pajak dan menjalankan fungsi perlindungan hukum bagi Wajib Pajak yang mencari keadilan di bidang perpajakan. Namun, fenomena yang terjadi hingga saat ini bahwa disparitas putusan Pengadilan Pajak atas kasus serupa masih sering terjadi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis alasan terjadinya perbedaan dan kepastian hukum pada putusan banding yang dikeluarkan oleh Pengadilan Pajak atas sengketa Branch Profit Tax BUT migas dengan mengambil dua putusan Pengadilan Pajak BUT X No. PUT-108978.36/2011/PP/M.XVIB Tahun 2019 dan PUT- 006362.36/2018/PP/M.IA Tahun 2020. Metode penelitian yang digunakan berupa pendekatan kualitatif dengan melakukan studi literatur dan studi lapangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perbedaan yang terjadi pada kedua putusan tersebut disebabkan oleh perbedaan interpretasi Hakim dalam memahami konsep bagi hasil yang tertera dalam Production Sharing Contract Sanga Sanga serta pemanfaatan tax treaty dalam menetapkan tarif Branch Profit Tax dan kepastian hukum dari putusan tersebut masih belum terpenuhi baik dari sisi konsistensi putusan dan belum didasarkan pada ketentuan hukum yang jelas.

---

The Tax Court is an institution that has the authority to decide cases related to tax disputes and carries out the function of legal protection for taxpayers seeking justice in the taxation sector. However, the phenomenon that has occurred up to now is that the disparity of court decisions on similar cases is still common. This study aims to analyze the reasons for the differences and the law in the appeal decision issued by the Tax Court on the Profit Tax dispute of the BUT Oil and Gas Branch by taking two decisions of the BUT X Tax Court No. PUT-108978.36/2011/PP/M.XVIB Year 2019 and PUT- 006362.36/2018/PP/M.IA Year 2020. The research method used is a qualitative approach by conducting literature studies and field studies. The results of the study indicate that the differences between the two decisions are caused by differences in the interpretation of the judge in understanding the concept of profit sharing stated in the Production Sharing Contract Sanga Sanga and the use of tax treaties in setting the Branch Profit Tax rate and the legal certainty of the decision has not been fulfilled either from in terms of consistency of decisions and not yet based on clear legal provisions."

"Perhitungan branch profit tax (BPT) untuk BUT Usaha Jasa Konstruksi dilakukan berdasarkan pembukuan yang sudah dikoreksi fiskal. Terdapat ambiguitas di dalam pelaksanaan perhitungan dasar pengenaan branch profit tax tersebut. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis dasar pengenaan branch profit tax BUT usaha jasa konstruksi ditinjau dari asas certainty. Penelitian ini juga melakukan analisis di dalam penerapan dasar penganaan branch profit tax pada BUT X. Hasil dari penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa kepastian hukum atas kepastian subjek dan objek telah terpenuhi dalam pengenaan branch profit tax BUT usaha jasa konstruksi. Namun kepastian hukum dalam dasar pengenaan branch profit tax BUT usaha jasa konstruksi masih belum terpenuhi karena menimbulkan ambiguitas. Diperlukan aturan khusus dan aturan pelaksanaan perhitungan branch profit tax terhadap BUT usaha jasa konstruksi.

---

Branch profit tax (BPT) calculation on construction service permanent establishment should be calculated based on accounting method and fiscal correction. There is an issue of ambiguity in implementation of branch profit tax base for construction service permanent establishment. This research use qualitative approach. This research aims to analyze branch profit tax base onconstruction service permanent establishment in tems of certeinty principle. This research also analyze implementation of branch profit tax base on BUT X. The result of this research shows that certainty principle has been fulfilled on tax subjct and tax object. However, the policy has not fulfilled the certainty principle in implementation of branch profit tax base. The government should regulate special policy or implementation instruction to impelementate branch profit tax calculation on construction service permanent establishment."

