Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Laporan magang ini menyajikan evaluasi menyeluruh atas prosedur yang dilakukan Perusahaan ABC terkait Pajak Pertambahan Nilai (PPN) jasa ekspor yang diatur dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 32/PMK.010/2019. Sebagai perusahaan multinasional yang berspesialisasi dalam layanan konsultasi dan broker asuransi, praktik perpajakan Perusahaan ABC sangat menarik. Laporan tersebut menggali informasi rinci dan analisis dokumen pendukung yang diserahkan selama proses. Dengan mempelajari prosedur dan dokumen tersebut, laporan ini menyoroti upaya kepatuhan perusahaan dan memberikan wawasan berharga tentang penanganan PPN jasa ekspor di dalam organisasi. Metode dalam laporan ini menggunakan pengalaman pribadi penulis dalam menangani kasus pajak. Berdasarkan evaluasi tersebut, kompilasi bukti dan proses yang dialami oleh perusahaan yang bersangkutan telah dilakukan dengan baik dan telah teruji dalam kerangka evaluasi yang telah dibandingkan dengan ketentuan yang berlaku.

---

This internship report presents a comprehensive evaluation of the procedures undertaken by Company ABC regarding the export services value-added tax (VAT) that was regulated in Minister of Finance Regulation Number 32/PMK.010/2019. As a multinational company specializing in consulting and broker insurance services, Company ABC's tax practices are of significant interest. The report delves into the detailed information and analysis of the supporting documents submitted during the process. By examining these procedures and documents, this report sheds light on the company's compliance efforts and provides valuable insights into the handling of export services VAT within the organization.The method in this report uses the author's personal experience in handling tax cases. Based on this evaluation, the compilation of evidence and the process experienced by the company concerned has been carried out properly and has been tested within the evaluation framework, which has been compared with applicable regulations."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai upaya keberatan atas informasi yang bersifat privasi dalam putusan pengadilan di Indonesia, khususnya dalam hal pembatasan informasi berupa identitas para pihak yang dilindungi dalam putusan pengadilan dan upaya keberatan atas tidak dilaksanakannya pengaburan identitas sebagai informasi yang dibatasi. Dalam penyelesaiannya, pengadilan harus melindungi identitas para pihak sebagai bentuk perlindungan atas hak privasi serta memiliki mekanisme keberatan atas tidak dilaksakan pengaburan identitas. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang berguna menjawab permasalahan skripsi ini berdasarkan dasar hukum yang berlaku. Pada simpulan penelitian ini didapatkan bahwa Pengadilan dalam menjalankan pengaburan informasi harus lebih efektif dengan memperhatikan bahwa informasi yang seharusnya dikaburkan telah dilaksanakan dengan sepenuhnya dan diaturnya alasan pengajuan keberatan terhadap informasi yang tidak dilaksanakan pengaburan.

---

This undergraduate thesis will discuss the means of objection upon confidential information in courts decision in Indonesia, especially in the limitation of information, such as the identity of the parties that are protected in the courts decision and the means of objection for the failed implementation of blurring the identity of the parties as a form of information that is being limited. In the adjudication, court has to protect the identity of the parties as a form of protection on the rights of privacy as well as having an objection mechanism for failure of implementing the blurring of the identity.

In using the normative juridical method, this research will be able to answer the issue of the thesis based on the existing law. The conclusion of this research, it was found that the Court in carrying out the blurring of information should be more effective by taking into account information that should have been blurred had been carried out fully and to regulate the reasons for filing objections towards information that are not blurred."

"UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 selain mengatur permasalahan hukum persaingan usaha, juga mengatur permasalahan hukum acara dari penegakan hukum persaingan usaha. Masalah muncul dalam konteks hukum acara persaingan usaha dikarenakan adanya upaya gugatan intervensi dalam perkara keberatan di Pengadilan Negeri atas putusan KPPU. Selama ini gugatan intervensi hanya dikenal dalam hukum acara perdata sebagai salah satu bentuk pengikutsertaan pihak ketiga dalam perkara perdata. Tetapi, upaya tersebut dilakukan oleh empat pemohon intervensi dalam perkara keberatan Temasek di Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat dengan dasar bahwa adanya kepentingan hukum yang nyata dari pihak pemohon intervensi atas materi putusan KPPU dan Pasal 8 Perma No. 3 Tahun 2005.

