| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 會計研究所 === 99 === There is no exploring about the revision of the undistributed profit tax in 2005; thus, it is worth studying whether the changes of the issue conform to the purpose of the tax law before and after 2005. This study collects the judgments made by Taipei, Taichung, and Kaohsiung Administrative Courts, and analyzes prime issues and the changes about the number of cases.
This study concludes as follows:
1. Changes of the issues and the number of cases
(1) Relating to changes in law regulations and opinions
After the revision, disputes have been greatly decreased, but the relationship between the undistributed profit cases and the income tax cases before the revision of the income tax base should be noticed.
(2) Relating to fulfilling the burden of proof
The burden of proof has nothing to do with the revision, so there is no obvious change about the number of cases. But the problem of proof should be noticed.
(3) Tax privilege – research and development expense
It is relevant to the tax privilege policy, and the disputes focused on the density of investigation and the problem of realizing the purpose of the tax privilege. Issues, as well as cases have little relationship with the revision of the undistributed profit tax.
2. Recommendations
(1) As for Courts
They could cumulate the types of the issues gradually, and make unanimous judgments. Moreover, they could consider alternative dispute solution other than judicial action to reduce disputes, for example, impelling both parties to compromise.
(2) As for defendants
When formulating administrative directions, dependants should take taxpayers and accountants’ opinions into consideration. Further, when processing judicial procedures, arrange the types of the issues promptly, and referring to the judgments, examine if their directions is formulated appropriately.
(3) As for plaintiffs
It is important to predict future tax risk timely. Plaintiffs should adopt measures based on industry types which are benefit to themselves. Besides, they should preserve advantageous evidences for them to proof in the litigation.
|
|---|
