With respect to the punishment for breach of tax laws, “punishment for tax evasion” is imposed when a taxpayer evades tax and “punishment for misconduct”is imposed when a taxpayer violates the duty to act or not to act under tax laws. Article 35, Paragraph 1, of the Value-Added and Non-Value-Added Business Tax Act provides that, except as otherwise prescribed by the Act, a business entity, whether or not it has conducted sales, shall file with the collection authority-in-charge a bimonthly tax return on a prescribed form for its sales amount and tax payable or refundable for the preceding two months, together with refund or off-set amount and other related documents prior to the fifteenth day of the following filing period. The business tax payable, if any, shall be paid to the Treasury in advance. The receipt for the tax paid shall be enclosed with the tax return. Article 49 thereof stipulates that in the event that a business entity fails to file the sales amount or a detailed list of issued uniform invoices within the time limit as prescribed in the Act, the business entity shall be liable to a surcharge for late filing. The surcharge shall be equivalent to 1% of the tax payable for every two days’ overdue, provided that the filing is made within 30 days after the deadline. The fine shall not be less than NT $400. If the filing is made more than 30 days after the deadline, the business entity shall be liable to a non-filing surcharge equivalent to 30% of the tax payable as determined by the relevant authority. The amount of this surcharge shall not be less than NT $1,000. Where there is no tax payable, the surcharge for late filing and non-filing shall be NT$ 400 and NT $1,000, respectively. The purposes of the aforesaid provision are to compel business entities to comply with the obligations of filing so that the supervising authority can obtain relevant tax source information, and to establish a reasonable tax audit system. The surcharges for late filing and non-filing are imposed upon the business entity for its noncompliance with duty and such surcharges act as a kind of “punishment for misconduct.” “Punishment for misconduct” is different from “punishment for tax evasion,” which is imposed only when tax-evading acts have been committed. Such provision is necessary to protect the public interest and does not contradict the Constitution. However, the authority-in-charge should, according to J.Y. Interpretation No. 327, review and revise this provision under which a business entity would be punished by surcharges for late filing and/or non-filing at a fixed rate of tax payable without reasonable ceiling even though the tax has been paid. As to the conditions for “punishment for misconduct,” they have been elaborated in J. Y. Interpretation No. 275.