Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Planning represents a striking controversy in American political life. On one side, planning is maligned while on the other side it is praised. The opponents of planning, or any state intervention, base their rationale on the doctrine of laissez faire. It is argued that the function of the state should be reduced to the lowest minimum consistent with public safety. The role of the state should not be more than that of a modest policeman and should not interfere in the operation of economic processes. Advocates argue that planning is both pragmatic inevitable if citizens are to enjoy -a better and more equitable standard of living.

Despite basic disagreement between the advocates of planning and the defender of laissez-faire, the way as planning has been practiced for about two centuries, it is difficult to determine whether the exercise of planning in the United States restrains or actually perpetuates the existing economic system. As a matter of fact, the degree of disagreement is manifest in the inconsistency of proponents of doctrine of laissez-faire. For example, middle-class businessmen and entrepreneurs often are prepared to see the government step in and prevent profiteering landlords from making what they could from their property (Burns, et al, 1980: 759).

Englishmen Jeremy Bentham, an author in his? The Principles of Moral and Legislation, profoundly elaborated this notion 1789:

To suppose that a stable and beneficent society could emerge unassisted from a company of self-interested ego was...to suppose the impossible. Society, if it was to function properly, needed an organizing principle that would both acknowledge humanity's basic selfishness and at the same time compel people to sacrifice at least a portion of their own interests for the good of the majority ...that every institution, every law, must be measured according to its social usefulness." (Burns, et al, 1980: 759)

Within this context, the haphazard condition of the physical and social order in American cities in the late nineteenth of the century helped to shape the planning movement. The emergence of city planning amidst the social reformers suggests that the government's efforts to control through the planning were due to the inability of the laissez-faire system to adjust or alter the distribution of goods and services. When modern cities emerged at the end of the century, they encountered many unprecedented and severe problems such as residential congestion in the central cities, racial and class conflicts in the central city's ghettos, the eruption of labor violence, shortages and gaps in the city's new infrastructure, and the fact that the capitalistic system was plagued by economic instability. The concerns became more deep-seated as they became harmful the development of American democracy's value. In the context of urban life, the citizens also needed more civic centers to serve as focal points for the growth of a sense of community.

The crisis in America urban structure could best be understood by tracing the historical evolution of American cities during the development of capital accumulation. From the colonial era (1600s) through 1850, merchant capitalists developed their capital through commercial accumulation. Market place played the most important role where they tried to earn profits-. Colonial cities served their political economic functions, that is colonial control centers and commercial centers as well. Commodities being supplied from producers in hinterland to dispersed markets were collected in and distributed through seaports. Artisans who were the producers of luxury goods conducted their business in cities as the cities facilitated direct access to their wealthy customers.

To maintain that British merchants remained able to control the monopoly over commercial activity, the crown limited the functions of colonial cities. Because of this control the city growth was itself constrained."

"Perjanjian franchise merupakan perjanjian yang dibuat antara pihak franchisor dan franchisee mengenai pemberian izin untuk menggunakan merek dagang franchisor kepada franchisee. Dalam menjalankan bisnisnya ini franchisee harus menyesuaikan diri dengan metode dan prosedur yang ditetapkan franchisor. Di Indonesia franchise tengah pesat berkembang. Asas Terbuka Buku III KUHPerdata, memungkinkan bagi para pihak untuk membuat perjanjian apapun, dan perjanjian yang dibuat secara sah akan berlaku sebagai undang-undang bagi mereka yang membuatnya. Perjanjian franchise yang dibuat merupakan landasan untuk menuntut hak dan kewajiban para pihak. Perjanjian Franchise menjadi dasar untuk mengetahui sah atau tidaknya perbuatan para pihak. Namun pihak franchisor selaku pemilik merek dagang/jasa selalu berada di pihak yang lebih kuat, sehingga seringkali perjanjian itu tidak seimbang mengatur kepentingan/hak dan kewajiban para pihak, sebab franchisee lebih banyak diharuskan berprestasi. Franchisor menetapkan syarat-syarat dan standar yang harus diiikuti oleh franchisee yang memungkinkan franchisor membatalkan perjanjian apabila ia menilai franchisee tidak dapat memenuhi kewajibannya. Ketidakseimbangan hak dan kewajiban, juga ketidakseimbangan posisi itulah yang seringkali menjadi pemicu terciptanya pemutusan perjanjian secara sepihak. Perjanjian waralaba yang dibuat oleh para pihak adalah perjanjian waralaba standar yang dibuat dan disiapkan oleh franchisor, sehingga terdapat beberapa ketentuan yang kurang atau tidak melindungi kepentingan franchisee. Padahal idealnya suatu perjanjian franchise harus merupakan suatu hubungan yang terkait erat diantara franchisor dan franchisee, dan harus melindungi kepentingan para pihak yang membuatnya."

