지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
In Macomber vs. Eisner (1920), the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the realization requirement should be one of the essential elements to form an "income" to which the federal income taxes might be imposed under the interpretation of 16<SUP>th</SUP> Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Since the Macomber, however, the U.S. jurisprudence has persistently encroached upon the realm of the realization requirement in order to broaden the tax base and accelerate the moment of the taxation on the one hand and to restrict the tax evasion strategies based on the realization on the other hand.
Notwithstanding the consistent refinement of the requirement, the basic realization concept has remained remarkably stable since the Macomber decision, and still takes its role as the longstanding limits of the full application of the Haig-Simon type accretion taxation. In this article, after exploring the Macomber decision and the post-Macomber history of the realization requirement in part Ⅱ, part Ⅲ reviews two critical tax issues closely related to the concept of the realization in both the U.S. and Korea, i.e., the direct-consumption tax and the mark-to-market taxation of the commodity future contracts.
According to the proponents of the direct-consumption tax, the current income tax should be repealed and replaced with the USA tax or the flat tax both of which are based on the strictest application of the constitutional requirement of the realization in Macomber. On the other hand, the mark-to-market taxation of the commodity future contracts conceptually hinges on the complete exclusion of the realization requirement from the constitutional definition of the "income." Through the controversies over the two separate issues, we can empirically comprehend that the income tax system, in the real world, should be a certain point of the two extreme ends of a continuum in terms of the realization.
This article does not suggest whether to acknowledge the limits of the realization in the definition of the "income" for the income tax purpose. Instead, we have to strive for the golden medium of the two extreme ends taking every aspect into consideration on an issue by issue basis, and the only reliable standard for that job is the sound balancing of the efficiency and fairness.
Notwithstanding the consistent refinement of the requirement, the basic realization concept has remained remarkably stable since the Macomber decision, and still takes its role as the longstanding limits of the full application of the Haig-Simon type accretion taxation. In this article, after exploring the Macomber decision and the post-Macomber history of the realization requirement in part Ⅱ, part Ⅲ reviews two critical tax issues closely related to the concept of the realization in both the U.S. and Korea, i.e., the direct-consumption tax and the mark-to-market taxation of the commodity future contracts.
According to the proponents of the direct-consumption tax, the current income tax should be repealed and replaced with the USA tax or the flat tax both of which are based on the strictest application of the constitutional requirement of the realization in Macomber. On the other hand, the mark-to-market taxation of the commodity future contracts conceptually hinges on the complete exclusion of the realization requirement from the constitutional definition of the "income." Through the controversies over the two separate issues, we can empirically comprehend that the income tax system, in the real world, should be a certain point of the two extreme ends of a continuum in terms of the realization.
This article does not suggest whether to acknowledge the limits of the realization in the definition of the "income" for the income tax purpose. Instead, we have to strive for the golden medium of the two extreme ends taking every aspect into consideration on an issue by issue basis, and the only reliable standard for that job is the sound balancing of the efficiency and fairness.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론 - 이 글의 목적과 고찰범위
Ⅱ. 실현주의 과세원칙의 확립과 변천과정
Ⅲ. 실현주의를 둘러싼 두 가지 주요 논쟁
Ⅳ. 결론 - 실현주의의 미래와 교훈
〈참고문헌〉
〈Abstract〉
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
현행소득과세제도와 조세공평주의
법학연구
2007 .06
-
The Discrepancy between Statutory Tax and Real Tax Burden : The Case of Korea
Korea and the World Economy
2009 .04
-
지방세법상 토지과표의 개선방안
법학연구
2005 .12
-
분권화를 위한 지방세제 개혁
한국지방재정논집
2002 .06
-
소득세 세율구조의 개선 방안에 관한 연구
국제회계연구
2018 .04
-
관세법상의 가산세에 관한 사례연구
관세학회지
2004 .02
-
보유과세강화가 조세부담의 형평성에 미치는 효과
한국지방재정논집
2003 .12
-
주요 OECD 국가의 소비과세부담에 관한 비교분석
무역연구
2015 .01
-
지방소비세, 어떻게 진화할 것인가? : 지방세로서의 위상 정립 모색
한국지방재정논집
2012 .04
-
중소기업 조세지원제도의 유효성 분석
국제회계연구
2002 .11
-
중앙정부에 의한 감면이 지방 세입에 미친 효과 분석
지역정책연구
2013 .06
-
해외 부동산투자와 조세문제
조세학술논집
2007 .02
-
적정 간접세율 구조에 대한 소고 : 간접세제의 제재 기능을 고려하며
조세법연구
2013 .12
-
국세기본법과 지방세기본법의 통합과 체제 개편에 관한 연구
아태비즈니스연구
2018 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0