| Summary: | 碩士 === 淡江大學 === 會計學系 === 92 === Any levy of tax has to be implemented on basis of legal practices of administration by tax collection offices of government. But if anyone who concludes that an administrative action against him by tax collection office is illegal or unjust and has incurred damage or loss on his rights or interests, he should have right to claim administrative remedy. Although the new tax administrative remedy system in our country has been implemented since 1990, there is very high ratio of tax cases and has increased quickly year by year among cases considered in High Administrative Court. The situation highlights the fact that many people may have doubts about administrative action by tax administrative offices. Hence as lawsuits for administrative remedy are mounting, the problems behind situation and difficulties the related authorities and taxpayers face are worth of further explorations.
Based on above-mentioned considerations and in light of fact that there are few explorations through aspect of administrative remedy on impacts of tax administrative actions in our country on tax administrative offices and taxpayers and little information on them are available, the author of the thesis pioneered to conduct research by selecting cases of tax administrative litigation recorded from verdicts inquiry of law materials sorting system offered by Taipei High Administrative Court, which has most of cases among high administrative courts in Taiwan, on website of Judicial Yuan, with the case of “business income tax”, which is important category of tax for the central government, as primary target of research. The research adopted “content analysis” as the method of research and conducted exploration on sizes of companies, procurators, areas of jurisdiction of National Tax Administration and results of considerations, distribution of subject matters of actions. The results of research found that National Tax Administration has gained advantage over its opponents in most of administration litigation cases. For winning lawsuits, it will be better for companies to employ a procurator through joint procuration. Public companies have filed fewer lawsuits of administrative litigation than non-public companies. Most of reasons for filing lawsuits were involving lawful contentions.
The research offers its recommendations after summarizing above the results of research: 1) The tax authority should pay more attention to impacts brought by new system of administrative litigation in the early stage. The Ministry of Finance and the National Tax Administration should establish a mechanism that both parties have to regularly review various cases that are rescinded in addition to circulate rescinded cases in administrative litigation; 2) Considering tax administrative cost and maintaining the fair tax system, the tax authority should forge ahead toward short term goal – reduce tax lawsuits, and long term goal – speed up reform of related tax systems; 3) Procurators should enrich their professional knowledge of taxation and laws that may serve as best protection for the accusers and the defendants; 4) There are many cases of administrative litigation that had verdicts of “adjudication of rejection”. Therefore, in order to protect interests of taxpayers, related authorities should give more publicly on procedures and forms of administrative remedy.
|
|---|
