---

Politics economy expert of Indonesian Politics Economy Association (AEPI) Salamudin Daeng delivered testimony as Applicant’s expert in fourth session of Case No. 57, 58, 59, and 63/PUU-XIV/2016, on Wednesday (28/9), in Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ifa

 

 

 

The existence of Tax Amnesty Act (UU Pengampunan Pajak) legalizes crime, politics economy expert of Indonesian Politics Economy Association (AEPI) Salamudin Daeng delivered in fourth session of Case No. 57, 58, 59, and 63/PUU-XIV/2016, on Wednesday (28/9).

As Applicant’s Expert of Case No. 63, Daeng argued that the Government’s reason reasoning Tax Amnesty Act for increasing State revenue is unreasonable. He cited former Finance Ministry Bambang Brodjonegoro’s statement about the aim of tax amnesty; three financial sources targeted by the Government are tax arrears, tax evasion funds that kept abroad including funds sourced from international tax crimes, and tax funds sourced from illegal business, such as gambling and money laundering, both in Indonesia and outside Indonesia which seek other forms of assets legalization in Indonesia.

“Considering the source of funds, it can be concluded that the State conducts legalization of serious crimes committed by corruptors, criminals, etc. Granting tax amnesty (to them, ed.) will bring consequence; illegal money enters state institutions. It means that the State opens broader opportunity for the same serious crimes in the future,” said him to Justice Panel led by Deputy Chief Anwar Usman.

Daeng assessed that other countries who implement tax amnesty aim to help people and macro economy industries. Based on his tax experience in several countries, tax amnesty is a punishment for tax-abiding citizens.

“Tax amnesty punishes tax-abiding citizens. Regarding Applicant’s petition, tax amnesty clearly violates the principle of justice because tax-abiding citizens are being punished, while tax evaders are getting forgiven,” said him.

Threaten International Trading

International trading law expert M. Reza Syarifuddin Zaki as Applicant’s Witness of Case No. 57, 58, and 59 explained that Act of Tax Amnesty creates inconsistency towards tax regulation regime. He assessed that Article 21 (2), (3), and (4) Act of Tax Amnesty show uncooperative attempts in establishing disclosure on tax and international trading.

Moreover, Reza assessed that Act of Tax Amnesty have spirit to encourage the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s member countries who willing to revise bank secrecy which considered can hamper disclosure in 2018. “However, Article 22 Act of Tax Amnesty gives impression of law impunity for state official, in this case impunity in tax amnesty implementation, which violate the spirit of equality before the law,” said him.

According to him, Act of Tax Amnesty makes disharmony in international trading that potentially triggers instability both bilateral and multilateral trading. Uncertainty in trading can be occurred if aspect of violations regulated in each country found.

“Whereas trading is intended to encourage economy values for a big community called state. People within the State can enjoy the spill of economy process,” said him.

As known, the Indonesian People’s Struggle Union (Serikat Perjuangan Rakyat Indonesia) as Applicant of Case No. 57, the One Justice Foundation (Yayasan Satu Keadilan) as Applicant of Case No 58, Leni Indrawati et al. as Applicant of Case No 59, and the Indonesian Prosperous Workers Union (DPP SBSI), the Indonesian Workers Union Confederation (KSPI), and the All-Indonesian Workers Union Confederation (KSPSI) as Applicant of Case No. 63 filed petitions challenging Act of Tax Amnesty.

The Applicants assessed the provisions of Tax Amnesty Act have injured people’s sense of justice because it distinguish between taxpayer with non taxpayer. Moreover, they argued the provisions give exclusive privilege to tax evader in form of exemption on administration sanction, investigation process, and criminal sanction.

The Applicants also assessed that tax amnesty doesn’t in accordance with the Constitution because tax has force nature. Tax amnesty makes tax nature become flexible and negotiable, thus it can cause injustice and discriminative to tax abiding citizen. (Lulu Anjarsari/lul/Prasetyo Adi N)

 

---