Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Mengantisipasi peningkatan penerimaan pajak sebagai sumber dana bagi APBN, Direktorat Jenderal Pajak mengupayakan perbaikan di berbagai aspek, salah satunya dengan menempuh reformasi perpajakan. Reformasi Perpajakan khususnya Reformasi Peraturan dan Kebijakan Perpajakan dalam tubuh Direktorat Jenderal Pajak memberikan dampak pada tuntutan kesetaraan antara Wajib Pajak dan Fiskus serta tuntutan pemberian fasilitas perpajakan seperti pengampunan pajak bagi Wajib Pajak. Pengampunan Pajak sebenarnya bukan hal baru di Indonesia, pengalaman pertama pengampunan pajak terjadi melalui Penetapan Presiden RI Nomor 5 Tahun 1964 tentang Peraturan Pengampunan Pajak dan kedua pada tahun 1984 dengan Keputusan Presiden Nomor 26 Tahun 1984 tentang Pengampunan Pajak. Tetapi sejarah mencatat program pengampunan pajak tersebut tidak efektif karena adanya keenganan Wajib Pajak dan tidak tertatanya sistem administrasi perpajakan. Belajar dari pengalaman dan tuntutan keuangan negara, sudah sewajarnya pengampunan pajak diberlakukan dan penetapan pada tingkatan Undang-undang. Di dalam Undang-Undang No 28 Tahun 2007 tentang Perubahan Ketiga Undang-undang No 6 Tahun 1983 Tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan (UU KUP) terdapat ketentuan Pasal 37A, dikenal dengan Kebijakan Sunsel Policy, yang memberikan ruang kepada Wajib Pajak untuk memperoleh fasilitas pegampunan pajak. Hal yang perlu dicermati adalah pada aspek substansi Kebijakan Sunsel Policy itu sendiri sebagai perangkat hukum yang diharapkan memberi jaminan keadilan dan kepastian hukum yang seimbang antara wewenang Negara dalam melaksanakan pemungutan pajak, termasuk penerapan sanksi dengan perlindungan hukum terhadap hak-hak Wajib Pajak. Suatu kebijakan pajak dikatakan baik bila secara teknis dapat diimplementasikan melalui peraturan perundang-undangan yang praktis atau melalui prosedur administrasi yang efisien. Adapun filosofi dari Kebijakan Sunsel Policy adalah bahwa Pemerintah memasukan satu pasal baru, yaitu Pasal 37A dalam UU KUP untuk memberikan kesempatan kepada Wajib Pajak yang hingga saat ini belum memenuhi kewajiban perpajakannya secara benar agar secara sukarela melaporkan atau membetulkan surat pemberitahuan tahunan pajak penghasilan secara benar, jelas, dan lengkap dengan menjamin pengurangan/penghapusan sanksi atas bunga keterlambatan pelunasan pajak tidak/belum sepenuhnya dibayar. Kebijakan Sunsel Policy merupakan hasil kompromi antara kepentingan Direktorat Jenderal Pajak untuk memperluas base data Wajib Pajak dalam rangka mengamankan target penerimaan Negara dengan kepentingan Wajib Pajak yang menginginkan tax amnesty dan kesetaraan antara Wajib Pajak dan aparat pajak. ......Anticipating the increase of tax revenue as the revenue source for the budget, Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) have established improvement in all aspect, one of these efforts was tax reform. Tax Reform particulariy in Tax Regulation and Policy Reform in DGT have caused effect which requires the equality between tax payer and tax officer and requires tax facilities such as tax amnesty. Indonesia had implemented the tax amnesty program under President Decree No 5 of 1964 Concerning Tax Amnesty Regulation and President Decree No 26 of 1984 Concerning Tax Amnesty. The