Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pada periode tahun 2013-2017 telah ditetapkan 3 kali kenaikan Penghasilan Tidak Kena Pajak (PTKP) untuk pajak penghasilan pribadi, namun belum ada studi yang menguji kebijakan tersebut dalam konteks efektivitas dalam meningkatkan pendapatan wajib pajak. Peneliti menguji dampak kenaikan PTKP menggunakan data pendapatan bersih dari Sakernas dan menggunakan metode Pooled OLS untuk mengestimasi pengaruh kenaikan PTKP terhadap pendapatan. Estimasi statistik menunjukkan bahwa kenaikan PTKP berpengaruh positif terhadap pendapatan bersih di kelompok pendapatan bawah dalam 3 kali periode kebijakan. Sedangkan untuk kelompok pendapatan di atasnya hanya signifikan berpengaruh di dua periode pertama. Studi ini memberikan bukti empiris efektivitas dari kebijakan kenaikan PTKP.

---

In the period of 2013-2017 the government has carried out three times Personal Income Tax (PIT) Exemption expansions, but there are no studies that examine the policy in the context of effectiveness in increasing taxpayer income. We tested the impact of PTKP increases using net income data from Sakernas and used the Pooled OLS method to estimate the effect of PIT exemption increases on income. Statistical estimates show that the increase in PIT exemption has a positive effect on net income in the lower income group in 3 policy periods. Whereas the higher income group is only significantly affected the income in the first two periods. This study provides empirical evidence of the effectiveness of PIT exemption expansion policy.

"

"Personal income tax represents personal tax in a way that its imposition is as possible strives to be harmonized with the circumstance of taxpayer. This is generally realized in the form of personal exemptions, which in Indonesia is known as PTKP. Therefore, this thesis will study the method in determining PTKP to reach justice in personal income tax.The thesis aims to look for and explain the reasons and basis that form the background of PTKP adjustment, relationship between Minimum Live Requirement or KHM and amount of PTKP for personal taxpayer, and implication of policy that adjusts the amount of PTKP to Income Tax section 21 accounted by government. Finally, the thesis will also analyze whether the policy of PTKP adjustment may bring justice in tax imposition.Based on experts' theory, a person's income during a period of time is subject to tax. This view has become standard for the ability to pay tax after deducting all expenses incurred to earn, bill, and maintain that person's income. In order to impose fair tax collection, the tax regulations must be enforced to all people without exception. In practice, the tax burden should be tuned to individual's ability to pay. Variety in family burdens may induce variety in the capacity to assume the burdens. As far as personal income taxpayer; there is part of income that should be excluded from tax, especially for the poor. This exclusion should be given out as part of an effort to earn income or to fulfill the minimum live requirement. If some of the minimum live requirement is not available, then the taxpayer may not be able to earn income that would subsequently be subject to tax. The exception is recognized as PTKP, whereas its amount is constantly adapted with the growth of economy, monetary, and price of basic needs annually.Research in this thesis uses descriptive analysis method with qualitative approach on the study of policy. Technique on data collection is in the form of book and field study done through interviews with related parties.The research results in a summary, which implies that the government is not in accordance with the income tax laws that require adjustment of PTKP following any changes in the economy and monetary as well as the price fluctuations of basic needs each year. The government obligation to adjust PTKP accordingly has been replaced by Income Tax Section 21 Accounted by Government. The policy is passed only to taxpayer who earns income from work. Thus, the policy has caused injustice in the system of personal income tax. PTKP for taxpayer in the amount of Rp 1.000.000; (one million rupiah) monthly has been in accordance with current KHM. However, additional PTKP for married couple and their burdens is not suitable with recent situation of economy and monetary as well as price of basic needs. With the existence of policy to adjust PTKP in 2005, Income Tax Section 21 Accounted by Government does not affect the calculation of Income Tax Section 21 for those who owe. So far, PTKP policy has not served justice in tax imposition. Moreover, the policy still needs much attention to be harmonized with the principality of justice.Preferably, adjustment on PTKP is conducted each year so that PTKP policy is not left behind by any changes in basic needs and economical and monetary growth. Also, in determining PTKP, the government should specify more appropriate amount of PTKP to be in accordance with economy, monetary, and taxpayer KHM. Additional PTKP for married couple and their burdens should be around 50% of PTKP instead of 10%. Furthermore, Income Tax Section 21 Accounted by Government should be abolished to provide rule of law and justice for personal taxpayer. In drafting future PTKP policy, effort should be maximized to reach justice in aspects such as: paying more attention to PTKP for daily and weekly paid workers as well as other irregular workers, giving additional PTKP for the burdens and not only in the beginning of tax year, and lastly to allow additional PTKP for siblings of taxpayer in consideration of certain circumstances."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaruh tarif pajak progresif terhadap perilaku penggelapan pajak penghasilan orang pribadi di Indonesia. Sampel penelitian yang digunakan merupakan data hasil audit pajak Wajib Pajak Orang Pribadi di seluruh Indonesia untuk Tahun Pajak 2001 hingga 2012. Hasil analisis regresi Model Tobit dengan pooled data menunjukkan bahwa penerapan sistem tarif progresif cenderung mendorong perilaku penggelapan pajak di Indonesia. Demikian pula perubahan kebijakan tarif pajak dan braket lapisan penghasilan kena pajak yang ditetapkan melalui Undang-Undang Pajak Penghasilan Nomor 36 Tahun 2008 turut serta berkontribusi terhadap tingkat penggelapan pajak. Oleh karena itu, besaran Marginal Tax Rates maupun rentang braket penghasilan kena pajak menjadi hal yang krusial dalam menekan penggelapan pajak.

