지방세 과세표준 양성화 방안

Though the system of complex local taxes was arranged by classifying the law on revised local taxes and by simplifying the items of taxation from 2011, practically it is in a situation where several problems on local tax system are not solved yet. This study aimed to suggest an improving plan from an aspect of legalization of a standard of assessment of local taxes and convenience in the procedure for payment of taxes. Problems and the improving plan for legalizing the standard of assessment suggested in this study are as follows. First, the main agents of decision on the statutory standard price of fair market value which is the basis for the standard of assessment of local taxes are composed quite intricately and differently. From such an aspect, it is necessary to simplify the rights to decide the standard of assessment and the main agents of public announcement. That is, it is judged that the desirable method is to vest the unique authority on the right to decide the standard of assessment to local government and to unify the main agents of public announcement and a formal objection to local government. Second, from a viewpoint of practical principle of no taxation without law, to force to apply the statutory standard price of fair market value is a regulation infringing property rights when the acquisition cost is less than the statutory standard price of fair market value, and it is against the practical principle of no taxation without law. Accordingly, the statutory standard price of fair market value which exceeds actual acquisition cost should be considered as invalid. Third, actualization of the standard of assessment is valid from an aspect of fair taxation, but sharp increase in the standard of assessment may cause a tax protest by taxpayers. Therefore, it is necessary to legalize the standard of assessment gradually. In case that the standard of assessment is revised and increased, it is necessary to revise it gradually based on the principle of gradual revision or to revise rational tax rate. Fourth, while the statutory standard price of fair market value of lands and houses are operated by introducing a public announcement system on the local tax law, buildings in non-residential real estate use price calculated by a mayor or a governor based on the historical cost value method as the standard of assessment. It is necessary to unify the method to apply the standard value of real estate computed for tax imposition by publicly announcing the price reflecting market price for non- residential general buildings. Difference in calculation of the standard value for tax imposition by each kind of real estate may hinder equity for taxation. Therefore, it seems that it would be necessary to publicly announce the standard value for tax imposition reflecting market price for general buildings. Fifth, in case that actual acquisition cost becomes the standard of taxation, which costs would be included may be a problem. Especially, as for value added tax, it is judged that it would be desirable to deal with it differently based on the person with liability to taxation rather than to exclude it from the acquisition cost in a lump, and it would be proper to prepare clear regulations on the tax law about interest for installment plan and interest for building fund. Finally, when it is possible to know the actual acquisition cost such as trading and exchange, it is possible to calculate the standard for taxation based on the fact, but as for original acquisition by constructing a new large-sized building, it has to pass through a professional and complex procedure to apply accounting standards and relevant tax laws in calculating the acquisition cost. Accordingly, in case of original acquisition and deemed acquisition of the property rights over a certain amount, it would be proper to secure accuracy and reliability by receiving a pre-verification from a professional such as a tax accountant for payment by self-assessment of acquisition tax.