This September, the DPR was busy collecting DIM (Problem Inventory List) from various elements of society. The DIM is related to the Draft Law on General Provisions and Tax Procedures (RUU KUP) 2021. One of the crucial issues is in Article 37E-37I of the 2021 KUP Bill, the arrangement of which is similar to the tax sanctions elimination program or Sunset Policy (SP) Volume 1 in 2008.
Executive Director of the Pratama-Kreston Tax Research Institute (TRI) Prianto Budi Saptono revealed that the presence of “SP Volume 2” in the 2021 KUP Bill shows weak data management at the Directorate General of Taxes. “This provision also shows the ineffectiveness of AEoI (Automatic Exchange of Information) in improving the taxpayer database,” said Prianto, Friday (10/9).
The provisions of SP Volume 2 contained in the 2021 KUP Bill provide facilities in the form of eliminating tax sanctions specifically for Individual Taxpayers (WPOP) who have assets for the period 2016 to 2019. There are three criteria that must be met in this program. First, the acquisition of WPOP assets must be in the period 2016 to 2019. Second, the assets in the first condition are still owned by the WPOP as of December 31 2019. Third, the assets in the first condition have not been reported in the 2019 Income Tax SPT (Income Tax Return).
According to government data as stated in the Academic Text of the 2021 KUP Bill, there is a difference of IDR 451 trillion that has not been reported in the OP PPh SPT in 2019. This amount was obtained by comparing the assets in the 2019 OP PPh SPT and the 2019 AEoI data. If the difference is multiplied with an effective PPh rate of 15%, tax revenue of IDR 67.6 trillion will be obtained.
There are four weaknesses in AEoI data management. First, AEoI data does not include NPWP (Taxpayer Identification Number). Second, the address of the owner of the financial asset listed in the AEoI data is incomplete or located abroad, so the DGT experiences problems in following up. Third, the DJP did not find information on the names and dates of birth of financial account holders, so they experienced problems in tracking them via NIK (Resident Identification Number). Fourth, AEoI data does not cover all income earned by taxpayers, but only includes financial data.
The weaknesses above show the fact that AEoI data is not yet mature data and data matching still needs to be carried out. In this case, the Directorate General of Taxes must match the AEoI data with other data that the Directorate General of Taxes receives. This process takes even longer even though the tax assessment expiration date for 2019 will end after 2024. Apart from that, “The quality of data collected by ministries and government agencies also still varies,” he said.
In reality, said Prianto, Article 35A of the KUP Law regulates that every ILAP (Government Agency, Institution, Association and Other Parties) is obliged to provide data and information relating to taxation to the Directorate General of Taxes. This provision was strengthened by the ratification of Law Number 9/2017 which regulates Access to Financial Information for Tax Purposes. Thus, for tax matters, there is no longer any confidentiality between banks or other parties.
Prianto assessed that the problem came from the implementing regulations for Article 35A of the KUP Law, namely Government Regulation (PP) no. 31/2012. The PP regulates the provision and collection of data and information relating to taxation. However, these provisions do not explain the “standards” for the quality of financial information data that ILAP should have.
He suggested that the government should revise the implementing regulations so that there is uniformity in the data collected by ILAP, which in the end will make processing the data easier. According to him, the revision of PP no. 31/2012 could be a solution to overcome the weakness of data that is not ready for use.
Prianto assesses that the asset disclosure program with the aim of increasing taxpayer acceptance and compliance will be less than optimal if the four weaknesses in AEoI data processing have not been resolved and the quality of financial information data is not uniform.
