RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재후보

    대도시 내의 법인 취득세 중과세제도에 대한 고찰 - 판례를 중심으로 - = Heavy Tax Rate of Acquisition Tax in Metropolitan area

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109467601

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The current heavy tax rate of acquisition tax is intended to improve the welfare and living conditions of metropolitan residents by limiting the population density in large cities, thereby promoting more balanced economic growth. In order to achieve these reasons, current heavy rate on acquisition tax indirectly suppress the density and leads to more balanced growth, while it does not restricting corporate activities on metropolitan area.
    The article specifically focuses on case, especially Article 13 (2) (1) of the Local Tax Act, which is most contentiously applied. This paper examines the case and analyzes how the case is concluded the metropolitan corporate acquisition tax taxation requirements.
    It is pointed out that the Article 13 (2) (1) of the Local Tax Act has violated principle of prohibition of comprehensive mandate, because the regulation criteria is standardized by the form of comprehensive mandate. For example, there are no specific mandate criteria for branch or Liason office in the article, so that understanding of the terms are unclear. This seems to violate the basic principle of the taxation law, and therefore it means increase in constitutional violation.
    There is a clear and present need to return to the basic principle of taxation which guarantees and regulates the property rights of the people. It is also necessary to clearly, concretely, and objectively define the relevant legal provisions. If such unconstitutional behavior continues, arbitrary tax laws will only grow in both number and scope. A good first step would be to review the legislation defining the case requirements with an aim of clarifying it.
    번역하기

    The current heavy tax rate of acquisition tax is intended to improve the welfare and living conditions of metropolitan residents by limiting the population density in large cities, thereby promoting more balanced economic growth. In order to achieve t...

    The current heavy tax rate of acquisition tax is intended to improve the welfare and living conditions of metropolitan residents by limiting the population density in large cities, thereby promoting more balanced economic growth. In order to achieve these reasons, current heavy rate on acquisition tax indirectly suppress the density and leads to more balanced growth, while it does not restricting corporate activities on metropolitan area.
    The article specifically focuses on case, especially Article 13 (2) (1) of the Local Tax Act, which is most contentiously applied. This paper examines the case and analyzes how the case is concluded the metropolitan corporate acquisition tax taxation requirements.
    It is pointed out that the Article 13 (2) (1) of the Local Tax Act has violated principle of prohibition of comprehensive mandate, because the regulation criteria is standardized by the form of comprehensive mandate. For example, there are no specific mandate criteria for branch or Liason office in the article, so that understanding of the terms are unclear. This seems to violate the basic principle of the taxation law, and therefore it means increase in constitutional violation.
    There is a clear and present need to return to the basic principle of taxation which guarantees and regulates the property rights of the people. It is also necessary to clearly, concretely, and objectively define the relevant legal provisions. If such unconstitutional behavior continues, arbitrary tax laws will only grow in both number and scope. A good first step would be to review the legislation defining the case requirements with an aim of clarifying it.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