Tai Ji Men Voiced An Injustice Case of Tax in UN | WPN World People News

The national revenue and expenditure problems happen in many countries. To solve the tough problems, some financial authorities have claimed to collect wealth tax, a tax on the flow of assets. The news has caused uneasy among those targeted and the following story of tax disaster happens in Taiwan may offer some ideas to both financial authorities of the world and the rich and not so rich.

Tai Ji Men injustice case of tax has been recorded in the Taiwan Tax Right White Paper.

The Chinese Association for Human Rights (CAHR) and the Research Center for Taxation and Public Finance Law (RCTPFL) of National Taiwan University (NTU) have published “the Republic of China Centenary, Taxation and Human Rights White Paper” in December, 2011. In the 2012 Taxation Justice Round-Table Seminar, scholars and experts raised the slogan, “Set off taxation justice! Human Rrights, GO Go Go!” They called on the government to reform taxation such that people can get rid of fear of taxation injustice.

Mr. Rene Wadlow, who is the President of Association of World Citizens, and Representative to the United Nations, Geneva, has raised the Tai Ji Men Injustice Case of Tax through UN 1503 Procedure petition. He said that this is the start of what is likely a long process in which cases from other States will be progressively raised as well as more NGOs and legal scholars become aware of the importance of the issue.

In the preface of the White Paper, Control Yuan President Wang Chien-Shien entitled “Am I a Criminal?” He said that equity is the first priority for taxation and convenience is the second. Wang has been the First Division Head of the Taxation Agency, Ministry of Finance (MOF), R.O.C. He recognized that the authorities always treat everyone as if they are criminals, and make laws to prevent from abuse. The procedure is so critical that most innocent taxpayers may be persecuted.

I Am a Criminal—Wang Chien-Shien

Wang not only has worked in Ministry Of Finance for years but also has been the minister. He said, “There must have been many unjust or inconvenient laws made by me.” He is not the only one who made these laws that persecute the tax human rights. He reflected that many officials of tax authorities, especially senior officers, are his students or colleagues before. “As a teacher and director,” he said, “I should be in great charge of this.” “I am really a criminal,” said Wang.

The editors of the White paper are RCTPFL Director, Prof. Gee Keh-Chang, and CAHR Chairman Lawyer, Lin Tian-Tsai. Prof. Gee said that the white paper is a domestic human rights indicator, which has collected many cases. Lawyer Lin especially named the white paper as a textbook for Taiwan taxation human rights. Among the cases mentioned in the white paper, many are falsely issued with improper tax bills to common people. Many cases reveal that the authorities do not respect taxpayers. Without protecting taxpayers’ rights, the government only focuses on the obligation. Prof. Wu Ching-Fang, the President of the Legal Aid Foundation, said that there have been a number of taxation disputes. We should live up to the two UN covenants since our country has ratified the covenants in legislation.

The well-known Lawyer Su Yiu-Chen, who is the chairman of CAHR and has worked for “Su Chien-He case” for 21 years, emphasized that taxation should be friendlier. Su sighed for Tai Ji Men case. He said that Tai Ji Men was persecuted by the tax disaster for 16 years so the case should be dealt with seriously. He appealed that we should start taxation reform immediately such that no injustice case would happen any more.

Taiwan Does Not Live Up to the Two Covenants—Especially Taxation Problem

“Taxation justice” has attracted enthusiastic response from related scholars and experts. A lot of unjust tax bills have been issued due to the abuse of the public power and indirect taxes by national tax officials. Prof. Gee was depressed and said that this is a compulsory payment.
All scholars and experts agreed that the government have to live up to the two covenants: the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

“The common people will be impressed with filing tax return in May every year,” said Prof. Chen, “This is because our laws are out-of-date and bureaucratic.” He further said that most people consider only the obligation of taxpayers rather than their rights.

Prof. Chen said that the tax authority, Ministry Of Finance, does not live up to the two covenants. He said, “Is taxation so simple?” Many tax officials and prosecutors are lack of taxation knowledge. Moreover, they do not have the spirit of the two covenants, and thus a number of social problems are caused.

Prof. Gee said emotionally that taxation authorities often take “Explanatory Notes” as the source of laws. The Explanatory Notes even have no subject, description, truth and legal references. These explanatory Notes are not the source of laws. How can people be convinced to pay taxes?
In addition, Prof. Gee proposed another idea. Every neonate will be named individually. Similarly, every taxpayer is an individual and his human rights should be respected. In Taiwan, current taxation is based on qualified dependents. This viewpoint treats a person as another’s belongings.

Prof. Chen Ching-Hsiu, Department of Law, Soochow University, analyzed from the viewpoint of existence rights: the least cost-of-living is not deductible from tax payment. He took himself as an example: he is now litigating for income from professional practice and knows he will lose. He laughed, “I am waiting the justice of the Constitutional Court to interpret.” Most common people will pay the money directly. Prof. Chen, however, thinks that the unjust taxation violates the Constitution so he wants to reveal the truth.

Prof. Huang gave an insight from the concept of “Living Rights”. He pointed out that there are many deficiencies in filing tax return with one’s spouse. Especially the informant will be responsible in the future. For example, there has been a wife in charge of tax declaration. One day the National Tax Administration stated that her husband had incomes so she should pay the tax evaded and the fines as many as double. Finally the wife was restricted from going abroad. The husband had gone to China himself while the wife should pay the tax evaded. Is it fair?