---

Besides arranging the problem of competition law, UU No. 5 Tahun 1999 also arrange the problem of formal procedural law from the competiton law straightening. In the context of the competition formal procedural law, the problem arised when there is the intervention file suit in the objection case at district court for the verdict of Commision For Supervision Of The Bussiness Competition (KPPU). During the time, The intervention file suit is known in private formal procedural law only, as one of the form of the joining third party in the case. But, in the reality, the intervention file suit had been done by four intervention plaintiff in the Temasek objection case at Central Jakarta district court with the argument that there is a real law interest from the material of the verdict of the Commision For Supervision Of The Business Competotion (KPPU), and the section 8 Perma No. 3 Tahun 2005."

"Penelitian ini difokuskan pada analisis perbedaan keputusan keberatan dan putusan banding pada proses keberatan dan banding atas SKPKB PPN, penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode kaulitatif, karena penelitian kaulitatif sangat berperan untuk mendalami suatu pemahaman, dengan menggunakan studi kasus pada PT. Adhimix Precast Indonesia. Hal ini dilakukan mengingat bahwa penelitian ini mencakup aspek-aspek baik administrasi, hukum dan kebijakan melalui penerapan penyelesaian sengketa pajak melalui lembaga keberatan dan banding. Penulis berkesimpulan adanya perbedaan keputusan keberatan dan putusan banding lebih disebabkan adanya perbedaan dalam menginterpretasikan suatu obyek pajak, adapun perbedaan sebagai berikut wajib pajak berpijak terhadap aktivitas usaha tanpa menyebutkan secara jelas legal formal dan konsep dan teorinya, sedangkan fiskus berpijak kepada aturan pelaksana dalam hal ini peraturan pemerintah, tetapi tidak secara komprehensif dalam melihat peraturan yang ada, dimana menurut data dan analisa penulis, terbanding tidak mempertimbangkan aktivitas usaha yang dilakukan wajib pajak sehingga dalam pengenaan pasalnya hanya mengacu pada peraturan pelaksanaan tidak pada undang-undang dan peraturan penjelasannya, sedangkan lembaga keberatan belum berfungsi secara optimal dan dalam putusannya belum bersikap netral, masih diwarnai oleh intervensi birokrasi yg lebih tinggi. Lembaga keberatan masih dianggap sebagai Peradilan semu (Quasi-Litigasi) karena yang memutuskan masih satu lembaga dengan lembaga yang mengeluarkan peraturan peneliti keberatan sebagai hakim doleansi adalah seorang pegawai negeri sipil dan bertugas dalam jenjang hierarkhi organisasi, dengan demikian independensi tidak dapat diwujudkan dan untuk majelis hakim berpijak pada undang-undang dan batang tubuh aturan penjelasan yang didasari dari teori dan konsep dari pada obyek pajak tersebut., putusan hakim disertai keyakinan hakim yang memberikan otonomi atau Independent bagi para hakim untuk bersikap netral. Penulis berharap wajib pajak dalam mengajukan proses keberatan didasari dengan alasan-alasan jelas, jangan didasarkan pada pandangan atau persepsi tetapi alasan harus didasarkan atas legal formal yang disertai dengan teori dan konsep.sedangkan untuk fiskus dalam mengintepretasikan obyek pajak tidak terlepas dari teori dan konsep dan mempelajari legal formalnya secara komprehensif dan memperhatikan aktivitas usaha wajib pajak agar tidak salah pasal dalam mengenakannya obyek pajak yang disengketakan, terbanding diharapkan netral dalam menyikapi permohonan keberatan wajib pajak, sedangkan bagi lembaga keberatan diharapkan independent dalam memutuskan permohonan keberatan wajib pajak, penulis mengusulkan agar lembaga keberatan dihapuskan untuk hasil pemeriksaan yang terlebih dahulu dilakukan closing conference antara fiskus dan wajib pajak sedangkan untuk keputusan jabatan yang tanpa sepengetahuan wajib pajak lembaga keberatan dirasakan masih perlu dan untuk majelis hakim selain independent dan netral dalam memutuskan permohonan banding , diharapkan juga ahli dan menguasai dalam bidangnya.

---

The objection submitted only for DJP to material or content of tax assessment in research submitted to letter of tax assessment tax pay decrease value increase. Now the limit to submitted the letter of objection definited in three months since published the letter of assessment tax, and can be considered to extended so as obligatory tax have enough time to prepare the letter of objection with strong reason. Otherwise Dirjen Pajak must fulfill requested from obligatory tax.In timing not more than 12 months after the letter of objection received. Dirjen Pajak must give dicision on submitted objection, if in that timing has been expired and Dirjen Pajak not given some decision, so the correctness that submitted considered received. Decision from Dirjen Pajak on objection can be like received all or half, reject or add amount of debted tax on that objection in timing 12 months after the letter of objection received from Kantor Pelayanan Pajak On decision of rejected objection by DJP, the process continue for obligatory tax to submitted equal according tax regulation (UU perpajakan), Equal can only submitted on decision objection published by fiskus that still contain dispute between obligatory tax and fiskus.Process to submitted equal, start from submit to requested equal letter by obligatory taz to Sekretariat pengadilan pajak. If requested equal letter can be received so that will following by : process requested equal, process the justice tax send SUB to Direktorat PPN and PTLL send SUB to the Justice tax,The Justice tax send copy SUB to obligatory tax. Obligatory tax send objection letter to justice tax, equal assembly in justice tax, Decision justice tax on equal SKPKB PPN. Reseach about variance of objection decision and equal decision on process objection and equal done with qualitatif methode, because qualitatif reseach have very role of a certain comprehension, With using case study at objection case and equal PT. Adhimix Precast Indonesia, This thing done to remain that this research covered all aspects such as: administration, law, and policy by applied to solved dispute tax by objection and equal institution. After pass from processing and data analysis, writer in objection process and equal submitted by PT.Adhimix Precast Indonesia take conclution that have fulfilled requested objection and equal, the validity of requested objection letter is important requirements so as the bundles of requsted can be submitted to continue stage, Now the stage prosess can be conclution as follow: authority from people who sign objection letter, objection letter must based on clearly reason,obligatory tax must learn about SKPKB PPN, Researching SKPKB PPN, explaining amount of tax which debted, otherwise in processing equal in a substantial can taken conclution as follow : request explaining or answering to DJP about reasoning rejected to objection letter, making submitting equal letter which signed by board, request equal only for justice tax if indicated people who represent company, must be made authorization letter, prepare all data which connected with requested problem, there is explained about disagreement or recected on decision objection from obligatory tax with equal letter, Equal is right for obligatory tax. On varience of decision of objectionand decision equal, writer take conclution base on varience in interpretation a certain object tax, requester equal inpretation to activity without explain legal formal clearly, and equal interpretation to legal formal but not comprehensif to analysis explaining about section, according data and analysis writer, wrong equality in aplication section, ohterwise court of justice just to teory and consept which connected only to legal formal tax.Suggesting which can conveied in this writing, before request objection, obligatory tax must learn and research to assessment tax and in request objection suggested so as obligatory tax see authority frompeople who sign objection letter base on reason clearly, not to perception, but the reason must based on principle or argumentation which requested by fiskus, otherwise fiskus must netral in way of behaving requested obligatory tax, in equal process obligatory tax suggested to request explaining ar argument from DJP about rejected reason and prepare all condiment documents, matriks, accompany and recapitulation data which connected with requested problem and know counting formal requirement, obligatory tax pay 50 % from debted tax and in decision dispute tax sould be interpretation object tax not far from teory and concept and learn formal legal, in a comprehension so as not wrong section in using object tax which disputed not only for legal formal but respect to to Asas equity/equality, justice must be important pont in choise policy option.present in build tax system.Legal formal regulation tax shouldpoint to teory and concept and respect to the principle tax and avoid from ?political will? or others which can difficult for oligatory tax. So conviction for tax has been fair and spread out, it can develop awarness for obligatory tax in implementation."

"Skripsi ini bertujuan untuk melakukan analisis terhadap proses pemeriksaan pajak, terutama pemeriksaan yang berkaitan dengan masalah transfer pricing serta melakukan perbandingan dan analisis terhadap metode dan hasil pengujian kewajaran laba operasi PT X yang dilakukan perusahaan dengan pemeriksa. Dalam melakukan analisis, penulis menggunakan metode deskriptif analisis dengan sumber data yang sebagian besar merupakan data primer dari perusahaan. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian disimpulkan bahwa pemeriksaan pajak terkait dengan transfer pricing telah sesuai dengan prosedur dan ketentuan yang berlaku. Namun, perbedaan penentuan perusahaan pembanding mengakibatkan hasil perhitungan laba operasi yang jauh berbeda antara perhitungan perusahaan dengan pemeriksa.

---

This thesis aims to conduct an analysis of the tax audit process, especially relating to the examination of transfer pricing issues and also doing comparison and to analyze of the transfer pricing methods used by PT X (the company) and the tax officer. In conducting the analysis, the writer uses descriptive analysis method which the most data source is the primary data from the Company. Based on the results of the study, it can be concluded that the tax audit process related to transfer pricing has complied with the applicable procedures and regulations. However, differences in the determination of the comparable company resulted the big different in the amount of operating profit between the Company and tax officer."

"Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha berdasarkan Undang-Undang No.5 Tahun 1999 adalah lembaga yang memiliki kewenangan untuk memutuskan ada tidaknya suatu pelanggaran terhadap perkara persaingan usaha juga menjatuhkan sanksi terhadap pihak yang divonis bersalah berdasarkan pemeriksaan yang dilakukan oleh KPPU itu sendiri. Terhadap pihak yang merasa dirugikan oleh keputusan KPPU, melalui Perma No. 3 Tahun 2005 diatur mengenai pengajuan upaya keberatan atas putusan KPPU yang diajukan ke Pengadilan Negeri. Pemeriksaan yang dilakukan oleh pengadilan negeri masih dalam tahap judex factie. Namun berdasarkan pengaturan pasal 5 ayat (4) Perma No. 3 Tahun 2005, pemeriksaan dalam tahap upaya keberatan hanya didasarkan pada berkas pemeriksaan pada tahap pertama di KPPU yang diserahkan oleh KPPU ke pengadilan negeri. Atas perintah hakim pengadilan negeri melalui putusan selanya, pemeriksaan tambahan dapat dilakukan jika hakim pengadilan menganggap hal tesebut diperlukan. Pemeriksaan tambahan dilakukan oleh KPPU. Berdasarkan hal tesebut penulis akan membahas bagaimana kedudukan bukti baru yang diajukan dalam upaya keberatan untuk mendukung argumen dari pihak yang mengajukan permohonan keberatan.

---

KPPU pursuant to Act 5 of 1999 is an institution that has the authority to decide whether or not there is a breach of competition cases also impose sanctions against parties who were convicted based on an examination conducted by the Commission itself. Against those who feel aggrieved by the decision of the Commission, through the Perma No. 3 of 2005 regarding the filing of an effort organized against the decision of the Commission's objections filed to the District Court. Examination conducted by the district court is still in the stage judex factie. However, based on the setting of article 5 section (4) Perma No. 3 of 2005, the examination in an effort stage objections are based solely on the examination‟s files in the first stage in the Commission which was presented by the Commission to the district court. On the orders of district court judges through the temporary decisions (putusan sela), additional examination can be done if the judge considers it necessary proficiency level. Additional examination conducted by the Commission. Under the terms of proficiency level position of the author will discuss how new evidence is presented in an effort to support the objection that the argument of the parties filed an objection."

"Laporan ini membahas evaluasi proses pendampingan PT RPP terhadap keberatan Pajak Penghasilan Pasal 21 atas penghasilan ekspatriat pada PT NRD serta proses rekapitulasi dokumen yang digunakan sebagai bagian dari proses keberatan tersebut. Berdasarkan hasil evaluasi yang dilakukan, PT RPP sudah melakukan pendampingan keberatan tersebut dengan baik dan sesuai dengan peraturan perundang-undangan. PT RPP juga telah melakukan rekapitulasi dokumen dengan efektif, yang mampu mengakomodasi kebutuhan dari peneliti keberatan.

---

This report discusses the evaluation of PT RPP's assistance process against the objection of Article 21 Income Tax on expatriate income to PT NRD and the document recapitulation process used as part of the objection process. Based on the results of the evaluation, PT RPP has assisted the objection well and in accordance with the laws and regulations. PT RPP has also recapitulated the documents effectively, which is able to accommodate the needs of tax authorities."

