Anti-Avoidance Rules di Indonesia Pasca Amandemen UU Pajak Penghasilan

https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16249

Adrianto Dwi Nugroho(1*)

(1) 
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


The fourth amendment to the Indonesian Income Tax Act (UU PPh) has inserted three new provisions encountering three newly-identified tax avoidance schemes. However, the previous regulations in respect of thin capitalization, CFC and interest stripping were not carefully be given attention and be made in conformity with their newest developments. As an illustration, the term “company” has never been defined in the Act. Instead, the Act introduces the same term in the conduit company rules. Another example involves the CFC rule which does not put additional provisions to define “control”. Another interesting development is the regulation of the International-hiring out of labor which instead of making it in conformity with the OECD MC, the rule empowers the country to increase the taxable income of an employee in respect of employment excercised abroad. This article attempts to demonstrate how the Indonesian anti-avoidance rules work out and prove how taxpayers may well, ironically, abuse those rules.


Full Text:

PDF



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16249

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 642 | views : 4295

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Adrianto Dwi Nugroho

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Mimbar Hukum Indexed by:

DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journal) Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE) COREGoogle ScholarWorldCatLIVIVOCopac JISTHarvard LibraryElectronic Journals LibraryColumbia University LibrariesLeiden University LibrariesUniversity of Saskatchewan-CanadaGent University LibraryWestern Theological SeminaryUniversity of OxfordThe University of SheffieldThe University of Manchester Toronto Public LibraryEbsco

Member of :

Crossref


MIMBAR HUKUM ISSN: 0852-100X(print), ISSN: 2443-0994(online)