Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"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."

"Penerimaan negara dari sektor pajak dari tahun ke tahun mengalami peningkatan. Pentingnya pendapatan dari pajak ini dapat dilihat dalam trend persentase sumbangan perolehan pajak bagi APBN. Pemeriksaan pajak sebagai salah satu bagian dari administrasi pajak, dalam tujuannya untuk meningkatkan kepatuhan wajib pajak, merupakan hal yang selalu dikritisi karena hubungannya yang sangat "erat" dengan masyarakat, dalam hal ini sebagai wajib pajak yang diperiksa. Masyarakat menilai cara kerja dan kualitas aparat Ditjen Pajak tidak profesional dan cenderung mengandalkan kekuasaan.Tujuan penulisan tesis ini adalah untuk menganalisa kebijakan pemeriksaan pajak di Indonesia dan implementasinya, menguraikan permasalahan yang timbul dan melakukan analisis untuk mengatasi masalah yang timbul ditinjau dari prinsip kesetaraan antara wajib pajak dan fiskus.Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penulisan tesis ini adalah metode deskriptif analistis, dengan teknik pengumpulan data berupa studi kepustakaan dan studi lapangan melalui participant observation dan wawancara dengan pihak pihak terkait. Dari hasil pembahasan diperoleh bahwa banyak hal- hal yang perlu dikaji lebih jauh dan dilakukan perubahan dalam hal kebijakan pemeriksaan pajak di Indonesia dan implementasinya. Reformasi perpajakan, peningkatan kepatuhan sukarela, perubahan ketentuan perundang- undangan untuk lebih menjamin keadilan dan kepastian hukum dan perlindungan terhadap hak wajib pajak bisa meningkatkan kesetaraan antara wajib pajak dan fiskus.

---

From the beginning of Tax Payer Compliance Policy from 2001, the progress its implementation is not very good. It is proven from the fact that the amount of tax payer compliance compare to registered tax payer is very low according to data in 2001 it is only 0,008%. Based on that fact, it needs to examine why the policy is not functioned well and what are the factors that influence the implementation of the policy.The aim of the research is to identify the tax payer compliance policy and its implementation especially in the Office of Tax Services for Foreign Investment one and the District Office of General Directorate of Tax Special Jakarta. It aims to define the problem that rises from the implementation of the policy.The research uses the method of descriptive analysis with literature only and field study to interview related sources as data collection technique. From the analysis it is found that there are many things of the policy and its implementation that Must be explored and changed. The study relates several factors that detain the implementation of the policy in term of the tax payer and other factors. Other thing discussed in the research is the influence of the policy on tax auditing and the Nation of the policy and the voluntarily compliance."

"ABSTRAKDalam suatu proses pemungutan pajak, terdapat prosedur pengawasan melaluikegiatan pemeriksaan pajak. Namun pada kenyataannya koreksi yang dilakukan olehpemeriksa pajak banyak yang tidak disetujui oleh Wajib Pajak. Setidaknya sejaktahun 2011-2014, berkas masuk sengketa pajak di Pengadilan Pajak kian meningkat.Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui fakor utama penyebab timbulnya sengketapajak dan mempelajari permasalahan yang menyebabkan meningkatnya sengketapajak di Pengadilan Pajak sejak tahun 2011-2014.Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan desain deskriptif. Hasilpenelitian menunjukkan bahwa faktor penyebab timbulnya sengketa pajak adalahkarena terdapat perbedaan pengaplikasian hukum. Perbedaan pengaplikasian tersebutdapat disebabkan karena multitafsir peraturan perundang-undangan maupunperbedaan pemahaman substansi transaksi. Selain itu, timbulnya sengketa pajak jugatidak terlepas dari asumsi bahwa setiap individu bertindak sesuai dengankepentingannya. Permasalahan yang menyebabkan sengketa pajak meningkat setiaptahunnya adalah karena terdapat ketidakefektifan sistem administrasi dalampenyelesaian sengketa di tahap pemeriksaan dan keberatan serta kemampuanPengadilan Pajak untuk menghasilkan putusan tidak sebanding dengan peningkatanjumlah berkas sengketa yang masuk.

---

ABSTRACTIn a process of tax collection, there are monitoring procedures through taxaudits. But in fact the many corrections made by tax inspectors are not approved bythe Taxpayer. At least since 2011-2014, new file of tax disputes in the Tax Court isincreasing. This study was conducted to determine the main factor that causing taxdisputes and study the issues which led to increased tax disputes in the Tax Courtsince 2011-2014.This study is a qualitative research with descriptive design. The resultsshowed that the factors causing the tax dispute is because there are differences in theapplication of the law. The difference could be due to the application of multipleinterpretations of the legislation and the differences in understanding of thesubstance of the transaction. In addition, the incidence of the tax dispute can not beseparated from the assumption that individuals act according to its interests. Theproblems that led to the tax dispute is increasing every year because there areinefficiencies in the administrative system of dispute settlement in tax authority aswell as the ability Tax Court to give verdict is not proportional to the increase in thenumber of disputes new file."

"The findings of tax audit stipulated in the tax decree letter sometimes create disputes between tax payers and fiscus. The resolution of the tax dispute is done through Objection Institution at the first level, then Tax Court, and finally Supreme Court. Based on the data there were many appeal pledges granted at the appeal level. Long process along with the charges imposed on the tax payers for some parts of their outstanding taxes as a formal requirement of pledging the appeal has caused high cost from the part of tax payers. The Objection Institution is expected by the tax payers to be able to fulfil their aspirations in seeking for justice.This thesis was intended to provide a picture about what went on in the tax disputes that went into the appeal level of Tax Court; how the attitude of assembly towards the approch to calculating the Fiscus, what were the weaknesses of the audit results, and what solutions that could be done to overcome the problems.To answer those questions the data in a farm of Tax Court verdicts were collected and analysed. To limit the problems the verdicts (data) that were analysed were only verdicts related with the objections in the Regional Office of Directorate General of Tax Jakarta II. and confined to Income Tax type. Based on the research it was found that there a few things that made the difference between fiscus and tax payers. amongst other split opinions in verifying the supporting evidence, the officials handicaps in understanding and interpreting the patterns of the fax payers' businesses, the ignorance of the tax payers in understanding the tax rules and regulations. and the inadequate rules of tax implementation. From the four factors, in fact, the real problems were the followings:- Split opinions in verifying supporting evidence;- The officials handicaps in understanding and interpreting the patterns of the tax payers' businesses and accountancy;- The inadequate rules of tax implementationThe reviewed or cancelled tax assesments in the appeal process showed that there were weaknesses in the auditing products. Such weaknesses occurred particularly due to the insufficient application of the auditing procedures. The auditors found the indication of tax potency, however. they were not able to proove it with conclusive material evidence so that the auditors' correction could not be defended in the Tax Court.The unsatisfied tax payers towards the audit results had made the tax payers to take the objection process until the appeal and review. The length of the time span had caused two things:- The service provision to the tax payers decreased;- Opportunity for the tax payers.The correction in audit procedures was the main key because the audit results would play significant role and would determine the research process in the objection level, tax court, as well as judicial review in the Supreme Court. The confirmation of the data availabilty was of great importance, on condition that the tax payers were given sufficient time to respond to the audit resultsThe performance of the Objection Institution needed to be improved so that it could deny such negative perceptions as: stamping the audit results, lengthening the audit period, or merely to decrease the amount taxes that were reported to the Tax Court. To overcome such problems there needed to consider the discourse (concept) to shorten the objection resolution period, besides the proposal to consider jurisprudency of the Tax Court verdicts."