Article 8-2Succession to Taxing Authority in the Case of Abolition, Establishment, Division or Merger of Municipalities
第八条の二（市町村の廃置分合があつた場合の課税権の承継）
In the case where there has been an abolition, establishment, division or merger of municipalities (excluding the case falling under the main clause of paragraph (1) of the following Article), the right aimed at the collection of local government levies relating to a municipality extinguished by that abolition, establishment, division or merger (hereinafter in this Article referred to as an "extinguished municipality") (hereinafter in this Article referred to as "rights to the collections of an extinguished municipality") is succeeded to, in accordance with the area of the municipality to which the area of that extinguished municipality has newly come to belong (hereinafter in this Article referred to as the "succeeding municipality"), by that succeeding municipality. In this case, with regard to the rights to the collections of an extinguished municipality, the assessment and collection and other procedures carried out by the extinguished municipality and the returns, requests for review and other procedures filed with the extinguished municipality are deemed to be, respectively, the assessment and collection and other procedures carried out by the succeeding municipality and the returns, requests for review and other procedures filed with the succeeding municipality.
市町村の廃置分合があつた場合（次条第一項本文の規定に該当する場合を除く。）においては、当該廃置分合により消滅した市町村（以下この条において「消滅市町村」という。）に係る地方団体の徴収金の徴収を目的とする権利（以下この条において「消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利」という。）は、当該消滅市町村の地域が新たに属することとなつた市町村（以下この条において「承継市町村」という。）の区域によつて、当該承継市町村が承継する。この場合において、消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利について、消滅市町村がした賦課徴収その他の手続及び消滅市町村に対してした申告、審査請求その他の手続は、それぞれ承継市町村がした賦課徴収その他の手続及び承継市町村に対してした申告、審査請求その他の手続とみなす。
In the case where there are two or more succeeding municipalities that succeed to rights to the collections of an extinguished municipality under the provisions of the preceding paragraph, and the heads of those succeeding municipalities differ in opinion regarding the rights to the collections of that extinguished municipality that each of those succeeding municipalities is to succeed to, and their consultation fails to reach agreement, they must file an application with the prefectural governor (or, where those succeeding municipalities extend over the areas of two or more prefectures, the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications) seeking a decision.
前項の規定によつて消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利を承継する承継市町村が二以上ある場合において、当該承継市町村がそれぞれ承継すべき当該消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利について当該承継市町村の長の間において意見を異にし、その協議がととのわないときは、道府県知事（当該承継市町村が二以上の道府県の区域にわたる場合においては、総務大臣）に対し、その決定を求める旨を申し出なければならない。
The provisions of Article 8, paragraphs (2) through (10) apply mutatis mutandis to the application referred to in the preceding paragraph and the decision of the prefectural governor or the Minister for Internal Affairs and Communications relating to that application.
前条第二項から第十項までの規定は、前項の申出及び当該申出に係る道府県知事又は総務大臣の決定について準用する。
In the case where a succeeding municipality succeeds to rights to the collections of an extinguished municipality under the preceding three paragraphs, unless that succeeding municipality otherwise provides by Municipal Ordinance, the assessment and collection of the local government levies relating to that extinguished municipality that it is to succeed to is to be governed by the Municipal Ordinances, rules and other provisions of the extinguished municipality that were established regarding the assessment and collection of local government levies relating to that extinguished municipality. In this case, where the succeeding municipality intends to impose an ordinary tax imposed under Article 5, paragraph (3) or an earmarked tax imposed under paragraph (7) of that Article (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as a "non-statutory tax"), and, because among the local government levies relating to that extinguished municipality that the succeeding municipality succeeds to there is a non-statutory tax of the same kind with the same object of taxation as these, the same kind of non-statutory tax would be imposed in duplicate, the succeeding municipality must, as provided by its Municipal Ordinance, impose any one of these non-statutory taxes on the person liable for tax for the non-statutory tax relating to that extinguished municipality.
前三項の規定によつて承継市町村が消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利を承継する場合においては、当該承継市町村が条例で別段の定めをしない限り、その承継すべき当該消滅市町村に係る地方団体の徴収金の賦課徴収に関しては、当該消滅市町村に係る地方団体の徴収金の賦課徴収に関して定められている消滅市町村の条例、規則その他の定めの例によるものとする。この場合において、承継市町村が第五条第三項の規定によつて課する普通税又は同条第七項の規定によつて課する目的税（以下本項において「法定外税」という。）を課することとしており、かつ、当該承継市町村が承継する当該消滅市町村に係る地方団体の徴収金のうちにこれらと課税客体を同じくする同種の法定外税があるため、同種の法定外税を重複して課することとなるときは、当該消滅市町村に係る法定外税の納税義務者に対しては、当該承継市町村は、当該承継市町村の条例の定めるところによつて、これらの法定外税のうちいずれか一を課するものとしなければならない。
Read this with the articles around it
local government leviesmachine translation
「地方団体の徴収金」
A local tax (地方税) together with its demand fee (督促手数料), delinquency charge (延滞金), additional charge for understatement (過少申告加算金), additional charge for failure to file (不申告加算金), substantial additional charge (重加算金) and delinquent disposition costs (滞納処分費).
Defined inArticle 1, paragraph (1), item (xiv)· applies throughout the law
succeeding municipalitymachine translation
「承継市町村」
In Article 8-2, a municipality (市町村) to which part of the area of a municipality abolished in a merger, division or other boundary change (廃置分合) newly belongs, and which takes over, for that area, the rights to collect that municipality's local tax revenues (地方団体の徴収金).
