Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi atas uji materi UU Nomor 22 Tahun 2001 berimplikasi pada adanya tafsir konstitusional pengelolaan hulu minyak dan gas bumi di Indonesia yakni pada pelaksanaan konsep kepenguasaan negara dan sebesar-besarnya kemakmuran rakyat. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis realitas dan implikasi pelaksanaan sistem fiskal dan kelembagaan pengelola hulu minyak dan gas bumi yang sesuai dengan amanat konstitusi. Penelitian ini menggabungkan metode kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Penggunaan metode kualitatif dilakukan untuk melihat bagaimana realitas pelaksanaan sistem fiskal dan kelembagaan pengelola terhadap penerimaan negara dengan teknik analisis deskriptif. Sementara penggunaan metode kuantitatif terbatas untuk membandingkan bagaimana komposisi penerimaan negara dan kontraktor atas penerapan sistem kontrak bagi hasil gross split dan cost recovery dengan teknik analisis regresi berganda. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa sistem kontrak bagi hasil KBH adalah sistem fiskal yang mampu menerjemahkan konsep kepenguasaan negara dan sebesar-besarnya kemakmuran rakyat sebagaimana amanat konstitusi. Dalam pelaksanaan sistem KBH Cost Recovery, pemerintah rata-rata mendapatkan komposisi 55,96 persen dari total penerimaan minyak dan gas bumi. Pada tahun 2016, komposisi penerimaan pemerintah adalah sebesar 38,41 persen. Berdasarkan analisis data historis dan proyeksi minyak bumi, komposisi penerimaan pemerintah dan kontraktor tidak berbeda jauh jika menggunakan sistem KBH gross split dimana rentang penerimaan pemerintah adalah 41 - 42 persen sementara kontraktor sebesar 57 - 58 persen dari total penerimaan minyak dan gas bumi. Kelembagaan pengelola yang memiliki risiko fiskal paling rendah adalah berbentuk badan usaha khusus sebab pemerintah tidak menjadi pihak peserta kontrak. ...... The Constitutional Court 39 s decision on the judicial review of Law Number 22 2001 has impacted to the constitutional interpretation of upstream oil and gas management in Indonesia, namely on the concept of state control and the greatest prosperity of the people. This study aims to analyze the reality and implications of the implementation of the fiscal system and management body of upstream oil and natural gas in accordance with the mandate of the constitution. This research combines qualitative and quantitative methods. The use of qualitative methods is conducted to see how the implementing of the fiscal system and management body to state revenues by descriptive analysis techniques. The use of quantitative methods is limited to compare how the composition of state revenue and contractors on the implementation of gross split and cost recovery production sharing contract with multiple regression analysis techniques. This study concludes that the production sharing contract PSC is a fiscal system capable for translating the concept of state control and the maximum prosperity of the people as mandated by the constitution. In the implementation of the PSC cost recovery, the government gets average of 55.96 percent of total oil and gas revenues. In 2016, government revenues amounted to 38.41 percent. Based on analysis of historical data and projection of petroleum, government revenue and contractor does not differ much if using gross split PSC where the government revenue range is 41 42 percent while contractor equal to 57 58 percent of total oil and gas revenue. The organizational institution that has the lowest fiscal risk is in the form of a special business entity because the government is not a party to the contract.