---

The aim of this research was finding out how the progressive personal income tax had impact on the tax evasion behavior in Indonesia. The research sample used was the tax audit result data of personal taxpayer in the whole Indonesia for tax year 2001 to 2012. The result of Tobit Model regression analysis with pooled data showed that the progressive tariff system was inclined to drive tax evasion behavior in Indonesia. Likewise, the change of tax rates and taxable income bracket enforced through the Law of Income Tax No. 36 of 2008 also contributed on the level of tax evasion in Indonesia. Therefore, the magnitude of Marginal Tax Rates as well as the range of taxable income bracket are being crucial on suppressing tax evasion."

"[ABSTRAKTarif pajak tetap telah menjadi salah satu reformasi pajak yang popular di banyak negara. Kesederhanaan dan tarif pajak tetap yang rendah dapat mengurangi biaya kepatuhan, mengurangi penggelapan pajak, mengurangi disintesif, dan memberikan rasa keadilan. Namun tarif pajak tetap juga diyakini dapat meningkatkan ketimpangan pendapatan di masyarakat. Penelitian ini menguji efek dari tarif tetap pajak penghasilan pribadi terhadap ketimpangan pendapatan di Indonesia dengan menggunakan Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional (Susenas) tahun 2012. Dengan menggunakan teknik simulasi mikro, diketahui bahwa efek dari tarif tetap pajak penghasilan pribadi bisa mengakibatkan peningkatan atau penurunan tingkat ketimpangan pendapatan. Penerapan tarif pajak tetap di bawah 9% akan menghasilkan peningkatan ketimpangan pendapatan; Sebaliknya, jika tarif pajak rata lebih dari 10% diterapkan, ketimpangan pendapatan akan berkurang. Dua hasil yang berbeda ini disebabkan lebih dari 53% populasi rumah tangga memiliki penghasilan di bawah penghasilan tidak kena pajak karena beberapa pengurangan dan pengecualian penghasilan yang dikenakan pajak.

