부동산 기부채납의 법적 쟁점과 과세 문제 (Legal Issues and Taxation Problems on Real Estate Contributed Acceptance)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국부동산학회
· 수록지 정보 : 부동산학보 / 65호 / 50 ~ 64페이지
· 저자명 : 이상신

초록

각종 개발사업 시 이루어지는 기부채납에 대하여 법적 성질, 현황과 문제점, 과세문제 및 미국과 일본의 사례를 검토하였는데 다음과 같은 개선방안이 필요하다. 첫째 기부채납에 대해서 증여로 보는 법률구성을, 미국이나 일본과 같이 개발부담금 제도로 운영하는 것을 검토할 필요가 있다. 둘째 기부채납 요구가 과도한 경우에는 공용수용이 될 수 있으므로 적절한 인센티브를 제공하는 것이 필요하며, 기부채납이 필요한 경우에도 사업관련성이 있고 비례의 원칙에 부합하는 것이어야 한다. 셋째 기부채납 된 기반시설에 대해 유형화하여 토지의 취득가액 또는 무형자산으로 취급하여 상각하는 일본의 사례는 세무처리방법을 명시하고 있다는 점에서, 우리 과세관청에게도 명확한 지침이 요구된다. 넷째 기부채납이 필요한 것이라면 도로나 공원 등 이외에 문화시설이나 공공청사 등 지역별 또는 행정청의 수요에 맞는 기부채납이 이루어져 좀 더 효율적으로, 공공에 기여할 수 있는 기부채납이 되도록 하여야 한다.

영어초록

1. CONTENTS (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES This study set out to examine the current state of and problems with contributed acceptance, taxation issues according to contributed acceptance, and cases of contributed acceptance in other countries, thus finding important implications or improvement measures for the nation.


(2) RESEARCH METHOD The study reviewed concerned literature home and abroad, conducted legal analysis of contributed acceptance, and looked into the resulting taxation issues including corporate, value added, and acquisition taxes and the discussions about development charges in the U.S.A. and Japan.


(3) RESEARCH FINDINGS The study thus found differences in the legal composition of contributed acceptance, which is usually for the establishment of infrastructure, between South Korea and the U.S.A. and Japan. Unlike South Korea, the U.S.A. and Japan judged whether contributed acceptance was legitimate or not according to considerable causal relations and principle of proportionality and had no value added tax issues. Based on those findings, the study proposed the following improvement measures for the nation.


2. RESULTS First, there is a need to review a plan of running contributed acceptance as a development charge system like in the U.S.A. and Japan rather than a donation as in its current legal composition.
Second, contributed acceptance can be expropriation when demands for it are excessive, which calls for proper incentives. When there is a need for contributed acceptance, it should have relations with business and meet the principle of proportionality.
Third, Japan classifies the infrastructure attributed to contributed acceptance, treats it as the acquisition value of land or intangible asset, and thus repays it. Given that the Japanese case makes clear the tax management method, the South Korean taxation authorities also need to lay down clear guidelines.
Finally, if there is a need for contributed acceptance, it should meet the needs of areas and administrative agencies including cultural facilities and public offices in addition to roads and parks in order to make more efficient contributions to public good.

참고자료

· 없음