Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"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.

"

"Praktik transfer pricing di Indonesia berkembang pesat beriringan dengan perkembangan perusahaan multinasional. Berkaitan dengan hal ini, baik DJP maupun Wajib Pajak harus memenuhi peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku dalam menerapkan PKKU pada praktik transfer pricing. Namun, tidak jarang ditemukan baik DJP maupun Wajib Pajak belum dapat mengimplementasikan ketentuan-ketentuan tersebut, yang kemudian mengarah kepada terjadinya sengketa pajak. Salah satu isu yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini berfokus pada analisis koreksi biaya bunga pinjaman dan penerapan secondary adjustment dalam konteks keputusan Pengadilan Pajak atas permohonan Banding PT WBI. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengevaluasi kesesuaian putusan Pengadilan Pajak terhadap PKKU dalam koreksi yang dilakukan oleh DJP serta penerapan secondary adjustment. Metode yang digunakan adalah pendekatan kualitatif dengan studi lapangan dan studi pustaka, yang menggabungkan analisis dokumen dengan wawancara mendalam terhadap berbagai pihak yang terlibat dalam kasus ini. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Majelis Hakim telah mempertimbangkan argumen DJP dan Wajib Pajak dalam memutus sengketa dengan tetap memperhatikan regulasi yang ada. Koreksi yang dilakukan oleh DJP tidak didukung oleh bukti yang memadai, sehingga mengakibatkan pembatalan primary adjustment dan mempengaruhi kelayakan secondary adjustment yang diterapkan. Kesimpulannya, Majelis Hakim telah mengambil keputusan sejalan dengan PKKU, serta secondary adjustment dibatalkan karena pengaruh dari pembatalan primary adjustment. Namun demikian, penerapan secondary adjustment tetap harus diperhatikan karena tidak dapat diterapkan kepada seluruh Wajib Pajak. Kebutuhan akan kejelasan lebih lanjut bahwa penerapan secondary adjustment kepada selain pemegang saham diperlukan untuk mencegah sengketa pajak di masa mendatang.

---

The practice of transfer pricing in Indonesia has developed rapidly along with the growth of multinational companies. In this context, both the Directorate General of Taxes (DJP) and taxpayers are required to comply with applicable laws and regulations in implementing the General Provisions of Tax Procedures (PKKU) in transfer pricing practices. However, it is not uncommon to find that both the DJP and taxpayers have not yet implemented these provisions, leading to tax disputes. One issue addressed in this research focuses on the analysis of interest expense corrections and the application of secondary adjustments in the context of the Tax Court's decision on PT WBI's appeal. The objective of this study is to evaluate the consistency of the Tax Court's decision with PKKU in the corrections made by the DJP and the application of secondary adjustments. The method used is a qualitative approach with field studies and literature studies, combining document analysis with in-depth interviews with various parties involved in this case. The research findings indicate that the panel of judges considered the arguments of both the DJP and the taxpayers in resolving the dispute while still considering the existing regulations. The corrections made by the DJP were not supported by sufficient evidence, resulting in the annulment of the primary adjustment and affecting the feasibility of the secondary adjustment applied. In conclusion, the panel of judges made decisions in line with PKKU, and the secondary adjustment was canceled due to the impact of the annulment of the primary adjustment. However, the application of secondary adjustments must still be considered as they cannot be applied to all taxpayers. A further need for clarity that the application of secondary adjustments to parties other than shareholders is necessary to prevent future tax disputes."