投資型保險稅捐問題之研究─以保險人之給付為核心

A Study of the Issue of Investment-linked Insurance Taxes—Taking Payment by the Insurer as the Core

黃劍銘(Jian-Ming Huang)

指導教授 ： 黃茂榮

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/國家發展研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.02247

摘要

基於社會安全的政策目的，對於人身保險給付在所得稅及遺產稅提供稅捐優惠，長久以來，一直都是我國所得稅法、遺產及贈與稅法、保險法等相關法律未曾改變的立法原則。此從前開法律雖然歷經多次更迭，但有關保險給付稅捐優惠之條文卻始終未有重大變動即可得證。2001年保險法修正，開放保險業得經營投資型保險業務，經過數年發展，此種附加投資功能之新興險種已經成為市場上的主流商品，然其得否比照傳統商品享有稅捐優惠，卻也引發正反不同意見的討論。持肯定說者認為，依保險法施行細則第14條之定義，投資型保險仍為保險，相關規範所提供之稅捐優惠自應同等適用於投資型保險給付。否定說則主張投資型保險為投資與保險之結合，投資所得之部分仍應予以課稅。二說各有所本，迄無共識。為釐清爭議，本文一方面嘗試介紹美、英、德、日等保險發達國家之稅捐規範，期能從中發掘可資仿效的解決之道；另一方面則釐清投資型保險之本質，蒐集分析與之有關之司法實務見解，以尋求在現行法制架構下解決爭議的可能性。
經研究發現，外國立法例確有獨到之處，但能否在符合稅捐稽徵經濟原則下移植適用，仍有商榷之處。而投資型保險實質上為保險與信託之結合，一般帳戶之資金因依循保險原理運作，故保險給付中，源於一般帳戶之資金得享稅捐優惠，應無疑義，且無悖於憲法平等原則之要求。但源自分離帳戶之部分則屬信託所得，如一併免其稅捐義務，恐與現行法制不符。建議修正保險法施行細則第14條之規定，使投資型保險之法制定義能符合其投資與信託結合的本質；或修正稅法規範，明定保險給付中，非源自一般帳戶之資金不得享有稅捐優惠，以維護稅捐正義，同時促進保險事業健全發展，充分發揮其保障社會之功能。

關鍵字

投資型保險 ； 變額保險 ； 一般帳戶 ； 分離帳戶 ； 稅捐優惠 ； 信託

並列摘要

Based on the policy objective of social security, tax benefits are provisioned in personal income tax and estate tax. This has been, for a long time, unchanged legislative principle of Income Tax Act, Estate and Gift Tax Act, Insurance Act, and other relevant laws in our nation. The clauses on insurance tax benefits have generally not been altered although the said laws have been amended many times. In 2001, The Insurance Act was amended to allow insurance proprietors to engage in investment-linked insurance operations. After several years of development, this emerging investment insurance with such additional features has become the mainstream commodity in the market. However, whether or not tax benefits should be enjoyed as a traditional commodity has also led to the discussion of different opinions of the pros and cons. The positive says that according to Article 14 of Enforcement Rules for the Insurance Act, investment-linked insurance should still be considered as insurance. Tax benefits provisioned under the relevant norms should be equally applicable in investment-linked insurance benefits. The negative says that investment-linked insurance is the combination of investment and insurance, and revenues from investments should be taxed. As both say has their basis, no consensus has so far been reached. To clarify the controversy, in one way, the income tax norms of the United States, the U.K., Germany and Japan will be introduced in this paper in order to derive at solution plans; in the other, the nature of investment-linked insurance is clarified and relevant judicial practices are collected and analyzed to seek possible ways to settle disputes under the framework of the existing legal system.

After research, it is found that foreign legislations are indeed unique. However, whether it is applicable for our nation under the economic principle of taxation is still open to debate. Investment-linked insurance is essentially the combination of insurance and trust. Since funds in general account is transacted based on insurance principles, it is without a doubt that in insurance benefits, funds sourced from general account is entitled to tax benefits. In addition, the principle of equality stated in the constitution is not contravened. However, funds sourced from separate account fall under “incomes derived from trust.” The existing laws are believed to be contravened if the said funds are tax-exempted. It is therefore recommended that Article 14 of Enforcement Rules for The Insurance Act be amended to ensure that the legal definitions of investment-linked insurance are consistent with the nature of investment and trust combined. It is also suggested that the norms in tax laws be amended, which stipulates that in insurance benefits, funds not sourced from general account is not entitled to tax benefits in order to ensure fairness in taxation while promoting the healthy development of the insurance industry, and giving full play to its function to protect the community.

並列關鍵字

Investment-Linked Insurance ； Variable Insurance ； General Account ； Separate Account ； Tax Benefit ； Trust

參考文獻

王志誠，2005，《信託法》，臺北：五南。

江朝國，2002，《保險法基礎理論》，臺北：瑞興圖書。

江朝國，2003，《保險業之資金運用》，臺北：財團法人保險事業發展中心。

陳靜慧，2005，〈國際金融商品課稅問題之研究〉，臺北：國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文。

江朝國，1990，〈論我國保險法第六十四條據實說明義務之規定─以對價平衡之概念為論點〉，《保險專刊》，22，頁84。