DJP's Business Valuation Fails to Correct Hundreds of Billions in Corporate Income Tax in PT SP’s Debt-to-Equity Swap Case

PUT-009753.15/2024/PP/M.IXA Of 2025 - 30 September 2025

Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)
Wednesday, January 14, 2026 | 15:13 WIB
00:00
Optimized with Google Chrome
DJP's Business Valuation Fails to Correct Hundreds of Billions in Corporate Income Tax in PT SP’s Debt-to-Equity Swap Case

This Tax Court Decision provides crucial clarity on the limits of applying the Arm’s Length Principle (ALP/PKKU) and the definition of income from debt forgiveness in the case of Debt-to-Equity Swap (DES)PT SP successfully demonstrated that this corporate restructuring action did not create an object of Corporate Income Tax (CIT), resulting in the full cancellation of the Out-of-Business Income correction amounting to IDR 390,871,389,030.00 asserted by the Directorate General of Taxes (DJP). The core of this dispute lies in the fundamental interpretive difference of whether a DES should be valued based on fair market price or merely treated as a balance sheet reclassification using legally agreed-upon par value.

The conflict began when the DJP, utilizing its authority under Article 18 paragraph (3) of the Income Tax Law (UU PPh), claimed that the DES between PT SP and its affiliated party was not fair. The DJP argued that the value of the debt converted was higher than the fair market value of PT SP’s shares, which was determined through a Business Valuation method. This positive difference in value was interpreted by the DJP as income from debt forgiveness, pursuant to Article 4 paragraph (1) letter k of the UU PPh. Based on the valuation result, which yielded a significantly low share value, the DJP added hundreds of billions of Rupiah to PT SP’s taxable income.

On the other hand, PT SP consistently argued that DES was neither debt forgiveness nor an exchange of assets. PT SP asserted that the transaction was purely a balance sheet reclassification, where the debt was settled by issuing new shares at par value. Since there was no actual economic gain and no difference was considered a share premium/discount upon capital injection, there should be no CIT object. PT SP rejected the DJP’s Business Valuation results, emphasizing that the share’s par value, established in the notarial deed, should be the legally valid and relevant value for tax purposes.

The Tax Court Panel of Judges firmly sided with PT SP in their decision. The Panel’s legal consideration focused heavily on the substance of the transaction and corporate legality. The Judge stated that DES is an internal restructuring that does not meet the criteria for income from debt forgiveness. Most critically, the Panel ruled that the DJP failed to provide a strong legal basis to enforce the fair value determined by the Business Valuation as a basis for the CIT correction, especially when the par value used was consistent with the legal agreements. The cancellation of this primary correction automatically nullified the consequential correction made to PT SP’s Prior Year Loss Compensation.

The implications of this decision are significant for Taxpayers undertaking debt restructuring with affiliates. The ruling affirms that not all affiliated transactions must be subject to the ALP test if the transaction does not involve the transfer of goods, services, or assets, but merely reclassifies the balance sheet. This provides legal certainty that the legally recognized par value in the deed of establishment can be upheld as the basis for a DES transaction, thereby limiting the DJP’s scope to unilaterally use business valuations as a basis for Corporate Income Tax corrections.

A Comprehensive Analysis and the Tax Court Decision on This Dispute Are Available Here.

Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H.
Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H.
Tax Business Consultant and Lawyer

April 04, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | PPN | Appeal | Fully Granted

PUT-002998.16/2024/PP/M.XA Of 2025 – 24 September 2025

April 04, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Income Tax Article 26 (Non-Final) | Appeal | Partially Granted

PUT-003062.13/2024/PP/M.IA Of 2025 – 24 September 2025

April 04, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Annual Corporate Income Tax | Appeal | To Reject the Appeal/ Lawsuit

PUT-002448.15/2022/PP/M.IVB Of 2025 – 25 September 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | PPN | Appeal | To Reject the Appeal/ Lawsuit

PUT-002117.16/2024/PP/M.XIVB Of 2025 – May 15 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Annual Corporate Income Tax | Appeal | Fully Granted

PUT-002152.15/2024/PP/M.XXA Of 2025 – 22 May 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Annual Corporate Income Tax | Appeal | Fully Granted

PUT-015139.15/2020/PP/M.XB Of 2025 – 27 May 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | PPN | Appeal | Fully Granted

PUT-002157.16/2024/PP/M.XXA Of 2025 – 22 May 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Annual Corporate Income Tax | Appeal | To Reject the Appeal/ Lawsuit

PUT-002294.15/2023/PP/M.XIIIB Of 2025 – 20 May 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Tax Lawsuit | Lawsuit | To Reject the Appeal/ Lawsuit

PUT-011578.99/2023/PP/M.XIVA Of 2025 – 11 June 2025

April 02, 2026 • Taxindo Prime Consulting | Adv. Muhammad Faiz Nur Abshar, S.H. - Lilik F Pracaya, Ak., CA., ME., BKP (C)

Tax Court Decision | Annual Corporate Income Tax | Appeal | To Reject the Appeal/ Lawsuit

PUT-012651.15/2022/PP/M.XVIIIA Of 2025 – 10 June 2025

Taxindo Prime Consulting (TPC) is a firm specializing in tax, accounting, business, and business law consulting.
Taxindo Prime Consulting (TPC) is established as a trusted strategic partner, providing comprehensive solutions in tax consulting, accounting, business development, and business law. Driven by a commitment to integrity and professionalism, TPC is dedicated to delivering more than just standard consultation; we provide education, tactical advice, and concrete solutions. Our services are meticulously designed to analyze and resolve clients' tax and business challenges with objectivity, in-depth insight, and full independence, ensuring both regulatory compliance and long-term business sustainability.
OFFICE
Mega Plaza Building 12th Floor
Jl. H.R. Rasuna Said Kav C-3 Jakarta 12940

Phone :
+62 21 521 2686
+62 817 001 3303

Email :
info@taxindo.co.id
Copyright © 2026 Taxindo Prime Consulting

All content on this website is provided solely for general informational and educational purposes. This information is not intended as a substitute for professional tax advice or consultation specific to your situation. We strongly encourage you to contact our team of consultants directly to receive appropriate guidance and advice.

Taxindo Prime Consulting
Tax and Transfer Pricing Calculator
Tax Calendar
×
Newsletter