加值型營業稅進項稅額扣抵及漏稅額計算之爭議──以無法取得進項憑證案件為探討中心

The Disputes about Input Tax Deduction and Calculation of Tax Leakage Amount in Value-added Business Tax—Focusing on Unavailable Input Documentary Evidence Cases

系所名稱：法律學系碩士班
學位別：碩士
畢業學年：111
指導教授：陳汶津
加值型營業稅係以「進項稅額扣抵法」，計算營業人當期之應納或溢付稅額。營業人以進項稅額扣抵銷項稅額，須取得合法進項憑證作為前提要件，否則不准扣抵。又營業人涉犯逃漏稅，於計算漏稅額時，亦同樣不准未取得合法進項憑證者扣抵銷項稅額。然實務上，卻有營業人於進貨時無法取得法定進項憑證之情形，倘若皆不准其於本稅及漏稅額部分扣除進項稅額，將使此類型之營業人面臨鉅額的營業稅及漏稅罰。
目前立法上除二手車買賣，以及財政部制定之「廢棄物運銷合作社代開發票」函釋外，並無其他針對此情形之對應規範。實務上普遍認為，應採嚴格的憑證主義，不許未履行法定憑證義務者申報進項稅額扣抵，且在計算漏稅額時，亦不允許其扣除該未依規定取得並申報之進項稅額。學說上則認為，納稅義務人違反稅法上協力義務，應僅生稽徵機關得進行推計課稅之法律效果，不應使營業人就此喪失進項稅額扣抵權利，而對於所漏稅額之認定，則在看法上產生可否推計之意見分歧。
本文於綜觀學說、實務見解後，乃針對營業稅相關規範進行基本權合憲性檢驗。並於得出違憲結論後，從納稅者權利保護觀點，認為得透過推計方式解決系爭問題。最後，援引日本消費稅之簡易課稅制度，作為往後營業稅修法之借鏡。

The value-added business tax is calculated using the "input tax deduction method" to determine the amount of tax payable. Input tax deduction is not allowed if the business entity does not obtain input documentary evidence. In addition, when calculating the amount of tax leakage, it is not allowed to deduct input tax without obtaining input documentary evidence.
However, in practice, there are cases where a business entity is unable to obtain input documentary evidence at the time of purchase. If it is not allowed to deduct the input tax from both the amount of tax payable and tax leakage, this will result in a large amount of business tax and the punishment of tax evasion.
Currently, there are no other regulations on this issue. In practice, it is widely believed that those who don’t obtain input documentary evidence should not be allowed to claim input tax deduction or deduct input tax when calculating tax leakage amount. Academics argue that the violation of the taxpayer’s cooperation obligation should only allow for tax estimation, with different views on the estimation of tax leakage amount.
This paper summarizes academic and practical views and examines the constitutionality of the fundamental rights within the relevant business tax regulations. Concluding that they are unconstitutional, it argues that the controversial issue can be resolved through tax estimation while considering the perspective of protecting taxpayers’ rights. Finally, it cites the simplified taxation system of Japan’s consumption tax as a model for future amendments to Taiwan’s Business Tax Act.