Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 320 Download : 741

Main Article Content

Abstract

E-Objection is one of the services of the Directorate of Taxes that can be used by taxpayers in submitting tax objection letters. E-Objection is an adoption policy that is an alternative to the previous program, namely the manual submission of objection letters. E-Objection can be accessed via E-Filling. This research is motivated by the lack of exploration of the introduction of E-Objection to taxpayers that there are still many who submit objection letters manually. Based on the data submitted by the Directorate General of Taxes (Direktorat Jenderal Pajak/DJP) and previous research in 2021 based on 2020 data, data on submitting objection letters online (E-Objectionareis still very minimal so that are problems in analyzing the effectiveness of E-Objection. Therefore, this study was conductedtoo to analyze the effectiveness of E-Objection from 2020 to 2021 at KPP Pratama Cibitung, but because the data of taxpayers who submitted objection letters by E-Objection was confidential, it was hindered from interviewing informants who had accessed E-Objection besides that because E-Objection data could not be accessed from KPP Pratama, so in this study using two research objects, namely KPP Pratama Cibitung and Kanwil  DJP II. So that the purpose of this study can determine the effectiveness of E-Objection as an alternative to the previous system. Based on E-Objection data in the West Java DJP Regional Office II in 2020 there were 109 data and in 2021 there were 115 data so it could be known that there was an increase, but based on the percentage of effectiveness criteria, the percentage of e-objection effectiveness in the DJP of the West Java Regional Office II in 2020 was 8.93% and in 2021 it was 9.75% so that it can be concluded that the analysis of the effectiveness of E-Objection in KPP Pratama Cibitung during the Covid-19 pandemic (2020-2021) was ineffective.

Keywords

Effectiveness E-Filling E-Objection Taxpayers Covid-19

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Irawati, Sitinjak, M. M. S., Harjo, D., & Fahriah, A. (2023). Analysis of the Effectiveness of E-Objection in Making It Easier for Officers and Taxpayers during the Covid-19 Pandemic at the Cibitung Primary Tax Service Office. Ilomata International Journal of Tax and Accounting, 4(2), 296-310. https://doi.org/10.52728/ijtc.v4i2.682

References

  1. Drucker, J., Funderburg, R., Merriman, D., & Weber, R. (2020). Do local governments use business tax incentives to compensate for high business property taxes? Regional Science and Urban Economics, 81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2019.103498
  2. González Canché, M. S. (2022). Post-purchase Federal Financial Aid: How (in)Effective is the IRS’s Student Loan Interest Deduction (SLID) in Reaching Lower-Income Taxpayers and Students? Research in Higher Education, 63(6), 933–986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-021-09672-6
  3. Hadi, H. R. (2017). Reformulation of Tax Dispute Resolution in Indonesia. J. Law, Policy Glob, 61, 67–76. www.iiste.
  4. HAMAD, W. (2022). Understanding the foremost challenges in the transition to online teaching and learning during COVID’19 Pandemic: A systematic literature review. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning. https://doi.org/10.31681/JETOL.1055695
  5. Ispriyarso. (2019). Budi “Kelemahan Lembaga Keberatan Pajak. Adminitrative Law Gov, 2(2), 11.
  6. Kashefi Pour, E., & Lasfer, M. (2019). Taxes, governance, and debt maturity structure: International evidence. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 58, 136–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2018.09.011
  7. Kumala, R., Subagyo, A., Harjo, D., Arimbhi, P., & Hidayati. (2021). Mainita “Effectiveness Of Application Of Online Objection Submission Service ( E-Objection ) At The Primary Tax Office Of South Bekasi (Vol. 8, Issue 2, pp. 97–104).
  8. Lazăr, S., & Istrate, C. (2018). Corporate tax-mix and firm performance. A comprehensive assessment for romanian listed companies. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, 31(1), 1258–1272. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2018.1482225
  9. Liu, H., Xia, Q., & Xu, J. (2011). Notice of Retraction: Taxpayer compliance in China: A prospect theory analysis. 2011 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Electronic Commerce, AIMSEC 2011 - Proceedings, 7292–7297. https://doi.org/10.1109/AIMSEC.2011.6009750
  10. Mardiasmo. (2013). Perpajakan. Andi.
  11. Moleong, & J., L. (2014). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Edisi Revisi. PT. Remaja Rosdakarya.
  12. Nasution, N. A. (2020). Imelda Situmorang “Analisis Proses Banding Surat Ketetapan Pajak Kurang Bayar (Skpkb) Terhadap Pajak Penghasilan (Pph) Pasal 21 Wajib Pajak Orang Pribadi Pada Kantor Wilayah Direktorat Jenderal Pajak Sumatera Utara I (Vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 201–221).
  13. Petrila, iu, Goudenhooft, G., Fatime Gyarmati, B., Popescu, F.-A., Simut, C., & Brihan, A.-C. (2022). Effective teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic? Distance learning and sustainable communication in Romania. Mdpi.Com. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14127269
  14. Putra haris darmawan. (1983). Handayani, siti ragil; and Azizah, devi farah “Evaluasi Atas Penyelesaian Keberatan Dalam Upaya Menyelesaikan Sengketa Di Bidang Perpajakan (pp. 1–9).
  15. Qadri, R. A., & Fatmawati, F. (2021). Storytelling Case Study: How To Win a Tax Dispute Against Tax Authority? J. Pajak dan Keuang. Negara, 2(2), 112–134. https://doi.org/10.31092/jpkn.v2i2.1118.
  16. Rahmi, N., Selvi, S., & Purwaningtyas, A. S. (2022). Pentahelix Collaboration in Improving Taxpayer Compliance. Ilomata International Journal of Tax and Accounting, 3(4), 351–358. https://doi.org/10.52728/ijtc.v3i4.562
  17. Ravenda, D., Valencia-Silva, M. M., Argiles-Bosch, J. M., & García-Blandón, J. (2020). Measuring labour tax avoidance and undeclared work: evidence from tax-avoidant offending firms. Journal of Applied Accounting Research, 21(3), 477–496. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAAR-01-2019-0016
  18. Revesz, J. (2020). A Model of the Optimal Tax Mix Including Capital Taxation. Atlantic Economic Journal, 48(3), 387–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11293-020-09676-0
  19. Revida, E., & dkk. (2020). Teori Pengantar Ilmu Administrasi Publik. Yayasan Kita Menulis.
  20. Rex, B., & Campbell, P. (2022). The impact of austerity measures on local government funding for culture in England. Cultural Trends, 31(1), 23–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2021.1915096
  21. Rey. (2021). Alessandro “Tax Objection Agency in Indonesia (Issue 44). https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.14-4-2021.2312507.
  22. Sa’adah. (2018). Nabitatus “Tinjauan Terhadap Penyelesaian Sengketa Pajak Melalui Lembaga Keberatan. Adm. Law Gov. J, 1(3), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.14710/alj.v1i3.268-279.
  23. Safitri, H. R., Yanty, N. A., Adelia, S., Kusumaningtyas, T., & Sofyan, M. (2021). Implementasi Kebijakan PPh 21 Selama Pandemi Covid-19 di Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Edu-Business.Org, 1(4). http://www.edu-business.org/index.php/JIAPB/article/view/18
  24. Saragih. (2018). Risma “Efektivitas Kebijakan Penatausahaan Barang Milik Negara di Sekolah Tinggi Penyuluhan Pertanian Medan. J. Adm. Publik Public Adm. J, 7(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.31289/jap.v7i1.1266.
  25. Satria, H., Nasution, M., Mungkin, M., … Y. A.-… J. of E., & 2022, undefined. (2021). Design and Demonstration of the Use of Automatic Hand Washing Sink Technology in Covid-19 Pandemic Conditions. Jurnal.Peneliti.Net, 08(01). http://jurnal.peneliti.net/index.php/IJEIT/article/view/1222
  26. Segal, S., & Gerstel, D. (2018). The global economic impacts of COVID-19, critical questions. https://www.csis.org/analysis.
  27. Suci. (2013). Dewi “Pengaruh Penerapan". J. Chem. Inf. Model, 53(9), 1689–1699.
  28. Sugiyono. (2020). Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif. Kualitatif dan R&D. Alfabeta.
  29. Taylor, P., & Knipe, P. (2022). Introduction: Pandemic Perspectives – Doing Research Differently During Covid-19*. IDS Bulletin, 53(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.19088/1968-2022.124
  30. Valenzuela, R. L. G., Velasco, R. I. B., & Jorge, M. P. P. C. (2023). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on sleep of undergraduate students: A systematic literature review. Stress and Health, 39(1), 4–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMI.3171
  31. Wright, D. B., Wolff, S. M., Jaspal, R., Barnett, J., & Breakwell, G. M. (2022). The choice of response alternatives in COVID- 19 social science surveys. PLoS ONE, 17(11 November). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263552
  32. Zhang, J., Ding, Y., Yang, X., Zhong, J., Qiu, X., Zou, Z., Xu, Y., Jin, X., Wu, X., Huang, J., & Zheng, Y. (2022). COVID-19’s impacts on the scope, effectiveness, and interaction characteristics of online learning: A social network analysis. PLoS ONE, 17(8 August). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273016

Most read articles by the same author(s)