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini membahas mengenai penetapan risiko fiskal dalam pelaksanaan tugas dan wewenang Bank Indonesia (BI) dan Lembaga Penjamin Simpanan (LPS). Tujuan pengelolaan Anggaran Pendapatan dan Belanja Negara (APBN) dibatasi oleh Undnag Undang Dasar 1945 yaitu untuk mewujudkan tujuan bernegara. Sejak APBN 2008, risiko fiskal mulai dicantumkan, diantaranya risiko fiskal sektor keuangan berupa risiko kekurangan modal BI-LPS. Risiko fiskal adalah segala sesuatu yang akan membebani APBN, yang dapat mempengaruhi ketahanan dan kesinambungan fiskal serta kemampuan APBN untuk melaksanakan fungsi penganggaran. Oleh karenanya, penetapan risiko fiskal harus dilakukan secara cermat. Adapun permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai peran dan kewajiban negara terhadap kekurangan modal BI-LPS; dan, bagaimana APBN sebagai wujud pengelolaan keuangan negara untuk mencapai tujuan bernegara dapat ditranformasikan untuk mendukung pendanaan risiko BI-LPS sebagai badan hukum. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan analitis (analytical approach) dan interdisiplin meliputi pendekatan hukum, ekonomi dan politik. Adapun analisa data dilakukan secara preskriptif. analisis didasarkan pada nilai kemanfaatan dari penggunaan APBN (dalam bentuk risiko fiskal) untuk mengejawantahkan peran dan kewajiban negara pada sektor keuangan disandingkan dengan fungsi konstitusional APBN untuk mencapai tujuan bernegara (kemkmuran rakyat yang berkeadilan sosial). Hasil analisa adalah bahwa penetapan risiko fiskal terhadap kecukupan modal BI-LPS dilakukan untuk melindungi rakyat terhadap ekses dari ketidakstabilan sektor keuangan, melalui penjagaan eksistensi bank sentral dan lembaga penjamin simpanan agar perekonomian nasional tetap stabil dan keberlanjutan fiskal tetap terjaga.ABSTRACT
This study discusses the determination of fiscal risk in implementation of the duties and authorities of Bank Indonesia (BI) and the deposit Insurance Institutions (LPS). The goal of managing the state budget (APBN) is limited by the Undang Undang Dasar 1945 namely to realize the goal of the state. Since APBN 2008, fiscal risks have begun to be concluded, including the financial sector risks in the form of a risk of lack of BI-LPS capital. Fiscal risks is anything that will burden the state budget, which can effect the resilience and fiscal sustainability as well as the ability of the state budget to carry out the budgeting function. Therefore, the determination of fiscal risk must be carried out carefully. The problems raised in this study are how the role and obligations of the state towards the lack of BI-LPS capital; and how the APBN as a formn of management of state finances to achieve the goals of the state can be transformed to support BI-LPS risks fundiing as a legal entity. To answer this problem, normative legal research methodes use analytical and interdisiplinarry approaches, including legal, economic and political approaches. The data analysis is done prescriptively. The analysis is based on the value of benefit from the use of the state budget (in the form of fiscal risk) to manifest the role and obligations of the state in financial sector juxstaposed with the constitutional function of the state budget to achieve the goal of the state (social prosperity and justice). The results of the analysis is that the determination of fiscal risk to the capital adequacy of BI-LPS is done to protect the people agains the excesses of financial sector instability through maintaining the existence of central bank and deposit insurance institutions so that the national economy remains stable and fiscal sustainability is maintained.

