一視同仁？法官專業化對稅務訴訟代理人訴訟績效之影響

Impartial Judgment? The Impact of Judges Professionalization on Agent's Tax Litigation Performance

10.6538/TAR.2016.1201.01

林秀鳳(Hsiu-Feng Lin)；陳岳鴻(Yueh-Hung Chen)

稅務訴訟 ； 法官 ； 績效 ； 轉換模型 ； tax litigation ； judges ； performance ； switching regression model

中華會計學刊

12卷1期（2016 / 07 / 01）

1 - 42

繁體中文;英文

稅務訴訟未納入專業審理機制，本研究藉由司法院以經驗為基礎的專業久任規定，探討法官專業化對稅務訴訟的影響。透過門檻指標內生轉換模型的結果顯示，一般法官審理所得稅與營業稅訴訟時，會計師訴訟績效及效率皆優於律師；未發現律師與會計師在專業法官審理能明顯影響訴訟績效。本研究進一步考量會計事項樣本發現，一般法官審理會計事項二稅案件，會計師績效表現反而不佳。一般法官缺乏審理系列案件經驗，代理人取得勝訴機率皆未超過5%；專業法官審理時，會計師訴訟績效佳，且訴訟效率與效果皆優於律師。本文實證結果呈現，法官藉由審理經驗專業化養成，可強化二稅案件審理的決策行為，而會計師在會計事項案件，則顯露出專業的訴訟代理角色。

This paper examines the experience effect of judges professionalization on agent's tax litigation performance. We employ the endogenous switching regression model with unknown sample separation to classify experienced judges on income- and business-tax litigation into the professional judges regime. The empirical result shows that Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) perform better than attorneys when the judges lack related tax litigation experiences. On the other hand, we do not find significant performance differences between CPAs and attorneys in the regime of professional judges. The accounting issue subsample test of tax litigation, the professional judges regime sample indicates that CPAs have better litigation performance than attorneys, and also perform advantage in litigation effect and efficiency. In contrast, CPAs perform worst in litigation performance, and both CPAs and attorneys have trail-win rates extremely under the 5% by the judges who lack of experiences. In sum, judges' experience is important for the legal system, and CPAs play a role of professional agent in the tax litigation.

1. 杜榮瑞、林孝倫(2010)。法官對審計品質之評估：後果知識與經驗之影響。會計評論，50，1-21。
   連結：
2. 沈中華、林昆立(2008)。公司治理對基本財務資訊與股票報酬關係的影響：內生性轉換模型之應用。管理評論，27(2)，1-27。
   連結：
3. 林秀鳳、陳岳鴻(2016)。瑜亮之爭：稅務訴訟代理人訴訟績效差異之研究。人文及社會科學集刊，28(2)，2016。
   連結：
4. Ai, C.,Norton, E. C.(2003).Interaction terms in logit and probit models.Economics Letters,80(1),123-129.
5. Ashton, R. H.(ed.),Ashton, A. H.(ed.)(1995).Judgment and Decision-Making Research in Accounting and Auditing.New York, NY:Cambridge University Press.
6. Black, K. D.,Black, S.(2004).A national tax bar: An end to the attorney-accountant tax turf war.Saint Mary's Law Journal,36(1),1-78.
7. Blouin, J.,Grein, B. M.,Rountree, B. R.(2007).An analysis of forced auditor change: The case of former Arthur Andersen clients.The Accounting Review,82(3),621-650.
8. Bonner, S. E.(1990).Experience effects in auditing: The role of task-specific knowledge.The Accounting Review,65(1),72-92.
9. Bonner, S. E.,Lewis, B. L.(1990).Determinants of auditor expertise.Journal of Accounting Research,28,1-20.
10. Byrne, D.(1961).Interpersonal attraction and attitude similarity.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,62(3),713-715.
11. Chen, K.-P.,Huang, K.-C.,Lin, C.-C.(2015).Party capability versus court preference: Why do the "Haves" come out ahead? - An empirical lesson from the Taiwan supreme court.Journal of Law, Economics and Organization,31(1),93-126.
12. Fiske, S. T.,Taylor, S. E.(1984).Social Cognition.New York, NY:Random House.
13. Garvey, G.,Milbourn, T.(2003).Incentive compensation when executives can hedge the market: Evidence of relative performance evaluation in the cross section.The Journal of Finance,58(4),1557-1581.
14. Guthrie, C.,Rachlinski, J. J.,Wistrich, A. J.(2001).Inside the judicial mind.Cornell Law Review,86(4),777-830.
15. Hovakiman, G.,Titman, S.(2006).Corporate investment with financial constraints: Sensitivity of investment to funds from voluntary asset sales.Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking,38(2),357-374.
16. Hu, X.,Schiantarelli, F.(1998).Investment and capital market imperfections: A switching regression approach using U.S. firm panel data.The Review of Economic and Statistics,80(3),466-479.
17. Huang, K.-C.,Lin, C.-C.(2013).Rescuing confidence in the judicial system: Introducing lay participation in Taiwan.Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,10(3),542-569.
18. Huang, K.-C.,Lin, C.-C.,Chen, K.-P.(2014).Do rich and poor behave similarly in seeking legal advice? Lessons from Taiwan in comparative perspective.Law & Society Review,48(1),193-223.
19. Judge, T. A.,Ferris, G. R.(1993).Social context of performance evaluation decisions.The Academy of Management Journal,36(1),80-105.
20. Kemp, C.,Bernstein, A.,Tenenbaum, J. B.(2005).A generative theory of similarity.27th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
21. Lederman, L.,Hrung, W. B.(2006).Do attorneys do their client justice? An empirical study of lawyers' effect on tax court litigation outcomes.Wake Forest Law Review,41(4),1235-1295.
22. Lin, S.(2000).CPA attested tax returns and tax evasion.Taiwan Accounting Review,1(1),15-36.
23. Luce, R. D.,Fishburn, P. C.(1991).Rank- and sign-dependent liner utility models for finite first-order gambles.Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,4(1),29-59.
24. Luce, R. D.,Fishburn, P. C.(1995).A note on deriving rank-dependent utility using additive joint receipts.Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,11(1),5-16.
25. Norton, E. C.,Wang, H.,Ai, C.(2004).Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models.The Stata Journal,4(2),154-167.
26. Turban, D. B.,Jones, A. P.(1988).Supervisor-subordinate similarity: Types, effects, and mechanisms.Journal of Applied Psychology,73(2),228-234.
27. 王全三、廖珮真、林敬偉(2010)。訴訟代理人專業背景對所得稅訴訟案件的影響。台大管理論叢，20(2)，173-207。
28. 陳長文(2006)。法律人，你為什麼不爭氣：法律倫理與理想的重建。台北:天下遠見。
29. 黃士洲(2002)。稅務訴訟的舉證責任。台北:翰蘆圖書。
30. 葛克昌(2005)。行政程序與納稅人基本權。台北:翰蘆圖書。
31. 熊秉元(2005)。基準點和經濟分析。經社法制論叢，36，45-77。

1. 黃美珠,陳明進,汪瑞芝(2021)。我國稅務會計文獻回顧。會計審計論叢，11(2)，1-42。