과세전 적부심사제도의 운영현황 및 개선방안

The pre-assessment review is a key part of preliminary remedy that protects the procedural rights of taxpayers at the stage prior to taxation. In particular, the Supreme Court recently issued a series of rulings emphasizing the procedural legality of the pre-assessment review, which has increased interest in the pre-assessment review. In order to revitalize pre-assessment review, this article examined the current status of the pre-assessment review and suggested ways to improve it. The contents are summarized as follows. First, it is desirable to operate the Pre-assessment Review Committee and the National Tax Review Committee separately to ensure taxpayers' options for appeals and to strengthen the expertise in the hearing on the pre-assessment review. Second, it is necessary to readjust reasons for restriction of the pre-assessment review. If taxpayers provide collateral for the amount of tax notice, even if there is a reason for collection before payment period or an occasional imposition, a request for pre-assessment review should be allowed. Also, if the term until the expiration of the imposition period is less than three months, a request for a pre-assessment review should be allowed and a special imposition period should be recognized instead. In the case of a notice of return of an application for exemption or reduction, a pre-assessment review should be allowed when a change in the amount of income is notified, but if an imposition is made according to a correction request or imposition order from the Board of Audit and Inspection, it should be excluded from the pre-assessment review. Third, in order to increase the effectiveness of the pre-assessment review and protect the trust of taxpayers, it is necessary to stipulate the binding force of the pre-assessment review decision in the statute. If the taxpayers submit false data during the pre-assessment review process or the tax office finds new evidence to justify the tax imposition after the decision, the binding force should be excluded if tax imposition is made in response to a correction request based on the audit results of the Board of Audit and Inspection. Fourth, if the decision to examine the pre-assessment review is delayed, the additional delayed payment tax for the delayed period should be exempted by 100%, but if the tax office proves that the decision to examine the pre-assessment review has been delayed due to reasons attributable to the taxpayer, the additional delayed payment tax should be imposed by 100%. Fifth, the period for requesting a pre-assessment review and the period for determining or notifying the pre-assessment review are too short, so each should be extended from 30 to 45 days.