Judicial review trial of Act 28/2009 about Local Taxes and Retribution was held on Monday (8/25) at MK plenary room. Clerk registered the case upon number 46/PUU-XII/2014 for the lawsuit filed by PT Kame Komunikasi Indonesia

In Maria Farida Indrati-led trial, Plaintiff represented by attorneys explained that the side has revised the document as advised by the Panel in the previous trial. The Plaintiff has attached its loss caused by the ruling of taxable value of property (NJOP).

“About the loss, if the average taxable value of a tower was I billion, approached with the 2% of the NJOP, the retribution will be 20 million, meanwhile if we just consider Act-based retribution, the retribution would be just 2 million. Therefore, our potential loss generating for about 17.927.272,00/tower. That’s just number,” he explained

Apart from it, Dony Tri Istiqomah, with fixed document, stated that explanation of Article 124 is basically opposing its own purposes. “While (change in the) petitum is only a gate of editorial changes as the Justices has advised in the previous trial,” he saId

In its Pleading, Applicant argued that its Constitutional Rights were harmed by the ruling of Article 124 UU 28/2009 about Local Taxes and Retribution, says: Considering the usage of service and controlling is difficult to be decided for later maximum retribution tariff is 2 % from the taxable value of property, to which based telecommunication property taxes assessment. Retribution related to controlling and supervision of which tower. In the preliminary trial (7/11), Plaintiff’s attorney Radian Syam revealed that the explanation encompasses retribution tariff to not be calculated after cost of monitoring and controlling. The Plaintiff sees that in the practice Local governments directly apply 2% tariff from NJOP.

 (Lulu Anjarsari/KUN)