---

ABSTRACTA flat tax rate has become a popular tax reform in many countries. Simplicity and a lower flat tax rate could reduce compliance costs, reduce evasion, reduce disincentives, and provide fairness. However, it is strongly believed that a flat tax rate could increase inequality in a society. This study examines the effect of a personal income flat tax rate on inequality in Indonesia by using National Socioeconomic Survey (Susenas, Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional) 2012. Using a microsimulation technique, the effect of a flat tax rate on personal income could result in an increase or decrease on inequality. Applying a flat tax rate below 9% will result in an increase in inequality; in contrast, if a flat tax rate of more than 10% is applied, inequality will decrease. These two different results take place because more than 53% of households in the population have an income below the taxable tax due to the some deductions and exemptions.;A flat tax rate has become a popular tax reform in many countries. Simplicity and a lower flat tax rate could reduce compliance costs, reduce evasion, reduce disincentives, and provide fairness. However, it is strongly believed that a flat tax rate could increase inequality in a society. This study examines the effect of a personal income flat tax rate on inequality in Indonesia by using National Socioeconomic Survey (Susenas, Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional) 2012. Using a microsimulation technique, the effect of a flat tax rate on personal income could result in an increase or decrease on inequality. Applying a flat tax rate below 9% will result in an increase in inequality; in contrast, if a flat tax rate of more than 10% is applied, inequality will decrease. These two different results take place because more than 53% of households in the population have an income below the taxable tax due to the some deductions and exemptions., A flat tax rate has become a popular tax reform in many countries. Simplicity and a lower flat tax rate could reduce compliance costs, reduce evasion, reduce disincentives, and provide fairness. However, it is strongly believed that a flat tax rate could increase inequality in a society. This study examines the effect of a personal income flat tax rate on inequality in Indonesia by using National Socioeconomic Survey (Susenas, Survei Sosial Ekonomi Nasional) 2012. Using a microsimulation technique, the effect of a flat tax rate on personal income could result in an increase or decrease on inequality. Applying a flat tax rate below 9% will result in an increase in inequality; in contrast, if a flat tax rate of more than 10% is applied, inequality will decrease. These two different results take place because more than 53% of households in the population have an income below the taxable tax due to the some deductions and exemptions.]"

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai analisis formulasi kebijakan pajak pengecualian pengenaan pajak penghasilan atas dividen luar negeri yang diterima oleh wajib pajak orang pribadi. Pengecualian pengenaan pajak penghasilan atas dividen luar negeri bagi wajib pajak orang pribadi yang terjadi akibat pengesahan Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 mengindikasikan terjadinya pergeseran sistem pajak Indonesia yang semula menganut sistem pajak worldwide menjadi sistem pajak semi teritorial. Pengeleminasian pajak penghasilan atas dividen merupakan salah satu kebijakan yang cukup krusial mengingat proporsi penerimaan pajak Indonesia masih mengandalkan dari sektor pajak penghasilan. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian kualitatif bersifat deskriptif. Kebijakan ini belum sepenuhnya melalui tahapan proses formulasi kebijakan akibat tidak ditemukannya alternatif kebijakan masalah. Kebijakan pengecualian dividen dari luar negeri yang diterima oleh wajib pajak pribadi dilatarbelakangi oleh kondisi laju pertumbuhan perekonomian Indonesia bergerak lamban yang disebabkan oleh daya saing Indonesia yang dinilai rendah, terjadinya perlambatan pertumbuhan ekonomi secara global, kurang meratanya pertumbuhan ekonomi antar daerah di Indonesia, kurang optimalnya kapasitas produksi nasional yang disebabkan oleh kurang berkembangnya industri manufaktur, permasalahan efektifitas reformasi birokrasi serta tata kelola data yang dinilai masih kurang baik, sehingga menghambat kemudahan dalam berusaha (ease of doing business).

---

This study discusses to analyze the formulation tax policy of exemption from the imposition of income tax on foreign dividends received by individual taxpayers. The exemption of income tax on foreign dividends for individual taxpayers that occurred as a result of the ratification of Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2020 indicates a shift in the Indonesian tax system which originally adhered to the worldwide tax system to a semi-territorial tax system. Elimination of income tax on dividends is one of the most crucial policies considering the proportion of Indonesia's tax revenue still relies on the income tax sector. This research is a descriptive qualitative research. This policy has not yet fully gone through the stages of the policy formulation process due to the absence of alternative policy problems. The policy of exemption from foreign dividends received by private taxpayers is motivated by the condition of Indonesia’s slow pace of economic growth due to Indonesia’s low competitiveness, global economic slowdown, uneven economic growth among regions in Indonesia, less than optimal capacity. National production caused by the lack of development of the manufacturing industry, problems in the effectiveness of bureaucratic reform and data management which are considered to be still not good, thus hampering the ease of doing business. However, this policy still needs to be reviewed considering the self-assessment system adopted by the Indonesian tax system and improvements in the administration side in terms of supporting regulations regarding investment provisions made outside of financial institutions to avoid tax evasion loopholes and tax disputes."

