재활용폐자원 등에 대한 부가가치세매입세액 공제특례제도에 대한 연구 (The study on ‘Deemed Input Tax Deduction of VAT for Recycling of Wastes Act')

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국조세연구포럼
· 수록지 정보 : 조세연구 / 16권 / 3호 / 103 ~ 144페이지
· 저자명 : 백승천, 구자은

초록

세금계산서 수수가 전제인 우리나라의 부가가치세제에서 세금계산서 수취 없이 부가가치세를 공제받을 수 있는 제도가 있다. 조세특례제한법의 ‘재활용폐자원 등에 대한 부가가치세매입세액 공제특례’로 이 제도는 폐자원의 원활한 수집과 환경 보호를 위해 재활용사업자에게 조세 혜택을 주고 있는 제도이다. 그런데 이 제도는 실무적으로 불가능한 사항을 조세 감면 요건으로 하고 있어 오히려 재활용사업자에게 폐해가 되는 측면이 있다. 재활용폐자원 사업자가 미등록사업자로부터 폐자원을 수집하여 세액공제 받은 후 미등록사업자의 연 매출액이 4,800만원 이상으로 확인되는 경우와 중고차사업자가 일반과세자의 비사업용 차량을 매입하고 세액공제를 받았으나 해당 차량이 사업용으로 확인되는 경우이다. 이 후에 해당 사업자들은 세액공제를 반환하고 가산세 등을 부담해야 한다.
본 연구는 과세특례의 대상인 재활용폐자원과 중고차로 나누어 거래과정을 서술하면서 과세특례를 적용할 때 발생하는 실무적 문제를 제시하였다. 제시되는 문제가 선행 연구를 통해 개선되는지를 검토하고 재활용폐자원 사업자에 대한 세액공제대상에 미등록사업자를 포함시키는 방안, 비영업용승용차를 부가가치세 과세대상에서 제외하는 방안, 재활용공제율의 환원 및 공제 한도를 폐지하는 방안을 개선 방안으로 제시하였다. 또한 이해당사자인 국세공무원과 세무대리인 및 재활용사업자의 재활용폐자원특례제도 인지 정도 및 인지도의 차이를 검토하고, 개선방안에 대해 이해당사자의 선호 여부 및 선호도의 차이를 보기 위하여 설문조사를 실시하였다. 검정하고자 하는 가설은 4개로 가설 1은 재활용폐자원특례제도에 대한 인식의 차이 여부를 검정하기 위한 것이고, 가설 2-1부터 가설 2-3은 대안별로 이해당사자의 선호도에 차이가 나는 지를 검정하기 위한 것이다. 검정방법으로 One-way ANOVA를 실시하고, 사후검정으로 Scheffe를 실시하였고 추가분석을 위하여 카이제곱검정을 실시하였다.
본 연구는 재활용폐자원특례제도에 대한 실무적인 문제점을 사례 등을 통하여 심층적으로 분석한 점에 의의가 있다. 또한 파악한 문제점에 대한 개선방안을 도출하고 객관성 확보를 위해 설문조사를 하였고 이를 통해 이해당사자의 해당 대안에 대한 선호도 및 그 선호도의 차이를 통계적으로 검정하였다. 가설 1에 대한 검정결과, 해당 사업자에 비하여 국세공무원과 세무대리인은 재활용폐자원특례제도를 혜택으로 인식하고 있었다.
재활용폐자원 사업자에 대한 세액공제대상에 미등록사업자를 포함시키는 방안인 가설 2-1에 대한 검정결과는 재활용폐자원 사업자 및 세무대리인은 해당 대안을 선호하고 있지만 세무공무원은 선호한다고 보기는 어려웠다. 이는 미등록사업자의 등록에 대한 책임이 누구에게 있는가에 대한 견해 차이가 있기 때문으로 보인다. 재활용폐자원특례제도의 재활용공제율을 환원시키는 방안인 가설 2-3에 대한 검정결과는 재활용폐자원 사업자 및 세무대리인은 해당 대안을 선호하고 있지만 세무공무원이 이 대안을 선호한다고 보기는 어려웠다. 또한 비영업용승용자동차를 부가가치세 과세대상에서 제외하자는 방안인 가설 2-3에 대한 검정결과는 세무대리인과 중고차 사업자는 해당 대안을 선호하고 있지만, 세무공무원은 선호한다고 보기는 어려웠다. 또한 각 이해관계자의 대안에 대한 인식은 차이를 보였다. 이러한 결과는 해당 제도가 불합리한 적용으로 인하여 특혜가 되지 못하는 측면이 있으며 개정에 대한 방향도 납세자가 인지하고 있는 것과 과세당국이 인지하고 있는 것에 차이가 있음을 시사한다고 할 수 있다.