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Dalam menjalan fungsi pemerintahan (bestuurs functie), pemerintah melakukan tindakan hukum publik dan tindakan hukum privat dimana kedua tindakan hukum ini akan dapat bertentangan kepentingan masyarakat atau perorangan, sehingga dapat dikatakan tindakan Pemerintah rentan akan tuntutan hukum. Dikaitkan dengan keuangan negara putusan yang telah inkracht atas tuntuan hukum tersebut dapat menimbulkan risiko fiskal kepada Pemerintah berupa kewajiban kontinjensi pihak ketiga. Yang menjadi pokok permasalahan pada penelitian ini adalah: pertama bagaimana pengaturan risiko fiskal akibat tuntutan hukum dalam pelaksanaan kewajiban kontijensi dalam APBN? kedua dalam hal terjadi potensi kerugian Negara dalam risiko fiskal akibat tuntutan hukum, lembaga mana yang berwenang melakukan pemeriksaan?. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang berbasis pada kaedah-kaedah atau norma-norma hukum yang terdapat dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, yaitu dengan melakukan penelusuran terhadap Undang-undang Nomor 17 Tahun 2003 Tentang Keuangan Negara, Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2004 tentang Perbendaharaan Negara, Undang-Undang Nomor 15 tahun 2004 tentang Pemeriksaan Pengelolaan dan Tanggungjawab Keuangan Negara, Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2006 tentang Badan Pemeriksaan Keuangan dan peraturan perundang-undangan terkait Kesimpulan yang Penulis peroleh dari penelitian in atas kontijensi pemerintah terkait tuntutan hukum ini BPK berwenang memeriksa sesuai konstitusi namun di lain sisi sesuai Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 60 tahun 2008 tentang Sistem Pengendalian Intern Pemerintah ada pengawasan intern yang dilakukan oleh BPKP dan/atau Aparat Pengawasan Intern Pemerintah terhadap seluruh proses kegiatan pemerintah yang terkait APBN. lembaga mana yang berwenang melakukan pemeriksaan

---

ABSTRACT
In running the government functions (bestuurs functie), the government made public legal action and private legal action in which both these legal actions will be able to contradict the interests of society or the individual, so that it can be said government action vulnerable to lawsuits. Associated with the financial state of a final verdict a claim that the law could pose a risk to the Government in the form of fiscal contingent liability of third parties. Which are at issue in this study are: first , how the setting of fiscal risks due to lawsuits in the implementation of contingent liabilities in the state budget ? both in the event of a potential loss of State in the fiscal risks due to lawsuits, which agency the authority to conduct inspections?. This study was conducted using normative juridical, that is by doing a search on the the study of law based on rules or norms of law contained in the legislation , ie by performing a search of Law No. 17 of 2003 on State Finance, Law Number 1 of 2004 on State Treasury , Law Number 15 of 2004 on the Management Audit and responsibilities State finances, Law Number 15 of 2006 on the Board of Audit and related legislation. Authors conclusions obtained from this study on contingencies related to lawsuits government is authorized to examine the BPK according to the constitution , but on the other hand as the Government Regulation Number. 60 of 2008 on the Internal Control System The Government thereinternal controlconducted by BPKP and /or officers of the Government Internal Audit the whole process of government activities related to the state budget.;In running the government functions (bestuurs functie), the government made public legal action and private legal action in which both these legal actions will be able to contradict the interests of society or the individual, so that it can be said government action vulnerable to lawsuits. Associated with the financial state of a final verdict a claim that the law could pose a risk to the Government in the form of fiscal contingent liability of third parties. Which are at issue in this study are: first , how the setting of fiscal risks due to lawsuits in the implementation of contingent liabilities in the state budget ? both in the event of a potential loss of State in the fiscal risks due to lawsuits, which agency the authority to conduct inspections?. This study was conducted using normative juridical, that is by doing a search on the the study of law based on rules or norms of law contained in the legislation , ie by performing a search of Law No. 17 of 2003 on State Finance, Law Number 1 of 2004 on State Treasury , Law Number 15 of 2004 on the Management Audit and responsibilities State finances, Law Number 15 of 2006 on the Board of Audit and related legislation. Authors conclusions obtained from this study on contingencies related to lawsuits government is authorized to examine the BPK according to the constitution , but on the other hand as the Government Regulation Number. 60 of 2008 on the Internal Control System The Government thereinternal controlconducted by BPKP and /or officers of the Government Internal Audit the whole process of government activities related to the state budget., In running the government functions (bestuurs functie), the government made public legal action and private legal action in which both these legal actions will be able to contradict the interests of society or the individual, so that it can be said government action vulnerable to lawsuits. Associated with the financial state of a final verdict a claim that the law could pose a risk to the Government in the form of fiscal contingent liability of third parties. Which are at issue in this study are: first , how the setting of fiscal risks due to lawsuits in the implementation of contingent liabilities in the state budget ? both in the event of a potential loss of State in the fiscal risks due to lawsuits, which agency the authority to conduct inspections?. This study was conducted using normative juridical, that is by doing a search on the the study of law based on rules or norms of law contained in the legislation , ie by performing a search of Law No. 17 of 2003 on State Finance, Law Number 1 of 2004 on State Treasury , Law Number 15 of 2004 on the Management Audit and responsibilities State finances, Law Number 15 of 2006 on the Board of Audit and related legislation. Authors conclusions obtained from this study on contingencies related to lawsuits government is authorized to examine the BPK according to the constitution , but on the other hand as the Government Regulation Number. 60 of 2008 on the Internal Control System The Government thereinternal controlconducted by BPKP and /or officers of the Government Internal Audit the whole process of government activities related to the state budget.]

