Investasi di Indonesia dalam Kaitannya dengan Pelaksanaan Perjanjian Hasil Putaran Uruguay

Kusumaatmadja, Mochtar

doi:10.20885/iustum.vol3.iss5.art1

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the event that the Heir during his lifetime is a taxpayer who is not registered/does not have a NPWP, so that the Heir during his life never reported his assets in the annual SPT, then the KPP will grant an Income Tax SKB on the inheritance submitted by the heir and the heir will not be obliged to pay tax payable even though the testator does not have a NPWP and never reported his assets in the annual SPT. This is done because the KPP considers that there is no tax owed that must be paid off by the heirs, because the heirs have income below non-taxable income (Kusumawati, 2023).…”

Section: Reasons For Sharing Joint Inheritance Rights Can Be Subject ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Analysis of the Status of Distribution of Joint Inheritance Rights in the Collection of Income Tax (PPh)

Wahyudi,

Handayani,

Karjoko

2024

IJSSHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inheritance is not an object of Income Tax, however, in certain circumstances inheritance, especially the distribution of joint inheritance rights, can be subject to Income Tax. This research aims to analyze the position of distribution of joint inheritance rights in the collection of PPh according to applicable laws and regulations, as well as to examine the reasons for the distribution of joint inheritance rights being subject to PPh. The research method is normative juridical. The type of data used is secondary data. The data collection method is literature study. The results of this research are: first, Article 4 paragraph (3) letter b of the Income Tax Law regulates that transfers due to inheritance are not objects of Income Tax. The PPh exemption must be based on the SKB PPh issued by the KPP Pratama where the object of inheritance is located. The application for issuing an Income Tax SKB can be accepted or rejected by KPP Pratama. When KPP Pratama refuses to issue an PPh SKB, the heirs must pay PPh of 2.5% on NPOP. PPh payments are made to obtain a Tax Payment Letter (SSP PPh), and will be used as the basis for fulfilling taxation when registering the transfer of land rights. Second, the reason the distribution of joint inheritance rights may be subject to Income Tax (PPh) is because the inherited assets have never been reported in the heir's Annual SPT. However, if the heir can prove that the heir has income below Non-Taxable Income even though the heir did not report the inherited assets in the heir's SPT, then the heir cannot be charged PPh, and KPP Pratama must grant the request for an Income Tax SKB submitted by the heir. Because there is no tax owed that must be paid off by the heirs.

show abstract

Section: Reasons For Sharing Joint Inheritance Rights Can Be Subject ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Analysis of the Status of Distribution of Joint Inheritance Rights in the Collection of Income Tax (PPh)

Wahyudi,

Handayani,

Karjoko

2024

IJSSHR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite this phenomenon, from a legal perspective, Indonesia's ratification of the Marrakesh agreement brings implications in the form of rights and obligations that must be utilized and implemented correctly. As stated by Atmadja (1996), Indonesia's attachment to the WTO is a reality. Therefore, Indonesia's participation in globalization requires legal efforts to follow up and address issues that arise from the Marrakesh agreement, such as in the field of investment as regulated in TRIMs agreement.…”

Section: Hasil Dan Pembahasan Implikasi Perjanjian Trims Bagi Indonesiamentioning

confidence: 99%

The Implications of TRIMs Agreement on Domestic Economy in the 21st Century: A Study of Legal Development

Hasyim

Husen

Nasrullah

2023

sjh

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to analyze the implications of the TRIMs agreement for Indonesia. It discusses the exceptions to the TRIMs agreement, the utilization of transition periods, as well as the efforts of the Government to increase the investment value. This normative legal study uses statute, sociological, and comparative approaches with a literature study technique. The study results a show that Indonesia implements the TRIMs agreement, considering the exceptions and transition period. The Government’s efforts to increase investment include clear legal protection, improvement of human resources, a conducive investment environment, digital technology, innovative approach, and simplifying the investment process. Therefore, it is recommended that the Government strengthens investment regulations and policies that consider the development of society and the business world and increases investment in education and digital technology. The community must also actively participate in helping to increase investment by creating a conducive investment environment. With reasonable efforts and cooperation, investment in Indonesia is expected to increase and positively impact Indonesia’s economic growth in the 21st century.

