Go to Content Area :::

Constitutional Court R.O.C. (Taiwan) Logo

Home Sitemap 中文版
   

Decisions

Home > Decisions > Interpretations (before 2022)
:::
:::
  • Interpretation
  • No.330【Under Translation】
  • Date
  • 1993/12/24
  • Issue
    • Where the decedent was declared dead by court judgment, is it constitutional to specify in the Enforcement Rules of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act that the six-month statutory period for filing estate tax declaration begins to run from the date of declaration of such judgment?
  • Holding
    •        The Estate and Gift Taxes Act provides in Article 23, Paragraph 1, the first sentence, that where a decedent has left an estate upon his death, the person liable for payment of estate tax shall make a declaration of estate tax to the competent taxing authority at the place of his household registration within six months from the date of death of the decedent. In the case where the decedent was declared to be dead by a court judgment, Article 21 of the Enforcement Rules of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act sets out that the period specified for declaring the estate tax shall run from the date such judgment was declared, as the taxpayer was not in a position to make the estate tax declaration before the date on which the death was declared by the court. The provision is consistent with the legislative intent of the law and the nature of the thing (Natur der Sache) regarding the declaration of estate tax in case of judicial declaration of death of the decedent, and is therefore consistent with the essence of Article 19 of the Constitution.
  • Reasoning
    •        That the legal capacity of a person begins from the moment of birth and terminates at the moment of death and that, in case a deceased person has left property, the competent taxing authority is legally entitled to levy estate tax upon such property, are respectively prescribed by Article 6 of the Civil Code and Article 1, Paragraph 1, of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act. While judicial declaration of death is different from natural death, both are causes by which the legal capacity of a person terminates. Where a decedent has left property, the Estate and Gift Taxes Act provides in Article 23, Paragraph 1, the first sentence, that the person liable to payment of estate tax shall make a declaration of estate tax to the competent taxing authority at the place of his household registration within six months from the date of death of the decedent. In the case of a missing person declared to be dead, he is presumed to have been dead from the date determined in the judgment, and this presumed time of death must have been earlier than the time the court declares its judgment. Before the court makes such declaration, however, it is not yet certain whether the property of the missing person is an estate. Thus, the person liable to payment of estate tax is not yet in a position to proceed with the declaration of the estate tax, nor can the taxing authority begin to exercise its taxing power. For this reason, Article 21of the Enforcement Rules of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act states: "Where the decedent was declared to be dead by court judgment, the period specified in Article 23 of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act for filing the estate tax declaration shall run from the date such judgment was declared." The provision, being intended to be applicable to both the taxpayer and the taxing authority, is consistent with the legislative intent of the law and the nature of the thing (Natur der Sache) regarding the declaration of estate tax in case of judicial declaration of death of the decedent by court judgment, and is therefore consistent with the essence of Article 19 of the Constitution. Nevertheless, where the decedent was declared to be dead, matters regarding the date from which the period of estate tax declaration begins to run and the basis on which the estate is evaluated, having to do with the people*s duty to pay tax under law, would be more appropriately prescribed by law to avoid possible controversies. As regards the doubt of whether the proviso to Paragraph 1 of Article 10 of the Estate and Gift Taxes Act may be in conflict with the Constitution, we have given our opinions in Interpretation No. 311. No further interpretation is needed here.  
      
    • *Translated by Raymond T. Chu.
Back Top