英文摘要 |
The theoretical disputes about the subject of taxation revocation procedure in Taiwan are manifested in two subjects, which the first one is “subject of litigation” and the other one “procedural subject”. The dispute around “subject of litigation” is theoretical debate between dispute doctrine (also known as individualization theo-ry) and gross doctrine (also known as settlement theory); disputes about “procedur-al subject” involve the administrative assessments between the original tax assess-ment and the review decision made through the review procedure by tax admin-istration. The dispute doctrine originated from one administrative court’s precedent, which indicate only the taxpayer’s factual disputes raised in the review process, instead of the administrative assessment itself, as the subject of the taxation revoca-tion litigation. Just the view of precedent has led to disputes over taxation, which cannot be resolved in one tome in litigation. To resolve the problem, Taiwan’s leg-islators adopted the provisions of Article 21of the Taxpayer’s Rights Protection Act, TRPA, to abandon the dispute doctrine and adopt the gross doctrine, and hope through this specification, that disputes can be resolved at one time. However, gross doctrine has its limits in its application. In terms of this country’s normative situation, if there are two separate tax assessments for a single tax in the same year, it will be impossible to apply settlement theory and resolve disputes in litigation at one time. TRPA is therefore to be revised, which need the relevant supporting regu-lations in the Tax Collection Act and the Administrative Litigation Act. This article provides suggestions revisions in the conclusion for consideration. |