History reveals that these tax amnesties program were ineffective because of unwillingness of tax payers and unorganized of tax administration system. Learning from the failure and the budget requirement, tax amnesty should be implemented and applicable in the law level. Consolidation of Law of the Republic Indonesia Number 6 of 1983 Concerning General Provisions and Tax Procedures As Lastiy Amended By Law Number 28 of 2007 (UU KUP) consist Article 37A, better known as Sunset Policy, which give an opportunity to tax payers to have tax amnesty. The thing that we should notice carefully is the substance of Sunset Policy itself as a law instrument that expected giving equality and certainty which is equivalent between State’s responsibility to conduct tax collection, including claim of administration penaity and State’s law protection to tax payer’s right. A tax policy is concluded to be well constructed tf the policy could be implemented technically by having uncomplicated regulations or having an efficient administration procedure. The philosophy of Sunset Policy is Government inserted new article, article 37A in UU KUP to give an opportunity to tax subjects who have not correctfy fulfilled their taxation obligations up to now to report or revise their annual income tax notification letters in a correct, clear, and complete manner by the granting of reductions or omissions in administrative sanctions in the form of interests over taxes which have not been paid in full or in part. Sunset Policy is a compromised result between DGT’s interest to broader tax payer’s data base in order to guard the budget revenue and tax payer’s interest to require tax amnesty and the equalily between tax payer and tax officer.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai pelaksanaan kewajiban pasca pengampunan pajak dan Pengungkapan Aset Sukarela dengan Tarif Final (Pas Final) ditinjau dari asas kemudahan administrasi dengan studi kasus Kantor Pelayanan Pajak Pratama Jakarta Gambir Tiga. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk menganalisis penerapan kewajiban pasca pengampunan pajak dan Pas Final ditinjau dari asas kemudahan administrasi serta mengetahui kendala yang dihadapi dalam pelaksanaannya di KPP Pratama Gambir Tiga. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif, menyimpulkan bahwa pengalihan dan realisasi investasi dan penempatan harta tambahan, Pas Final, dan pengawasan pasca pengampunan pajak sudah memenuhi keempat asas kemudahan administrasi, sedangkan pelaporan berkala harta tambahan belum sepenuhnya memenuhi dikarenakan pelaporan secara elektronik (e-reporting) belum memenuhi asas certainty. Kendala yang dihadapi Wajib Pajak yaitu saat validasi macro pada softcopy formulir laporan harta dan gangguan jaringan server atau traffic, sedangkan kendala yang dihadapi fiskus yaitu sulitnya mengawasi jenis harta tertentu yang mobilitas kepemilikannya mudah berpindah dan perbedaan lokasi Wajib Pajak dengan lokasi harta. Saran yang diberikan antara lain DJP disarankan untuk menerbitkan peraturan pelaksana mengenai e-reporting, menambah kapasitas bandwith, dan melakukan pengawasan khusus kepada Wajib Pajak yang mengikuti pengampunan pajak. Di sisi lain, Wajib Pajak disarankan untuk menyampaikan laporan berkala harta tambahan jauh hari sebelum jatuh tempo pelaporan.

