Local Tax Act

Where a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3) has been made and there is a shortfall amount (meaning the shortfall in the remittance resulting from a reassessment or the amount of remittance resulting from a determination; the same applies hereinafter with regard to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc.), a tax collection official must collect it, taking as the due date for payment the day on which one month has elapsed from the day on which notice was given under paragraph (4) of that Article.

In the case of the preceding paragraph, an amount of delinquency charge equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the shortfall amount by a rate of 14.6 percent per annum (7.3 percent per annum for the period up to the due date for payment under the preceding paragraph or the period up to the day on which one month has elapsed from the day following that due date for payment), according to the number of days in the period from the day following the due date for payment under Article 718, paragraph (2) (where the due date for payment has been extended, the extended due date for payment; the same applies hereinafter with regard to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc.) to the day of remittance, must be added and collected.

Where the head of the local government finds that there are unavoidable grounds for a special collection agent having been subject to a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraph (1) or (2), the head may reduce or exempt the amount of delinquency charge under the preceding paragraph.

Where a remittance return is submitted by its deadline for filing (including the case where a remittance return is submitted after its deadline for filing and the proviso to the following paragraph or paragraph (8) applies; the same applies hereinafter in this paragraph), and a reassessment under Article 719, paragraph (1) or (3) has been made, the head of the local government must, except where the head finds that there are justifiable grounds for the error in the tax base amount or tax amount relating to the remittance return before that reassessment, collect an amount of additional charge for understatement equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the shortfall amount resulting from that reassessment (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as the "covered shortfall") by a rate of 10 percent (where the covered shortfall (where, before that reassessment, a reassessment has been made with respect to the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. relating to that reassessment, the amount obtained by adding to it the total of the shortfall amounts resulting from that earlier reassessment (where it is found that there were justifiable grounds for the error in the tax base amount or tax amount relating to the remittance return before that earlier reassessment, the amount after deducting the shortfall amount resulting from that earlier reassessment, and where, with respect to that water utilization and land benefit tax, etc., there has been a reassessment reducing the amount payable, or a change of the original disposition by a ruling or judgment on a request for review or suit relating to a reassessment, the amount after deducting the amount equivalent to the portion reduced by them)) exceeds the greater of the amount equivalent to the tax amount relating to the remittance return in the case where it was submitted by its deadline for filing and 500,000 yen, the amount obtained by adding the amount calculated by multiplying the amount equivalent to the excess portion (where the covered shortfall is less than the amount equivalent to the excess portion, the covered shortfall) by a rate of 5 percent).

In any of the following cases, the head of the local government must collect an amount of additional charge for failure to file equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the tax amount payable as a result of the remittance return, determination or reassessment prescribed in each item by a rate of 15 percent; provided, however, that this does not apply where it is found that there were justifiable grounds for the remittance return not having been submitted by its deadline for filing.

Where a remittance return is submitted after its deadline for filing, or a determination under Article 719, paragraph (2) has been made;

Where, after a remittance return was submitted after its deadline for filing, a reassessment under Article 719, paragraph (1) or (3) has been made;

Where, after a determination under Article 719, paragraph (2) was made, a reassessment under paragraph (3) of that Article has been made.

Where, in a case falling under the preceding paragraph (excluding where the proviso to that paragraph or paragraph (8) applies; the same applies in the following paragraph and paragraph (5)), the tax amount payable prescribed in the preceding paragraph (in the case of item (ii) or (iii) of that paragraph, the amount obtained by adding to it the total of the tax amounts payable by a remittance return, relating to the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. concerned, submitted after its deadline for filing before the reassessment prescribed in those items, or by a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3) (where there has been a reassessment reducing the tax amount payable, or a change of the original disposition by a ruling or judgment on a request for review or suit relating to a reassessment, the amount after deducting the amount equivalent to the tax amount of the portion reduced by them; referred to in the following paragraph as the "cumulative remitted tax amount"); referred to in the following paragraph as the "cumulative remitted tax amount after addition") exceeds 500,000 yen, the amount of additional charge for failure to file prescribed in the preceding paragraph is, notwithstanding the provisions of that paragraph, the amount obtained by adding, to the amount calculated pursuant to the provisions of that paragraph, the amount calculated by multiplying the amount equivalent to the excess portion (where the tax amount payable prescribed in that paragraph is less than the amount equivalent to that excess portion, that tax amount payable) by a rate of 5 percent.

