透過您的圖書館登入
IP:44.200.23.133
  • 學位論文

解釋函令變更之相關法律問題—以稅捐稽徵法第1條之1第1至3項為中心

A Legal Study on Changes of Interpretative Rules—Focus on Article 1-1, Paragraph 1 through 3 of the Tax Collection Act

指導教授 : 葛克昌
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


有鑑於憲法第19條租稅法定主義之要求,有關課稅主體、稅目、稅率、納稅方法等重要事項,應以法律或法律明確授權規定為之。然而解釋函令卻為稽徵機關所大量運用,尤其在函令發生變更時,依法行政原則與納稅人權益保護是否受到重視,乃本文之研究動機。此外,第一章並就研究範圍與方法、文獻回顧簡單敘明。 釋字第287號解釋與稅捐稽徵法第1-1條,為目前稅法上解釋函令操作之主要依據。第二章以此兩者為研究範圍,從287號解釋意旨及稅捐稽徵法第1-1條之要件以觀,提出適用上可能產生之爭議。再者,民國100年對稅捐稽徵法第1-1條有所增訂與修正,其增訂係為彌補舊法的哪些不足?修法之目的,究為改善稅捐實務的哪些問題?點出問題意識。 第三章則以解釋函令為討論重心,蓋現行法並未就解釋函令之定義明確規定,而解釋函令又為本文討論之前提,因此,藉由行政法學者文獻,將解釋函令予以界定,並將稅法上解釋函令之範圍、性質與效力討論與比較。 第四章以行政法院判決的重心,在解釋函令發生變更時,對稽徵機關而言僅是法律適用變更,然對納稅人而言不僅影響租稅安排,也牽涉生活與財產之安排。故在解釋函令變更且訴諸法院之案件中,納稅人與稽徵機關如何攻防,行政法院如何裁判,是否符合憲法平等原則、量能負擔之要求?是否符合信賴保護原則?本文藉由蒐集行政法院判決並加以歸類討論。 第五章結論部分,係綜合學者文獻與實務見解加以整理,嘗試提出淺見。

並列摘要


In view of the principle of statutory taxpaying, based on Constitution of the Republic of China Article 19, the important elements about tax-collection, like subject, object, or tax-rate, should be set up in law or in ordinance which has explicit delegation from law. Whether the Rule by law and the taxpayers’ rights are respected, especially when interpretative rules changed by the tax administration? It is the motivation of this research. The second chapter focuses on J.Y. Interpretation No. 287 and Article 1-1 of Tax Collection Act. What flaw would be redeemed by the amendment on the Article 1-1 of Tax Collection Act in 2011? The third chapter is focused on the related arguments about interpretative rules. There is no definition of interpretative rules under the current law. I collate the academic documents to discuss the definition, character, and efficiency in on interpretative rules. The fourth chapter is centered upon the judgments made by court of administration. When the interpretative rules change, it affects not only arrangement in tax but also in property and life to taxpayer. Whether the judgments made by court of administration were tally with Ability to Pay Principle in case about the interpretative rules change? The fifth chapter is this essay’s conclusion, which is included the academic documents, opinions in practice and my own ideas.

參考文獻


16.黃士洲,實質課稅原則與納稅人權利保障,翰廬圖書出版有限公司,2011年9月。
19.張文郁,論撤銷課稅處分訴訟之訴訟標的,政大法學評論第126期,2012年4月,頁239-290。
57.黃俊杰,解釋函令變更與信賴保護—行政法院八十八年度判字第三九0七號判決評釋,台灣本土法學雜誌,2001年03月,頁1-13。
61.黃俊杰、陳敏娟,稅法解釋函令之檢討—以釋字第287號解釋評析為中心—中原學報第26卷第2期。
34.陳清雲,稅法解釋函令與違憲審查(上)─司法院大法官釋字第四九六號解釋評析,台灣本土法學雜誌,2004年09月,頁55-66。

延伸閱讀