•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Tax dispute resolution in Indonesia has not yet met the principles of quick, simple, and economical. Taxpayers have to wait more than 3 years for the lawful certainty. This paper elaborates the potential strategy in resolving the tax dispute in Indonesia through administrative law. OECD has suggested taxpayers and revenue body to build positive connection through the changing of confrontation to the collaborative relationship. Mediation is a solution to encourage this positive bond in solving the dispute. It is successfully implemented in Australia. The similar way is strongly recommended for the Indonesian Government to develop a good relationship between taxpayers and revenue body. One of the chances for mediating in an attempt to minimize tax dispute is in the auditing process. This process cannot be easily done because it needs political will and high desired improvement from the Government to make a change. Mediation is an attempt to achieve a win-win solution and is in line with the principles of Pancasila, that is a deliberation for reaching an agreement. If it is done, then mediation will be a courteous way in tax dispute resolution and will be able to improve a good post-dispute relationship in Indonesia.

Bahasa Abstract

Indonesia memiliki persoalan dalam penyelesaian sengketa pajak karena belum mampu mewujudkan prinsip cepat, sederhana dan murah. Wajib pajak harus menunggu lebih dari 3 tahun untuk mendapatkan kepastian hukum. Tulisan ini menjelaskan mengenai kemungkinan strategi potensi penyelesaian sengketa pajak di Indonesia melalui proses hukum administrasi. OECD telah menyarankan untuk meningkatkan hubungan yang lebih baik yaitu merubah dari hubungan konfrontasi menjadi hubungan kolaboratif antara wajib pajak dan fiskus. Mediasi adalah sebuah upaya untuk meningkatkan hubungan yang lebih baik antara kedua belah pihak jika terjadi perselisihan . Mediasi telah berhasil diterapkan di Australia. Cara ini tentunya dapat dijadikan sebagai rujukan bagi Indonesia untuk meningkatkan hubungan yang lebih baik antara fiskus dan wajib pajak. Salah satu peluang upaya mediasi yang dapat dilakukan untuk meminimalisir sengketa pajak adalah mediasi dilakukan pada saat proses pemeriksaan. Namun hal tersebut tidak mudah dilakukan karena membutuhkan political will dan keinginan yang kuat dari pemerintah untuk membuat perubahan. Mediasi merupakan bentuk upaya yang memberikan win-win solution dan sesuai dengan nilai dalam Pancasila yaitu musyawarah untuk mufakat. Jika mediasi bisa diwujudkan, maka mediasi akan menjadi cara yang santun dalam penyelesaian sengketa pajak di Indonesia dan dapat meningkatkan hubungan yang lebih baik pasca perselisihan.

References

Bibliography Legal Documents Indonesia. Undang-Undang tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan (Law concerning General Guidelines and Taxation Procedure). UU No. 6 Tahun 1983, LN. No. 49 Tahun 1983 (Law Number 6 Year 1983, SG No. 49 Year 1983). ———. Undang-Undang tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan (Law concerning Amandement of the Law concerning General Guidelines and Taxation Procedure No. 6 Year 1983). UU No 9 Tahun 1994 tentang Perubahan UndangUndang No. 6 Tahun 1983. (Law No. 9 Year 1994, SG No. 59 Year 1994). ———. Undang-Undang Tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 1983 Tentang Ketentuan Umum Dan Tata Cara Perpajakan (Law concerning the Second Amandement of the Law concerning General Guidelines and Taxation Procedure. No. 6 Year 1983. Undang-Undang No. 16 Tahun 2000. LN. 126 Tahun 2000 (Law No. 16 Year 2000, SG No.126 Year 2000) ———. Undang-Undang Tentang Perubahan Ketiga Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 1983 Tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan (Law concerning The third Amandement of the Law concerning General Guidelines and Taxation Procedure No. 6 Year 1983). Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 28 Tahun 2007, LN. No. 85 Tahun 2007 (Law No. 28 Year 2007, SG No. 85 Year 2007). ———. Undang-Undang tentang Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti UndangUndang Nomor 5 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perubahan Keempat Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 6 Tahun 1983 Tentang Ketentuan Umum dan Tata Cara Perpajakan Menjadi Undang-Undang (Law Concerning The Fourth Amandemen of the Law concerning General Guidelines and Taxation Procedure No. 6 Year 1983). Undang-Undang No. 16 Tahun 2009, LN. No. 62 Tahun 2009 (Law No. 16 year 2009, SG. 62 year 2009) ———. Undang-Undang tentang Pengadilan Pajak (Law Concerning Tax Court). Undang-Undang No. 14 Tahun 2002, LN. No. 27 Tahun 2002 (Law No. 14 Year 2002, SG. 27 Year 2002) ———. Undang-Undang Tentang Arbitrase dan Alternative Penyelesaian Sengketa (Law Concerning Arbitration and ADR). Undang-Undang No. 30 Tahun 1999, LN. No. 138 Tahun 1999 (Law No. 30 Year 1999, SG No. 138 Year 1999) Books Abdurrahman. Penyelesaian Sengketa Melalui Mediasi Pengadilan dan Mediasi Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa: Refleksi Dinamika Hukum [Settlement of Disputes through Court-annexed Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution of Mediation: A Reflection of Legal Dynamics]. Jakarta: Peruri, 2008. Alexander, Nadja. “Global Trends in Mediation: Riding the Third Wave.” in Global Trends in Mediation, ed. Nadja Alexander. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer International, 2006. Boulle, Laurence and Kathleen Kelly. Mediation: Principles Process and Practice. New York: LexisNexis, 1996. Darmodihardjo, Sidharta Darji. Pokok-Pokok Fisafat Hukum [Fundamentals of Philosophy of Law]. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama, 1999. ~ 166 ~ HIDAYAH, SUHARININGSIH, ISTISLAM, PERMADI Volume 8 Number 2, May - August 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review Folberg, J. dan A. Taylor. Mediation: A Comprehensive Guide to Resolving Conflict without Litigation. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1984. Friedman, Wolfang. Legal Theory. London: Stevens & Son Limited, 1953. Ilyas, Wirawan B. dan Richard Burton. Manajemen Sengketa dalam Pungutan Pajak. Analisis Yuridis terhadap Teori dan Kasus[Dispute Management in Tax Collection, Juridical Analysis towards the Theory and Cases]. Jakarta: Mitra Wacana Media, 2012. Jaglowitz, Chris. Mediation in Federal Income Tax Disputes. Canada: Faculty of Law University of Windsor, 1999. Kriekhoff, Valerine J. L. “Mediasi: Tinjauan dari Segi Antropologi Hukum [Mediation: An Overview from the Legal Anthropology].” in Antropologi Hukum sebuah Bunga Rampai [Legal Anthropology an Anthology], ed. T. O. Ihromi. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor, 2001. OECD. Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting. Paris: OECD, 2013. ———. Study into the Role of Tax Intermediaries. Paris: OECD, 2008. Sidharta. “Pendekatan Hukum Progresif dalam Mencairkan Kebekuan Produk Legislasi [Progressive Law Approach in Unfreezing the Frozen Legislative Product]” in Dekonstruksi dan gerakan pemikiran hukum progresif [Deconstruction and the Movement of Progressive Law], ed. Moh. Mafud M. D. Yogyakarta: Taafa Media, 2013. Stilwell, Karen Dawn “Mediation of Canadian Disputes.” Master Thesis, University of Toronto, 2014. Articles Billingsley, Barbara and Masood Ahmed. “Evolution, revolution and culture shift: a critical analysis of compulsory ADR in England and Canada.” Common Law World Review 45 (2016): 186-213. Doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1473779516657745. Hanks, M. “Perspectives on Mandatory Mediation.” UNSW Law Journal. 35(3) (2012): 929-952. Inside Tax, “Ning Rahayu: Perjalanan Panjang Penanganan Sengketa Pajak di Indonesia [Ning Rahayu: The Long Journey of the Handling of Tax Disputes in Indonesia],” Inside Tax 22 (August, 2014): 48-52. Jone, Melinda. “What Can the United Kingdom’s Tax Dispute Resolution System Learn from Australia? An Evaluation and Recommendations from a Dispute Systems Design Perspective.” Australian Tax Forum 32, no. 1 (2017): 59-94. Khoirul Hidayah. “Indonesian Tax Dispute Resolution in Cooperative Paradigm Compared to United Kingdom and Australia”. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 175 (2018) 012203 MacFarlane, J. and M. Keet “Civil justice reform and mandatory civil mediation in Saskatchewan: Lessons from a maturing program.” Alberta Law Review 42, no. 3 (2005): 677. OECD, “Working Paper 6 – The Enhanced Relationship,” OECD Tax Intermediaries Study, July 2007. Radjagukguk, M. A. “Reformasi Sistem Tata Kelola dalam Pelayanan Publik pada MEDIATION FOR INDONESIAN TAX DISPUTES ~ 167 ~ Volume 8 Number 2, May - August 2018 ~ INDONESIA Law Review Pemerintahan yang Baik (Good Governance) [Governance Reform in the Public Services in Good Governance]” Veritas (2016): 68-89. Rahadjo, Satjipto. “Hukum Progresif (Penjelajahan Suatu Gagasan) [Progressive Law (An Exploration of the Idea).” Paper Presented at Diponegoro University, Semarang, 4 September 2004. Sander, F. E. “The Future of ADR.” Journal of Dispute Resolution 1 (2000): 3-10. Vos, Roelof. “Mediating Tax Disputes in the Netherlands.” Dutch-Flemish Magazine for Mediation and Conflict Management 18, no. 3 (2014): 1-7. Waye, Vicki. “Mandatory mediation in Australia’s civil justice system.” Common Law World Review 45, no. 2-3 (2016): 214-235. doi: http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1473779516645455. Websites Australian Taxation Office. “Alternative Dispute Resolution.” https://www.ato.gov. au/General/Dispute-or-object-to-an-ATO-decision/In-detail/Avoiding-andresolving-disputes/Alternative-Dispute-Resolution/Alternative-DisputeResolution-(ADR)/. Accessed on 10 August 2016 Australian Taxation Office. “Practice Statement Law Administration: Alternative Dispute Resolution in ATO Disputes.” http://law.ato.gov.au/atolaw/view. htm?locid=%27PSR/PS20133/NAT/ATO%27. Accessed on 7 August 2016. Ministry of Finance Republic of Indonesia. “Statistics.” http://www.setpp.depkeu. go.id/Ind/Statistik/StatBerkas.asp. accessed on 5 August 2016 Syukro, Ridho. “Ini 3 Penyebab Sengketa Pajak [This is the three main cause of tax disputes].” Berita Satu. http://www.beritasatu.com/makro/170973-ini-3- penyebab-sengketa-pajak.html, accessed on 20 August 2014. Tania Sourdin, “Evaluating ADR in ATO Disputes: Executive Summary,” http://www. civiljustice.info/adreval/5, accessed on 5 August 2016.

Download

Share

COinS