"Laporan magang ini membahas evaluasi pelaporan SPT Tahunan Pajak Penghasilan Orang Pribadi yang dilakukan oleh divisi Individual Tax DV Indonesia. Subjek evaluasi laporan magang ini adalah seorang ekspatriat dari India bernama Mr. B yang dipilih berdasarkan keunikan kasusnya yang melaporkan SPT Tahunan berstatus Kurang Bayar meskipun hanya menerima penghasilan dari satu pemberi kerja dan sudah dipotong PPh 21. Hasil evaluasi menunjukkan perlakuan perpajakan sebagai Wajib Pajaka Dalam Negeri, penghitungan pajak penghasilan terutang, pengisian Formulir SPT Tahunan, pembayaran PPh kurang bayar hingga pelaporan SPT Tahunan secara e-filing sudah dilakukan sesuai dengan peraturan perpajakan yang berlaku di Indonesia. DV Indonesia juga melakukan prosedur verifikasi data penghasilan dan harta untuk menjamin pengisian SPT Tahunan Mr. B telah memenuhi kriteria benar, lengkap dan jelas. Meskipun bukan ranah konsultan pajak, perhitungan PPh 21 yang dilakukan oleh pemberi kerja juga dibahas pada laporan magang ini untuk mencari penyebab masih terdapatnya pajak kurang bayar pada SPT Tahunan Mr. B.

---

This internship report discusses the evaluation of reporting of Individual Annual Income Tax Return conducted by the Individual Tax division of DV Indonesia. The subject of this internship report evaluation is an expatriate from India named Mr. B, who was chosen based on the uniqueness of his case, who reported his Annual SPT underpayment status even though he only received income from one employer and had been deducted with Income Tax Art. 21. The evaluation results show that the tax treatment as a domestic taxpayer, the calculation of income tax payable, the filling of the Annual Income Tax Return, the payment of underpaid income tax to the reporting of the Annual Income Tax Return through e-filing have been carried out in accordance with the applicable tax regulations in Indonesia. DV Indonesia also performs procedures for verifying income and assets data to ensure that the filling of Mr. B's Annual Income Tax Return has met the correct, complete and clear criteria. The calculation of Income Tax Art. 21 is also discussed in this internship report, although it is not the realm of tax consultants to find out the cause of the underpayment income tax in Mr. B' Annual Income Tax Return."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengevaluasi efektivitas Insentif Pajak Peghasilan Impor dalam menjaga produktivitas wajib pajak konstruksi di KPP Madya Kota Bekasi pada Masa Pandemi. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan post-positivisme dengan mix-method, yang meliputi metode kuantitatif dan kualitatif. Metode kuantitatif mengadopsi analisis difference-in-differences. Metode tersebut mengukur pengaruh perlakuan rata-rata terhadap produktivitas wajib pajak konstruksi sebelum dan sesudah pelaksanaan. Untuk memperkuat analisis kuantitatif, penelitian ini menggunakan analisis kualitatif berupa wawancara mendalam untuk mengkonfirmasi hasil analisis kuantitatif. Sektor konstruksi dipilih sebagai objek penelitian karena menjadi sektor yang paling ditargetkan oleh Pemerintah dalam kebijakan insentif. Sementara itu, penelitian ini memilih KPP Madya Kota Bekasi karena mengalami penurunan produktivitas paling rendah selama masa Pandemi. Studi menyimpulkan bahwa Insentif Pajak Penghasilan Impor tidak efektif dalam menjaga produktivitas wajib pajak konstruksi di KPP Madya Kota Bekasi. Keefektifan yang tidak signifikan tersebut disebabkan oleh tingkat utilisasi yang rendah, dengan 96% wajib pajak konstruksi tidak memanfaatkan insentif tersebut. Rendahnya utilisasi ini disebabkan kurangnya minat dari wajib pajak konstruksi dan nilai insentif pajak yang relatif kecil. Namun, insentif pajak ini dapat secara efektif mempertahankan Produktivitas Total Factor dan Produktivitas Tenaga Kerja dari wajib pajak konstruksi yang memanfaatkan insentif tersebut. Oleh karena itu, penelitian ini merekomendasikan agar pemerintah memantau tingkat pemanfaatan dan mengukur efektivitas insentif pajak sebelum mempertimbangkan penerapannya kembali apabila terjadi penurunan produktivitas wajib pajak konstruksi.

