How
Many Gayuses are There?
Mohammad Tsani Annafari, a senior staff at the Finance Ministry and a PhD candidate in
technology management and economics at CTH Gothenburg
Sumber
: JAKARTA POST, 28 Februari 2012
I
could not imagine the feeling of many fellow tax officials when the media
reported the recent tax scandals. I know many of them have given their best to
rebuild the image of the tax agency that was ruined by Gayus H Tambunan, a
former junior tax officer who now serves a prison sentence for fraud.
In the latest case, the Attorney General’s Office named tax officer Dhana Widyatmika a corruption suspect after the Financial and Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre found he had Rp 28 billion and US$250,000 in accounts at 18 banks, which was beyond common sense due to his low-level ranking at the tax office.
Even though some say that this new scandal, which involves a huge amount of taxpayers’ money, is evidence of the country’s failed tax reform and remuneration program, I have a different view on this.
To me, every graft case within the tax agency that has been and will be heard in court is a concrete result of reform.
The huge amount of stolen money unveiled only indicates how bad the system and the culture of the agency was, so that such a crime could take place. Rather, the scandals signify how daunting the challenge of the tax reform is.
This also shows that remuneration is a worthy policy, since you cannot only feed your dog with small bones when the thieves offer larger and delicious meat.
Therefore, once a scandal is revealed, the public should proportionally react.
Instead of condemning the tax agency and blaming the reform, they should closely follow the judiciary process against the tax officials to ensure they get punished accordingly.
In addition, it is easy to imagine that if one is willing to bribe Rp 60 billion then they will receive more than the amount from the crimes. Therefore, the punishment should not only be handed to the tax officials, but also to any parties that benefit from the scandals.
The public should also monitor how cooperative and transparent the tax agency is in supporting the investigation.
As the tax agency becomes more transparent and open to law enforcement agencies, for instance by officially mandating all tax officials to report their wealth, the “harvest” will actually begin. The first victims are, of course, the bad officials.
It is hard for these corrupt individuals to hide themselves among those who work for the tax agency with sincerity. They will be haunted by guilty feeling and anxiety every time they watch their fellows work with honesty and dignity to serve the people.
They know that sooner or later their crime will be uncovered. Some of them have even chosen to resign or change jobs to move away from the spot.
Second, the recent cases actually show how reform destroys the misleading esprit de corps that in the past often helped bad officials escape justice. If we fairly compare the recent situation with the past, we will notice how different the Finance Ministry and the tax agency support the judiciary process against these officials.
In the past, there was no way the ministry and tax agency would have provided investigators with access to evidence, or quickly fire individual officials implicated in corrupt practices. Often the law enforcers were also involved in the scandals themselves. Therefore, very few corrupt tax officials went to jail or received severe punishment.
The cases of Gayus and senior tax official Bahasyim Assifie are examples that the tax office no longer offers protection to corrupt tax officials. The tax agency and judiciary agencies have no choice but to keep this “no mercy for corrupt acts” policy going to regain public trust.
The public should support this policy by reporting any bad officials to the ministry through the whistle blowing mechanism or tax supervisory committee that both offer better protection to tax payers from possible retaliation from corrupt tax officials and their networks.
Furthermore, the public should be aware of the fact that there are plenty people out there who are unhappy with the reform.
Bad tax consultants and bad tax payers, in particular, now have fewer collaborators and weakened networks inside the tax agency to sustain their dirty work.
They have to “bargain” with higher costs to obtain such support from any tax officials, as most of them have received higher remuneration and are aware of the harsh punishments they will face for committing fraud.
The IT based working environment and stronger public monitoring also contribute to the promotion of transparency, which forces them to think twice before committing any tax crime.
In short, reform has supported tax officials to find fewer reasons to commit corruption.
Nevertheless, the tax agency may still have many more “Gayuses” that remain undisclosed as they have long been cultivated. Therefore, we should help the agency to find and punish these corrupt individuals by continuously promoting transparency until we know how many “Gayuses” actually exist. ●
In the latest case, the Attorney General’s Office named tax officer Dhana Widyatmika a corruption suspect after the Financial and Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre found he had Rp 28 billion and US$250,000 in accounts at 18 banks, which was beyond common sense due to his low-level ranking at the tax office.
Even though some say that this new scandal, which involves a huge amount of taxpayers’ money, is evidence of the country’s failed tax reform and remuneration program, I have a different view on this.
To me, every graft case within the tax agency that has been and will be heard in court is a concrete result of reform.
The huge amount of stolen money unveiled only indicates how bad the system and the culture of the agency was, so that such a crime could take place. Rather, the scandals signify how daunting the challenge of the tax reform is.
This also shows that remuneration is a worthy policy, since you cannot only feed your dog with small bones when the thieves offer larger and delicious meat.
Therefore, once a scandal is revealed, the public should proportionally react.
Instead of condemning the tax agency and blaming the reform, they should closely follow the judiciary process against the tax officials to ensure they get punished accordingly.
In addition, it is easy to imagine that if one is willing to bribe Rp 60 billion then they will receive more than the amount from the crimes. Therefore, the punishment should not only be handed to the tax officials, but also to any parties that benefit from the scandals.
The public should also monitor how cooperative and transparent the tax agency is in supporting the investigation.
As the tax agency becomes more transparent and open to law enforcement agencies, for instance by officially mandating all tax officials to report their wealth, the “harvest” will actually begin. The first victims are, of course, the bad officials.
It is hard for these corrupt individuals to hide themselves among those who work for the tax agency with sincerity. They will be haunted by guilty feeling and anxiety every time they watch their fellows work with honesty and dignity to serve the people.
They know that sooner or later their crime will be uncovered. Some of them have even chosen to resign or change jobs to move away from the spot.
Second, the recent cases actually show how reform destroys the misleading esprit de corps that in the past often helped bad officials escape justice. If we fairly compare the recent situation with the past, we will notice how different the Finance Ministry and the tax agency support the judiciary process against these officials.
In the past, there was no way the ministry and tax agency would have provided investigators with access to evidence, or quickly fire individual officials implicated in corrupt practices. Often the law enforcers were also involved in the scandals themselves. Therefore, very few corrupt tax officials went to jail or received severe punishment.
The cases of Gayus and senior tax official Bahasyim Assifie are examples that the tax office no longer offers protection to corrupt tax officials. The tax agency and judiciary agencies have no choice but to keep this “no mercy for corrupt acts” policy going to regain public trust.
The public should support this policy by reporting any bad officials to the ministry through the whistle blowing mechanism or tax supervisory committee that both offer better protection to tax payers from possible retaliation from corrupt tax officials and their networks.
Furthermore, the public should be aware of the fact that there are plenty people out there who are unhappy with the reform.
Bad tax consultants and bad tax payers, in particular, now have fewer collaborators and weakened networks inside the tax agency to sustain their dirty work.
They have to “bargain” with higher costs to obtain such support from any tax officials, as most of them have received higher remuneration and are aware of the harsh punishments they will face for committing fraud.
The IT based working environment and stronger public monitoring also contribute to the promotion of transparency, which forces them to think twice before committing any tax crime.
In short, reform has supported tax officials to find fewer reasons to commit corruption.
Nevertheless, the tax agency may still have many more “Gayuses” that remain undisclosed as they have long been cultivated. Therefore, we should help the agency to find and punish these corrupt individuals by continuously promoting transparency until we know how many “Gayuses” actually exist. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar