지방세법상 취득 간접비용의 범위 명확화 방안 - 조세심판원 심판결정례를 중심으로 -

The purpose of this study is to provide clarification method about acquisition indirect cost for taxpayer liable to acquisition tax in building union house. There are many tax conflicts about the scope of taxable object to acquisition tax in building union house between taxpayer and taxation authorities. To achieve the purpose of this study we examine several judgement decision cases that the Tax Tribunal has made on the tax conflicts about the scope of taxable object to acquisition tax in building union house. The taxpayer liable to acquisition tax in building union house claims that the acquisition price of apartment houses in housing reconstruction project does not include expenses being unlated with the construction of apartment houses. On the contrary, taxation authorities take up the opinion that the acquisition price of apartment houses in housing reconstruction project encompasses all direct and indirect cost connected to the precedure for building union house. In this study we find the next points. First, the Tax Tribunal has made judgement decision to dismiss taxpayer’s claim that the acquisition tax base in building union house does not contain the expenditure for constructing school facilities, the operating expenses of housing reconstruction association, the appraisal cost of housing reconstruction association member’s asset, the migration-related expense of housing reconstruction association member. Because those expenses or costs are acquisition indirect cost in housing reconstruction project. Thus we suggest that Article 18 (1) in the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act should include cost items such as necessary acquisition procedure costs related to the object to be acquired and business performance expenses paid by the acquirer in the process acquiring the object(for example, the operating expenses of housing reconstruction association). And compulsory expenses in accordance with relevant laws should include expenditure for constructing school facilities. Service fee paid in exchange for the service being provided should include the service cost related to migration of housing reconstruction association member. Second, the Tax Tribunal has made judgement decision to accept taxpayer’s claim that the acquisition tax base in building union house does not contain the expenditure for constructing urban planning facilities such as park and road. Because those facilities are separate from building union house. Thus we suggest that Article 18 (2) in the Enforcement Decree of the Local Tax Act should include cost items such as amounts paid to acquire an object separate from the object subject to acquisition If the clarification method on the scope of acquisition indirect cost in Local Tax Act proposed in this study is implemented, tax conflicts about the scope of taxable object to acquisition tax in building union house between taxpayer and taxation authorities will be reduced. The results of this study have contributing points in that it has clarified the scope of acquisition indirect cost in Local Tax Act.