AmCham Taiwan Healthy Aging Forum:
2025健康台灣樂齡論壇:公私協力促進全人健康
AmCham Taiwan Healthy Aging Forum:
2025健康台灣樂齡論壇:公私協力促進全人健康
Committee Events & Luncheons
The international investment climate is evolving rapidly, demanding a more efficient, user-friendly, and competitive tax environment that enhances Taiwan’s attractiveness for business. We appreciate the government’s continuous efforts to improve Taiwan’s tax environment. To further support this objective, the Committee urges the government to eliminate the tax on undistributed profits and allow a 10-year statutory period for tax refunds under tax-treaty regulations.
Additionally, we recommend revising the calculation method used for determining the indirect transfer of shares in companies that own real estate, ensuring adherence to the principles of equality and legal certainty. We also advocate for more adaptable and reasonable customs regulations to mitigate uncertainties in international trade.
Suggestion 1: Ensure that relevant regulations regarding the allowable period for tax refunds are consistent with the Tax Collection Act.
Since 2013, statutory periods for tax refund applications under various tax regulations have been extended from 5 to 10 years to align with Article 131 of the Administrative Procedure Act. In 2021, Article 28 of the Tax Collection Act was amended to extend the period within which taxpayers can apply for a refund of overpaid taxes to 10 years from the payment date. In response to the public’s request, similar amendments were made in 2023 to the guidelines for Article 25 of the Income Tax Act concerning foreign profit-seeking enterprises, as well as to Article 15 of the “Guidelines for the Determination of Income from Sources in the Republic of China in Accordance with Article 8 of the Income Tax Act.”
However, the period for applying for a tax refund under Article 34 of the “Regulations Governing the Application of Agreements for the Avoidance of Double Taxation with Respect to Taxes on Income” remains at five years. These regulations contradict Article 131 of the Administrative Procedure Act and may lead to disputes and create confusion for taxpayers. The Committee recommends amending the statutory period to apply for a tax refund under Article 34 to 10 years to ensure consistency, protect taxpayers’ rights, reduce disputes, and enhance overall efficiency.
Suggestion 2: Abolish the undistributed earnings tax to encourage further investments.
Since 1998, Taiwan has imposed undistributed earnings tax (UET) on current-year earnings to encourage shareholder profit distribution among companies. This regime erects commercial barriers for corporations looking to reinvest their earnings. The Committee acknowledges that the UET rate was reduced from 10% to 5% in 2018, and that the government offers tax relief for substantial investments or improvements in production technology and service or product quality under Article 23-3 of the Statute for Industrial Innovation. However, the current UET scheme continues to pose unnecessary hurdles for businesses. We note the following specific issues:
Suggestion 3: Amend the formula for determining the status of real-property-rich companies in the tax reform of the individual house and land transactions income tax.
According to Article 6 of the “Directions for Filing the Income Tax on the Consolidated Income from House and Land Transactions,” a company is classified as real-property rich if 50% or more of its share or share capital value is derived from real property located in Taiwan. The denominator in the formula is the net asset value (NAV) of the shares/share capital of the company, and the numerator is the fair market value of the real property.
This formula creates certain distortions that may seriously impact many MNCs’ internal reorganization and M&A activities across industries. We strongly urge the government to expedite review of this formula to ensure the protection of normal business transactions and prevent stagnation in overall economic activity. We urge the following changes:
Suggestion 4: Align documentation requirements for import/export declaration correction applications with international standards.
Under Articles 2 and 10 of the Regulations Governing the Correction of Import and Export Forms, as well as the Import/Export Declaration Correction Scenarios and Review Table (the Table), importers and exporters are permitted to submit applications to correct inaccuracies in their import/export declarations. Notably, for corrections related to transaction values (such as unit price, customs value, and free on board price) the regulations mandate provision of the external bank remittance slip associated with the transaction.
While the Table offers some flexibility regarding the types of supporting documentation acceptable for verifying the correctness of declared values, it falls short in cases where no physical cash flows or bank transfers have occurred. Applicants who cannot provide an external bank remittance slip face significant difficulties, as there are no clear alternative regulations to guide the review of their applications. This requirement is particularly impractical for MNCs that handle large volumes of transactions, where receivables are often offset against payables without involving external banks. This method of offsetting not only boosts efficiency but is also customary practice among such businesses.
Furthermore, the documentation requirement is out of step with international standards practiced by entities such as the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, where bank remittance slips are not required for declaration corrections. This misalignment underscores the need for Taiwan Customs to reevaluate and harmonize its documentation requirements with global standards.
To address this oversight, we recommend that the Table be amended to explicitly include records or accounting entries that show either 1) the offset between receivables and payables, or 2) the settlement of the transaction. Such an amendment would provide clarity and better support the realities of modern business transactions, ensuring that companies are able to comply efficiently with customs requirements without unnecessary hindrances.
