請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/7095
標題: | 論信賴保護原則下之稅捐核課與補徵處分 Legitimate Expectation on Tax Assessment and Administrative Acts on Back Taxes |
作者: | Jun-Yu Guo 郭峻瑀 |
指導教授: | 柯格鐘 |
關鍵字: | 信賴保護,核課期間,核課處分,補徵處分,另發現應徵之稅捐,解釋函令, legitimate expectation,periods for assessment,administrative acts on taxes,administrative acts on back taxes,additional tax,administrative regulations and legal interpretations, |
出版年 : | 2020 |
學位: | 碩士 |
摘要: | 稅捐核課同時涉及事實認定變更導致之補徵處分與法律見解變更之補徵處分以及解釋函令變動之稅捐核課。補徵處分依稅捐稽徵法第21條第2項,以在「核課期間」內作成為必要。核課期間之性質係消滅時效。核課期間之起算、期間長度、中斷、中斷效力、完成適用稅稽徵法規定;在稅捐稽徵法未規定之情形,應適用行政程序法之規定。至於核課期間之不完成,不應類推適用民法之規定。納稅者權利保護法第21條第4項無法取代核課期間,亦無從解決萬年稅單問題。核課處分有將抽象稅捐債務具體化、確定以及中斷核課期間之功能。前後核課處分之關聯應採取消滅說(吸收說)。核課處分並有暫時性核課處分以及附事後審查權保留之核課處分兩種特殊形態。
因認定事實變更而補徵處分時,應分為兩個層次:第一層為稅捐稽徵法第21條第2項之「另發現應徵之稅捐」,應以「稽徵機關核課時尚未出現之事實」為判斷標準。第二層則為類推適用行政程序法第117條但書第2款撤銷違法授益處分之信賴保護限制。信賴基礎之判斷上,核課處分得作為信賴基礎;在信賴表現之判斷上,宜放寬信賴表現之判斷,以納稅義務人完納稅捐為已足;至於當納稅義務人故意違反協力義務或稅捐規避等情形時,自屬信賴不值得保護。 法律適用錯誤中,在單純適用法律錯誤之情形,不得補徵稅捐。但在解釋函令變更之情形,符合稅捐稽徵法第1條之1第1項以及第2項要件時,解釋函應溯及適用,稽徵機關得據此補徵稅捐,惟仍應檢視是否符合信賴保護原則。新發布解釋函令之情形,得透過稅務預先核釋或立法上增訂稅務衡平措施解決信賴保護之問題。 在無核課處分之補徵稅捐,因無信賴基礎,無從構成信賴保護。所得稅法上核定之公告得作為信賴基礎。惟在其他核定公告之申報繳納型態之稅捐,則在立法上得增訂申報視為附事後審查權保留之核課處分或是以電子化行政處分送達納稅義務人,以使納稅義務人得主張信賴保護。 As the authority impose back taxes, fact-finding or interpretation-changed is necessary. Administrative acts on back taxes shall be imposed within periods for assessment, which are in accordance with Article 21 of Tax Collection Act. Periods for assessment are extinctive prescription. Commencement of extinctive prescription, Period of extinctive prescription, Suspension of prescription, Renewal of period, Completion of prescription shall follow rules of Tax Collection Act and Administrative Procedure Act. Frist administrative act on taxes would be replaced by administrative acts on back taxes. There are two transformations of administrative acts on taxes: temporary administrative acts and administrative acts with reservation of the power to scrutinize. Administrative acts on back taxes on fact-finding shall be ruled by Article 21 of Tax Collection Act. The scope of “Any additional tax is found to be assessable on the same taxpayer under investigation” of Paragraph 2 Article 21 of Tax Collection Act shall be limited in “the fact of which the authority is aware at the time of imposition.” Administrative acts on back taxes on fact-finding shall be ruled by Subsection 2 Article 117 of Administrative Procedure Act. Administrative acts on taxes can be the foundation of reliance. Payment of taxpayers can be the manifestation of reliance. As taxpayers violate the obligations to Cooperate on purpose or plan to tax avoidance, they shall not be protected under reliance. As interpretation changes without administrative regulations and legal interpretations issued by the authorities changed, the authority cannot impose on back taxes. Even though the authority can impose on back taxes under Article 1-1 of Tax Collection Act, it shall abide by the principle of legitimate expectations. As the authority promulgate new administrative regulations and legal interpretations, tax advance rulings or discretionary relief measures may be the solutions to legitimate expectations. Taxpayers cannot claim legitimate expectations without administrative acts on back taxes. Public declaration of the income tax assessments can be the foundation of reliance. In other situations, reports of taxpayers on taxes shall be considered administrative acts with reservation of the power to scrutinize. Besides, administrative acts in electronic form can be the foundation of reliance as well. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/7095 |
DOI: | 10.6342/NTU202000604 |
全文授權: | 同意授權(全球公開) |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-109-1.pdf | 2.69 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
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。