税收征管法第45条:限制纳税人隐私是否违宪?

Q3 Social Sciences South African law journal Pub Date : 2021-01-01 DOI:10.47348/SALJ/V138/I1A8
F. Moosa
{"title":"税收征管法第45条:限制纳税人隐私是否违宪?","authors":"F. Moosa","doi":"10.47348/SALJ/V138/I1A8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011 is a law of general application. Section 45 of the Act empowers a SARS official to enter, without a warrant, premises where a trade or enterprise is reasonably believed to be carried on in order to conduct an inspection aimed at gathering information that will aide SARS in determining whether the business operator is compliant with tax obligations. In a constitutional democracy, the enjoyment of fundamental rights has a high premium. Accordingly, every lawful exercise of the power conferred by s 45 must take place in an orderly fashion, with decency and respect for taxpayers and their privacy. The state may not unduly interfere with this right, whether by withdrawing it altogether, abridging it, or diminishing its scope and ambit. This article hypothesises that inspections undertaken in terms of s 45 limit taxpayers’ privacy in a manner that may not pass muster under s 36(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. On this basis, it is argued that, to cure its deficiencies, s 45 ought to be amended by the introduction of the provisions proposed in this article.","PeriodicalId":39313,"journal":{"name":"South African law journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Section 45 of the Tax Administration Act: An unconstitutional limitation on taxpayer privacy?\",\"authors\":\"F. Moosa\",\"doi\":\"10.47348/SALJ/V138/I1A8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011 is a law of general application. Section 45 of the Act empowers a SARS official to enter, without a warrant, premises where a trade or enterprise is reasonably believed to be carried on in order to conduct an inspection aimed at gathering information that will aide SARS in determining whether the business operator is compliant with tax obligations. In a constitutional democracy, the enjoyment of fundamental rights has a high premium. Accordingly, every lawful exercise of the power conferred by s 45 must take place in an orderly fashion, with decency and respect for taxpayers and their privacy. The state may not unduly interfere with this right, whether by withdrawing it altogether, abridging it, or diminishing its scope and ambit. This article hypothesises that inspections undertaken in terms of s 45 limit taxpayers’ privacy in a manner that may not pass muster under s 36(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. On this basis, it is argued that, to cure its deficiencies, s 45 ought to be amended by the introduction of the provisions proposed in this article.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African law journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African law journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/V138/I1A8\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.47348/SALJ/V138/I1A8","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

2011年第28号《税收管理法》是一部普遍适用的法律。该法第45条授权税务局官员在没有手令的情况下,进入有理由相信经营某一行业或企业的场所进行检查,目的是收集信息,帮助税务局确定该经营者是否遵守纳税义务。在宪政民主国家,享有基本权利是非常重要的。因此,第45条所赋予权力的每一项合法行使都必须以有序的方式进行,并尊重纳税人及其隐私。国家不得不当干涉这一权利,无论是完全撤销、删节或缩小其范围和范围。本文假设,根据第45条进行的检查限制了纳税人的隐私,其方式可能无法通过1996年南非共和国宪法第36(1)条的审查。在此基础上,有人认为,为了纠正其不足之处,第45条应当加以修正,采用本条所提议的规定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Section 45 of the Tax Administration Act: An unconstitutional limitation on taxpayer privacy?
The Tax Administration Act 28 of 2011 is a law of general application. Section 45 of the Act empowers a SARS official to enter, without a warrant, premises where a trade or enterprise is reasonably believed to be carried on in order to conduct an inspection aimed at gathering information that will aide SARS in determining whether the business operator is compliant with tax obligations. In a constitutional democracy, the enjoyment of fundamental rights has a high premium. Accordingly, every lawful exercise of the power conferred by s 45 must take place in an orderly fashion, with decency and respect for taxpayers and their privacy. The state may not unduly interfere with this right, whether by withdrawing it altogether, abridging it, or diminishing its scope and ambit. This article hypothesises that inspections undertaken in terms of s 45 limit taxpayers’ privacy in a manner that may not pass muster under s 36(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. On this basis, it is argued that, to cure its deficiencies, s 45 ought to be amended by the introduction of the provisions proposed in this article.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
South African law journal
South African law journal Social Sciences-Law
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
A legislative framework for shareholder approval of political donations and expenditure by companies in South Africa Reflecting on the tension between the development of the common law and the doctrine of separation of powers in Paulsen v Slip Knot Investments 777 (Pty) Ltd Notes: The Krugersdorp gang rapes — Another Tshabalala v S; Ntuli v S? Book Review: Tjakie Naudé & Daniel Visser (eds) The Future of the Law of Contract: Essays in Honour of Dale Hutchison (2021) The classification of a ‘maritime claim’ in South Africa under the Admiralty Jurisdiction Regulation Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1