취득세 세율구조의 문제점과 개선방안

취득세 세율구조의 문제점과 개선 방안을 분석한다.

Prior to the Local Tax Act being completely revised to Act 10221, acquisition tax and registration tax existed separately, but was then integrated into the acquisition tax due to the revision for simplifying the tax itemization system. However, while integrating acquisition tax and registration tax, tax rate structures were maintained according to the past tax rates, and therefore, disputes on its interpretation are ongoing. In other words, when combining acquisition tax and registration tax back in 2011, the acquisition tax rate, which had a simple proportional tax structure in the past, was changed to a differential tax rate to maintain the tax burden of the past.

With the change to such differential tax rate structure, disputes on its interpretation including original acquisition, succession acquisition, paid acquisition, free acquisition, etc. are continuing. Meanwhile, in the case of housing, Local Tax Act Article 11 Subparagraph 8 prescribes a tax rate structure for revitalizing the housing economy, and Local Tax Act Article 13-2 has a tax rate structure for suppressing speculations on housing. In other words, the Local Tax Act has both regulations to cut acquisition taxes and regulations for heavy taxing for housing.

The most fundamental reason for integrating acquisition tax and registration tax is to reduce the tax burden of taxpayers in which acquisition tax and registration tax are applied redundantly for the same object for taxation such as real estate. For example, the purpose of this is to resolve the issues of having to pay acquisition taxes and registration taxes when a taxpayer acquires land. Thus, the current acquisition tax rate structure that has a differentiated tax rate structure according to the object of taxation or acquisition type should be converted to a single proportional tax rate.

By switching to such single proportional tax rate structure, it will be possible to not only reduce tax administration expenses and taxpayer cooperation costs resulting from the disputes between taxpayers and tax authorities such as in original acquisition, succession acquisition, paid acquisition, and free acquisition, but also prevent tax evasion by taxpayers for houses. Meanwhile, it would be advisable to abolish the heavy tax rate system for applying 8% to 12% tax rates for houses.