請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74194
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林明昕(Ming-Hsin Lin) | |
dc.contributor.author | Shu-Fen Kuo | en |
dc.contributor.author | 郭淑芬 | zh_TW |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T08:23:47Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2019-08-19 | |
dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-19 | |
dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
dc.date.submitted | 2019-08-12 | |
dc.identifier.citation | 李宗黎、林蕙真、陳榮俊(2018),《稅務會計理論與應用》,第5版,臺北:証業。
林蕙真(2017),《中級會計學新論上冊》,第9版,臺北:証業。 邱聰智,姚志明(2008),《新訂債法各論(中)》,初版,臺北:元照。 陳敏(2019),《稅法總論》,初版,臺北:自版。 李建良(2003),〈論司法審查的政治界限—美國「政治問題原則」初探〉,《憲法理論與實踐(一)》,臺北:學林,頁267-320。 夏傳位(2017),〈明修棧道,暗渡陳倉:會計作為金融化(financialization)的渠道〉,《金融經濟、主體性、與新秩序的浮現》,新北:群學,頁75-116。 陳清秀(2015),〈加值型及非加值型營業稅(上)〉,《稅法各論》,臺北:新學林,頁195-248。 黃源浩(2015),〈加值型及非加值型營業稅(下)〉,《稅法各論》,臺北:新學林,頁249-277。 楊子慧(2015),〈人民聲請釋憲程序之理論與實務〉,《憲法訴訟》,臺北:元照,頁261-288。 葉俊榮(2003),〈司法院大法官附期限憲法解釋的分析〉,《民主轉型與憲法變遷》,初版,臺北:元照,頁323-389。 蘇永欽(1999),〈財產權的保障與大法官解釋〉,《違憲審查》,臺北:學林,頁75-148。 曾正安(2016),《論營業稅之進項稅額扣抵權》,中正大學財經法律學研究所碩士論文。 柯格鐘(2013),〈營業稅法上取得非實際交易對象發票之課稅問題—評析行政法院87年7月份第一次庭長評事聯席會議決議〉,《東吳公法論叢》,第6期,起訖頁133-157。 柯格鐘(2014),〈公法債務與私法債務—稅捐債務法之基本問題〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第235期,起訖頁198-218。 柯格鐘(2018),〈量能課稅原則與稅捐優惠規範之判斷—以所得稅法若干條文規定為例〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第276期,起訖頁164至187。 陳清秀(2010),〈量能課稅與實質課稅原則(上)〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第183期,起訖頁72-92。 陳清秀(2013),〈營業稅之稅捐主體與客體之探討〉,《當代財政》,25期,起訖頁19-40。 黃俊杰(2011),〈階段課稅之營業稅法問題〉,《月旦財經法雜誌》,24期,起訖頁125-154。 黃奕超(2001),〈量能原則在德國之歷史發展(下)—兼論我國相關之學說及實務見解〉,《司法周刊》,第1560期,起訖頁2-3。 黃茂榮(2007),〈間接稅與稅捐之代徵義務〉,《植根雜誌》,23卷4期,起訖頁31-39。 黃茂榮(2012),〈營業稅債務之發生的構成要件(上)〉,《植根雜誌》,28卷5期,起訖頁01-40。 黃茂榮(2012),〈營業稅債務之發生的構成要件(下)〉,《植根雜誌》,28卷7期,起訖頁01-40。 蔡茂寅(2010),〈財政法:第三講—稅課收入(上)〉,《月旦法學教室》,第91期,起訖頁67-77。 蔡茂寅(2010),〈財政法:第三講—稅課收入(下)〉,《月旦法學教室》,第93期,起訖頁72-80。 蘇南、湯文章(2014),〈兩岸公共工程的轉分包實務與相關規範之比較〉,《財產法暨經濟法》,第37期,起訖頁107-170。 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/74194 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 營業稅的性質為消費稅,本應以購買人為納稅義務人,但基於稅捐稽徵經濟之考量,而將其稅捐客體由「支出」改為「銷售」,並以銷售人為納稅義務人。因此,營業稅制便以間接稅規劃之。透過轉嫁的機制,使最後的消費者成為該稅捐之終極的負擔者,以使其課徵結果符合量能課稅的原則。然而,在多階段銷售的營業過程中,若營業人無法將銷項稅額轉嫁給買受人,就必須承受額外的營業稅負擔,而與營業稅係屬消費稅之立法意旨有違。
司法院釋字第688號解釋的聲請人為一包作業營業人。由於依據加值型及非加值型營業稅法(以下簡稱營業稅法)中的「營業人開立銷售憑證時限表」之規定,包作業營業人應開立銷售憑證的時間為「依其工程合約所載每期應收價款時為限」,係早於收款前,相較於勞務承攬業係於收款時才須開立銷售憑證,前者顯然承擔了較為嚴竣的營業風險。一旦遇到帳款無法收回的情況時,稅額無法轉嫁,營業稅法也沒有提供業者任何補救之措施,不僅使包作業營業人居於較其他業別之營業人不平等之地位,且將使其財產權因而受損。 本研究針對營業人賒銷後發生呆帳的情形,分別從會計準則、所得稅法以及營業稅法所適用的規範來分析,發現:包作業營業人在帳款無法回收時,由於其行業特性所致,在受到:(1)營業稅法的開立銷售憑證時限規定非採用現金基礎,以及(2)當營業人發生呆帳時,營業稅法與所得稅法均採取對營業人較為不利的規定,二個因素交互作用之下,輕微者影響公司績效,嚴重者可能影響公司存亡。 因此,本研究以釋字第688號解釋為中心,除了對其違憲審查結果加以評析外,另亦針對財政部為配合該號解釋所公布的「包作業營業人申請退稅要點」、後續的行政法院實務見解,深入分析包作業營業人之稅額轉嫁權益是否有獲得較完善的保障。可惜分析結果顯示,包作業營業人於實務上所遇到的困境並未獲得改善。故本文最後提出修法的建議,期能落實營業稅之體系正義與量能課稅之目標。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | The nature of the business tax is consumption tax, the purchaser should be the taxpayer originally. However, based on the economic considerations of tax collection, its tax object is changed from 'expenditure' to 'sale', and the seller becomes the taxpayer. Therefore, the business tax is designed to be an indirect tax model. Through the mechanism of transfer, the final consumer becomes the person who ultimately bears the tax, so that the taxation result is in line with the ability-to-pay principle. However, in the process of multi-stage sales, if the business cannot pass the output tax to the buyer, it must bear the additional business tax burden, and the legislative intent that business tax is a consumption tax will be violated.
