Analisis Instrumen Debt to Equity Ratio sebagai Upaya Menangkal Thin Capitalization dalam Meningkatkan Penerimaan Pajak di Indonesia (Studi Kasus pada Perusahaan yang Terdaftar di BKPM dan KPP PMA)

Notika Rahmi; Chairil Anwar Pohan; Sunarmin; Iin Andrayanti; Budhi Yuwono; Cut Dinnie

doi:10.31334/transparansi.v8i2.3533

Authors

Notika Rahmi Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI Jakarta
Chairil Anwar Pohan Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI
Sunarmin Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI
Iin Andrayanti Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI
Budhi Yuwono Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI
Cut Dinnie Institut Ilmu Sosial dan Manajemen STIAMI

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31334/transparansi.v8i2.3533

Keywords:

Debt Equity Ratio, Thin Capitalization, Investment Policy, Tax Revenue

Abstract

(Analysis of Debt to Equity Ratio Instruments as an Effort to Counter Thin Capitalization in Increasing Tax Revenue in Indonesia (Case Study of Companies Registered with the BKPM and KPP PMA)

Peraturan di Indonesia menyatakan biaya bunga yang dapat dikurangkan sebagai pengeluaran, sementara dividen tidak dapat dibiayakan membuat investor lebih cenderung berinvestasi dalam pinjaman daripada berinvestasi dalam modal. Akibat praktik ini, banyak perusahaan yang membiayai usahanya dengan pinjaman daripada modal atau yang biasa disebut thin capitalization. Praktik ini merugikan negara karena akan mengikis basis pajak nasional atau mengurangi penerimaan negara dari sektor pajak. Untuk mengendalikan praktik thin capitalization, pemerintah telah membuat kebijakan mengenai rasio utang terhadap ekuitas, yaitu rasio antara utang dan modal yang telah ditetapkan pada 4:1. Penelitian ini dilakukan secara kualitatif dan pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan wawancara di lapangan menggunakan metode analisis deskriptif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa masih ada beberapa wajib pajak yang memiliki rasio utang terhadap modal di atas 4:1. Kesimpulan yang dapat ditarik adalah bahwa metode rasio utang terhadap ekuitas cukup efektif dalam mencegah praktik thin capitalization, tetapi masih belum optimal karena masih ada beberapa wajib pajak yang memiliki rasio utang terhadap modal di atas 4:1. Penulis merekomendasikan agar pemerintah lebih aktif dalam melakukan sosialisasi dan memastikan bahwa wajib pajak memahami kebijakan tersebut.

Abstract

The existence of provisions in Indonesia regarding interest costs that can be allowed as a deduction, while dividends do not make investors more inclined to invest in loans rather than investing in capital. The result of this practice is that many companies will emerge that finance their companies with loans rather than capital or what is usually called thin capitalization. This practice is detrimental to the state because it will erode the national tax base or reduce state revenues from the tax sector. To control the practice of thin capitalization, the government has made a policy regarding the debt to equity ratio, namely the ratio of the amount between debt and capital which has been set at 4:1. This research was conducted qualitatively and data collection was carried out by interviews in the field using descriptive analysis methods. The research results show that there are still several taxpayers who have a debt to capital ratio above 4:1. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the debt to equity ratio method is quite effective in preventing the practice of thin capitalization, but it is still not optimal because there are still some taxpayers who have a ratio between debt and capital above 4:1. The author recommends that the government should be more active in conducting outreach and ensuring that taxpayers understand the policy.

References

Altshuler, Rosanne, & Grubert, H. (2006). Governments and Multinational Corporations in The Race to The Bottom. Tax Notes International, 41(5), 459.

Broek, P. Van Den. (2021). Ralph Extends Debt Definition. International Tax Review, 11(2), 39–41. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/intaxr11&div=34&id=&page=

Buettner, Thiess, Overesch, M., Shreiber, U., & Wamser, G. (2012). The Impact of Thin Capitalization Rules on The Capital Structure of Multinational Firms. Journal of Public Economics, 96(11–12), 930–938. https://www.sciencedirect.com/ science/ article/abs/pii/S0047272712000710. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2785182

Crumbley, D. L., Friedman, J. P., & Anders, A. B. (1994). Dictionary of Tax Terms. Barrons.

Darussalam, Hutagaol, J., & Septiriadi, D. (2007). Konsep dan Aplikasi Perpajakan Internasional (Basic Concept of International Taxation). Danny Darussalam Tax Center.

Gunadi. (2007). Pajak Internasional, Edisi Revisi. Lembaga Penerbit FEUI.

Martins, A. (2012). Thin Capitalization and Its Practical Application in Portugal: a Note. International Journal of Law and Management, 54(4), 274–283. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542431211245314

Moleong, L. J. (2016). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif Edisi Revisi. PT. Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.

Munir, & Dasril. (2004). Kebijakan dan Manajemen Keuangan Daerah. YPAPI.

Neuman, W. (2014). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approach, 7th ed. Allyn and Bacon.

Noor, A. (2014). Debt To Equity Rule: Thin Capitalization Dalam Perkembangan Investasi di Indonesia. Jurnal: Penelitian Hukum, 1.

Nuraini, N., & Marsono. (2014). Analisis Faktor-faktor yang Mempengaruhi Thin Capitalization Pada Perusahaan Multinasional di Indonesia. Journal: Diponegoro of Accounting, 3.

OECD, O. for E. C. and D. (2012). Thin Capitalization Legislation: A Background Paper for Country Tax Administrations. OECD. http://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-global/5. thin_capitalization_background.pdf

Panayi, H. C. (2015). Is Aggresive Tax Planning Socially Irresponsible? Intertax, 43(10), 544–558. http://www.kluwerlawonline.com/abstract.php?area=Journals&id=TAXI2015054

Pohan, C. A. (2014). Pembahasan Komprehensif Pengantar Perpajakan. Mitra Wacana Media.

Rahayu, N. (2010a). Evaluasi Regulasi atas Praktik Penghindaran Pajak Penanaman Modal Asing. Jurnal Akuntansi Dan Keuangan Indonesia, 7, 61–78. http://jaki.ui.ac.id/index.php/home/article/view/168

Rahayu, N. (2010b). Praktik Penghindaran Pajak Penanaman Modal Asing. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Negara, 10, 171–180. https://ejournal.unri.ac.id/index.php/JIANA/article/view/1067

Rohatgi, R. (2002). Basic International Taxation. Kluwer Law International.

Schindler, Dirk, & Schjelderup, G. (2010). Multinationals, Minority Ownership and Tax Efficient Financing Structures. In CEsifo Working Paper.

Schoen, W. (2008). Statutory Avoidance and Disclosure Rules in Germany, in Freedman, J. (Ed.) (Beyond Bou). Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.

Shackelford, D., & Shevlin, T. (2001). Empirical Tax Research in Accounting. Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31(2), 321–387. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0165410101000222

Shackelford, D., Slemrod, J., & Sallee, J. (2007). A Unifying Model of How The Tax System ang Generally Accepted Accountiing Principles Effect Corporate Behavior. https://www.nber.org/papers/w12873 http://ejournal-sl.undip.ac.id/index/php/accounting

Sugiyono. (2017). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, R&D. CV. Alfabeta.

Taylor, G., & Richardson, G. (2012). International Corporate Tax Avoidance Practices: Evidence from Australian Firms. The International Journal of Accounting, 47(4), 469–496. https://espace.curtin.edu.au/handle/20.500.11937/9274

Taylor, G., & Richardson, G. (2013). The Determinants of Thinly Capitalized Tax Avoidance Structures: Evidence from Australian Firms. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 22, 12–25.