Local Tax Act

In the case falling under Article 701-12, paragraph (1), if a special collection agent conceals or disguises all or part of the facts that are to be the basis for calculating the amount of the tax base, and files a remittance return or the written request for reassessment prescribed in Article 20-9-3, paragraph (3) (referred to as the "written request for reassessment" in the following paragraph) based on the facts so concealed or disguised, the mayor of the municipality must, as provided by Cabinet Order, collect, in lieu of the amount of additional charge for understatement prescribed in Article 701-12, paragraph (1), an amount of substantial additional charge equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the deficiency amount due to reassessment that is to be the basis for that calculation by a rate of 35 percent.

In the case falling under Article 701-12, paragraph (2) (excluding the case where the proviso to Article 701-12, paragraph (2) applies), if a special collection agent conceals or disguises all or part of the facts that are to be the basis for calculating the amount of the tax base, and, based on the facts so concealed or disguised, does not file a remittance return by the deadline for filing, or files a remittance return after the deadline for filing, or files a written request for reassessment, the mayor of the municipality must, in lieu of the amount of additional charge for failure to file prescribed in Article 701-12, paragraph (2), collect an amount of substantial additional charge equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the tax amount that is to be the basis for that calculation by a rate of 40 percent.

In the case falling under the preceding two paragraphs, when any of the following items applies (item (i) in the case falling under paragraph (1)), the amount of substantial additional charge prescribed in the preceding two paragraphs is, notwithstanding those paragraphs, the amount calculated under those paragraphs plus the amount calculated by multiplying, by a rate of 10 percent, in the case falling under paragraph (1), the shortfall amount due to the reassessment forming the basis for calculation prescribed in that paragraph, and in the case falling under the preceding paragraph, the tax amount forming the basis for calculation prescribed in that paragraph.

In the case where, during the period up to the day five years before the day preceding the day on which, based on the concealed or disguised facts that are to be the basis for calculating the amount of the tax base prescribed in the preceding two paragraphs, the remittance return was filed after the deadline for filing, or a reassessment or determination under Article 701-9, paragraphs (1) to (3) was made, an additional charge for failure to file, etc. has been collected with respect to bathing tax

In the case where a specified additional charge for failure to file, etc. has been collected with respect to bathing tax for which special collection obligation arose in the year preceding, and the year before the year preceding, the year containing the day on which the special collection obligation arose for the bathing tax relating to the remittance return filed after the deadline for filing, or a reassessment or determination under Article 701-9, paragraphs (1) to (3), or it is found that a determination should be made regarding a specified additional charge for failure to file, etc.

In the case falling under the preceding two paragraphs, if there are grounds prescribed in Article 701-12, paragraph (6) with respect to the filing of the remittance return, the mayor of the municipality does not collect the amount of substantial additional charge calculated on the basis of the tax amount relating to that remittance return.

When the mayor of the municipality has determined the amount of substantial additional charge to be collected pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2), the mayor must notify the special collection agent of it without delay.

If a special collection agent does not pay in full the local government levies on bathing tax by the due date for payment (where a reassessment or determination has been made, meaning the due date for payment of the deficiency amount; the same applies hereinafter with respect to bathing tax), a municipal tax collection official must issue a demand letter within 20 days after the due date for payment; provided, however, that this does not apply in the case of advance collection.

A municipality with special circumstances may specify, by Municipal Ordinance of the municipality, a period different from the period prescribed in the preceding paragraph.

When a municipal tax collection official has issued a demand letter, the official may collect a fee as provided by the Municipal Ordinance of that municipality.

When a person delinquent in payment of bathing tax falls under any one of the following items, a municipal tax collection official must seize the property of the person delinquent in payment with respect to the local government levies on that bathing tax.

When the person delinquent in payment has received a demand and does not pay in full the local government levies on bathing tax relating to the demand by the day on which 10 days elapse counting from the date on which the demand letter was issued.

When the person delinquent in payment does not pay in full the local government levies on bathing tax by the due date for payment designated by the notice relating to advance collection.

Where the provisions of the preceding paragraph are applied to a secondary taxpayer or a guarantor, the phrase "demand letter" in item (i) of that paragraph is deemed to be replaced with "written reminder for remittance".

If, by the day on which the 10 days prescribed in paragraph (1), item (i) elapse after the due date for payment of local government levies on bathing tax, a fact falling under any item of Article 13-2, paragraph (1) arises with respect to a person delinquent in payment who has received a demand, a municipal tax collection official may immediately seize that person's property.

When a compulsory liquidation procedure has been conducted with respect to the property of a person delinquent in payment, a municipal tax collection official must make a request for share distribution, with respect to the delinquent local government levies on bathing tax, to the enforcement agency (where the request for share distribution is made for local government levies on bathing tax relating to a claim listed in Article 114, item (i) of the Bankruptcy Act, the court handling the bankruptcy case relating to that request for share distribution).

In a case where the municipal tax collection official may effect seizure under paragraphs (1) through (3), if property of the person delinquent in payment that is listed in the items of Article 86, paragraph (1) of the National Tax Collection Act has already been seized in a delinquent tax collection procedure for local government levies of another local government or for national taxes, or in a disposition following the example of such a delinquent tax collection procedure, a request for share distribution with respect to that property may be made by participatory seizure.

The delinquent tax collection procedures for local government levies on bathing tax, including what is provided for in the preceding paragraphs, are to be carried out in accordance with the rules for the delinquent tax collection procedure under the National Tax Collection Act.

A disposition under the preceding paragraphs may also be carried out outside the area of the municipality concerned.

When a special collection agent of bathing tax, for the purpose of evading the execution of delinquent tax collection procedures, conceals or damages his or her property, disposes of it to the detriment of the municipality, falsely increases the encumbrances on it, or alters its present state, thereby reducing the value of the property or increasing the expenses for the delinquent tax collection procedure relating to it, that person is to be punished by imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than 2,500,000 yen, or both.

The same applies where a third party in possession of the property of a special collection agent commits an act referred to in the preceding paragraph for the purpose of enabling the special collection agent to evade the execution of a delinquent tax collection procedure.

If a person, knowing the circumstances, becomes the counterparty of the special collection agent or of the third party in possession of the property in an act referred to in the preceding two paragraphs, the person who committed the violation as the counterparty is to be punished by imprisonment for not more than two years or a fine of not more than 1,500,000 yen, or both.

If a representative of a corporation, or an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation or a person, commits a violation prescribed in the preceding three paragraphs in connection with the business or property of that corporation or person, then in addition to punishing the offender, the fine prescribed in the relevant paragraphs is imposed on that corporation or person.

In the case of Article 701-18, paragraph (6), where a person violates, without justifiable grounds, an order of a municipal tax collection official issued in accordance with the rules of the proviso to Article 72-2, paragraph (1) of the National Tax Collection Act, the person who committed the violation is to be punished by imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of not more than 2,500,000 yen, or both.

If the representative of a corporation, or an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation or individual, has committed a violation referred to in the preceding paragraph in connection with the business or property of that corporation or individual, in addition to punishing the offender, the fine prescribed in that paragraph is to be imposed on that corporation or individual.

In a case that falls under any of the following items, the person who committed the violation is to be punished by imprisonment for not more than one year or a fine of not more than 500,000 yen:

In the case referred to in Article 701-18, paragraph (6), when a person fails to answer, or makes a false statement in answer to, questions put by a municipal tax collection official in accordance with the example of the provisions of Article 141 of the National Tax Collection Act.

In the case referred to in Article 701-18, paragraph (6), when a person refuses, obstructs or evades an inspection by a municipal tax collection official, conducted in accordance with the example of the provisions of Article 141 of the National Tax Collection Act, of books and documents (meaning the books and documents prescribed in Article 141 of the National Tax Collection Act; the same applies in the following item) or other articles.

In the case referred to in Article 701-18, paragraph (6), when a person, without justifiable grounds, fails to comply with a request by a municipal tax collection official, made in accordance with the example of the provisions of Article 141 of the National Tax Collection Act, for the presentation or submission of articles, or presents or submits books and documents or other articles (including copies thereof) containing false entries or records.

Where a representative of a corporation, or an agent, employee or other worker of a corporation or person, has committed a violation set forth in the preceding paragraph in connection with the business or property of that corporation or person, in addition to punishing the offender, the fine prescribed in that paragraph is to be imposed on that corporation or person.

In the case referred to in Article 701-18, paragraph (6), a person who makes a false statement on a matter that is to be stated to the mayor of the municipality in accordance with the rules of the provisions of Article 99-2 of the National Tax Collection Act (including as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 109, paragraph (4) of that Act) is to be punished by imprisonment for not more than six months or a fine of not more than 500,000 yen.