The petitioner of Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 688 is a firm that belongs to package contracting industry. According to the provisions of 'The timetable of business operator’s issuance of sales certificates'under the Value-added and Non value-added Business Tax Act (hereinafter Business Tax Act), the regulation on the timeframe for package contracting businesses to issue sales certificate is “at the time a receivable payment is due in each period under the construction agreement”. And that time is earlier than the actual receipt of payment. Compared with the labor contracting industry, whose sales certificate is issued at the time of collection, the former obviously bears stricter business risks. In the event that the account cannot be successfully recovered, the tax cannot be transferred, and the Business Tax Act does not provide any remedy for the business operator, which not only places the package contracting business operators in a more unequal position than other business operators, but also impairs their property rights. The study analyzes the situation of bad debts of business operators from the applicable regulations of accounting standards, Income Tax Act and Business Tax Act, respectively. It is found that: when the accounts are not recoverable, due to its industry characteristics, the business operators of the package contracting business encounter the following two difficulities : (1) The time limit for issuing sales certificate in the Business Tax Act is not based on the cash basis, and (2) when a business operator has a bad debt, both the Business Tax Act and the Income Tax Act adopt regulations that are more unfavorable to the business operator. Under the interaction, the slightest affects the company's performance, and the serious one may affect the company's survival. Therefore, the study carefully examines the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 688. In addition to the analysis of the results of its constitutional review, it also conducts an in-depth analysis of the “Guidelines for the Application of Tax Refunds by the Package Contracting Business Operators” published by the Ministry of Finance to cope with the requirement of Interpretation No.688 and the the subsequent practical opinions of Administrative Court’s in order to understand whether the right of transferring business tax of package contracting business operators has been better protected. Unfortunately, the analysis shows that the practical difficulties encountered by the package contracting business operators have not been improved. Therefore, the thesis finally proposes the amendment of the relevant provisions of Business Tax Act and its sub-laws, and hopes to implement the system justice and ability-to-pay taxation objective of the business tax. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T08:23:47Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R04a41029-1.pdf: 2947080 bytes, checksum: 78d74be46667cb9d28de4f6699d1c7cd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 論文口試委員會審定書 I
謝 辭 II 摘 要 III ABSTRACT V 簡 目 VII 詳 目 IX 圖 目錄 XIII 表 目錄 XIV 第一章 緒論 1 第一節 研究動機 1 第二節 研究方法與限制 3 第三節 論文架構 4 第二章 營業稅的構成要件與建制原則 6 第一節 前言 6 第二節 營業稅之構成要件 7 第三節 加值型營業稅之重要性質與原則 30 第三章 營業人發生銷貨與呆帳時的財稅規定 55 第一節 前言 55 第二節 財務會計與稅務會計之關聯性 58 第三節 營業稅與營利事業所得稅之關聯性 66 第四節 釋字第688號解釋之案件說明 79 第四章 釋字第688號解釋之評析與後續發展 91 第一節 釋字第688號解釋之評析 91 第二節 行政機關對於釋字第688號解釋之回應 103 第三節 釋字第688號解釋後的實務見解 116 第五章 結論與建議 123 第一節 結論 123 第二節 修法建議 124 參 考 文 獻 128 附 錄 131 | |
dc.language.iso | zh-TW | |
dc.title | 包作業稅額轉嫁權益之問題探討-以司法院釋字第688號解釋為中心 | zh_TW |
dc.title | Study on the Right of Transferring Business Tax of Package Contracting Businesses-Focusing on Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 688 | en |
dc.type | Thesis | |
dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 柯格鐘(Ke-Chung Ko),陳衍任(Yen-Jen Chen) | |
dc.subject.keyword | 包作業營業人,司法院釋字第688號解釋,營業人開立銷售憑證時限表,平等原則,間接稅,稅額轉嫁權益, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Package Contracting Businesses,Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 688,Time Table for the Issuance of Sales Certificate by the Business Operators,The Principle of Equality,Indirect Tax,The Rights and Interests of Transferring Business Taxes, | en |
dc.relation.page | 150 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201903319 | |
dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
dc.date.accepted | 2019-08-13 | |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 科際整合法律學研究所 | zh_TW |
顯示於系所單位: | 科際整合法律學研究所 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-108-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.88 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。