That easier to comprehend its(the problem is following is presented some example of transactions concerning applying Section 15 sentence ( 2).
Example of 1:
SinCo is company livinging in Singapore, peripatetic in training vesting in the field of the application of computer software. SinCo signs up with PT Indo, company livinging in Indonesia to give training to employee PT Indo. For the SinCo sends Liem, one of its(the past master to Jakarta to execute training as according to agreement. In situation that way, along the length of concerning production received by Liem during executing its(the duty in Jakarta, Indonesialah executing rule P3B. In a state of said Indonesia ( in this case DITJEN Pajak) cannot have a notion is other except that Liem is employee from SinCo, of what executed in Jakarta is indivisible part from business activity SinCo. Thereby, to determine is salary received by it during undertaking in Jakarta will bow to rule Section 15 sentence ( 2) from P3B Indonesia-Singapura.
Example of 2:
Cco is holding companies from some companies ( for example Dco, company livinging in D), be company livinging in C. Cco has developed marketing strategy for whole world for the agenda of sale of its(the product. Cco then sends John Doe to Dco ( for a period of brief) to ascertain has Dco have applied strategy which has been developed by Cco. In this case domiciled John Doe as employee Cco cannot be questionable again because Cco as holding companies in its(the business group acts for the agenda of manage his(its global marketing strategy. So Activity done by John Doe as according to business activity Cco, its(the place company works. So, treatment of salary John Doe during assigned in D to bow to rule Section 15 sentence ( 2). Mean the salary can only be hit tax in C along the length of up to standard arranged in Section 15(2).
Example of 1:
SinCo is company livinging in Singapore, peripatetic in training vesting in the field of the application of computer software. SinCo signs up with PT Indo, company livinging in Indonesia to give training to employee PT Indo. For the SinCo sends Liem, one of its(the past master to Jakarta to execute training as according to agreement. In situation that way, along the length of concerning production received by Liem during executing its(the duty in Jakarta, Indonesialah executing rule P3B. In a state of said Indonesia ( in this case DITJEN Pajak) cannot have a notion is other except that Liem is employee from SinCo, of what executed in Jakarta is indivisible part from business activity SinCo. Thereby, to determine is salary received by it during undertaking in Jakarta will bow to rule Section 15 sentence ( 2) from P3B Indonesia-Singapura.
Example of 2:
Cco is holding companies from some companies ( for example Dco, company livinging in D), be company livinging in C. Cco has developed marketing strategy for whole world for the agenda of sale of its(the product. Cco then sends John Doe to Dco ( for a period of brief) to ascertain has Dco have applied strategy which has been developed by Cco. In this case domiciled John Doe as employee Cco cannot be questionable again because Cco as holding companies in its(the business group acts for the agenda of manage his(its global marketing strategy. So Activity done by John Doe as according to business activity Cco, its(the place company works. So, treatment of salary John Doe during assigned in D to bow to rule Section 15 sentence ( 2). Mean the salary can only be hit tax in C along the length of up to standard arranged in Section 15(2).
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar