{"title":"再保险佣金的税务问题:PT X 再保险佣金所得税第 23 条争议案例研究","authors":"Sonni Cipta Pratama","doi":"10.33395/owner.v8i2.2041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reinsurance commission fees are costs that are inseparable from the reinsurance business with a fairly large cost composition, including the reinsurance business carried out by PT X. Through the withholding tax mechanism in the Indonesian tax system which is regulated in Article 23 of the Income Tax Law, DJP imposes PPh article 23 on reinsurance commissions through a tax audit process, giving rise to a tax dispute between DJP and PT X. This research is a case study with a qualitative method which aims to analyze the tax aspects of reinsurance commission fees through tax disputes faced by PT X, by looking at the substance of reinsurance commission fees through the process of recording and implementing taxation, chronology of tax disputes, company tax management in dealing with disputes , and analysis of expert opinions, to solve the problems faced by PT X in determining whether the reinsurance commission is an object of Income Tax Article 23 or not an object of Income Tax Article 23. This research also aims to find a solution so that tax disputes over reinsurance commission fees do not occur repeatedly in the future. The results of this research show that the reinsurance commission is not an object of PPh Article 23 by looking at the substance of the transaction, as well as the dispute result decision won by PT X for a consecutive five year dispute period which gives permanent legal force to the reinsurance commission case. This indicates that DJP must be more open in understanding the company's business model and business processes, and that DJP field officers must be more careful in implementing tax regulations appropriately.","PeriodicalId":124624,"journal":{"name":"Owner","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aspek Perpajakan Biaya Komisi Reasuransi: Studi Kasus Sengketa Pajak Penghasilan Pasal 23 atas Komisi Reasuransi Pada PT X\",\"authors\":\"Sonni Cipta Pratama\",\"doi\":\"10.33395/owner.v8i2.2041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reinsurance commission fees are costs that are inseparable from the reinsurance business with a fairly large cost composition, including the reinsurance business carried out by PT X. Through the withholding tax mechanism in the Indonesian tax system which is regulated in Article 23 of the Income Tax Law, DJP imposes PPh article 23 on reinsurance commissions through a tax audit process, giving rise to a tax dispute between DJP and PT X. This research is a case study with a qualitative method which aims to analyze the tax aspects of reinsurance commission fees through tax disputes faced by PT X, by looking at the substance of reinsurance commission fees through the process of recording and implementing taxation, chronology of tax disputes, company tax management in dealing with disputes , and analysis of expert opinions, to solve the problems faced by PT X in determining whether the reinsurance commission is an object of Income Tax Article 23 or not an object of Income Tax Article 23. This research also aims to find a solution so that tax disputes over reinsurance commission fees do not occur repeatedly in the future. The results of this research show that the reinsurance commission is not an object of PPh Article 23 by looking at the substance of the transaction, as well as the dispute result decision won by PT X for a consecutive five year dispute period which gives permanent legal force to the reinsurance commission case. This indicates that DJP must be more open in understanding the company's business model and business processes, and that DJP field officers must be more careful in implementing tax regulations appropriately.\",\"PeriodicalId\":124624,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Owner\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Owner\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v8i2.2041\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Owner","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33395/owner.v8i2.2041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
再保险佣金费用是与再保险业务密不可分的成本,其成本构成相当庞大,包括 PT X 开展的再保险业务。通过印尼税制中《所得税法》第 23 条规定的预扣税机制,DJP 通过税务稽查程序对再保险佣金征收 PPh 第 23 条,从而引发了 DJP 与 PT X 之间的税务纠纷。本研究是一项案例研究,采用定性方法,旨在通过 PT X 面临的税务争议来分析再保险佣金费用的税务问题,通过税收记录和执行过程、税务争议的时间顺序、处理争议时的公司税务管理以及专家意见分析来了解再保险佣金费用的实质,从而解决 PT X 在确定再保险佣金是否属于所得税第 23 条征税对象时所面临的问题。本研究的目的还在于找到一种解决方案,使再保险佣金费用的税收争议今后不再重复发生。本研究的结果表明,从交易的实质以及 PT X 在连续 5 年的争议期内赢得的争议结果裁决来看,再保险佣金不属于《所得税法》第 23 条的征税对象,这使再保险佣金案件具有永久的法律效力。这表明 DJP 在了解公司的业务模式和业务流程时必须更加开放,DJP 现场人员在适当执行税 务法规时必须更加谨慎。
Aspek Perpajakan Biaya Komisi Reasuransi: Studi Kasus Sengketa Pajak Penghasilan Pasal 23 atas Komisi Reasuransi Pada PT X
Reinsurance commission fees are costs that are inseparable from the reinsurance business with a fairly large cost composition, including the reinsurance business carried out by PT X. Through the withholding tax mechanism in the Indonesian tax system which is regulated in Article 23 of the Income Tax Law, DJP imposes PPh article 23 on reinsurance commissions through a tax audit process, giving rise to a tax dispute between DJP and PT X. This research is a case study with a qualitative method which aims to analyze the tax aspects of reinsurance commission fees through tax disputes faced by PT X, by looking at the substance of reinsurance commission fees through the process of recording and implementing taxation, chronology of tax disputes, company tax management in dealing with disputes , and analysis of expert opinions, to solve the problems faced by PT X in determining whether the reinsurance commission is an object of Income Tax Article 23 or not an object of Income Tax Article 23. This research also aims to find a solution so that tax disputes over reinsurance commission fees do not occur repeatedly in the future. The results of this research show that the reinsurance commission is not an object of PPh Article 23 by looking at the substance of the transaction, as well as the dispute result decision won by PT X for a consecutive five year dispute period which gives permanent legal force to the reinsurance commission case. This indicates that DJP must be more open in understanding the company's business model and business processes, and that DJP field officers must be more careful in implementing tax regulations appropriately.