透過您的圖書館登入
IP:54.224.124.217
  • 學位論文

租稅公平與公正補償之研究 —土地徵收與捐地抵稅以大法官釋字第705號解釋為中心

A study of Taxation Equity and Just Compensation —Eminent Domain and Tax Deduction for the Donation of Expropriated Land based on Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 705

指導教授 : 陳志龍

摘要


大法官釋字第705號解釋涉及捐地申報所得稅列舉扣除額其認列標準之財政部函釋,認定係與憲法第19條租稅法律主義不符,為行政規則僅屬執行所得稅法規定之細節性或技術性事項及應予法律具體明確授權之問題。此外,其間存在兩個相互衝突的現狀:一是公共設施保留地與負有公用地役關係之既成道路的徵收補償延宕,為延續大法官釋字第400號解釋之財產權保障精神,以實現個人自由、發展人格及維護尊嚴,捐地抵稅具有一定之正當性;二是納稅義務人之節稅規劃,利用購買系爭土地捐贈造成所得稅收鉅額之減少。以取得成本為基礎之扣除額估算有其未盡公平合理之處,所得稅法第17條之4修正草案條文仍有財產權、人性尊嚴保障不足之缺憾。本文提出應以「財產損失」、「特別犧牲」有無為區別之原則,若為「有受損失補償權利」之納稅義務人,方可捐地抵稅以獲取相當於徵收補償之租稅減免,而土地徵收條例第30條規定:「在都市計畫區內之公共設施保留地,應按毗鄰非公共設施保留地之平均市價補償其地價」,為維持法律統一性與補償之公正,實有參考之必要;至於購買土地捐贈抵稅者,在未達特別犧牲之情形,如採「公告現值」認列,則應考量租稅優惠不宜過度與存在援引實質課稅原則之可能。針對減低財政負擔衝擊之建議,可規定受贈者須為有徵收義務之地方政府,訂定每年受贈總額,並以分期抵償方式解決。

並列摘要


Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 705 associates with the Ministry of Finance orders prescribing the standard of assessment in tax declarations for the amount to be deducted for the donation of land, which do not comply with the principle of taxation by law of Article 19 of the Constitution. These administrative rules are not merely detailed or technical matters for the enforcement of Income Tax Law. Such matters shall be specified by a law or regulations having the clear authorization of a given law. In addition there are two conflicked present situations. Firstly, the postponement of eminent domain for the land reserved for public facilities and the private preexisting roads burdened with public easement, to persist the protection of people's property right to develop personality and to maintain dignity of people disclosed by Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 400 make it legitimate to render the abovementioned land tax-deductible. Secondly, the tax saving planning of taxpayers through purchasing and then donating these land tremendously reduces Income Tax revenues. However utilizing purchasing cost as the basis to estimate the amount to be deducted for the donation of land is not fair and reasonable sufficiently. The amended draft of Article 17-4 of the Income Tax Law still not well protect people's property right and maintain their dignity. This thesis reveals using the existence of “property loss” and “special sacrifice” as the distinguished standard. Only when the taxpayers have the right to be compensated from land expropriation, can donate the land to have the tax deduction which equals to eminent domain compensation. Besids, the Land Expropriation Act 30 states: “The value of land reserved for public facilities in the urban planning area shall be compensated based on the average market value of its adjoining lands not reserved for public facilities.” It shall be refered to maintain the unitity of law and just compensation. For those people purchased then donated land for tax deduction, if there is no special sacrifice, declarating the amount according to the “government declared value” of the donated land shall be considered as the cases of over tax incentive and have the possibility of applying principle of substantive taxation. The suggestions of lowering the impact of finance are restricting the donated land must be received only by local government with expropriation obligation, limiting total receiving amount of donation per each year and deducting tax by installments.

參考文獻


5.劉志清(2009)。《政府土地徵收補償之研究-從財產權的觀點》,國立臺灣大學政治學研究所碩士論文。
4.鄧煜祥(2007)。《從財產權保障之觀點論土地使用管制與損失補償—美國法管制準徵收概念之引介》,國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文。
2.吳怡鳳(2014 )。《所得稅法上實物捐贈扣除之研究》,國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文。
37.黃忠正(2013年4月)。〈論Radbruch公式〉,《政大法學評論》,132期,頁115-162。
30.陳清秀(2008年11月)。〈實質課稅原則裁判之研討〉,《東吳公法論叢》,卷期:2 [民97.11],第135-194頁。

延伸閱讀