Go to Content Area :::

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

Home Sitemap 中文版
   

Decisions

Home > Decisions > Interpretations (before 2022)
:::
:::
  • Interpretation
  • No.484【Under Translation】
  • Date
  • 1999/05/14
  • Issue
    • Does the Directive T.T.S.T. No. 36889 of the Ministry of Finance exceed the legislative intent of Article 2 of the Deed Tax Act, and is it thus unconstitutional?
  • Holding
    •        Article 2, Paragraph 1, of the Deed Tax Act (hereinafter the “Act”) provides: “Any purchaser and acceptor of a pledge, exchange, donation or partition of immovable property, and any acquirer of ownership thereof by virtue of possession shall procure and use official deed forms and pay deed taxes.” Article 18, Paragraph 1, of the Act provides: “Upon receipt of the deed tax declaration submitted by the taxpayer, the collection authority-in-charge shall, within 15 days therefrom, complete the examination thereof, assess the amount of the deed tax payable, and give a notice to the taxpayer requiring him/her to pay the tax within the prescribed time limit.” Article 23 of the Act further provides: “Where the registration of ownership is to be effected as a result of sale, pledge, exchange, donation, partition or possession of immovable property, the land office shall effect the registration of the change in rights against the tax payment receipt.”Therefore, declaration and payment of deed tax concerns the exercise and acquisition of the people’s property rights. The Directive T.T.S.T. No. 36889 of the Ministry of Finance dated August 19, 1981, states: “If several persons submit declarations for the same building or land and if all of them have a legal basis, to avoid any subsequent dispute, the tax collection authority-in-charge may notify all the parties concerned to coordinate by themselves. Before the parties reach an agreement or institute an action to the court for confirmation of the right to register the transfer of ownership, the collection authority-in-charge may suspend the issuance of the notice of tax payment related to the declaration.” The said directive exceeds the legislative intent of the abovementioned law by instructing that the tax collection authority-in-charge may suspend the issuance of tax payment notice for the declaration, which renders the people unable to complete the tax payment procedures for the purpose of ownership transfer registration and impedes the people’s exercise of their property rights. As the said directive is inconsistent with Article 15 of the Constitution intended to protect the people’s property rights, it shall no longer be applied.
  • Reasoning
    •        Article 2, Paragraph 1, of the Act provides: “Any purchaser and acceptor of a pledge, exchange, donation or partition of immovable property, and any acquirer of ownership thereof by virtue of possession shall procure and use official deed forms and pay deed taxes.” Article 23 of the Act provides: “Where the registration of ownership is to be effected as a result of sale, pledge, exchange, donation, partition or possession of immovable property, the land office shall effect the registration of the change in rights against the tax payment receipt.” Therefore, declaration and payment of deed tax concerns the exercise and acquisition of the people’s property rights. Article 18, Paragraph 1, of the Act provides further: “Upon receipt of the deed tax declaration submitted by the taxpayer, the collection authority-in-charge shall, within 15 days therefrom, complete the examination thereof, assess the amount of the deed tax payable, and give a notice to the taxpayer requiring him/her to pay the tax within the prescribed time limit.” Where several persons apply for payment of deed tax for the same building or land, the tax collection agency shall issue a notice of tax payment to each of the applicants to allow them to register the change of real estate property right after payment of deed tax. In addition, a civil dispute involves the people’s rights and obligations and should be resolved by the parties concerned in accordance with legal procedures, and the administrative agency should not intervene by requesting the parties concerned to coordinate by themselves and reach an agreement. Where a thing is sold to several persons, each of the sales contracts is valid. The buyers have the same claim against the seller. Based on the principle of equal claims, none of the creditors can validly exclude any other creditors, and each of them has the right to make a request for ownership transfer registration. The Directive T.T. S.T. No. 36889 of the Ministry of Finance dated August 19, 1981, states: “If several persons submit declarations for the same building or land and if all of them have legal basis, to avoid any subsequent dispute, the tax collection authority-in-charge may notify all the parties concerned to coordinate by themselves. Before the parties reach an agreement or institute an action to the court for confirmation of the right to register the transfer of ownership, the collection authority-in-charge may suspend the issuance of the notice of tax payment related to the declaration.” The said directive exceeds the legislative intent of the abovementioned law by instructing that the tax collection authority-in-charge may suspend the issuance of tax payment notice for the declaration, which renders the people unable to complete the tax payment procedures for the purpose of ownership transfer registration and impedes the people’s exercise of their property rights. As the said directive is inconsistent with Article 15 of the Constitution intended to protect the people’s property rights, it shall no longer be applied.  
      
    • *Translated by Dr. C.Y.Huang of Tsar & Tsai Law Firm.
Back Top