---

ABSTRACT
This research discusses the application of post tax amnesty obligations and Pas Final in terms of ease of administration principle with study case in Tax Office Jakarta Gambir Tiga. The purpose of this research is to analyze the application of post tax amnesty obligations and Pas Final in terms of ease of administration principle as well as knowing the obstacles faced in the application at Tax Office Jakarta Gambir Tiga. This research uses a qualitative method, concludes that the application of post tax amnety obligations and Pas Final have not fully met the ease of administration principle because the policy of online reporting (e-reporting) has not met certainty principle, but it has met the other principles which are convenience, efficiency, and simplicity. The obstacles faced by the taxpayer when they file the report by online (e-reporting) is macro validation on softcopy form often errors and for tax authorities is when conducting taxpayer and assets supervision there is difficulty in monitoring certain types of assets whose ownership mobility is easy to move and also the difference of taxpayer location with the location of the assets. Directorate General of Taxes should release an additional regulation for e-reporting, increase the bandwidth capacity, and distinguish and classify supervision between taxpayer who participated in tax amnesty with those who do not. While for taxpayer, they should report far before the due date.

Abstrak :
Masih banyak Wajib Pajak yang tidak patuh melaporkan dan membayar utang pajaknya, dengan diterapkannya sistem pemungutan pajak self assessment. Maka dari itu, lahirlah program pengampunan pajak 2016 dengan bentuk penghapusan pajak yang terutang, tidak dikenakan sanksi administrasi dan pidana bagi Wajib Pajak yang melaporkan harta yang belum dibayar pajaknya. Atas keringanan yang diberikan tersebut, sudah seyogianya pemerintah mengatur pelaksanaan pengampunan pajak dengan benar hingga pengaturan atas penyelesaian sengketa terkait yang timbul. Skripsi ini membahas pengaturan upaya hukum sengketa. Tax Amnesty di Indonesia yang tertuang dalam Undang-Undang Pengampunan Pajak dan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan sebagai peraturan pelaksana, ditinjau dari pemenuhan asas kepastian hukum. Penelitian penulis menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif dengan alat pengumpulan data berupa studi dokumen terdiri dari bahan hukum primer dan sekunder, diantaranya dilakukan wawancara dengan narasumber terkait. Permasalahan berupa tidak terciptanya kepastian hukum karena pengaturan upaya hukum dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang secara hierarki peraturan berada dibawah Undang-Undang, mengatur berlainan. Ketidaksinkronan pengaturan menimbulkan dualisme hukum terhadap Wajib Pajak selaku pihak yang mengajukan upaya hukum. Dalam Undang-Undang Pengampunan Pajak, segala sengketa terkait Tax Amnesty diselesaikan melalui upaya gugatan ke Pengadilan Pajak, sedangkan ketentuan tambahan dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan, atas sengketa SKPKB yang terbit dalam hal pelaksanaan pengampunan pajak, diselesaikan melalui upaya hukum sebagaimana dalam Undang-Undang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan, yakni keberatan, kemudian banding, atau permohonan pembatalan/pengurangan atas Surat Ketetapan Pajak, disamping upaya gugatan langsung.  Maka dari itu, penulis menyarankan adanya penyempunaan pengaturan berupa revisi Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2016 tentang Pengampunan Pajak (Tax Amnesty) khususnya pada bagian pengaturan upaya hukum. ......There are a lot of taxpayers who are not compliant to report and pay their tax arrears with the applied tax collection system called self-assessment. Consequently, a tax amnesty program was made in 2016 in a form of the elimination of tax payable-it is not subject to administrative and criminal sanctions for taxpayers who report assets which taxes have not been paid. With the remission given, it is in the government`s part to control things from the implementation of tax amnesty properly to the arrangements for resolving related arising disputes. This research paper discusses the regulation of legal efforts regarding disputes related to the Tax Amnesty in Indonesia which is stated in the Tax Amnesty Law and the Minister of Finance Regulation as the implementing regulation in terms of fulfilling the principle of legal certainty. This research uses juridical-normative method with data collection tools in the form of document studies consisting of primary and secondary legal materials, including interviews with related sources. The problem in the form of not creating legal certainty is because the regulation of legal efforts in the Minister of Finance Regulation, which is in the hierarchy of regulations under the Law, regulates differently. Irregularities in the regulation have led to legal dualism of taxpayers as those who submit legal remedies. In the Tax Amnesty Law, all disputes related to Tax Amnesty are resolved through a lawsuit to the Tax Court, while additional provisions in the Minister of Finance Regulation regarding Notice of Tax Underpayment Assessment disputes issued in the case of tax amnesty implementation are settled through legal remedies as in the Law on General Provisions Act and Tax Procedures, namely objections, then appeals, or cancellation/reduction requests for Notice of Tax Assessment, in addition to direct claims. Therefore, author suggests that there should be a refinement regarding regulations in the form of revisions to Law No. 11 of 2016 concerning Tax Amnesty, especially in the regulation of legal efforts.