"Franchise is a legal agreement on delegation of right or special right to market the product or service given by the owner of franchise (franchisor) to other party (franchisee) that arranged in a certain rule. Franchise is glow in Indonesia now, from time to time it keep increasing and being expected keep growing and dominating in domestic market significantly. Local franchise, which is expanding the most now, is supermarket sector because this sector provides daily needs. That expansion mentioned above have to be followed by tax implementation that can arrange variant transaction which relate to franchise until tax potential on it has explored optimum. Thus, if this has explored deeper especially one that connected to income tax on franchise, will give big contribution to country income. Therefore, the main questions in this thesis are: (i) How does the reality of economic on franchise transaction?, (ii) How does tax implementation on franchise in Indonesia nowadays?, (iii) How does PT "X" do the tax obligation on itself as franchisor and its franchisees? (iv) Are there any cases which is related to tax collection system to be improved?Analysis descriptive research type has been done as a research method to support research and study process on that problem analysis, which is describe all information or data gotten from the research first, then all the data are analyzed by income tax law and the correlation with the tax system that fulfill tax principle. Data technical collection was done in the field by interview and From literature study documents, to study related law and other related documents. Interview was done to people who are related to franchise and taxation to get reference on their opinion regarding tax obligation in income tax section.Franchise delegation most of the time is related to a certain payment. There are two kinds and types of franchise and the taxation are known generally which can be requested by franchisor to franchisee that is direct monetary compensation and indirect and non monetary compensation. Firstly there are 4 (four) principle of good taxation suggested by Adam Smith in his book An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of The Wealth Nation to set the right taxation system on the right income tax on franchise. Beside that Mansury suggested for tax income expected suitable with fair principles then fulfillment of horizontal justice condition (5 conditions) and vertical justice (2 conditions) need to be held strongly.Tax auditor who audits franchise obviously does not fully understand on franchise position which is separate Taxpayer so that franchisee income is different from franchisor income. Withholding tax implementation on franchise income have not fulfill equality principle, mainly realization on individual taxpayer, franchisee that most have status as individual taxpayer can not do withheld on payment of paid income on the royalty whereas franchisee that have status as corporate taxpayer have done the withholding the royalty. Other result study is found uncertainty law on determines franchise fee whether royalty category or as technical fee because PT_ "X" withheld with 15 % rate on the other hand the elements in franchise fee put into technical fee category that its effective rate are 6 %. Other aspect appeared is withheld on franchise fee for the amount of 15 % happened on lack of knowledge of PT. "X" whereas for technical fee withholding rate effectively for the amount of 6% showed that the decision of net estimation income is 40 % for too small technical fee on a franchise.At the end suggested tax auditor suppose to know the relation of franchisee with franchisor which is franchisee position is not subsidiary of franchisor. Next suggestion to reach equitable principle, withholding on Tax Income of chapter 23 object the most on income of royalty can not only be done to franchisee that has status as corporate taxpayer but also that individual taxpayer. The determination of type of fee on franchise fee need to be cleared then appear certain law because it emphasized the technical fee element not the royalty element. Review to the estimation of net income to technical fee that valid nowadays also needed so that the estimation percentage of net income different for all types of business."