재화의 수입과 수입세금계산서의 수취의무자에 관한 소고 ― 실질과세원칙과 행정질서벌 성격의 매입세액 불공제를 중심으로 ―

Abstract

In accordance with the provisions of the Customs Law, the importation of goods under the tax law is being managed uniformly by the head of customs office. However, provisions related to the establishment of tax obligation of the Value Added Tax (the “VAT”) Law, the Customs Law, the Individual Consumption Tax Law, the Liquor Tax Law and the Local Tax Law are stipulated in some other phrases. As to this, this review explains that the separate provisions related to importation of goods should be uniformly interpreted in accordance with the Customs Law. In addition, establishment of tax obligation on the importation of goods should be determined based on whether the actual importation has been carried out and determined based on the legal ownership, which could be finalized through interpretation of agreement. If there is a problem in price, adjustment may be made based on the Article 30 of the Customs Law, however, interpretation of tax obligation and tax obligator could be made based on each factual act establishment and legal ownerships. Even the interpretation of the VAT Law, it is also consistently explained. A person who receives the import tax invoice under the VAT Law is in line with the person who imports goods. Even when the substance over form principle is applied in relation to the import tax invoice, it must be determined based on the legal relation same as the domestic transaction under the VAT Law. Furthermore, as the non-deduction of the input VAT of the import tax invoice has an administrative order punishment characteristic, there is no necessity to apply it in the case of a conduit transaction under the VAT Law. In addition, if there is a disagreement between the national institutions, it is violation of the principle of responsibility to burden the responsibilities to the tax obligators. In such cases, as there is disagreement in the interpretation, administrative order punishment could not be applied and imposed. This review is meaningful in that it should limit the application of substance over form principle and imposition of administrative order punishment on the unified interpretation of “importation of goods” and the import tax invoice.