Abstrak :
In order to increased voluntary disclosure from the tax payer, the Indonesian government trough Directorate General of Tax making a tax reforms and the policy that the government choose is by using tax amnesty policy. At the year 1984 the government has been issued a tax amnesty policy, but this policy failed in implementation and the government never evaluated the failure. At 2008 the government issuing the same tax amnesty policy and it called sunset policy. This research will explain about government comparison when issuing tax amnesty policy at the year 1984 and the year 2008, what exactly becomes the major obstacle on the implementation of the tax amnesty policy at the year 1984, and what are the differences between tax amnesties that were used at 1984 with tax amnesty that used in 2008. The approach used in this research is qualitative approach. The goal is to find an understanding about tax amnesty policy that implemented in Indonesia since 1984 until 2008. The research type is descriptive because the researcher tries to give a detailed description about tax amnesty policy that implemented in Indonesia since 1984 until 2008. Data collected in this research is by trough in depth interview with Directorate General of Tax, academic, tax payer, and tax expert. Beside that the data was also collected trough study literature, books, magazine, journals, and the tax regulation which are related to tax amnesty at the year 1984 and 2008. The result from this research found that the government rationale issuing tax amnesty policy at the year 1984 because of the change of tax system in Indonesia from official assessment system to self assessment system. The change of tax system needs honesty and voluntary disclosure from every tax payer. Based on that reason, the government issuing tax amnesty policy. At the year 2008 the government tries to collect taxation data from Indonesian citizen who already registered as tax payer and the citizen who are not registered as tax payer. In order to make the tax payer willing to declare the taxation data that they have, government issuing tax amnesty policy. The obstacle on the implementation of tax amnesty at the year 1984 are because the limitation of taxation data, information technology, tax authorities who are not ready with this policy, and public perception of unfairness in tax amnesty. The main differences between tax amnesty at the year 1984 and 2008 is what the government forgiven. At the year 1984 the government forgives all the tax liabilities including interest, penalties, and other prosecution, whereas tax amnesty at the year 2008 only forgive the interest.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Notaris/PPAT merupakan salah satu pihak yang berperan dalam program Pengampunan Pajak di Indonesia. Salah satu peran Notaris/PPAT yang terdapat dalam Undang-Undang Pengampunan Pajak adalah merahasiakan data dan informasi wajib pajak peserta Pengampunan Pajak. Namun, di sisi lain, Notaris/PPAT juga memiliki kewajiban untuk melakukan pelaporan Transaksi Keuangan Mencurigan. Pelaporan Transaksi Keuangan Mencurigakan perlu dilakukan agar program Pengampunan Pajak tidak dijadikan sebagai suatu sarana Pencucian Uang. Permasalahan dalam tesis ini yaitu perlindungan hukum terhadap Notaris/PPAT yang melakukan pelaporan Transaksi Keuangan Mencurigakan Wajib Pajak peserta Pengampunan Pajak dan kedudukan akta Notaris terkait Pengampunan Pajak sebagai dasar penyelidikan, penyidikan, dan penuntutan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang yang dilakukan oleh Wajib Pajak peserta Pengampunan Pajak. Metode penelitian dalam tesis ini adalah yuridis-normatif dengan melihat norma-norma hukum yang terdapat dalam peraturan perundang-undangan khususnya Undang-Undang Pengampunan Pajak. Hasil penelitian dalam tesis ini yaitu bahwa Notaris/PPAT seharusnya diwajibkan melaporkan Transaksi Keuangan Mencurigakan Wajib Pajak peserta Pengampunan Pajak dan telah terdapat perlindungan hukum bagi Notaris/PPAT yang melaporkan tersebut serta akta Notaris/PPAT seharusnya dapat dijadikan dasar penyelidikan, penyidikan dan penuntutan Tindak Pidana Pencucian Uang terkait Pengampunan Pajak.

---

ABSTRACT
Notary have a role in Tax Amnesty Program in Indonesia. One of Notary rsquo s role described in Tax Amnesty Law is confidential of Taxpayer rsquo s data and informations. On the otherside, Notary also have an obligation to report Suspicious Financial Transaction. Suspicious Financial Transaction Report is required to make Tax Amnesty Program clear from any Money Laundering process. The problems in this thesis are law protection for Notary who report Suspicious Financial Transaction of Taxpayer participating in Tax Amnesty Program and legal standing of Notary rsquo s deed as a basis for investigation and prosecution of Money Laundering crime conducted by Tax Amnesty rsquo s Taxpayer. This thesis rsquo s method is juridical normative by viewing legal norms from regulations, especially Tax Amnesty Law. The result of this thesis are Notary should be required to report Suspicious Financial Transaction of Taxpayers participating in Tax Amnesty Program and there are enough law protections for Notary who report that and also Notary rsquo s deed should be used as a basis for investigation and prosecution of Money Laundering crime conducted by Tax Amnesty rsquo s Taxpayer.

