Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Implementation of Tax Hostage Taking (Gijzeling) in Indonesia in the Perspective of Tax Compliance and Deterrence Effect Seselia Ongso; Sugeng Santoso PN
Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies Vol. 5 No. 12 (2025): Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies
Publisher : Green Publisher Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59188/eduvest.v5i12.52527

Abstract

Indonesia has reformed its tax system into a self-assessment framework that grants taxpayers the autonomy to independently calculate, report, and settle their tax obligations. However, this system faces significant enforcement challenges due to increasing tax arrears and low taxpayer compliance. When administrative instruments such as warning letters, forced collection notices, and asset confiscation prove ineffective, tax hostage-taking (Gijzeling) emerges as an ultimum remedium designed to create a deterrence effect. This study employs a normative legal method with conceptual and legislative approaches to analyze the effectiveness of tax hostage-taking from the perspectives of tax compliance and deterrence effect. Findings reveal that, theoretically, Gijzeling serves as a law enforcement instrument aimed at enhancing taxpayer compliance through criminal sanction threats that induce fear. However, empirical evidence demonstrates that tax hostage-taking has not effectively increased state revenue, as its deterrent impact is limited to directly affected taxpayers and fails to influence broader taxpayer behavior. Consequently, Gijzeling cannot serve as a primary strategy for improving tax compliance. Instead, sustainable compliance requires integrated approaches that strengthen voluntary compliance through enhanced literacy, transparency, and reconstruction of public trust.
Structural Market Distortions in Indonesia's Aviation Industry: Evidence of Monopolistic Practices, Price Discrimination, and Cartel Activities by the Lion Air Group Seselia Ongso; Sugeng Santoso PN
Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies Vol. 6 No. 5 (2026): Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies
Publisher : Green Publisher Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59188/eduvest.v6i5.53159

Abstract

There is an indication of market dominance through a cooperation agreement that has the potential to limit the access of other business actors and cause discriminatory treatment. One of the cases of monopoly practices is market control through a cooperation agreement by Lion Air Group in ICC Decision Number 07/ICC-I/2020 and Cassation Decision Number 1811K/Pdt.Sus-ICC/2022. The research method employed is doctrinal legal research using a library research and statute approach, by examining legal regulations on monopoly, discrimination, and cartel practices, which are then analyzed alongside material facts and judicial ratio decidendi. The results of the study show that the monopoly practice in ICC Decision Number 07/ICC-I/2020 is reflected in the granting of exclusive rights to use cargo capacity to PT Lion Express which has an impact on limited access for other business actors and fulfills the elements of violation of Article 19 letter d of Law No.5/1999. In addition, indications of cartel pricing and practices were also found through the uniformity of flight fare policies by the Lion Air Group in Cassation Decision Number 1811K/Pdt.Sus-KPPU/2022. Although, the evidence of alleged cartel practices was not met, the Panel of Judges still affirmed the existence of cartel violations as intended in Article 5 of Law No. 5/1999. Therefore, this study emphasizes that monopoly practices can trigger unfair business competition, so strict supervision by ICC is needed to ensure the achievement of healthy, fair, and efficient business competition in the aviation industry.