본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

신탁관계에 있어서의 부가가치세 납세의무자 - 대법원 2017. 5. 18. 선고 2012두22485 전원합의체 판결 -

The Value Added Tax Payment Obligator under Trust regarding the judgement of the Supreme Court 2012Du2485(2017. 5. 18.)

0

조회

0

다운로드

14

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

The Supreme Court of Korea, 2017. 5. 18. sentenced that the tax payment obligor in trust has to be a trustee(the Judgement of 2017. 5.). Before that judgement, a truster or a beneficiary have been recognized as the tax payment obligors by the Supreme Court. However, under such old sentences, lots of problems were happened. The most important problem was that Government cannot seize and execute trusted estate. That kind of problems have occurred in other kind of taxes including the Estate Tax and the Deemed Acquisition Tax. In case of the Estate Tax, such problem could be solved by revision of the Local Tax Act which switched the payment obligor from truster to trustee. In case of the Deemed Acquisition tax, the Supreme Court recognize trustee as the tax payment obligator. the reason of such recognition would be same with the Judgement of 2017. 5. Even though the reason for the Judgement of 2017. 5. that the object of taxation will be "transaction itself" is not persuasive, the conclusion that the tax payment obligors are trustees regardless of trust type has to be highly appreciated on the fact that the principle of Priority of National Taxes and the principle of Substantial Taxation could be revived through that judgement.. However, there could be some side effects in the Judgement of 2017. 5. including (1) truster can be uncooperative to the fufillment of tax obligation, and (2) the property of truster cannot be seized and executed under the Judgement of 2017. 5. Under above mentioned circumstances, government suggest a plan to revise the Value Added Tax Law. In according to that plan, the tax payment obligator will be trustees, instead of that, the trusted estate could be seized by government. However such plan has several problems. Therefore, this thesis suggest that (1) the tax payment obligator has to be trustee as in the Judgement of 2017. 5. (2), the liability of trustee has to be limited to trusted estate, and (3) trustors or a beneficiaries have joint and several obligation for tax liability of trustee.

Abstract

The Supreme Court of Korea, 2017. 5. 18. sentenced that the tax payment obligor in trust has to be a trustee(the Judgement of 2017. 5.). Before that judgement, a truster or a beneficiary have been recognized as the tax payment obligors by the Supreme Court. However, under such old sentences, lots of problems were happened. The most important problem was that Government cannot seize and execute trusted estate. That kind of problems have occurred in other kind of taxes including the Estate Tax and the Deemed Acquisition Tax. In case of the Estate Tax, such problem could be solved by revision of the Local Tax Act which switched the payment obligor from truster to trustee. In case of the Deemed Acquisition tax, the Supreme Court recognize trustee as the tax payment obligator. the reason of such recognition would be same with the Judgement of 2017. 5. Even though the reason for the Judgement of 2017. 5. that the object of taxation will be "transaction itself" is not persuasive, the conclusion that the tax payment obligors are trustees regardless of trust type has to be highly appreciated on the fact that the principle of Priority of National Taxes and the principle of Substantial Taxation could be revived through that judgement.. However, there could be some side effects in the Judgement of 2017. 5. including (1) truster can be uncooperative to the fufillment of tax obligation, and (2) the property of truster cannot be seized and executed under the Judgement of 2017. 5. Under above mentioned circumstances, government suggest a plan to revise the Value Added Tax Law. In according to that plan, the tax payment obligator will be trustees, instead of that, the trusted estate could be seized by government. However such plan has several problems. Therefore, this thesis suggest that (1) the tax payment obligator has to be trustee as in the Judgement of 2017. 5. (2), the liability of trustee has to be limited to trusted estate, and (3) trustors or a beneficiaries have joint and several obligation for tax liability of trustee.

참고문헌 (10)

  1. 김성균, "開發信託 관련 租稅債權을 원인채권으로 하는 信託財産에 대한 押留", 중앙법학, 13(2), pp.319~348 (2011), 중앙법학회
  2. 김성균, "수익증권발행신탁 세제", 중앙법학, 16(4), pp.241~308 (2014), 중앙법학회
  3. 김성균, "부동산 신탁 관련 재산세 및 부가가치세 검토", 원광법학, 33(1), pp.153~174 (2017), 법학연구소[DOI]
  4. 김성균, "신탁세제 개정 관련 신탁과세이론의 재검토", 중앙법학, 19(2), pp.211~250 (2017), 중앙법학회
  5. 김형성, "수탁자가 위탁자로부터 이전받은 신탁재산을 관리·처분하면서 재화를 공급하는 경우의 부가가치세 납세의무자", 법률신문, ~ (2017)
  6. 송동진, "신탁부동산의 관리·처분과 부가가치세 납부의무자", 법률신문, ~ (2017)
  7. 이중교, "신탁법상의 신탁에 관한 과세상 논점", 법조, 58(12), pp.318~359 (2009), 법조협회
  8. 정기상, "신탁법상 신탁관계에서 토지 지목의 사실상 변경으로 인한 취득세의 납세의무자(대상판결:대법원 2012. 6. 14. 선고 2010두2395 판결)", 세무와 회계연구, 1(2), pp.243~276 (2012), 한국세무사회 부설 한국조세연구소
  9. 한원식, "신탁소득의 납세의무자에 대한 연구", 조세법연구, 19(2), pp.245~282 (2013), 한국세법학회
  10. 金子 宏, "信託税制の体系的研究-制度と解釈-" (2011), 財団法人日本税理研究センター

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)