Petition of five regents of different provinces entirely rejected by the Constitutional Court (MK), Tuesday (2/10) at the Plenary Court. In its decision No.. 44/PUU-IX/2011, the Court stated the principal issue of the petition is unproven and unreasonable laws. "Declare reject Petitioners' petition for all," said Chairman MK Mohammad. Mahfud MD when reading the verdict.

They are Regent Sumbawa, West Nusa Tenggara Province, Zulkifli Muhadli; Vice Regent Timika, Papua province, Abdul Muis; Regent Joyless Kingdom, Central Kalimantan, Willy M. Yoseph; Regent North Halmahera, North Maluku, Hein Namotemo; Regent Morowali, Central Sulawesi, Anwar Hafid.

They examined the inclusion of related income tax (income tax) individual taxpayers in the revenue-sharing and do not include corporate taxpayers in revenue sharing. According to them the Petitioner in this case the phrase "natural person" contrary to Article 18A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. The articles were tested against the 1945 Constitution is Article 160 paragraph (2) letter c of the Regional: "Income Tax (PPh) Article 21, Article 25 and Article 29 individual taxpayers in the country." Article 11 paragraph (2) letter c UU 33/2004: "Income Tax (Income Tax) of Article 25 and Article 29 taxpayer and PPh Article 21." In addition, Article 31C Paragraph (1) of Law 36/2008: "State revenue from the income tax domestic and personal income tax under Article 21 that was cut by the employer shall be divided 80% to the central government and 20% to the area where the taxpayer is registered ".

Rules of PPh on the Track 

In accordance with the considerations set forth in its decision, the Court found that the inclusion or exclusion of corporate tax or simply enter a personal income tax in a revenue-sharing to local government, a legal policy of open (opened legal policy) the legislators are highly dependent in accordance with the needs of the dynamic development of the affairs of the division between the central and local governments.

"No entry in corporate tax revenue-sharing is already correct, since it is done in order to protect all the people of Indonesia and the entire country of Indonesia and to promote the general welfare by the state as mandated by the Constitution of 1945," said the Court's decision.

In addition, the Court in its decision also does not deny the existence of social and environmental degradation environmental degradation caused by mining activities. However, the Court said, there is no causal relationship between the inability of the applicant to address the direct and indirect impacts of mining activities in the form of social and environmental degradation environmental degradation with the distribution of corporate income tax.

"Due to the impact of prevention activities and social environmental degradation environmental degradation as a result of the company's activities can be done with other statutory provisions that require companies to allocate a budget to address the impacts of environmental degradation as a result of mining activities," said the Court.

In accordance with Law 40/2007 concerning Limited liability company, according to the Court, the local government with the powers granted by the legislation could also put pressure on the owner / owners of capital to improve the social and environmental degradation environmental degradation as a result of the company's activities. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)