In the case falling under paragraph (2), if the cumulative remitted tax amount after addition (or, where among the facts forming the basis of calculating that cumulative remitted tax amount after addition there is a fact that was not made the basis of calculating the tax amount (including the tax amount equivalent to the amount of a refund) before the remittance return, determination or reassessment prescribed in the items of that paragraph, and it is found that there are no grounds attributable to the special collection agent concerned for this, the tax amount after deducting the amount calculated, as provided by Cabinet Order, as the tax amount based on that fact) exceeds 3,000,000 yen, the amount of additional charge for failure to file prescribed in that paragraph is, notwithstanding the preceding two paragraphs, the amount obtained by deducting, from the total of the amounts calculated by dividing the cumulative remitted tax amount after addition into the amounts set forth in the following items and multiplying each amount by the rate provided respectively in those items, the total of the amounts calculated by dividing the cumulative remitted tax amount into the amounts set forth in those items and multiplying each amount by the rate provided respectively in those items:

The amount equivalent to the portion not exceeding 500,000 yen: a rate of 15 percent

The amount equivalent to the portion exceeding 500,000 yen and not exceeding 3,000,000 yen: a rate of 20 percent

The amount equivalent to the portion exceeding 3,000,000 yen: a rate of 30 percent

In the case falling under paragraph (2), when any of the following items applies, the amount of the additional charge for failure to file prescribed in that paragraph is, notwithstanding the preceding three paragraphs, the amount calculated under those paragraphs plus the amount calculated by multiplying the tax amount to be remitted prescribed in paragraph (2) by a rate of 10 percent.

Where, during the period from the day before the day on which a remittance return was submitted after its deadline for filing (limited to one made with foreknowledge that a determination by an investigation of the head of the local government would be made with respect to the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. relating to that remittance return; the same applies in the following item) or a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3) was made, back to the day five years before, an additional charge for failure to file (excluding one to which the following paragraph applies; the same applies in that item) or a substantial additional charge (referred to as "additional charge for failure to file, etc." in paragraph (3), item (i) of the following Article) has been collected with respect to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc.;

Where, with respect to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. for which the special collection obligation arose in the year immediately preceding, and the year before that, the year containing the day on which the special collection obligation arose for the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. relating to a remittance return submitted after its deadline for filing or a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3), an additional charge for failure to file or a substantial additional charge (limited to one to which paragraph (2) of the following Article applies) (hereinafter in this item and in paragraph (3), item (ii) of the following Article referred to as "specified additional charge for failure to file, etc.") has been collected, or it is found that a determination should be made concerning a specified additional charge for failure to file, etc.

Where a remittance return is submitted after its deadline for filing, if its submission was not made with foreknowledge that a determination by an investigation of the head of the local government would be made with respect to the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. relating to that remittance return, the amount of additional charge for failure to file prescribed in paragraph (2) relating to the tax amount relating to that remittance return is, notwithstanding the provisions of that paragraph through paragraph (4), the amount equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying that tax amount by a rate of 5 percent.

Where the head of the local government has determined the amount of additional charge for understatement to be collected under the provisions of paragraph (1) or the amount of additional charge for failure to file to be collected under the provisions of paragraph (2), the head must notify the special collection agent without delay.

The provisions of paragraph (2) do not apply when a remittance return falling under paragraph (6) has been filed, if that filing was made in a case specified by Cabinet Order as one in which it is found that there was an intention to file by the deadline for filing the remittance return, and was made by the day on which one month elapses from the deadline for filing the remittance return.

In a case falling under the provisions of paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, where a special collection agent has concealed or disguised all or part of the facts that should form the basis of calculating the tax base amount and has submitted a remittance return or a written request for reassessment prescribed in Article 20-9-3, paragraph (3) (referred to as a "written request for reassessment" in the following paragraph) on the basis of the facts so concealed or disguised, the head of the local government must, as provided by Cabinet Order, collect, in lieu of the amount of additional charge for understatement prescribed in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, an amount of substantial additional charge equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the shortfall amount resulting from the reassessment that should form the basis of its calculation by a rate of 35 percent.

In a case falling under the provisions of paragraph (2) of the preceding Article (excluding where the proviso to that paragraph applies), where a special collection agent has concealed or disguised all or part of the facts that should form the basis of calculating the tax base amount and, on the basis of the facts so concealed or disguised, has not submitted a remittance return by its deadline for filing, or has submitted a remittance return after its deadline for filing, or has submitted a written request for reassessment, the head of the local government must, as provided by Cabinet Order, collect, in lieu of the amount of additional charge for failure to file prescribed in that paragraph, an amount of substantial additional charge equivalent to the amount calculated by multiplying the tax amount that should form the basis of its 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.

Where, on the basis of facts that were concealed or disguised and that should form the basis of calculating the tax base amount prescribed in the preceding two paragraphs, an additional charge for failure to file, etc. has been collected with respect to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. during the period from the day before the day on which a remittance return was submitted after its deadline for filing or a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3) was made, back to the day five years before;

Where, with respect to water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. for which the special collection obligation arose in the year immediately preceding, and the year before that, the year containing the day on which the special collection obligation arose for the water utilization and land benefit tax, etc. relating to a remittance return submitted after its deadline for filing or a reassessment or determination under Article 719, paragraphs (1) to (3), a specified additional charge for failure to file, etc. has been collected, or it is found that a determination should be made concerning a specified additional charge for failure to file, etc.

In a case falling under the provisions of the preceding two paragraphs, where there are grounds prescribed in paragraph (6) of the preceding Article with regard to the submission of the remittance return, the head of the local government does not collect the amount of substantial additional charge calculated on the basis of the tax amount relating to that remittance return.

Where the head of the local government has determined the amount of substantial additional charge to be collected under the provisions of paragraph (1) or (2), the head must notify the special collection agent without delay.