English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 888/888 (100%)
Visitors : 11914688      Online Users : 703
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ccur.lib.ccu.edu.tw/handle/A095B0000Q/654


    Title: 人壽保險遺產稅課徵之研究;A Study on the Estate Tax of Life Insurance Proceeds
    Authors: 楊琬婷;YANG, WAN-TING
    Contributors: 會計與資訊科技學系碩士在職專班
    Keywords: 稅捐法定主義;實質課稅原則;principle of taxation under the law;substantive taxation principle
    Date: 2017
    Issue Date: 2019-07-17
    Publisher: 會計與資訊科技學系碩士在職專班
    Abstract: 要保人購買人壽保險契約以本人為被保險人並指定受益人,要保人死亡時,由保險公司給付要保人(即被繼承人)所指定受益人的人壽保險金額,依遺產及贈與稅法第16條第9款規定,不計入遺產總額課稅。核其立法目的為分散風險、消化損失、避免被保險人因不可預料或不可抗力之事故死亡,致其家人失去經濟來源使生活陷於困境。然因應時代變遷,人壽保險契約型態趨於多樣化及稅捐規避手法日益精進等,實務上迭發生被繼承人藉由死亡前投保人壽保險,將應稅財產轉化為免稅保險給付,藉以規避遺產稅,稅捐稽徵機關基於實質課稅原則,將該等死亡人壽保險金納入遺產總額課徵遺產稅,衍生徵納雙方眾多爭議。本文經分析行政法院判決及財政部訴願決定個案態樣,稅捐稽徵機關認定被繼承人生前投保人壽保險屬於稅捐規避行為的類型,歸納可分為兩大類,其一係依據被繼承人生前投保時的健康狀況、時程及投保金額等綜合判斷;其二則以投保的人壽保險是否具有投資性或儲蓄性質為判斷依據。然基於稅捐法定主義為課予人民稅捐義務的基本原則,爰實務上運用實質課稅原則核課稅捐應有其界限,以免侵犯稅捐法定主義,本文認為應建立一客觀認定基準,即稅捐稽徵機關於認定被繼承人生前投保人壽保險,核屬稅捐規避性質,依實質課稅原則核課遺產稅,該稅捐規避行為應具備下列特性:被繼承人投保時罹患重病且與死亡有直接因果關係者可視為稅捐規避,亦即被繼承人於投保人壽保險時已知遺產稅稅捐債權有發生之可能性,卻藉由繳交保險費方式,將應稅之現金轉換成免稅之死亡人壽保險金,始有實質課稅原則之適用。另有鑑於重病之認定難有一致性標準且易淪為個人主觀判斷,又投資型及儲蓄型等非傳統型人壽保險,含有投資收益及儲蓄孳息部分,死亡保險金全額不計入遺產稅是否與立法目的相符引發廣泛討論,況且人壽保險成為規避稅捐工具,本文進一步提出,遺產及贈與稅法於第16條第9款有關死亡人壽保險金不計入遺產總額規定應改為定額免稅。關鍵字:稅捐法定主義、實質課稅原則
    An applicant for life insurance names himself/herself as the insured and designates the beneficiary. At the time of the death of the applicant, the death benefit paid by the insurance company to the beneficiary designated by the applicant (the inherited party) will be excluded from the gross estate which should be subject to estate tax, according to Subparagraph 9, Article 16 of the Estate and Gift Tax Act. The purpose of this Act is to help reduce risk through diversification, minimize loss, and avoid the insured’s family from financial difficulties because of losing their source of finance if the insured dies due to an unpredictable or unavoidable sickness/accident. However, to keep abreast with the times, the types of life insurance tend to be diversified and tax avoidance becomes more sophisticated. Therefore, in practice, the inherited party may buy life insurance before death and transform his/her property subject to tax into tax-free insurance death benefits to avoid estate tax. Based on the substantive taxation principle, the taxing authority includes such death benefits as the gross estate, which shall be subject to estate tax, resulting in many controversies between the taxing authority and taxpayers. After conducting an inductive analysis on judgments of administrative courts and individual patterns of written decisions on administrative appeals filed by the Ministry of Finance, this study found that the situations which the taxing authority identifies as tax avoidance when the inherited party buys life insurance before death can be divided into two categories: one is comprehensive, determined based on the health conditions of the inherited party during the insurance term before death, the time of buying the insurance, and the insurance amount. The other is determined based on whether the life insurance is investment-oriented or savings-oriented. However, since the principle of taxation under the law is the basic principle of taxation, there should be restrictions when it comes to actually applying the substantive taxation principle in practice, so that the basic principle of taxation under the law will not be violated. This study concludes that there should be an objective identification standard; in other words, only when the life insurance is bought under the following conditions can the taxing authority decide that the inherited party has bought life insurance before death to avoid paying tax, and that the subsequent estate tax should be paid according to the substantive taxation principle: when buying the life insurance, the inherited party is already suffering from a serious illness that will directly cause death. In other words, the inherited party already knows the potential estate tax debts while buying the insurance, and yet he/she chooses to pay for an insurance policy to transform the cash subject to tax into tax-free insurance death benefit. The benefits will then be subject to the substantive taxation principle. Furthermore, it is difficult to reach a consistent standard for determining the time of severe illness, which easily becomes a subjective identification. In addition, non-traditional life insurance policies, such as investment-oriented and savings-oriented insurance policies, contain investment income and accrued savings interest. There is a heated debate over whether it is in accordance with the purpose of legislation if the entire amount of death benefits is exempt from estate tax. In addition, life insurance has become a tool for tax avoidance. This study further suggests that Subparagraph 9, Article 16 of the Estate and Gift Tax Act, which stipulates that insurance death benefits are excluded from the gross estate should be amended so that the insurance death benefits only appertain to a lump?sum tax exemption.Keywords:principle of taxation under the law, substantive taxation principle .
    Appears in Collections:[會計與資訊科技研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML312View/Open


    All items in CCUR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    版權聲明 © 國立中正大學圖書館網頁內容著作權屬國立中正大學圖書館

    隱私權及資訊安全政策

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback