The draft Presidential Regulation (Peraturan Presiden/Perpres) that will serve as the legal basis for transferring the Tax Court’s organizational, administrative, and financial oversight from the Ministry of Finance to the Supreme Court is entering its final stage.
Aditya Agung, Coordinator of the Tax Court Transition Preparation Team, said they finalized the draft Perpres at the end of August 2026. Following a public consultation, the draft will proceed to the harmonization process.
The drafting process involves six ministries and government institutions, i.e., the Ministry of Finance, the Supreme Court, the Ministry of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform, the Ministry of Law, the National Civil Service Agency, and the Ministry of State Secretariat. Cross-agency discussions have been ongoing since the interministerial committee was established in February 2026.
The Perpres follows up on Constitutional Court Decision Number 26/PUU-XXI/2023, which provides for the gradual transfer of the Tax Court’s organizational, administrative, and financial oversight to the Supreme Court, to be completed no later than December 31, 2026.
During the transition, the government and the Supreme Court must ensure that the transfer of authority does not disrupt public services or legal certainty for parties with ongoing cases.
Why the Transition?
The Tax Court has a unique position in the judicial system, as it hears and decides tax disputes, while organizational, administrative, and financial oversight has historically fallen under the Ministry of Finance. At the same time, the Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) is one party whose decisions or actions may be challenged before the Tax Court.
This arrangement raised questions about institutional independence, which were subsequently brought before the Constitutional Court.
In Decision Number 26/PUU-XXI/2023, the Constitutional Court ruled that the phrase “Department of Finance” in Article 5(2) of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 14 of 2002 was inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution insofar as it was not interpreted as referring to the Supreme Court. The gradual transition is to be completed no later than December 31, 2026.
The decision provides the basis for transferring the Tax Court’s oversight to the Supreme Court as part of implementing a single-roof judicial system.
Regardless, transferring oversight alone does not guarantee judicial independence or the quality of court decisions. Its success will depend on how the new oversight is performed, as well as governance, human resources, case administration, and the consistency of judicial proceedings.
What It Means for Taxpayers
For taxpayers, the change is not simply about transferring oversight responsibilities. It also raises whether the transition can occur without disrupting ongoing tax disputes.
Moving oversight to the Supreme Court may affect perceptions of the Tax Court’s independence, given that the Ministry of Finance previously oversaw it. However, whether this perception changes in practice will depend on how the new oversight operates and the quality of judicial proceedings after the transition.
Maintaining service continuity during the transition will also be central. According to Aditya, during the initial stage, litigation procedures, appeal filing procedures, and court proceedings will continue to follow the applicable rules. Therefore, the transfer of oversight does not automatically change procedural law.
Any changes to procedural law or the institutional structure will still require regulatory adjustments, including possible amendments to the Tax Court Law.
The transition will also need adjustments to administrative and information technology systems. The Supreme Court has its own judicial administration and case information systems. Integrating these systems will require adjustments for judges and Tax Court staff who have so far been under the Ministry of Finance’s oversight structure.
From the perspective of tax legal certainty, improving the Tax Court’s institutional framework could affect the consistency of tax dispute resolution. The Tax Court takes part in the tax dispute resolution process before a case, where eligible, proceeds to judicial review by the Supreme Court.
Nevertheless, greater institutional independence does not lead to more consistent court decisions by default, which will need to be assessed based on judicial practice after the integration is completed.
Several transition risks also need to be anticipated, including potential administrative delays, clarity on employment status and rights, and adjustments to budgets, facilities, and infrastructure previously managed within the Ministry of Finance.
Gearing Up
The transfer of the Tax Court’s oversight to the Supreme Court is a structural change that follows up on Constitutional Court Decision Number 26/PUU-XXI/2023. The transition will place the Tax Court’s organizational, administrative, and financial oversight within the judicial branch under the Supreme Court.
The success of the transition should not be measured solely by the issuance of the Perpres or the administrative completion of the transfer of authority. The government and the Supreme Court must guarantee judicial services continue without disruption throughout the transition.
Taxpayers, tax consultants, and other stakeholders should also receive clear information on litigation procedures during the transition.
Furthermore, the status, rights, and employment arrangements for personnel transferring between institutions need to be clearly established before the integration is completed.
Regulatory reform should also continue so that the integration does not stop at organizational, administrative, and financial matters. The Tax Court Law, including its procedural rules and other relevant institutional provisions, should be reviewed to ensure that the tax judicial system has a consistent legal basis after the transition.
Also Read
Tax Refunds Are a Right, Not a Fiscal Favor
What Is Tax in Indonesia?
Breaking Down the Article 21 Withholding Tax Provisions