國際投資環境正在迅速變化,需要一個更具效率、友善及競爭力的稅務環境,以增強台灣對企業的吸引力。我們感謝台灣政府持續努力改善此稅務環境。為達此目標,我們呼籲政府取消未分配盈餘稅,並允許租稅協定下的退稅法定期限延長至十年。
此外,我們建議修改房地合一間接股權轉讓之計算公式,以符平等和明確原則。我們也期望制訂更彈性合理的關務法規,以減少國際貿易的不確定性。
建議一:確保退稅申請法定期限的相關規定與《稅捐稽徵法》一致
自2013年來,許多稅法中的退稅申請法定期限已從五年延長至十年,以符合《行政程序法》第131條的規定。《稅捐稽徵法》第28條於2021年修訂納稅義務人得自溢繳稅款之日起10年申請退還。外國營利事業申請適用《所得稅法》第25條第1項審查原則以及「所得稅法第8條規定中華民國來源所得認定原則」第15條亦於2023年進行了相關的修訂。
然而,申請租稅協定時的「適用所得稅協定查核準則」第34條中,申請退稅的期限仍為五年。此與《行政程序法》第131條相互抵觸,故可能引發爭議,並造成納稅義務人的混淆。我們建議將「適用所得稅協定查核準則」第34條中關於申請退稅的法定期限修改為十年,以確保一致性、保護納稅人權利、減少爭議及提高整體效率。
建議二:廢除未分配盈餘稅,以鼓勵企業進行額外投資
自1998年起,台灣對公司當年度之盈餘課徵未分配盈餘稅,以鼓勵企業與股東分享利潤。然而,此制度在實務上對於公司將其盈餘再投資造成一定程度之商業障礙。雖自2018年起,未分配盈餘稅之稅率已從10%降至5%,且台灣政府亦根據《產業創新條例》第23-3條,對透過實質投資、提升生產技術、產品或勞務品質的企業提供租稅減免優惠,但目前未分配盈餘稅之制度仍造成企業發展面臨不必要之障礙,說明如下:
建議三:房地合一所得稅改革下,修改界定不動產高佔比公司之計算公式
根據「房地合一課徵所得稅申報作業要點」第6條,如果一家公司之股份或出資額價值有50%以上是由台灣之不動產所組成,則被視為不動產高佔比公司。在這個公式中,分母是公司股份或出資額之資產淨值,而分子則是不動產的時價。
上述公式恐導致計算結果失真,可能會嚴重影響許多跨國企業的內部重組或併購活動。因此,我們敦促政府盡快重新審視上述公式,以維護正常的商業交易,避免整體經濟活動停滯不前。我們建議進行以下修訂:
當公司有高額債務時,使用資產淨值進行計算可能會導致不精確的結果。例如,假設總資產價值一億元,當公司之資產60%以上是透過債務融資時,如公司之總資產中有30%為土地和房屋,在其資產淨值僅有四千萬元情況下則很容易超過50%的門檻。
國際稅務界在界定一家公司是否為不動產高佔比公司時,一般採用公司之總資產價值進行評估。根據2017年經濟合作暨發展組織所得與資本稅約範本(2017 OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital, 2017 OECD MC)第13.4條,如果股份於轉讓前365天內之任何時間,有超過50%之價值直接或間接源自不動產,則其被定義為不動產高佔比股份。這種分類亦適用於合夥企業或信託權益,如其至少50%的財產價值係以類似之方式取得。
此外,2017 OECD MC第13條註釋28.4進一步指出,決定股份或可比較權益是否達到此門檻,通常會將不動產之價值與公司或實體所有之總資產價值比較,但不考慮債務或其他負債(無論是否以相關不動產抵押擔保)。
根據資產的市場公允價值計算公式的分子將導致公式比率偏差;比率應準確反映兩個數額之間的量化關係。在決定一家公司是否為不動產高佔比公司時,公式之比率應將不動產的帳面價值與公司的股份或出資額進行比較。
建議四:遵循國際進出口申報更正申請文件之標準,調整要求之文件類型
根據「進出口報單申報事項更正作業辦法」第2條及第10條與「進╱出口報單申報錯誤情形及審核更正依據表」(下稱「依據表」),若進出口報單申報事項有錯誤需更正,進出口人得以申請更正。其中,若更正項目與價格有關(例如單價、完稅價格、離岸價格等),法規要求提供與該交易有關的「銀行水單」。
雖然「依據表」中對於可佐證更正價格正確性的文件類型有一定的彈性,但對於未產生實際現金流或未發生銀行轉帳的情況,「依據表」並未指出能作為銀行水單的替代文件。若申請人無法提供銀行水單,因缺乏明確法規及明文規定,在後續審查過程便會面臨許多困難。對於在不同國家進行大量交易(含進出口貨物、勞務提供)的跨國企業而言,此要求(即銀行水單的要求)是相對無法符合實務需求的,因為此類型的交易普遍是透過應收帳款與應付帳款的沖轉、互抵、結轉沖帳而不會涉及外部銀行。相對於透過銀行實際進行大量多筆收付款的交易模式,跨國企業申請人以應收、應付款項互抵之方式為更普遍且有效率。
此外,目前對於證明文件之要求可能亦未符合國際上之實務(例如,美國海關及邊境保護局並無要求銀行水單以進行報單更正),因此建議台灣海關重新評估,並考量將對相關文件的要求與全球標準接軌。
為因應上述的需求,建議接受修訂「依據表」,以明確的包含以下紀錄或會計分錄:一、應收和應付款項間之沖轉、互抵,或二、交易結算之紀錄或會計分錄為相關佐證文件,此修正將可提升明確性並更佳的貼近現今企業交易實務,以確保企業有效率的符合海關的要求而不會遭遇不必要的阻礙。