Short name set inArticle 8-2, paragraph (1)· applies only in this article
extinguished municipalitymachine translation
「消滅市町村」
In Article 8-2, a municipality that ceased to exist through an abolition, establishment, division or merger of municipalities (廃置分合); its rights to collect local government collections (地方団体の徴収金) pass, area by area, to the municipalities its area now belongs to.
Short name set inArticle 8-2, paragraph (1)· applies only in this article
rights to the collections of an extinguished municipalitymachine translation
「消滅市町村の徴収金に係る権利」
In Article 8-2, the rights to collect the local government collections (地方団体の徴収金) of an extinguished municipality (消滅市町村), which pass, area by area, to the municipalities its area now belongs to.
Short name set inArticle 8-2, paragraph (1)· applies only in this article
Prefectural or Municipal Ordinance
条例
A rule a local government makes for itself: a prefecture (都道府県), a city, town or village (市町村), or one of Tokyo's special wards (特別区) (Local Autonomy Act, Articles 1-3, 281 and 283). Its assembly (議会), whose members the residents elect, passes it (Articles 89 and 96, paragraph (1), item (i)), and its head — the governor or the mayor (Article 139) — promulgates it, that is, makes it public so that it can take effect (Article 16). The Constitution lets local governments make them within the limits of Acts (Constitution, Article 94), and one may not go against the national laws and regulations (法令), such as Acts, Cabinet Orders (政令) and Ministerial Orders (省令) (Local Autonomy Act, Article 14, paragraph (1)). Unless national laws and regulations provide otherwise, a local government can impose a duty or restrict a right only by one of these (Article 14, paragraph (2)), and it may write into one penalties for breaking it, within limits the Local Autonomy Act sets (Article 14, paragraph (3)). It is made for that local government's own affairs (Article 2, paragraph (2) and Article 14, paragraph (1)), so the same matter can be handled differently from one place to the next. It is a local rule, not a national one: an "ordinance" in the name of a national rule, such as an Ordinance for Enforcement of an Act, is usually a Ministerial Order (省令) or another national instrument.
Written by AI using Constitution, Art. 94 and Local Autonomy Act, Arts. 1-3, 2, 14, 16, 89, 96, 139, 281, 283 as a reference.
request for review
審査請求
A request to an administrative agency (行政庁) to review a disposition (処分) the person objects to, or, where the person applied for a disposition under a law or regulation and a reasonable time has passed with none made, the agency's failure to act (不作為) (Administrative Complaint Review Act, Articles 2 and 3). Unless an Act, or for a disposition based on a local ordinance (条例) that ordinance, provides otherwise, it is made to the agency that made the disposition or failed to act where that agency has no superior agency or is itself the competent minister (主任の大臣) or the head of certain agencies; where such a minister or head is the agency above it, to that minister or head; and otherwise to its highest superior agency (Article 4). Another Act can set rules of its own for it, naming another body to make it to or another route (Article 1, paragraph (2); Article 4): the Employees' Pension Insurance Act, for instance, has a request about a disposition (処分) of the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare (厚生労働大臣) on a person's status as insured, standard remuneration or insurance benefits, other than a decision on a request to correct the pension insurance register, made to a social insurance examiner (社会保険審査官), and disapplies most of the Administrative Complaint Review Act's rules for it (Employees' Pension Insurance Act, Articles 90, paragraph (1), and 91-2). Under the Administrative Complaint Review Act, a request about a disposition must be made within three months of the day after the person learned of it — or one month after learning of the decision, where a request for re-investigation (再調査の請求) was made first — and within a year of the disposition or that decision, unless there is a justifiable reason (Administrative Complaint Review Act, Article 18, paragraphs (1) and (2)). Making one does not by itself stop the disposition taking effect or being carried out, or the proceedings going on (Article 25, paragraph (1)), but the agency reviewing it can suspend them in whole or in part on the application of the person who made the request — and, where it made the disposition or is the agency above the one that did, of its own motion — and, once the person who made the request has applied, must where that is urgently needed to avoid serious harm, unless that would seriously affect the public welfare or the request appears to have no grounds (Article 25, paragraphs (2) to (4)). The agency reviewing it (審査庁) decides it by a determination (裁決): it dismisses a request that is unlawful, for instance one made too late, rejects one that is groundless, and, where one is well founded, revokes the disposition in whole or in part or changes it — though never to the disadvantage of the person who made the request, and an agency that neither made the disposition nor is above the agency that did cannot change it (Articles 45, paragraphs (1) and (2), 46, paragraph (1), and 48). Where the request is about a de facto act (事実上の行為), the determination instead declares the act unlawful or unjust and orders it abolished in whole or in part or changed, or abolishes or changes it (Article 47). A well-founded request about a failure to act ends instead in a determination declaring the failure unlawful or unjust, and, where the agency finds a disposition should be made, an order to make it or the disposition itself (Article 49, paragraph (3)). Where revoking an unlawful or unjust disposition, or abolishing an unlawful or unjust de facto act, would seriously harm the public interest, the agency can reject the request while declaring in the determination that it is unlawful or unjust (Article 45, paragraph (3)). The determination takes effect when it is served on the person who made the request — or, where someone other than the disposition's addressee made it and the determination revokes or changes the disposition or deals with a de facto act, once it is served on the addressee too — and binds the agencies concerned (Articles 51, paragraph (1), and 52, paragraph (1)).
Written by AI using Administrative Complaint Review Act, Arts. 1 to 4, 18, 25, 45 to 49, 51, 52 and Employees' Pension Insurance Act, Arts. 90, 91-2 as a reference.