本篇論文之研究目的,主要在於檢討稅捐稽徵法第24條第3項在歷經多次修正後,相關實務問題是否真正獲得解決,並進一步就修法後至今之實務判決擇其要者,進行有系統的整理與消化,試做批判,期能供稅務爭訟時之參考輔助。 此外,對於稅捐稽徵法第24條第3項本身實質上對於基本權有所侵害而可能違憲之問題,仍舊有檢討空間,加以我國簽署兩公約後,其中公政公約在限制出境稅務判決之適用,亦將對稅捐稽徵法第24條第3項存在之合憲性造成新的衝擊。因此,冀望透過各個層面去檢討以權衡並獲致結論。 本篇之研究方法部分,先從最基本的法條出發,探究欠稅限制出境之歷次修法,再透過對於法條文義之理解,從事論理認識,進一步將稅捐稽徵法第24條第3項及行政執行法第17條等加以進行規範關聯性認識,配合立法目的與基本權限制合憲性檢驗,以確認所理解與實務正在運用之法條文義是否符合正義之要求。此部分是法條研究法。 另外,蒐羅過去實務見解,包括主管機關函釋、實務操作情形及各級法院判決及學者豐富的著作及過去此一議題之相關論文。既存在促進修法之研究目的,則外國法制之參輔及相關文獻之引介亦不可免。此部分是文獻研究法。 本篇之研究內容與結果如下:總結對於公約之研究及合憲之檢驗,嘗試提出修法模型與替代手段。第一種是以現行欠稅限制出境制度為合憲,進行規範調整,參考德國護照法及代宣誓之保證制度,將我國稅捐稽徵法修正外,並在拘提管收之前加入緩和手段。第二種是以欠稅限制出境為違憲,進行法制配套,由於美國法與我國制度的背離情況更高,為了有效掌握納稅義務人財產狀況,又不致過度侵害人民權利,有必要另外建立專業納稅人保護官之度為輔佐。
This research adopts the case study and as the research method .This thesis's main structure is in accordance with restriction from exiting the Republic of China, Paragraph 3, Article 24 of Tax Collection Act and judgment. Tax Safeguards is an indirect way to collect tax. It is the purpose that collected the tax payable. However, there are still many tax payers do not pay taxes.The taxpayer or the responsible person of an enterprise does not pay taxes which total amount reach legal standard formulated by National Taxation Bureaus. The most important thing is to calculate the total amount that the person liable to penalty paid taxes or offered equivalent collaterals for lifting the restriction and find out whether exit restriction matches the principle of proportionality and constitutionality or not. in order to protect tax payers’ rights, tax collection institutions’ discretion and taxation security process should be restrained under the legal country’s principles, as well as to provide opportunity of human rights relief.