지방세 과세표준 양성화 방안 (Study on a Plan for Legalizing a Standard of Assessment of Local Taxes)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국세무사회 부설 한국조세연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 세무와 회계연구 / 1권 / 1호 / 255 ~ 287페이지
· 저자명 : 정지선, 정재현

초록

본 연구에서는 2011년부터 개편된 「지방세법」의 측면에서 취득세와 재산세와 관련하여 지방세 과세표준 양성화 측면에서 개선방안을 제시하고자 하였다. 본 연구에서 제시하는 취득세와 재산세 과세표준의 양성화를 위한 지방세제의 개편방안은 다음과 같다.
첫째, 지방세 과세표준의 기초가 되는 시가표준액의 결정주체가 복잡하고 상이하게 구성되어 있다. 이러한 측면에서 과세표준의 결정권한과 공시주체를 단일화하는 것이 필요하다.
둘째, 실질적 조세법률주의의 시각에서 볼 때 사실상의 취득가격이 시가표준액에 미달하는 경우 시가표준액을 강제적으로 적용하도록 하는 것은 납세자의 재산권을 침해하는 규정으로 실질적 조세법률주의에 위배된다. 따라서 사실상의 취득가액을 초과하는 시가표준액은 무효로 보아야 한다.
셋째, 과세표준의 현실화는 공평과세의 측면에서는 타당하나 급격한 과세표준의 인상은 납세자의 조세저항을 일으킬 여지가 충분하다. 따라서 단계적인 과세표준 양성화가 필요할 것이다.
넷째, 「지방세법」상 토지와 주택의 시가표준액은 공시제도를 도입하여 운영하고 있지만, 비주거용 부동산의 건축물은 시장․군수가 원가방식에 의하여 산출한 가격을 과세표준으로 하고 있다. 비주거용 일반 건물도 시가를 반영한 가격을 공시하여 부동산 과세표준액의 적용 방법을 통일시켜야 할 것이다.
다섯째, 사실상의 취득가격을 취득세의 과세표준으로 하는 경우 어느 비용을 취득가격에 포함시킬 것인지 문제가 될 수 있다.
마지막으로, 대형 건축물의 신축으로 인한 취득과 같이 원시취득의 경우에는 취득가액 계산에 있어 회계기준 및 관련세법을 적용하여야 하는 전문적이고 복잡한 과정을 거쳐야 한다. 따라서 일정 규모 이상의 재산권을 원시취득 및 간주취득하는 경우에는 취득세 신고 납부시 세무사와 같은 전문가의 사전검증을 받아 정확성과 신뢰성을 확보할 수 있도록 하는 것이 옳을 것이다.

영어초록

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.

참고자료

· 없음