違反扣繳義務處罰規定之探討─以中華民國來源所得之爭議扣繳案例為中心

The Discussion Of Penalties For Violation Of The Provision Of The Withholding Obligation─ROC Source Income Withholding Cases As The Center Of The Controversy

李芷軒(Jr Shiuan Li)

指導教授 ： 盛子龍

國立中正大學/法學院/財經法律學系/碩士(2013年)

摘要

稅捐之課徵是作為國家主要的財政收支來源，在租稅國家中，稅捐之核定及徵收本為國家之任務，原則上應由具公法職務關係與忠誠義務之公務員執行，惟所得稅法設有就源扣繳制度，責成特定人為扣繳義務人，就納稅義務人之所得，於給付時依規定之扣繳率或扣繳辦法，扣取稅款，在法定期限內，向國庫繳清，並開具扣繳憑單，彙報該管稽徵機關，及填具扣繳憑單發給納稅義務人。此項扣繳義務，其目的在使國家得即時獲取稅收，便利國庫資金調度，並確實掌握課稅資料，為增進公共利益所必要。由於扣繳義務不同於納稅義務，扣繳義務人違反扣繳義務時所受到之處罰，是否應輕於納稅義務人，以及對扣繳義務人主觀上之故意過失歸責要件，是否也應不同於納稅義務人。尤其在針對營利事業支付境外公司之所得費用時，須先認定是否為中華民國來源所得，若屬中華民國來源所得，才有判斷是否為應扣繳所得之問題。在面對稅務法規龐雜且屬專業領域之範疇，一般人對專業法規不易熟知之情況下，是否不應使扣繳義務人負過高之注意義務、在過失之判斷上更應區分行為人過失程度之不同而異其處罰，在處罰之結果上也不應違反比例原則。所得稅法第114條規定以應扣未扣或短扣之稅額作為倍數處罰之基礎，且未設定處罰之金額上限是否有不合理之處，立法者應考量扣繳義務人在法律上之地位做最妥善之立法規定，如此才可通過比例原則之考驗，以達到實質的租稅公平，在具體個案中實現租稅正義。

關鍵字

扣繳義務人之法律地位 ； 扣繳義務 ； 中華民國來源所得

並列摘要

The imposition of taxes is the country's main source of revenue and expenditure，Countries in tax，the collection and approval of the taxes are the mission of any country， In principle, it should be a public law duty of loyalty to their duties and the execution of civil，However，the Income Tax Act adopts the system of pay-as- earn(PAYE) by designating specific individual as the tax withholder，who，at the time of paying tax payer’s income，deducts the tax amout in accordance with regulated withholding rate or procedure，submits to the national treasury within the statutory period，completes the tax withholding voucher to the taxing authority and issues the withholding certificates to the tax payers. The purpose of this tax withholding obligation is to ensure the state’s timely collection oa tax income，to facilitate the dispatching of funds，and to take actual control over the taxing information，necessity to enhance the public interests. The withholding obligation is different from the taxpayers. The tax witholders withholding obligations suffered violation of punishment, whether it should be light on the taxpayers, as well as withholding agents of the subjective element of willful misconduct attributable to that, whether it should be different from the taxpayer. Especially in the offshore companies to pay for profit-seeking enterprise's income fee,we must first identify whether the ROC source income or not, the case of the Republic of China source income, only to determine whether the proceeds of the issue should be withheld. In the face of complex tax regulations and the scope of a professional field, most people are familiar with professional regulations difficult circumstances,whether or not the withholding of negative high duty of care. The judgment in negligence should distinguish from the actors fault varies its level of penalties.On the result in the punishment should not violate the principle of proportionality. Article 114 of the existing provisions of the Income Tax Law to be withheld and a tax deduction or a short multiple punishment as a basis, and did not set the maximum amount of penalty if there is unreasonable. Legislators should consider withholding agent is legally the status to make the most of proper legislation. So before adopting the principle of proportionality test, in order to achieve substantial tax fairness, in the specific case to achieve tax justice.

並列關鍵字

The Legal Status Of The Tax Withholding ； Withholding Obligation ； ROC Source Income

參考文獻

09. 洪家殷，《行政罰法論》，五南，2006年11月。

14. 黃俊杰，《行政程序法》，元照，2008年9月。

07.財團法人國家政策研究基金會，http://www.npf.org.tw/。

01. 王建煊，《租稅法》，華泰，2009年8月。

36. 潘英芳，〉納稅人權利保障之建構與評析─從司法保障到立法保障》，翰蘆，2009年5月。