Abstrak :
Penyertaan modal negara dalam proyek kereta cepat jakarta bandung menimbulkan risiko fiskal yang signifikan, yang perlu ditangani dengan cermat sesuai dengan peraturan yang ada. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis risiko fiskal yang terkait dengan penyertaan modal negara dalam proyek tersebut. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis-normatif yang disusun secara eksplanatoris. Hasil penelitian ini adalah bahwa status hukum penyertaan modal negara yang disetorkan pada untuk pembangunan proyek kereta cepat jakarta bandung tidak dapat dikatakan sebagai keuangan negara akibat terjadinya transformasi status hukum keuangan negara menjadi keuangan privat atau badan hukum. Selain itu penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa risiko yang timbul dari penyertaan modal negara dalam proyek kereta cepat jakarta bandung mencakup risiko teknis, risiko ekonomi, risiko hukum, dan risiko sosial politik. Risiko yang timbul tersebut tidak dapat disebut sebagai risiko fiskal karena hanya merupakan risiko perusahaan. Hal tersebut juga berimplikasi terhadap pengelolaan keuangan dan tanggung jawab hukumnya. Namun dalam praktiknya terdapat problematika yang dihadapi terkait dengan penyertaan modal negara untuk pembangunan proyek kereta cepat jakarta bandung yang dikhawatirkan dapat membebani APBN. ......The state equity participation in the jakarta bandung high-speed rail project poses significant fiscal risks, which need to be handled carefully in accordance with existing regulations. This research aims to analyze the fiscal risks associated with state equity participation in the project. The method used in this research is juridical-normative which is organized in an explanatory approach. The result of this research is that the legal status of state equity participation deposited in the development of the jakarta bandung high speed train project cannot be said to be state finance due to the transformation of the legal status of state finance into private finance or legal entities. In addition, this research shows that the risks arising from the state equity participation in the jakarta bandung high-speed train project include technical risks, economic risks, legal risks, and socio-political risks. The risks that arise cannot be referred to as fiscal risks because they are only corporate risks. This also has implications for financial management and legal responsibility. However, in practice, there are problems encountered related to state equity participation for the development of the Jakarta-Bandung high-speed train project, which is feared to burden the state budget.