영어초록

Value-added-tax(VAT) system of South Korea which requires receiving tax invoices as its basis has an exceptional system that tax invoices can be deducted when satisfying certain requirements. The system is 'Deemed Input Tax Deduction of VAT for Recycling of Wastes Act' from Article 108 of Restriction of Special Taxation and this is a system to give tax benefits to the recycle waste carriers and used car businesses to achieve environment protection through smooth collection and usage of the waste. However, this system is actually acting negatively to the recycle businesses in some cases due to practically impossible requirements by the Restriction of Special Taxation Act to satisfy tax deduction.
This study looks deeply into the practical problems through cases in recycling waste and used cars, and reviewed similar preceding research, therefore presented improved alternatives as below.
Firstly, include unregistered businesses that satisfy as business licensee to the deduction subject of input tax for recycle waste businesses.
Secondly, do not judge whether the used car was used for business in the input tax deduction subject for used car businesses but apply Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes when the purpose of the car is not for business.
Thirdly, abolish refund and deduction limit 80% of recycling deduction rate as other improved alternative through review such as advanced research etc.




Also, this study carried out a survey to find out whether the concerning parties who are tax officials group, tax agencies group, recycle wastes carriers group and used car business group are aware of the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes as well as it acknowledgement of the system, find out if the concerning parties prefer the improved alternative that were suggested through literature research and find out if there are any differences in the preference by each group. There were 4 hypothesis to prove through the survey. Hypothesis 1 is to test if there is any difference in the acknowledgment of the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes, and from hypothesis 2-1 to 2-3 is to test whether there are any differences in the preference by the concerning parties for each alternative.
Hypotheses 1 resulted that the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes was acknowledged as to show benefit at a level of significance 1% Hypothesis 2-1 was to test whether there were different preferences concerning including unregistered businesses as deduction subject of the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes, the preference on the alternative resulted that tax agencies and recycle waste carriers group showed higher preferences compared to the tax official group and tax agencies and recycle waste carriers group preference had an average of 4.03 which was level 'good'. Result of hypothesis 2-1 test selected hypothesis 2-1 as there was 1% significance level of the difference between the preferences of the alternative by tax officials, tax agency, and recycle waste carriers group.
Hypotheses 2-2 was to test the difference in acknowledgement on the alternative to refund the deduction rate of the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes, the preference in the alternative stood out higher in the tax agency and recycling waste carriers group than the tax officials and the preference of the alternative by the tax officials and recycling waste carriers group was 4.35 average which is a bit higher than level 'good'. Result of hypothesis 2-2 test selected hypothesis 2-2 as there was 1% significance level of the difference between the preferences of the alternative by tax officials, tax agency, and recycling waste carriers group.
Hypotheses 2-3 was to test the difference in acknowledgement on the alternative to refund the excluded cars not used for business from the VAT taxation target, the preference in the alternative stood out higher in the tax agency and recycling waste carriers group than the tax officials and the preference of the alternative by the tax officials and recycling waste carriers group was 4.43 average which is between the level 'good' and 'very good'. Result of hypothesis 2-3 test selected hypothesis 2-3 as there was 1% significance level of the difference between the preferences of the alternative by tax officials, tax agency, and recycling waste carriers group.
The purpose of this study was to analyze in depth the case where problems occur when practically applying Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes. This study derived improved alternatives to not just address problems but to solve them through literature research. Moreover, the study determined whether the concerning group preferred the alternative through survey to ensure objectivity and focused on the point that difference in the preference could be difference and statistically validated the difference of acknowledgement. Such result shows there is a need to build the system narrowing the difference of acknowledgment as there could be differences in the acknowledgement and problem solving alternative concerning the act between the tax officials who provide the act, and tax agencies and recycling waste carriers who need to abide by the act.
However, the Special VAT rule on Recycling of Wastes of the leading countries is possible to support taxes through other tax items limitless of the VAT, but there is a limit for such judgment as overall understanding on the tax system of other countries is low. There are margin tax system from the leading countries that is compared from Recycling of Wastes Act, but it was excluded as judged to be hard to change the system itself in a short term. From now on there needs to be a follow-up study including such system. Also, there is a limit where analysis was simultaneously analyzed even though recycle wastes and used cars do not share the same personality.

참고자료

· 없음