show abstract

“…In addition, the provisions of FIRA also violate Article XI Paragraph (1) GATT regarding quantitative restrictions because of the argument of foreign investors that there is a value-added undertaking to FIRA as Canadian action to limit the import of products contained in undertaking and Article XVI Paragraph (I) due to subsidies not in the form of money (Carasco, 1983). During the Uruguay Round, The FIRA case of USA v Canada leads to an important agenda for the round that resulted in the creation of TRIMs Agreement in WTO Establishment Agreement's annex (Kusumaatmadja, 1996).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Meanwhile, on the second Illustrative List that stated TRIMs that are inconsistent with the obligation of General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions provided for in paragraph 1 of Article XI of GATT 1994 include those which are mandatory or enforceable under domestic law or under administrative rulings, or compliance with which is necessary to obtain an advantage, and which restrict: (a) the importation by an enterprise of products used in or related to its local production, generally or to an amount related to the volume or value of local production that it exports; (b) the importation by an enterprise of products used in or related to its local production by restricting its access to foreign exchange to an amount related to the foreign exchange inflows attributable to the enterprise; or (c) the exportation or sale for export by an enterprise of products, whether specified in terms of particular products, in terms of volume or value of products, or in terms of a proportion of volume or value of its local production (Kusumaatmadja, 1996). Indonesia has also violated the General Elimination of Quantitative Restriction principle in their modern retail regulation by limiting imported products used in the manufacture of merchandise production or selling products in modern retailers to only 20% (twenty percent).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Analysis on Local Content Requirements Regulation for Modern Retail Business in Indonesia

Pratama¹,

Velentina²

2021

Proceedings of the Asia-Pacific Research in Social Sciences and Humanities Universitas Indonesia Conference (APRISH 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research paper examined the adjustment of domestic Local Content Requirements rules in Indonesia for the implementation of Modern Retail business in Indonesia and the Local Content Requirements provisions of the WTO. Indonesia showed their self-approval to WTO by ratifying Law Number 7 of 1994 concerning the Ratification of the Agreement Establishing The World Trade Organization on November 2, 1994 (Dirdjosisworo, 2004). However, since 2014, the Government of Indonesia has received protests from WTO member countries such as The European Union, Japan, the United States, Australia and New Zealand in relation to the Local Content Requirement policy in the form of fulfilling 80% (eighty percent) of domestic products that must be sold on the modern retail market on Ministry of Trade Regulation 53/2012, 68/2012, and 70/2013 which was replaced by Regulation 56/2014. These provisions are contrary to the TRIMs Agreement, principled by Article III GATT on National Treatment and Article XI GATT on General Elimination of Quantitative Restrictions, which is an annex to the WTO Establishment Agreement that has been ratified by Indonesia. Comparison between the regulations of Indonesia's local content requirements and WTO provisions will be done by looking at the adjustments between regulations and the application of WTO exceptions. Based on rules of Local Content Requirements, the Modern Retail has violated TRIMs Agreement with no applicable exceptions on the provisions.

show abstract

Investasi di Indonesia dalam Kaitannya dengan Pelaksanaan Perjanjian Hasil Putaran Uruguay

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Legal Analysis of the Status of Distribution of Joint Inheritance Rights in the Collection of Income Tax (PPh)

Legal Analysis of the Status of Distribution of Joint Inheritance Rights in the Collection of Income Tax (PPh)

The Implications of TRIMs Agreement on Domestic Economy in the 21st Century: A Study of Legal Development

Legal Analysis on Local Content Requirements Regulation for Modern Retail Business in Indonesia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About