Abstrak :
KPBU dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur berpotensi menimbulkan risiko fiskal yang dapat membebani dan mengganggu kesinambungan APBN. Risiko fiskal yang timbul dari KPBU dalam Penyediaan Infrastruktur timbul dari hakikat kegiatan penyediaan dan/atau pembangunan infrastruktur yang lekat dengan risiko politik dan regulasi, usaha dan makroekonomi, serta teknis. Risiko fiskal yang tidak dikelola dan dikendalikan dapat mengganggu kesehatan keuangan dan kemampuan Pemerintah dalam menyelenggarakan pemerintahan umum dan pelayanan publik. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penelitian ini dilangsungkan untuk mengkaji (1) risiko fiskal yang timbul dari pembangunan infrastruktur serta (2) dampak kebijakan pemberian fasilitas Dukungan Kelayakan terhadap pengelolaan risiko fiskal. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis-normatif yang disusun secara eksplanatoris. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah: (1) risiko fiskal dalam pembangunan infrastruktur lahir dari kewajiban kontinjensi pemerintah atas risiko pembangunan infrastruktur. Risiko fiskal lahir dari pemberian dukungan dan jaminan pemerintah serta tuntutan moral terhadap pemerintah terhadap risiko yang melekat pada kegiatan penyediaan dan pembangunan infrastruktur. Risiko pada pembangunan infrastruktur sendiri ketidakpastian dalam tahapan pembangunan infrastruktur; dan (2) Dukungan Kelayakan sebagai kontribusi finansial terhadap sebagian biaya konstruksi yang diberikan Pemerintah kepada Swasata membantu Pemerintah mengelola risiko-risiko fiskal. Risiko fiskal yang dikelola oleh Dukungan Kelayakan antara lain meliputi risiko fiskal yang timbul dari kerentanan keuangan BUMN, pelaksanaan APBN, serta utang Pemerintah. ......PPPs in Infrastructure Provision have the potential to create fiscal risks that can burden and disrupt the sustainability of the State Budget (APBN). Fiscal risks arising from PPPs in Infrastructure Provision arise from the nature of infrastructure provision and/or development activities which are closely related to political and regulatory, business, and macroeconomic, as well as technical risks. Fiscal risks that are not managed and controlled can interfere with financial health and the ability of the Government to execute public administration and public services. Upon this notion, the research was conducted to examine (1) fiscal risks arising from infrastructure development and (2) the impact of the policy of Viability Gap Fund facilities on fiscal risk management. The research method used in this research is juridical-normative which is arranged in an explanatory manner. The results of this study are: (1) fiscal risk in infrastructure development arises from the government's contingent liability upon infrastructure development risks. Fiscal risks arise from the provision of government support and guarantees as well as moral expectation on the government against risks inherent in infrastructure provision and development activities. The risk in infrastructure development itself arises from uncertainty at various stages of infrastructure development; and (2) Viability Gap Fund as a financial contribution provided by the Government to the private sector that covers partial construction costs helps the Government in managing fiscal risks. Fiscal risks that are managed by Viability Gap Fund encompass fiscal risks arising from the financial vulnerability of SOEs, implementation of the State Budget, and government debt.

Abstrak :
Lindung nilai adalah suatu strategi yang diciptakan untuk mengurangi timbulnya risiko bisnis yang tidak terduga. Transaksi lindung nilai adalah transaksi yang dilakukan oleh Pemerintah dengan counterparty , dalam rangka mengendalikan risiko fluktuasi beban pembayaran bunga dan kewajiban pokok utang dan/atau melindungi posisi nilai utang, dari risiko yang timbul maupun yang diperkirakan akan timbul sebagai akibat volatilitas faktor-faktor pasar keuangan. Transaksi lindung nilai dilakukan berdasarkan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Nomor 12/PMK.08/2013 Tentang Transaksi Lindung Nilai (Hedging) Dalam Pengelolaan Utang Pemerintah. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah studi kepustakaan yang bersifat yuridis-normatif. Hasil penelitian menyarankan agar pengelolaan lindung nilai utang harus dapat memperkirakan nilai tukar Rupiah terhadap valuta asing ke depannya. Pengaturan risiko keuangan negara seharusnya diatur secara terperinci, jelas dan pasti, sehingga memungkinkan pengelolaan utang pemerintah dilakukan secara transparan, akuntabel dan memiliki kepastian hukum.

---

Hedging is a strategy created to reduce enpredictable business risks. Hedging transaction is a transaction conducted by government with it counterpart in order to manage risks due to fluctuation in interest rate and principal amount and/or to protect the debt from predictable risks due to market volatility. Hedging transaction is conducted under Minister of Finance Regulation Number 12/PMK.08/2013 regarding Hedging Transaction in Government Debt Management. Research approached used in preparing this thesis was juridical-normative literature-based study. Result of the research suggests that hedging management shall be able to predict future Rupiah exchange rate to other currencies. Financial risk management shall be regulated in detail, elaborative, and certain, in order to enable government debt management to be transparent, accountable, and providing legal certainty.