Hello, is there anything we can help?
Jakarta, Ideatax -- It is known that one of the steps that must be done in the tax audit process is the final discussion of audit findings. By definition, the final discussion is a discussion between the Taxpayer and the Tax Auditor on the Audit findings, the findings of which are set forth in the minutes of the final discussion of the Audit findings signed by both parties and contains the correction of the principal tax payable both approved and unapproved and the calculation of administrative sanctions.
Final discussion is a crucial process in tax audit because without the final discussion, all audit findings can be canceled. This is as regulated in Article 36 paragraph (1) letter d of the KUP Law which states that the Director General of Taxes on his authority or at the request of the Taxpayer may cancel the findings of a tax audit conducted without the submission of a Notification of Tax Audit Findings (SPHP), or without a Final Discussion of Audit Findings (PAHP) with the Taxpayer. This regulation is intended to ensure a sense of justice for taxpayers and protect the fulfillment of taxpayer rights in tax audits.
However, there are some considerations that during the final discussion, there is a negotiation between the taxpayers and the Tax Authority. This is because in the final discussion, the taxpayer can determine the amount of tax agreed or disagreed as stated in Article 42 paragraph (1) of the Minister of Finance Regulation Number 17 of 2013 concerning Audit Procedures as last amended by PMK 184 of 2015.
The value approved by the taxpayer then becomes the basis for the taxpayer to make payment if the taxpayer files a legal appeal in the form of an objection. This is as regulated in PMK 9 of 2013 concerning Procedures for Objection which states that before submitting an objection letter, the taxpayer must pay off the accrued tax at least the amount agreed by the taxpayer in the final discussion of the audit findings.
The size of the value agreed by the taxpayer will also affect the amount of administrative sanctions that must be paid by the taxpayer if the taxpayer's objection is rejected or partially granted. Article 25 of the HPP Law states that in the event that the taxpayer's objection is rejected or partially accepted, the taxpayer is subject to an administrative sanction of 30% of the amount based on the objection decision minus the tax paid before filing the objection.
From this we can see that the determination of the amount agreed by the taxpayer in the final discussion has long implications. However, providing an opportunity for taxpayers to state the amount of tax payable according to taxpayers also arises to answer the sense of justice in the audit process.
Therefore, although the self-assessment system applies in calculating the amount of tax that should be payable is the right of the taxpayer, taxpayers must fill it in with a sense of responsibility. Article 12 paragraph (1) of the KUP law regulates that every taxpayer is obliged to pay the tax payable in accordance with the applicable regulations, without relying on a tax assessment letter. In a broad sense, this regulation explains that tax audit is the last stage in the implementation of the self-assessment system in accordance with the KUP law.
It is possible to think that the final discussion of audit finding is a momentum for taxpayers to conduct "negotiation" with the Tax Authority. However, it should be noted that the word negotiation is neutral. According to the Great Indonesian Dictionary, negotiation is the process of bargaining by negotiating to reach a mutual agreement. Negotiation is the peaceful settlement of a dispute through discussion between the disputing parties.
In the context of the final discussion of the audit findings, negotiations refer to negotiations between the tax authorities and taxpayers in submitting arguments related to questions of law and questions of fact found in tax audits.
Conversely, the final discussion is an opportunity given by the government to taxpayers to disclose the actual tax payable according to the taxpayer's calculations, so that in the long run it is expected that taxpayer compliance will increase. This is in line with research conducted by Iskandar et al (2016) which states that giving rewards/rights and penalties to taxpayers during the audit process will increase taxpayer compliance compared to only giving penalties to taxpayers.
Thus, we should place the final discussion of the audit findings as a mandate for the implementation of the self-assessment system in fulfilling tax obligations. Moreover, there are internal and external agencies that randomly conduct peer reviews on the implementation of tax audits.
Related Regulations
-
Law Number 6 of 1983 concerning General Provisions and Tax Procedures as amended lastly by Law Number 7 of 2021 concerning Harmonization of Tax Regulations
-
Minister of Finance Regulation Number 17 of 2013 concerning Audit Procedures as last amended by PMK 184 of 2015
-
PMK 9 of 2013 concerning Objection Procedures