---

This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Income Tax Incentive on Imports in maintaining the productivity of construction taxpayers in the Kota Bekasi Medium Tax Office during the Pandemic. It uses a post-positivism approach with a mixed method, which includes quantitative and qualitative methods. The quantitative method adopts the difference-in-differences analysis. Such a method measures the average treatment effect of the construction taxpayers’ productivity before and after the implementation. To strengthen the quantitative analysis, this thesis uses qualitative analysis in the form of in-depth interviews to confirm the quantitative result. The construction sector is selected as the research object since it becomes the Government’s most targeted sector under the incentive policy. Meanwhile, this study selected the Kota Bekasi Medium Tax Office because it faced the lowest decline during the Pandemic. The study concludes that the Income Tax Incentive on Imports is insignificantly effective in maintaining the productivity of construction taxpayers in the Kota Bekasi Medium Tax Office. This insignificant effectiveness is attributed to the low utilisation rate, with 96% of construction taxpayers not utilising the incentive. The low utilisation is due to a lack of interest from construction taxpayers and the limited value of the tax incentive. However, such an incentive could effectively maintain the Total Factor Productivity and Labour Productivity of the construction taxpayers utilising the incentive. Therefore, this study recommends that the Government monitor utilisation levels and promptly assess the tax incentive's effectiveness before considering its re-implementation during construction taxpayers’ productivity decline."

"[ABSTRAKPajak di Indonesia merupakan kontributor terbesar total penerimaan pemerintah, sementara pajak penghasilan orang pribadi (PPh OP) hanya berkontribusi sekitar 10% dari total penerimaan pajak nasional. Banyak peneliti yang telah menguji hubungan antara tarif progresif PPh OP dan ketimpangan pendapatan. Penelitian ini menginvestigasi dampak dari tarif progresif PPh OP terhadap distribusi pendapatan di Indonesia menggunakan data mikro Susenas 2006 dan 2011. Dengan dekomposisi data Susenas berdasarkan faktor komponen: pengeluaran konsumsi, pajak penghasilan, dan tabungan, efek dari perubahan komponen tersebut terhadap ketimpangan total pendapatan dapat diketahui. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa satu persen kenaikan komponen PPh OP di Indonesia cenderung untuk meningkatkan indeks Gini ketimpangan total pendapatan sebesar 1,4% di 2006 dan 1,8% di 2011. Hasil ini mengindikasikan bahwa struktur PPh OP tahun 2011 sedikit berkontribusi terhadap meningkatnya ketimpangan pendapatan. Dengan kata lain, PPh OP di Indonesia memiliki efek meningkatkan indeks Gini dari ketimpangan total pendapatan. Namun, komponen pengeluaran konsumsi memiliki efek menurunkan indeks Gini sampai dengan 6,4%.

---

ABSTRACTTax in Indonesia contributes as the largest share to total government revenue while personal income tax (PIT) only contributes nearly 10 percent to total national tax revenue. Many researchers have tried to examine the correlation between progressive personal income taxation and income inequality. This research investigates the impact of progressive PIT rates on income distribution in Indonesia by using micro data Susenas 2006 and 2011. By decomposing Susenas data by factor components: consumption expenditure, income tax, and savings, the effect of a marginal change on these components on total income inequality are captured. This study finds that a one percent increase in income tax in Indonesia tends to increase the Gini index of total income inequality 1.4% in 2006 and 1.8% in 2011. This implies that the income tax structure in 2011 slightly increases its contribution to the income inequality. In other words, income tax in Indonesia has unequalizing effect to the Gini index of total income inequality. However, consumption expenditure has the equalizing effect to the Gini index up to 6.4%.;Tax in Indonesia contributes as the largest share to total government revenue while personal income tax (PIT) only contributes nearly 10 percent to total national tax revenue. Many researchers have tried to examine the correlation between progressive personal income taxation and income inequality. This research investigates the impact of progressive PIT rates on income distribution in Indonesia by using micro data Susenas 2006 and 2011. By decomposing Susenas data by factor components: consumption expenditure, income tax, and savings, the effect of a marginal change on these components on total income inequality are captured. This study finds that a one percent increase in income tax in Indonesia tends to increase the Gini index of total income inequality 1.4% in 2006 and 1.8% in 2011. This implies that the income tax structure in 2011 slightly increases its contribution to the income inequality. In other words, income tax in Indonesia has unequalizing effect to the Gini index of total income inequality. However, consumption expenditure has the equalizing effect to the Gini index up to 6.4%., Tax in Indonesia contributes as the largest share to total government revenue while personal income tax (PIT) only contributes nearly 10 percent to total national tax revenue. Many researchers have tried to examine the correlation between progressive personal income taxation and income inequality. This research investigates the impact of progressive PIT rates on income distribution in Indonesia by using micro data Susenas 2006 and 2011. By decomposing Susenas data by factor components: consumption expenditure, income tax, and savings, the effect of a marginal change on these components on total income inequality are captured. This study finds that a one percent increase in income tax in Indonesia tends to increase the Gini index of total income inequality 1.4% in 2006 and 1.8% in 2011. This implies that the income tax structure in 2011 slightly increases its contribution to the income inequality. In other words, income tax in Indonesia has unequalizing effect to the Gini index of total income inequality. However, consumption expenditure has the equalizing effect to the Gini index up to 6.4%.]"

