| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立成功大學 === 財務金融研究所在職專班 === 101 === This study focuses on the problems of “using physical objects for payment of taxes” that was derived from estate and gift tax act, and on the impact upon fiscal revenue. The research domain includes the districts under the administration of National Tax Administration of Southern Taiwan Province, analyzing and exploring the data on the final reports between 1992 and 2011.
The reason why uncashed treasury deposit increased was that the restrictions on alternative to using physical objects for payment of taxes were eased in the amendment to estate and gift tax act on January 13, 1995. Either it is “object of taxation” or “any treasure easily sold or kept” might be qualified as alternatives. In order to attract capitals back to Taiwan in 2009, tax act has been substantially revised to adopt 10% single tax rate. The government also realized the fact that physical objects were not easily turned into cashes. Thus, the tax act revision also took measures to tighten up on the alternatives to using physical objects for payment of taxes.
According to data analysis, the categories seen in physical objects for payment of taxes were shown from high to low proportion as land, unlisted stocks, listed stocks, creditor’s right, houses, and other investment. Land reserved for public facilities accounted for the highest proportion among all. It is local government’s responsibility to turn the land into cash, while unlisted stocks could not be traded on the open market. Even worse, no creditor’s right has ever been sold. All these contributed to the tremendous uncashed treasury deposit.
The study shows that “using physical objects for payment of taxes” accounted for 34% of estate and gift tax, among which 0.78% was turned into cash averagely. There was normally 0.42% lost or written off, which means 33.64% of estate and gift tax was bad debts. The administration of these objects will also incur extra costs. The first suggestion this study comes up with is canceling the alternative to using physical objects for payment of taxes. However, for taxpayer’s sake, an installment plan with various terms is advised to set up based on different tax payable to obviate taxpayer’s immediate need for capital.
After the act was revised in 2009, 99% of physical objects for payment of taxes were land reserved for public facilities. It is local government who has the right of compulsory acquisition of the land. If using physical objects for payment of taxes cannot be repealed, it is recommended that estate and gift taxes be categorized as local taxes. By doing so, the problems with land reserved for public facilities were solved instantly. When physical objects cannot be turned into cash in a certain period, it is better to be written off to reflect the actual value of treasury deposit.
|
|---|