"Berlakunya Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 Tentang Larangan Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat menjadi langkah baru bagi Indonesia dalam hal melakukan penyelesaian permasalahan di bidang penegakan hukum persaingan usaha baik formil maupun materiil. Berdasarkan latar belakang tersebut penulisan ini akan dibahas pelaksanaan upaya hukum keberatan atas putusan KPPU dan pemeriksaan tambahan dalam pengaturan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 dan penerapannya pada putusan No. 3/KPPU/2010/PN.JKT.PST. Upaya hukum keberatan atas putusan KPPU adalah suatu upaya hukum yang dapat ditempuh oleh pelaku usaha yang tidak menerima putusan KPPU dan pelaksanaannya berdasar pada pengaturan pasal 44 ayat 2 dan 3 Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 jo. pasal 65 Peraturan KPPU Nomor 1 Tahun 2010 jo. Perma 3 tahun 2005 tentang Tata Cara Pengajuan Upaya Hukum Terhadap Putusan KPPU. Sedangkan Pemeriksaan tambahan adalah pemeriksaan yang dilakukan oleh KPPU sehubungan dengan perintah Majelis Hakim yang memeriksa dalam upaya keberatan, pelaksanaannya berdasar pada pasal 6 Perma 3 Tahun 2005 jo. pasal 69, 70, dan 71 Peraturan KPPU 1 tahun 2010. Pada putusan upaya keberatan atas putusan KPPU No. 03/KPPU/2010/PN.JKT.PST, pengajuan dan pemeriksaan telah sesuai dengan pengaturan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 dan Perma 3 Tahun 2005. Pelaksanaan pemeriksaan tambahan dalam hal ini juga telah sesuai dengan pengaturan Perma 3 Tahun 2005.

---

Enforcement of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition became a new step for Indonesia in term of conduct a settlement in field of enforcement of business competition law enforcement both formal and substantive. Based on this background, this minithesis will discuss the implementation of objection of the decisions of Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition and an additional investigation in the setting of Law Number 5 Year 1999 and its application to the verdict Number 3/KPPU/2010/PN.JKT.PST. Objection to the decisions of Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition is a remedies that can be achieved by businessesperson that is not accepted the verdict of Commission and the implementation based on the regulation of article 44 paragraph 2 and 3 of law Number 5 Year 1999 jo. article 65 of Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition's regulation Number 1 Year 2010 jo. Regulation of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 3 Year 2005 concerning the procedures for filing objection to the decisions of Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition. While the additional investigation is investigation done by commission in relation with the orders from the panel of Judges who handle the objection, that the implementation based on article 6 Regulation of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 3 Year 2005 jo. article 69, 70, and 71 Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition's regulation Number 1 Year 2010. In verdict of objection to the decisions of Commission for The Supervision of Business Competition Number 3/KPPU/2010/PN.JKT.PST, filing and investigation has compliance with law Number 5 Year 1999 and Regulation of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 3 Year 2005. The Implementation of additional investigation has been in accordance with Regulation of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 3 Year 2005."

"Laporan ini memaparkan studi kasus mengenai koreksi fiskal Pajak Penghasilan Badan Tahun 2013 PT X. Pembahasan mengenai studi kasus ini dimulai dari kronologis terjadinya pemeriksaan atas Pajak Penghasilan Badan Tahun 2013 yang mana fokus utamanya adalah koreksi fiskal yang diajukan keberatan oleh PT X. Penjelasan meliputi keputusan hasil pemeriksaan, pembahasan akhir hingga sengketa yang menjadi keberatan akan dibahas dalam laporan ini. Penjelasan atas koreksi fiskal yang diajukan keberatan akan dipaparkan dan didukung pula oleh analisis. Hasil analisis menyimpulkan bahwa masih terdapat kekurangan dari kedua belah pihak dalam mengimplementasikan peraturan perpajakan Indonesia.

---

This research emphasizes several cases of PT Xs fiscal income tax correction that occurred in 2013. The discussion of this research is based on an tax audit of corporate income tax in 2013 that is done chronologically, in that cause objection submitted by PT X. Comprehensively in this research will unfurl several facts started from the result of the investigation, final discussion, up to the matter that causes the objection. Explanation regarding those objection of fiscal correction will be presented within this paper. The paper will also elucidate their findings and analysis based on the facts. This analysis concluded that there were several deficiencies from both parties to implement tax regulation in Indonesia."