<![CDATA[The increasing number of international tax disputes resulting from double taxation and Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) has strengthened the importance of effective dispute resolution mechanisms. In response, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) introduced BEPS Action 14 to establish minimum standards for improving the effectiveness of the Mutual Agreement Procedure (MAP). This study aims to analyze the conformity of Indonesia's MAP regulations with the OECD BEPS Action 14 Minimum Standard and to compare Indonesia's regulatory framework with those of Singapore, Japan, and Australia. The research employs a normative juridical approach supported by statutory, comparative, historical, and conceptual analyses. Data were collected through library research, including legislation, tax treaties, OECD reports, MAP Peer Review Reports, and relevant academic literature. The findings indicate that Indonesia has substantially incorporated the OECD minimum standards through Minister of Finance Regulation No. 172/PMK.03/2023. However, challenges remain regarding procedural transparency, taxpayer accessibility, institutional capacity, and the timeliness of dispute resolution, with several cases exceeding the OECD's recommended 24-month resolution period. Compared with Singapore, Japan, and Australia, Indonesia demonstrates relatively lower performance in implementing an effective MAP framework. These shortcomings affect tax certainty, taxpayer protection, and Indonesia's compliance with international commitments under tax treaties. The study recommends strengthening the national regulatory framework, improving transparency and administrative procedures, enhancing the capacity of the Competent Authority, and adopting international best practices to increase the effectiveness of MAP implementation and reinforce legal certainty in international taxation.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