"Perbedaan interpretasi mengenai aspek perpajakan Bentuk Usaha Tetap (BUT) perusahaan pelayaran, yang diatur dalam Keputusan Menteri Keuangan (KMK) nomor 417/KMK.04/1996 dan Perjanjian Penghindaran Pajak Berganda (P3B) Indonesia dengan negara mitra, sering terjadi bahkan terdapat sengketa yang telah memiliki putusan pengadilan pajak. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis interpretasi Branch Profit Tax (BPT) dan penurunan tarif Pajak Penghasilan (PPh) berdasarkan P3B Indonesia dan Singapura menurut Direktorat Jenderal Pajak (DJP) dan BUT perusahaan pelayaran, serta memberikan masukan untuk menyelesaikan perbedaan interpretasi tersebut dengan membuat surat penegasan atau mengubah aturan (rule determination). Penelitian ini menggunakan The Theory of Legal Interpretation dan konsep penafsiran hukum. Pendekatan penelitian yang digunakan adalah kualitatif dengan studi kasus. Teknik pengumpulan data yang digunakan adalah wawancara dan dokumentasi. Teknik analisis menggunakan teknik descriptive, content, dan thematic analysis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa BUT perusahaan pelayaran menggunakan interpretasi sistematis atau logis dan menginterpretasikan tarif PPh sebesar 2,64% dalam KMK nomor 417/KMK.04/1996 sudah termasuk BPT, sedangkan DJP menggunakan interpretasi gramatikal dan menginterpretasikan tarif PPh sebesar 2,64% dalam KMK tersebut tidak termasuk BPT. Sedangkan terkait penurunan tarif PPh, baik BUT maupun DJP menggunakan interpretasi gramatikal. DJP menginterpretasikan bahwa BUT tidak mendapat penurunan tarif, sedangkan BUT menginterpretasikan sebaliknya. Masukan yang diberikan adalah mengubah KMK nomor 417/KMK.04/1996 dan membuat surat penegasan agar tidak terjadi perbedaan interpretasi pada masa yang akan datang dan KMK tersebut dapat dipergunakan untuk BUT perusahaan pelayaran asal seluruh negara mitra.

---

Differences in interpretation regarding the taxation aspects of permanent establishment (PE) of shipping company, which are regulated in Minister of Finance Degree (KMK) number 417.KMK.04/1996 and Agreement for The Avoidance of Double Taxation (P3B) between Indonesia and partner countries, often occur. There were even disputes that already have a tax court ruling. This study aims to analyze the interpretation of Branch Profit Tax (BPT) and the reduction in the rate of income tax (PPh) based on P3B Indonesia and Singapore according to Directorate General of Taxes (DJP) and PE of shipping company, as well as to provide input to settle this differences in interpretation by making confirmation letter or changing the regulation (rule determination). This study uses The Theory of Legal Interpretation and the concept of legal interpretation. The research approach used is qualitative with case study. Data collection techniques used are interviews and documentation. The analysis technique uses descriptive techniques, content, and thematic analysis. The results show that the PE of shipping company used a systematic or logical interpretation and interpreted the income tax rate of 2.64% in KMK number 417/KMK.04/1996 includes BPT, while DGP used grammatical interpretation and interpreted the income tax rate of 2.64 percent in the KMK does not include BPT. Meanwhile, regarding the reduction of income tax rates, both PE and DGT used grammatical interpretation. DGT interpreted that the PE does not get a tax reduction, while the BUT interpreted the opposite. The input given is to change the KMK number 417/KMK.04/1996 and make confirmation letter so that there are no differences in interpretation in the future and the KMK can be used for the PE of shipping companies from all partner countries."

"Ketentuan reduced rate yang berlaku dalam tax treaty berlaku khusus terhadap pengenaan Branch Profit Tax (BPT) pada UU PPh berdasarkan asas lex specialis derogat legi generali. Namun, dalam praktiknya kerap terjadi sengketa mengenai penerapan reduced rate yang dilakukan oleh kontraktor migas, alasannya karena penerapan reduced rate dianggap mengakibatkan ketentuan bagi hasil yang tercantum dalam Production Sharing Contract (PSC) menjadi tidak terpenuhi. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kedudukan tax treaty dengan PSC agar mengetahui ketentuan mana yang harus diacu pada penyelesaian sengketa BPT Bentuk Usaha Tetap hulu migas dan mengetahui desain bagi hasil yang menciptakan kepastian hukum dalam pengenaan BPT. Metode penelitian yang digunakan berupa pendekatan kualitatif dengan melakukan studi literatur dan studi lapangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa karena ketentuan perpajakan dalam PSC dikembalikan kepada UU PPh yang berlaku, maka ketentuan tax treaty dapat diterapkan dalam PSC berdasarkan Pasal 32A UU PPh, lalu untuk menciptakan kepastian hukum diperlukan penegasan terkait penggunaan tax treaty dalam ketentuan PSC.

---

Reduced rate provisions in tax treaty are applicable to the imposition of Branch Profit Tax (BPT) of the Income Tax Law based on the lex specialis derogat legi generali principle. However, in practice there are often tax disputes regarding the application of reduced rates towards BPT by oil and gas contractors because the implementation of reduced rates is presumed to result in the non-fulfillment of the production sharing provisions stated in the Production Sharing Contract (PSC). This study aims to analyze the comparison of legal position between tax treaty and PSC in order to find out which provisions should be referred to in the dispute resolution of BPT imposition towards oil and gas Permanent Establishments and to know the production sharing design that creates legal certainty in BPT imposition. The research method used is a qualitative approach by conducting literature studies and field studies. The result of this research indicates that because tax provisions in the PSC are based on the prevailing Income Tax Law, therefore tax treaty provisions can be applied toward PSC based on Article 32A of the Income Tax Law, and then to create legal certainty it is necessary to affirm in the PSC clauses the use of tax treaty provisions."