Abstrak :
Skripsi ini menganalisis ketentuan pengakuan harta aset dan kewajiban liabilitas tambahan dalam rangka pengampunan pajak di Indonesia yang ditetapkan dalam Undang-undang No. 11 Tahun 2016 dan Pernyataan Standar Akuntansi Keuangan No. 70 PSAK 70 . Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan tujuan untuk mendapatkan pemahaman mendalam mengenai fenomena perbedaan antara ketentuan perpajakan dan akuntansi dalam mengatur pengakuan harta dan kewajiban pengampunan pajak berikut dengan dampaknya. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa perbedaan terletak pada pemilihan saldo akun ekuitas antara ketentuan perpajakan dengan kebijakan akuntansi. Perbedaan tersebut memberikan dampak kepada Wajib Pajak yang ditinjau dari psychological cost dan kepastian hukum. ......This paper analyzed the regulations of additional asset and liability recognition based on tax amnesty program determined in Indonesia rsquo s Tax Amnesty Law. This study used qualitative approach to get a clearer understanding about the difference between tax and accounting policy in regulating the tax amnesty rsquo s asset and liability recognition along with the impacts. This study showed that the difference between tax and accounting policy was located in choosing the appropriate account under the equity balance. The difference gave some impacts to taxpayer that was analyzed from psychological cost and certainty principle.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Kebijakan pengampunan pajak yang telah dilakukan pada tahun 2016 berhasil memperoleh hasil yang memuaskan. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mendapatkan gambaran mengenai strategi pemerintah dalam memperbaiki sistem administrasi perpajakan pasca pelaksanaan kebijakan pengampuan pajak. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan teknik pengumpulan data melalui wawancara mendalam. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa strategi pemerintah dalam memperbaiki sistem administrasi perpajakan pasca pelaksanaan kebijakan pengampunan pajak adalah dengan cara memaksimalkan penggunaan teknologi elektronik dalam sistem penyelenggaraan pemungutan pajak dan meningkatkan upaya pengawasan serta penegakan hukum sebagai tindak lanjut atas kebijakan pengampunan pajak yang telah dilakukan.

---

ABSTRACT
In 2016, the government of Indonesia has implemented the tax amnesty with satisfactory results. This research was conducted to get the view of the government strategy in improving the tax administration system post implementation of tax amnesty. This research is qualitative paradigm with data collection techniques through in depth interviews. However, the result was showing that the government strategy in improving the tax administration system post implementation of tax amnesty is to maximize the use of electronic technology in tax collection system and increase the surveillance and law enforcement effort as the continue follow up of the tax amnesty.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis keikutsertaan perusahaan terbuka berdasarkan klasifikasi industrinya dalam pengampunan pajak di tahun 2016 serta penyajian dan pengungkapan aset dan liabilitas pengampunan pajak dalam laporan keuangan. Penelitian ini menggunakan pendekatan deskriptif kuantitatif dengan content analysis sebagai metode analisis terhadap informasi yang ada dalam laporan keuangan terkait pengampunan pajak. Hasil analisis penelitian menunjukan perusahaan terbuka yang melakukan pengampunan pajak di tahun 2016 sebanyak 194 atau sebesar 34,70 dari jumlah semua perusahaan terbuka sebanyak 559 perusahaan. Hasil analisis juga menunjukan terdapat dua cara penyajian aset dan liabilitas pengampunan pajak yaitu secara terpisah dengan aset dan liabilitas lain yang dilakukan 25 perusahaan dan secara tidak terpisah dengan aset dan liabilitas lain yang dilakukan 169 perusahaan lainnya. Pengungkapan aset dan liabilitas pengampunan pajak salah satunya terkait nilai aset pengampunan pajak dilakukan oleh 134 perusahaan atau sebesar 69,07 , lima puluh perusahaan di antaranya mengungkapkan hanya nilai aset pengampunan pajak dan 84 perusahaan lainnya mengungkapkan nilai dan jenis aset pengampunan pajak.

---

ABSTRACT
This study aims, to analyze listed companies participation in tax amnesty in 2016 based on industry classification and also the presentation and the disclosures of assets and liabilities from tax amnesty. Descriptive quantitative research is adopted in this study that use content analysis as analysis method on tax amnesty information in financial statement. The results of the analysis show there are 194 listed companies or 34.7 of 559 listed companies have been participating in tax amnesty in 2016. There are two alternative to present assets and labilities from tax amnesty, separately presented from other assets and liabilities which is applied by 25 companies, and 169 companies which is applied unseparately presented. There are 134 companies or 69.07 of tax amnesty participant that disclose the value tax amnesty assets, 50 of them disclose just the value of assets, where the remaining, 84 companies disclose the value and the type of tax amnesty assets.