生前贈與之財產視為遺產制度之探討

The thesis of the system regarding “property disposed of through donation prior to his or her death is regarded as estate property”

李惠鑾(Hui-Luan Li)

指導教授 ： 郭振恭

中原大學/商學院/財經法律研究所/碩士(2013年)

https://doi.org/10.6840/CYCU.2013.00361

摘要

我國自開徵遺產稅時，即明定被繼承人生前2年（昔為3年、5年）內贈與配偶、民法第1138條、第1140條各順位繼承人及前述各順位繼承人配偶之財產，應於被繼承人死亡時，視為被繼承人之遺產，併入遺產總額課徵遺產稅，以防杜納稅人生前以贈與方式分析財產，降低遺產總額規避繳納高累進稅率遺產稅。然自2009年1月23日起遺贈稅率均降為10％，兩稅目間已無稅率差距之節稅空間，上述制度之原立法目的已喪失；另2009年民法修訂時，僅參照遺贈稅法第15條第1項部分條文增訂第1148條之1，前者在保障公法債權，後者則著重保護私法債務，於法定繼承制改採「概括繼承有限責任」及遺贈稅均採單一稅率等衝擊下，該制度是否尚有存在之必要，實值檢討；筆者於本文中自行設計案例，藉以比較遺贈稅於累進稅率及單一稅率時期，被繼承人生前有無規劃生前贈與是否會產生不同節稅效益，進而檢討該制度是否有存在之必要。
另援引最高行政法院95年判字第01428號判決為楔子，蒐集及研讀國內相關文獻資料、期刊文章及碩博士論文，就租稅法、稅捐法體系、遺贈稅立法制度、納稅人財產權保障、繼承債權人權益、租稅公平原則及量能課稅原則等內容，參考判例、學者見解、法務部及財政部相關解釋函令，詮釋、評價及檢討遺贈稅法第1條、第6條、第11條第2項、第7條、第15條、同法施行細則第6條、民法第1148條之1及民法第1153條之規定，提出相關修法建議，期使國庫收入與債權人權益均能受到充分保護。

關鍵字

量能課稅 ； 重複課稅 ； 共同繼承 ； 視為遺產 ； 遺產稅 ； 限定繼承

並列摘要

It has been written in the laws of Taiwan since the beginning of the inherence tax that the property of an inheritee which is given to his/her spouse, the inheritors specified in Articles 1138 and 1140 of the Civil Code and the spouses of the inheritors mentioned above two years (which was 3 years and 5 years) before the inheritee passes away is considered the inheritance of the late inheritee at the time of his/her death, and shall be included in the total inheritance for the said tax to prevent the escape of high estate tax of accumulated rate by giving properties away, lowering the tax rate. However, the purpose of the legislation mentioned above was no longer served as the estate tax rate was decreased to 10% on Jan 23, 2009, which left no room to maneuver for tax savings. In addition, when the Civil Code was amended in 2009, Article 1148-1 was added by referencing Paragraph 1, Article 15-1 of the Estate and Gift Tax Act, the latter protecting the creditor’s rights in the public law while the former focusing on protection of the creditor’s rights in the private law. With impacts from change of legal inheritance to “inclusive inheritance and limited liability” and single rate for estate and gift taxes, it is worth investigating the necessity of such a system. A case was designed in this study to compare the differences in tax savings by planning to give away properties as gifts before death in the periods of accumulated tax rate and single tax rate, as to review whether the existence of this system is necessary.
The case numbered 2006 Pan-Tzu No. 01428 by the Supreme Administrative Court was used as an example. Local literatures, articles and reports were collected and reviewed. Suggestions for legislative amendments were proposed based on tax laws and systems, legislation of estate and gift taxes, protection of tax payers’ property rights, the rights of successive creditors, principle of tax equity, and principle of ability to pay, legal precedents of reference, academic opinions, explanatory orders, interpretations and evaluations of Ministry of Justice and Ministry of Finance, review of Article 1, Article 6, Paragraph 2 of Article 11, Article 7 and Article 15 of the Estate and Gift Tax Act, Article 6 of the Enforcement Rules of the Estate and Gift Tax Act, Articles 1148-1 and 1153 of the Civil Code in the hope of providing better protection for the treasury incomes and the rights of creditors.

並列關鍵字

Inheritance as Regarded ； Co-inheritance ； Ability to Pay ； Double Taxation ； Limited Succession ； Estate Tax

參考文獻

32、鄧學仁，繼承法修正簡介及評釋，法令月刊，第59卷7期，頁59-74（2008）。

14、黃士洲，限定繼承、遺產稅協力義務與漏稅處罰—最高行政法院94判字826判決評析，東吳法律學報，第18卷第3期，頁247-276（2007）。

2、陳彥琪，從租稅公平論遺產稅制，國立政治大學法律學系學士後法學組碩士論文（2008）。

1、林玨菁，遺產稅制與共同繼承人繳納遺產稅之法律關係，國立台灣大學法律研究所碩士論文（2009）。

21、藍元駿，稅捐債務作為繼承之標的—從最高行政法院92年9月與93年