官官相護？訴訟當事人身分影響稅務訴訟結果之初步證據

Do Judgments on Tax Litigations Show Partiality for the Government as a Litigant?-Preliminary Evidence on Tax Case Adjudicated Decisions

本研究之實證結果顯示，當最高行政法院在決定是否受理稅務訴訟上訴案件時，若上訴人為稽徵機關，最高行政法院實體審理而不加以程序駁回的機率，顯著高於當上訴人為個人或法人時；而經最高行政法院實體審理後的判決結果，稽徵機關獲得有利判決的機率亦顯著大於個人或法人。這種稽徵機關在稅務訴訟過程中所享有的優勢，即便納稅人延聘了專業的會計師、律師作為訴訟代理人之後仍然存在，惟會計師、律師的確有助於降低納稅人被程序駁回之機率。綜合統計分析之結果，本文無法向民眾提供稅務行政訴訟沒有官官相護之證據。

Our empirical results show that relative to the appeals launched by individuals and corporate entities, appeals lodged by the tax authorities have a significantly higher probability of being heard at the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC). Appeals lodged by individuals and corporate entities, on the other hand, are likely to be procedurally dismissed by the SAC. In addition, in the cases adjudicated by the SAC, the tax authorities have a considerably higher chance of winning than do individuals and corporate entities, even when the latter have engaged lawyers or CPAs as their legal representatives. Our univariate and probit analyses consistently indicate that case judgments adjudicated by the SAC demonstrate partiality for the tax authorities, consistent with the assumptions of government advantage theory.