受控外國公司課稅制度之研究

Study of Controlled Foreign Company Rules

系所名稱：法律學系 學位別：碩士 畢業學年：109年 指導教授：邱晨 受控外國公司課稅制度（Controlled Foreign Company Rules, CFC rules）於1960年代自歐美興起，作為國家課稅主權延伸至境外手段之一發展至今。在跨國經濟越發蓬勃情況下，OECD於2015年發布BEPS第3號行動方案，該方案指出CFC制度可以防範納稅人利用各國稅捐法制間差異取得稅捐利益，並提供各構成要件之立法方式。惟我國《所得稅法》第43-3條CFC稅制迄今仍未生效，納稅人與稽徵機關之間權利義務、構成要件適用範圍及時間點上存疑義。本文藉文獻整理、個案解析、立法例比較等研究方法，先從抽象層面討論CFC稅制應遵守之法律原則，具體層面則以美國CFC稅制（包含GILTI）、BEPS第3號行動計畫、歐盟法制下CFC稅制（包含反避稅指令、歐盟最高法院判決等）為比較標的。之所以特別研究歐盟CFC稅制，係因歐盟最高法院在Cadbury Schweppes案對納稅人跨境經濟活動自由給予最大的保障，也就是會員國只能在納稅人有「純粹人為安排」（wholly artificial arrangement）情況下始得課徵CFC稅捐，間接影響CFC稅制效力。本文將指出在我國CFC課稅制度下，（1）稅捐債務存在仍應由稅捐稽徵機關負舉證責任；（2）無須引進GILTI稅制；（3）且我國已引入歐盟法「純粹人為安排」概念，並討論實質營運豁免條款之運作疑義。至於《境外資金匯回管理運用及課稅條例》等過渡法律失效後，納稅人仍得主張自稅基中減除「彌補CFC稅制生效前受控外國公司之累積虧損」部分。

Consistently adopted in the United States and several European countries since the 1960s, CFC rules are recognized as an effective and legitimate anti-global tax avoidance regime. While combating tax base erosion became the common goal and OECD/G20 submitted an international framework as BEPS Projects providing recommendations to governments to reduce the rule gaps around the world in 2015, the CFC rules in R.O.C Income Tax Act section 43-3 haven’t come into force yet in 2021. Besides, the rights and duties between the taxpayers and the Authority and the scope of elements of the R.O.C CFC rules may be ambiguous. The thesis indicates that the Authority has the burden of proof in the tax collection process and that the covered losses which happened before the enforcement of CFC rules are principally exempted from the tax base with implementations of law principles. Also, by studying on US CFC rules（especially GILTI）, BEPS and EU tax law including ATAD, Cadbury Schweppes（C-196/04）judgment, etc., the thesis concludes that R.O.C doesn’t need GILTI legislation because of the current large scope of CFC income and that R.O.C has already applied the concept of“wholly artificial arrangement”as“substantial operating activities”.