Trusted by national to multinational businesses, Insimen meets the needs of legality, certification, and cross-sector compliance with a neat and professional process.
DJP extends tax supervision of all taxable persons through SE 8/PJ/2026, with administrative validation, Coretax data, and follow-up measured based on the compliance risk profiles of each company more systematically.
Tax supervision entered a more systematic stage after the Directorate General of Taxation issued the Executive Order of the Directorate General of Taxation No. SE 8/PJ/2026.
The circular does not mandate tax inspections of entire communities or companies. The D.J.P. first conducts administrative research through data available in the tax system.
SE 8/PJ/2026 became the guideline for the implementation of the Finance Minister's Regulation No. 111 of 2025 on Tax Compliance Supervision.
The Indonesian tax system uses the principle of self-assessment. Through this system, taxpayers gain confidence to calculate, pay, cut, collect, and report their own taxes.
However, the trust remains supervised. The DGP can investigate the obligations to be implemented, not implemented, or already implemented.
PMK 111 2025 explains that the supervision is carried out on the basis of research on data and information held by the DJP. Its coverage includes Income Tax, Value Added Tax, Sales Tax on Luxury Goods, Seal Duty, Land and Building Tax, Carbon Tax, as well as other taxes that are in the administration of the DJP.
The formal compliance study is conducted by the Account Representative or the assigned DJP employee and applies to all taxpayers administered by the relevant KPP.
Although it is broad in scope, formal research differs from taxation. Formal research focuses on the fulfillment of administrative obligations. Taxation has its own procedures and usually involves more in-depth testing of the calculation and payment of taxes.
Taxpayers who have reported and paid correctly do not automatically receive letters from the D.J.P. The system and officers will validate first. Further follow-up is done when unfulfilled obligations, data mismatches, or information that requires explanation are found.
Thus, the phrase all taxpayers should be read as administrative research coverage. That phrase does not mean that every individual, PT, CV, cooperative, or foundation will be directly examined by the tax auditor.
The implementation of the Coretax makes tax administration data in a more integrated system.
The taxpayer can match the tax report with the recorded payment. The officer can also see the tax period, the type of deposit, the country's acceptance transaction number, and the reporting status.
For example, a company may have paid Article 23 PPh. However, the payment is made using the wrong tax term or deposit type code.
Companies need to make administrative corrections or book transfers in accordance with applicable provisions.
In addition to electronic data, the DJP can request explanations, conduct discussions, invite taxpayers, hold visits, and request data from third parties.
The results of administrative research can be submitted to a nominative list, which contains taxpayers who meet certain conditions and require follow-up based on the type of deficiency found.
The follow-up is not always a review. The D.J.P. may choose a letter of appeal, a Tax Bill Letter, a letter of reprimand, a request for clarification, a change in administration in office, or other action in accordance with taxation regulations.
The Head of the Supervisory Section may also initiate cases manually. This step can be done when the officer finds a formal obligation not yet fulfilled, even if the case has not automatically appeared in the system list.
The first aspect is the status of the Taxable Entrepreneur. The DJP can examine whether the entrepreneur has met the conditions requiring him to report the business to be confirmed as a SME.
The second aspect is payment and taxation. Research can include timeliness, amount of payment, tax period, tax account code, deposit type code, as well as the validity of the country's acceptance transaction number.
The third aspect is the timeliness and completeness of the tax report, which includes the Time-Spot, the Annual Spot, the Tax Object Notice Letter, and other reports required by taxation provisions.
The SPT that has obtained proof of acceptance remains subject to review. The DJP may find errors in filing or attachments that are incomplete.
The fourth aspect is the tax installments in the current year. The taxpayer can examine Article 25 PPh which must be paid by the taxpayer himself.
The fifth aspect includes tax services and facilities; the sixth aspect includes other formal obligations, such as data updates, administration of place of business activities, taxable status, data manager, and cuts and collection obligations.
A letter of formal notice may be issued to ask the company to meet certain obligations, such as consolidation of the CCP, tax payments, reporting corrections, compliance with current year installments, and adjustment of tax facilities.
The taxable person may meet the obligations or provide explanations.
For such a mechanism, the taxable person may apply for an extension of up to seven days if the notification is given before the deadline for replying.
The Tax Bill may be issued if there is a tax that is not or is not paid, a lack of writing or miscalculation, and an administrative penalty in the form of interest or fine.
The letter of censure may be issued if the SPT is not delivered within the specified time limit.
For reporting delays, the general fine under the provisions of the KUP is Rp1,000,000 for the Annual SPT of the body, Rp100,000 for the Annual SPT of the individual, Rp500,000 for the VAT Period SPT, and Rp100,000 for the other Period SPT.
The biggest change for companies is not the emergence of new tax obligations, but the change lies in a more structured, documented, and connected tax administration data oversight process.
The company does not simply ensure that the tax has been paid, but that the payments must be made using the correct identity, tax code, tax period, and type of deposit.
Small errors can cause a difference in the system, but administrative differences do not always mean that there is a material tax breach or a lack of taxation.
The risk is rather high for companies that no longer operate business activities, but still have active NPWP.
In practice, NPWP, CCP, or reporting obligations do not always change automatically when business activity stops. Companies still need to check their administrative status and submit changes according to actual conditions.
If the SPT is not reported, the company may enter the nominative list of the letter of censure or STP. A fine may arise for any late reporting if the company is not included in the conditions exempted by the regulations.
The DGP may also propose data changes, the removal of NPWP, the strengthening of the PKP, changes in status, adjustment of facilities, or other administrative actions by the post.
The choice may be to maintain active status by fulfilling all obligations, to apply for non-active status under the terms, or to complete other administrative processes based on the conditions of the business entity.
Each company needs to ensure that Coretax access is available for use by the authorities, and email addresses, phone numbers, company addresses, administrator data, and responsible persons must also be updated.
The entire time period and annual period period period should be reviewed, electronic receipt, proof of payment, proof of deduction, tax invoice, billing code, and country receipt transaction number must be kept on a regular basis.
Companies also need to reconcile PPh Article 21, PPh Article 23, PPh Article 4 paragraph 2, PPh Article 25, and VAT.
When a company receives a letter from a DJP, management must not ignore it. The company must identify the type of letter, calculate the time limit, examine the data in question, and prepare explanations and supporting documents.
Simple formal questions do not automatically turn into tax audits, but inconsistent data, inadequate responses, and continually neglected obligations can increase the risk of material inspection, visits, assessments, examinations, to initial evidence-based examinations.
SE 8/PJ/2026 finally affirms that Tax Supervision is increasingly relying on data integration, administrative validation, and risk mapping. Companies with reporting, payments, SME status, as well as orderly documents need not panic. However, companies that allow NPWP to remain active without managing their obligations need to immediately undergo evaluation.
0 comments on this article.
No comments yet.