"Studi ini menganalisis dampak reformasi Pajak Penghasilan badan (PPh badan) dan Pajak Pertambahan Nilai (PPN) terhadap perekonomian Indonesia dengan menggunakan model Computable General Equilibrium (CGE). Hasil simulasi menunjukkan bahwa penurunan tarif PPh badan dan kenaikan tarif PPN secara bersamaan meningkatkan konsumsi pemerintah dan investasi tetapi menurunkan konsumsi swasta, PDB, dan pendapatan di semua kelompok rumah tangga dengan penurunan terbesar di kelompok rumah tangga perdesaan. Sektor yang mengalami peningkatan output terbesar antara lain sektor administrasi pemerintahan, pertahanan, dan jaminan sosial wajib, sektor jasa pendidikan, dan sektor jasa kesehatan dan kegiatan sosial

---

This study analyzes the impact of Corporate Income Tax and VAT reforms on the Indonesian economy using the Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) model. The simulation results showed that a decrease in the Corporate Income Tax rate and an increase in the VAT rate simultaneously increased government consumption and investment but decreased private consumption, GDP, and incomes in all household groups with the largest decline in the rural household group. The sectors that experienced the greatest increase in output included the government administration, defense, and compulsory social security sectors, the education service sector, and the health services and social activities sector."

"ABSTRAKPenghasilan Tidak Kena Pajak PTKP merupakan perlindungan atas penghasilan minimum yang akan digunakan untuk memenuhi kebutuhan minimum wajib pajak dan jumlah tanggungan yang dimilikinya. Adanya kebijakan PTKP tahun 2016 memiliki pengaruh bagi wajib pajak dan pemberi kerja. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kebijakan penyesuian PTKP tahun 2016 bagi kemampuan membayar wajib pajak jika ditinjau dari Kebutuhan Hidup Layak serta implikasi administrasti perpajakan atas penyesuaian PTKP di pertengahan tahun ditinjau dari asas ease of administration dengan studi kasus PT EJK. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan melakukan studi pustaka serta studi lapangan berupa wawancara. Pendekatan penelitian yang digunakan adalah pendekatan penelitian kualitatif. Hasil dari penelitian ini yakni jumlah PTKP yang diatur dalam PMK 101/PMK.010/2016 belum mampu memberikan perlindungan terhadap penghasilan yang digunakan oleh wajib pajak beserta tanggungannya untuk memenuhi kebutuhan hidup layaknya. Bagi pemberi kerja adanya penyesuaian PTKP tahun 2016 yang ditetapkan dipertengahan tahun dan berlaku surut tidak mencerminkan kebijakan pajak yang sesuai dengan asas ease of administration karena tidak memberikan kenyamanan bagi pemberi kerja dan meningkatkan cost of compliance pemberi kerja seperti direct money, time costs, dan psychological cost.

---

ABSTRACT

Personal Exemption is a protection against minimum income that will be used to meet the minimum taxpayer requirement and the number of dependents it has. The existence of Personal Exemption Adjustment Policy in 2016 has influence for taxpayers and employers. This study aims to analyze the policy of Personal Exemption adjustment in 2016 for the ability to pay taxpayers in terms of Decent Living Needs and tax administration implications for the adjustment of Personal Exemption in the middle of the year in terms of ease of administration with case study PT EJK. This research is done by doing a study of the literature and field studies in the form of an interview. The research approach used is a qualitative research approach. The result of this research is that the number of personal exemption that regulated in PMK 101 PMK.010 2016 has not been able to provide protection to the income used by the taxpayers and their dependents to fulfill their life needs. For the employer, the adjustment of Personal Exemption in 2016 determined in the middle of the year and retroactive does not reflect the tax policies in accordance with the principle of ease of administration because it does not provide comfort for the employer and increases the cost of compliance of the employer either direct money, time costs, and psychological cost."