| Summary: | 碩士 === 逢甲大學 === 財稅所 === 98 === This study is discussed the root causes of the taxation litigation cases always ahead of other category cases since the new system implementation of administration litigation. The main reasons that tax assessment disciplinary actions spread all over each pay duty entity (individual or profit-seeking enterprise) and except relate to common people life, especially tax payers’ equity protection awareness increase gradually in recent years. There are some deviations between the expectation and cognition of common people and the taxation or punishment disciplinary actions from the tax collection and audit office, and it is very easy to cause taxation litigation.
In order to understand above taxation litigation related main causes and their improvement solving methods, this study used collection and study related data of topic to do analysis, such as literatures, writings, discussions and reports. The research method applied to download the judged taxation litigation legal cases from the supreme administrative court, and check its disputes and justice reasons. After data statistic and summarization, the cases of substance tax are the most in this finding. Furthermore, this study used the interview method of open-end questionnaires, select triple portion of litigation stakeholders (litigators, litigation agent, taxation officers of legal affairs of tax collection and audit office) as specific respondents. According to aforementioned literatures and litigation cases, this study summarized four dimensions and seventeen main core subjects, and described their opinions from respondents. Through data sorting and analysis, the conclusions as following to below descriptions:
1. Invoke Substance-over-form principle should be thoroughly implemented the principle of taxation under the law and ability-to-pay principle. The taxation laws should address the formation element of each discipline and list every provision of legislation definitely. The law enforcement officials must have correct cognition, and the declaratory statutes can’t go beyond the law authorization scope while implementation.
2. The punishment legitimacy of presumptive tax still needs to be more discussion.
3. The punishment of taxation violation rules cases should follow the No. 18 regulation of administrative punishment law, think over the scenario of each case and conform to the principle of proportionality.
4. Establish professional taxation administrative law count and bring up specialized judicial bench.
Based on the above conclusions, this study addressed the research suggestions of each dimension separately for public reference.
|
|---|
