채무자회생법상 원천징수세의 법적 성질에 관한 연구 (A Study on the Withholding Tax in the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 외법논집 / 37권 / 2호 / 169 ~ 181페이지
· 저자명 : 박승두, 배영석

초록

채무자회생법1)은 원천징수2)하는 조세는 부가가치세 등과 함께 공익채권으로 규정하고 있다(제179조 제1항 제9호). 채무자회생법은 회생절차개시전의 원인에 기한 청구권은 ‘회생채권’, 개시이후에 성립한 채권은 ‘공익채권’으로 분류하고있으므로, 조세채권도 이 기준에 따르는 것이 원칙이다. 그러나 이들 조세의 원래 납세의무자는회생회사가 아닌 대표자 등 제3자이고, 회생회사는 징수의무자에 불과하다.3) 따라서 회생회사는징수권자인 국가 또는 지방자치단체를 대신하여납세의무자로부터 원천징수하여 보관하고 있지만, 아직 납부기한이 도래하지 않아 징수권자에게 납부하지 않고 회생회사가 일정기간 대신 징수한 세금을 보관하게 된다.

영어초록

Compared with the previous Corporate Reorganization Act, the current Debtor Rehabilitation Act and Bankruptcy has a smaller scope of application of withholding tax which is later claimed for public interests. That is, regarding the withholding tax taking place in the process of the Income Appropriation,what the current law accepts as a claim for public interest is the tax appropriated as a bonus for the representative of the company. Its intention was to improve the situation where companies that applied for rehabilitation were imposed excessive amount of withholding tax, making it harder for them to revive.
However, what is stipulated in the current law is still somewhat ambiguous and brings about nagging confusion on its interpretation with the companies still being prone to unexpected amount of a claim for public interest. Therefore, in order to provide the fundamental solution to this problem, the current law needs revising and define the concerning clauses with clearer language. The correct understanding about the existing law is also needed preceding the revision.
First, the tax, the probable claim for public interest, should not be taken as ‘the whole part’ but as a ‘clue’ found in the Article 106, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph 1 of the Regulations for Corporate Tax Act,which was stipulated according to the Article 67 of Corporate Tax Act.
Second, Article 179, Subparagraph 9, Clause A should state, “However, the tax on the income appropriated under the provision of Article 67 of the Corporate Tax Act(Income Appropriation) is limited to the amount withheld,” which will make, regardless of the appropriation of bonus, dividend and other income, only the tax withheld at the point of effectuation of the rehabilitation proceeding fall on the category of the claim for public interests. In this way, the authorities can prevent the ambiguity in the process of designing and implementing the rehabilitation plan. Not only that, there will be fewer irrational occasions, in which the definition of the claim for public interests kept changing according to the tax notice or opinions of the tax office, eventually leading to an efficient support for the companies striving to revive.

참고자료

· 없음