Review of The Effectiveness Transfer Land and Building Tax (PBB-P2) as A Regional Tax Authors: Siti Khairani, SE.Ak., M.Si Trisnadi Wijaya, SE., S.Kom Published at: 2013 International Forum on Contemporary Management Issues Proceedings ISBN : 978-986-6600-56-2

2. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
I
目錄
大葉大學企業管理學系(所) 2013 國際當代管理論壇(上冊) 2013 年 6 月
ISBN：978-986-6600-56-2
創新創業(Innovation & Entrepreneurship)
 從國際園區創新創業趨勢看台灣創新創業發展..................................................... 1
嚴萬璋 國立中山大學中國與亞太區域研究所博士生
賴英崑 工研究院產業經濟與趨勢中心政策組副組長
曹景翔 工業技術研究院產業經濟與趨勢中心政策組副研究員
 Applying the Open Innovation to SME of service industry...................................... 10
Tony Yang Student member of CIADA USA branch
Mike C. Yang Director of CIADA USA branch
 整合 Kano 模式與 QFD 於連鎖書店服務品質設計........................ 20
曾清枝 大葉大學
朱淑環 大葉大學
 以系統思考觀點探討產品擴張的成長動態-以王品集團為例.............. 32
史智元 大葉大學企研所
羅世輝 大葉大學企管系
 能創造價值的創業生態系統―以聖地牙哥創新聚落為例................. 41
曾大有 工業技術研究院產經中心
楊昌仲 社團法人中華產學發展協會
 台灣與中國技術創新能力之研究：專利資料之比較性分析............... 48
曾耀煌 大葉大學企業管理學系
孫玉齡 大葉大學管理學院碩士班事業經營組
賴鎧宏 大葉大學企業管理學系碩士班
 綠色大學之個案研究-以大葉大學與台北科技大學為例.................. 58
杜強國 大葉大學企管系
李英怡 大葉大學企管系

3. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
II
目錄
大葉大學企業管理學系(所) 2013 國際當代管理論壇(上冊) 2013 年 6 月
ISBN：978-986-6600-56-2
創新創業(Innovation & Entrepreneurship)
 產品碳標籤對購買意願前置因素之研究............................... 67
黃萬傳 亞洲大學經營管理學系
趙國吉 亞洲大學經營管理學系
陳翰紳 中山醫學大學健康餐飲暨產業管理學系
鄧旭茹 中山醫學大學健康餐飲暨產業管理學系
 運用層級分析法探討營建業專案經理核心能力......................... 75
曾清枝 大葉大學
張鳳玉 大葉大學
 建構服務業技術商品化管理模式－以證照培訓企畫之應用為例........... 86
朱子雄 義守大學國際商務學系
劉晏辰 義守大學國際商務學系
蕭郁君 義守大學國際商務學系
王映婷 義守大學國際商務學系
 概述資訊技術對歷史管理學研究的影響.............................. 103
胡靖 義守大學國際商務學系
張永昇 義守大學應用日語學系
 FIXED COSTS ALLOCATION PROBLEM........................................................ 108
楊文輝 義守大學國際商務學系
薄喬萍 義守大學工業管理學系
 技術商品化之實證―以熱敷袋配方最佳化為例 ....................... 114
謝德遠 社團法人中華產學發展協會
嚴虎台 社團法人中華產學發展協會
 关于高职教育中“教”与“学”的一些思考.......................... 116
李梓元 廈門工學院商學系

4. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
III
目錄
大葉大學企業管理學系(所) 2013 國際當代管理論壇(上冊) 2013 年 6 月
ISBN：978-986-6600-56-2
財務管理(Marketing & Distribution Channel)
 知覺被查核者參與與角色壓力關係之研究............................ 119
謝茵如 大葉大學會計資訊學系
林承宗 大葉大學會計資訊學系
 家族企業與現金股利政策之關係.................................... 128
陳恭敏 大葉大學企管系研究所
徐傳瑛 大葉大學企管系
 買賣牛熊證選擇之關鍵因素研究.................................... 137
黃華山 國立彰化師範大學
隋啟漢 國立彰化師範大學
施茗棋 國立彰化師範大學
黃彥寧 國立彰化師範大學
 日本３１１大地震前後日圓匯率波動對台灣半導體產業類股及觀光產業類股影響
之研究.......................................................... 148
賴文魁 大葉大學會計資訊學系
萬愛蓮 大葉大學管理學院碩士在職專班
胡名億 大葉大學財務金融學系
 家族企業之公司治理與財務危機關聯性之研究-以電子業為例........... 156
李勝榮 樹德科技大學金融系
張超盛 義守大學國際商務學系
余宛真 樹德科技大學金融系
邱芷嫻 樹德科技大學金融系
 股票流動性與資本資產訂價........................................ 167
陳玉芬 大葉企管系
林福來 大葉財金系
黃世瑋 大葉企管研究所

5. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
IV
目錄
大葉大學企業管理學系(所) 2013 國際當代管理論壇(上冊) 2013 年 6 月
ISBN：978-986-6600-56-2
財務管理(Marketing & Distribution Channel)
 影響南台灣鋼鐵產業夥伴關係因素之研究............................ 176
拾已宇 義守大學國際商務學系
楊智育 義守大學國際商務學系
張務華 義守大學國際商務學系
 持有銀行股權與現金持有.......................................... 182
江瑞德 逢甲大學商學博士生
 量是否為價的先行指標-以台灣 50 中的電子類股為例-................. 190
許維智 逢甲大學商學博士生
 Does Macao Suffer From Dutch Disease?A Theoretical Model on Macao’s Gambling
Booms ..................................................................................................................... 196
KE, Jing Ying 廈門工學院商學系
 Sports Management Information System to Reduce Failure of Sports................... 214
Organization
Muhammad Rizky Pribadi STMIK/STIE MDP, PALEMBANG, INDONESIA
 The Role of Zakat on the Country’s Economy........................................................ 219
RINI APRILIA STIE MDP, PALEMBANG, INDONESIA
YULIZAR KASIH STIE MDP, PALEMBANG, INDONESIA
 A study of the relationship between managerial philosophies of a peace culture and
cross-cultural ma ..................................................................................................... 226
鄧旭茹 中山醫學大學健康餐飲暨產業管理學系
 Suggestive Human Resource Policies on Events of Foxconn Jump ....................... 244
柯伟玲 厦门工学院
郑孝清 华东电力设计院

6. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
V
目錄
大葉大學企業管理學系(所) 2013 國際當代管理論壇(上冊) 2013 年 6 月
ISBN：978-986-6600-56-2
財務管理(Marketing & Distribution Channel)
 REVIEW OF THE EFFECTIVENESS TRANSFER LAND AND BUILDING
TAX(PBB-P2) AS A REGIONAL TAX.................................................................. 250
SitiKhairani, SE, Ak.,M.Si
TrisnadiWijaya, SE,S.Kom

7. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
250
REVIEW OF THE EFFECTIVENESS TRANSFER LAND AND
BUILDING TAX(PBB-P2) AS A REGIONAL TAX
SitiKhairani, SE, Ak.,M.Si
Email: siti.khairani@mdp.ac.id
TrisnadiWijaya, SE,S.Kom
Email:trisnadi.wijaya@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Since the enactment of Act No. 28 year 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies,
urban and rural sectors of the PBB which had been the center of taxes transferred to local
taxes.This review is just to see the positive and negative impacts of a tax when the PBB
became the central and local taxes.This review using descriptive analysis techniques.The
data used are secondary data such as the number of district / municipal management
assigns PBB-P2 years 2011-2014. Data were obtained from the literature, websites Tax
Ministry, and the Ministry of Finance website.This review have some conclusion thatthe
transfer of Land and Building Tax Rural and Urban (PBB-P2) bring some positive
impact and the weakness of the PBB-P2 is the transfer of the readiness and ability of
each region to facilitate the supporting infrastructure that is not the same.
1. INTRODUCTION
To conduct the general administration and development activities required considerable
amount of funds. The required funds continue growing along with increased development. No state
funding revenue sources derived from internal funds and external funds. For the Indonesian
Government attempted to reduce external funding and continue to increase the amount of state
revenue from internal sources. One source of internal funds that provide a substantial contribution
is tax. Taxes are the largest source of state revenue is used for governance, public services and
national development. Approximately 70% - 80% of all state revenue from taxes and this amount is
likely to increase from year to year in line with the needs of the state budget. Here is the proportion
of tax revenue to the state budget in 2006 and 2010.
Table 1
Proportion of State Revenue to State Budget year 2006 until 2010
No Budget Year Amount (in billion) Percentage of
Tax to State
Budget
State Budget Tax
1 2010 949.66 742.74 78%
2 2009 985.73 725.84 74%
3 2008 781.35 591.98 76%
4 2007 723.06 509.46 70%
5 2006 723.06 416.31 67%
Source: www.depkeu.go.id, year 2013

8. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
251
Taxes levied by the authority can be divided into two: central tax and local taxes.
Central tax is the tax collected and managed by the central government, while local taxes
are withheld and managed by either local governments Government Level I / Provincial
Government Level II / District and the City. Land and Building Tax (PBB) is a local tax.
The legal basis is the Act No. 12 year 1985 which converted into Act No. 12 year 1994,
and the last is Act No. 28 year 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies. Land and building
are two objects of the PBB, both of which are owned, earned benefits, and controlled.
Earth's surface is land and water, while the building is a construction technique that
embedded or attached to both land and in the waters of Indonesia.
Since the enactment of Act No. 28 year 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies,
urban and rural sectors of the PBB which had been the center of taxes transferred to local
taxes. And whether this transfer of authority will harm the country or reduce reception
center? Directorate General of Taxation is responsible for implementing the PBB-P2
until December 31, 2013 as long as not implemented by the district / city. But starting in
2014 the PBB management is the responsibility of the district / kota. This review is just
to see the positive and negative impacts of a tax when the PBB when the PBB became
the central and local taxes.
2. DISCUSSION
This review using descriptive analysis techniques. Descriptive analysis was
conducted to determine and be able to explain the characteristics of the studied variables
in a given situation (Sekaran 2009, p. 158). Used in this review reference material
consisting of papers, articles, and past research on the PBB ever done in Indonesia. The
data used are secondary data such as the number of district / municipal management
assigns PBB-P2 years 2011-2014. Data were obtained from the literature, websites Tax
Ministry, and the Ministry of Finance website.
The transfer of the management of Land and Building Tax Rural and Urban
(PBB-P2) from the central government to local government is a form of follow-up
regional autonomy and fiscal decentralization. Policy form was poured into Act No. 28
of 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies. With the transfer of the activities of the
process of data collection, assessment, determination, administration, collection / billing
and service of the PBB-P2 will be held by the Local Government (District/City).
Widespread implementation of regional autonomy and fiscal decentralization and its
responsibility began in 2004, as outlined in Act No. 32 year 2004
aboutLocalGovernment and Act No. 33 year 2004 about Fiscal Balance between the
Central Government and Local Government. Both of these laws regulate subjects of
local government authority and funding for the implementation of the authority. In
addition there is also the Act No. 28 year 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies regions
that regulate matters concerning the authority of the local Goverment do the collection to
local communities in order to obtain funding to implement regional development. Both
the principal Act and the Law on local taxes and levies are essentially linked to a basic
principle which is often called the money follows function. In the framework of fiscal
decentralization main instrument used is the granting of authority to local governments
to levy taxes.
Regional autonomy is the right, authority, and duty to regulate autonomous regions
and manage their own affairs and interests of local communities appropriate legislation

9. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
252
(ActNo. 32 year 2004). While decentralization is not only the devolution of authority
from central government to local governments but also devolution of some powers of
government to the private sector in the form of privatization (Mardiasmo, 2009 p. 24).
The central government must not allow for the very conduct and supervise all
implementation of development across the region is of infinite extent. So with the
implementation of fiscal decentralization is that local governments are able participate
actively in national development. The principle of decentralization is also likely to be a
factor in the opinion I made a policy judgment for the government to establish urban and
rural sectors of the PBB to local taxes.
In addition to considerations of fiscal decentralization on which to base
considerations, the PBB and the revenue sharing BPHTB from central government to
local governments are, in my opinion may be the reason why the transfer occurred. Here
are the results of the PBB division of the central government to local governments:
 Funds for the outcome of the PBB acceptance by 90% with the following details :
1. 16.2% for the province and distributed to the provincial Regional Treasury Account;
2. 64.8% for district / city and distributed to the concerned Regional Treasury Account district /
city;
3. 9% for collection costs;
 10% of the Government revenue of PBB distributed to all districts and cities based on the
realization of the PBB acceptance of the current budget year, with a proportion as follows:
1. 65% evenly distributed to all districts and cities;
2. 35% distributed as incentives to local counties and cities that the realization of the previous
year to reach / exceed revenue plan certain sectors.
 Revenue Sharing from BPHTB at 80% with the following details:
1. 16% for the province concerned and distributed to the provincial Regional Treasury Account;
2. 64% to counties and cities producing regions and distributed to Regional Treasury Account
district / city.
 20% of the Government of BPHTB distributed with equal portions to all counties and cities.
As can be seen in the division upon receipt of PBBfunds and BPHTB, then the
PBB should not the responsibility of the central government (the process of data
collection, evaluation, designation, administrating, collection / billing and service),
because almost all of its acceptance is to Regional Government.
As to which is the purpose of the removal of government PBB-P2 become regional taxes
in accordance with Act No. 28 year 2009 is:
1. Increase the accountability of regional autonomy.
2. Provide new opportunities to the region to impose a new levy (add types of local taxes and
levies).
3. Give greater authority to levy taxes and by expanding the local tax base.
4. Authorizes the county in the district tariff setting, and
5. Submit tax functions as an instrument in the area of budgeting and setting.
If we look at the meaning of the above objectives, the first of the accountability of
regional autonomy, then from the point of view of the author, with PBB-P2 maketh a
fully local taxes will be the responsibility region, the process of data collection,
assessment, determination, administration, collection / billing and service can be more
effective. The local government has full responsibility in managing the PBB as local
taxes that may increase the region's autonomy in carrying out development in their
respective regions without having to wait for the allocation of funds from the central

10. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
253
government. The PBB as local taxes can be a significant contribution to local revenue
(PAD). And of course, local governments must not forget the responsibility
(accountability) to the public both in terms of revenue and in terms of its use so as not to
give rise to public suspicion against the local government. The second aspect of
opportunities for the imposition of a new levy (add new taxes and levies) in the opinion
of the author, local governments must better understand the ins and outs of both the local
population, total employment, the number of investors or in other words, local
governments know the exact potential region and also to know what is best for the region.
Third expand the local tax base, which means that local governments can maximize
revenues by looking at the possibility of expanding the local tax base by not burden the
people. The fourth regional authority in setting local tax rates, this transition is not only
the responsibility of management, but also given the authority in setting local tax rates. It
means that the central government gives broad authority to the regions to set up
autonomous regions so that local independence is getting stronger and not always rely on
the central government. Here's a comparison with ofthe ActPBB to the Act PDRB:
Table 2
Comparison ofTheAct PBB toThe Act PDRD
Description Act of PBB Act of PDRD
Subject The person or entity that has a
real right to the earth, and / or
have, menguasa and / or utilize
the building (Article 4 Paragraph
1)
Same
(Article 78 Paragraph 1 and 2)
Object Earth and / or buildings (Article
2)
Earth and / or buildings, except
for the area used for business
activities plantation, forestry,
and mining. (Article 77
Paragraph 1)
Tariff 0.5% (Article 5) Highest 0.3% (Article 80)
Taxable Sales Value
(NJKP)
20% till 100% (Government
Regulation No. 25 year 2002 is
set at 20% or 40%)
Not used
Non-Taxable Sales
Value (NJOPTKP)
Maximum of Rp 12 million
(Article 6)
Least Rp 10 million
Payable PBB Tariff x NJKP x
(NJOP-NJOPTKP)
(Article 3 Paragraph 3)
0,5% x 20% x
(NJOP-NJOPTKP) atau
0,5% x 40% x
(NJOP-NJOPTKP)
(Article 7)
Max: 0,3% x
(NJOP-NJOPTKP)
(Article 77, Paragraph 4)
(Article 81)
Source: www. pajak.go.id, year 2013
As can be seen in the table above, it appears that the area has the authority to set
their own rates according to PBB that there is potential in the area. With the authority is
expected in terms of overall taxation services can also be better because of the good
service can increase tax compliance which will ultimately increase tax revenues. Last as

11. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
254
budgeting instruments and arrangements in the region, from the point of view of PBB as
a writer with the transfer tax area means PBB to be one of the components of a good
budgetary revenue and expenditure side.
When compared to some countries, PBB rates in Indonesia is smallest than another
country in the amount of 0.3%, below 1%, which means that local governments can
further maximize the PBB rates so as to increase local revenue and encourage economic
growth in the region. The following comparison of PBB in Indonesia with other
countries:
Table 3
Comparison of Land and Building Tax Collection in Indonesia and Other Countries
Tax Elements Taiwan Japan Australia Indonesia
Levels of
Government
Province Municipality State District / City
Basis for the
Imposition
Total value of
the land
Estimated
market value
worth
Value of
undeveloped
land
Taxable sale
value
Value of
Non-Taxable
N/A Land 300 yen,
Building
200,000 yen,
Assets
1,500,000 yen
$ 10,000 to $
150,000.
Different each
state
Minimal
Rp 10.000.000
Tax tariff Rated as low as
1% and high as
5.5%
1.4% - 2.1% Progressive
rates, monitor
certain
percentage in a
range with the
addition of a
certain
percentage.
Highest rated
4%
Maximum
0.3%
Imposition of
Tax on Vacant
Land
Tax imposed
2-fold
Additional 1.4%
of the land in
excess of the
minimum size
N/A Same with not
an empty land
Source:Tasniwati, 2010, p.70
With the issuance of Act No. 28 year 2009 about Regional Taxes and Levies, local
governments now have an additional source of local revenue (PAD) derived from local
taxes, so that when this type of local taxes consists of eleven types of taxes, ieHotel Tax,
Restaurant Tax, Entertainment Tax, Advertising Tax, Street Lighting Tax, Non Metallic
Minerals and Rocks Tax, Parking tax, Groundwater Tax, Swallow's Nests Tax, Tax on
Land and Building Rural and Urban, and the tax on Acquisition of Land and Building.
Addition type Local Taxes can be seen in the following table:

12. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
255
Table4
Differences Local Tax Type According to Act No. 34 year 2000
by Act No. 28 year 2009
Act No. 34 Year 2000 Act No. 28 Year 2009
Hotel Tax Hotel Tax
Restaurant Tex Restaurant Tex
Entertainment Tax Entertainment Tax
Advertising Tax Advertising Tax
Street Lighting Tax Street Lighting Tax
Parking Tax Parking Tax
Intake of Minerals Tax Group C Non Metallic Minerals and Rocks Tax
(Nomenclature Change)
Groundwater Tax (Transfer of Province)
Swallow's Nest Tax (new)
PBB Rural and Urban (new)
Tax on Acquisition of Land and Building
(new)
Source: Directorate General of Taxation, year 2013
The first city receiving PBB-P2 as a local tax is the city of Surabaya. Thus it can be said
that the city of Surabaya as a pioneer implementation of the transfer of the management of
revenues from PBB. Mayor of Surabaya, Tri IrRismaharini, MT stated, that in the year 2010,
PAD Surabaya only Rp 1 trillion, and in 2011 the city of Surabaya revenue to Rp 2 trillion. He
added the cause of the increase in revenue derived from PBB and BPHTB (Media Keuangan
Vol. No. V. 40 / December 2010, p. 8). With the success of the city of Surabaya in managing
PBB-P2 can be an example for permerintah districts / cities. The following stages of the
transfer of the management of the PBB and BPHT.
Table5
Number of District / City PBB-P2Management Recipients
Year 2011 – 2014
Year 2011 2012 2013 2014
Number of
District / City
1 17 105 369
Description Surabaya Depok Banda Aceh Remains
Bogor Bengkulu
Palembang Lampung tengah
Bandar
Lampung
Metro
Gorontalo Kab. Way
Kanan
Medan, etc Kab.
TulangBawang,
etc

13. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
256
Source: DJP, year 2013
From the above description, it is very worthy receipts submitted to PBB-P2 region.
Thus, the task can be helped the central government and the withdrawal of PBB and BPHTB
can be done optimally if the withdrawal is done by the region itself. With much reduced
taxpayer must be served by the central government, it is expected that overall taxation
services also will be much better. Because of good service will increase tax compliance of
taxpayers who will ultimately increase tax revenues. Because as we all know that taxes are a
significant source of revenue which is almost 80% state funds sourced from various kinds of
taxes that exist. In fact almost every area often difficulty in finding themselves and increase
their income. So that even after 10 years of decentralization implemented, some areas still
rely receipt of central assistance in the form of block grants or special allocation fund. This
happens because the level of revenue is still low.
Local revenue is another source of financing for the implementation of the
decentralization of the most significant because of the number of PAD is a symbol of a
regional self-reliance in the income does not depend on the central government to receive
assistance in the form of block grants and earmarked grants. PAD dominance over local tax
revenue and levies are to be authorized by a local.
By Rima Adelina research entitled "Analysis of Effectiveness and Revenue
Contribution Against Land and Building Tax Revenue in Gresik regency", that the acceptance
of PBB from 2007 till 2011 is very effective to reach more than 100%. By of that, with the
new policy Act No. 28 year 2009 about PDRD where the transfer of authority over PBB and
BPHTB from the center to the regions, is expected to provide more flexibility for local
governments to implement the maximum decentralization by increasing revenue through local
taxes so the government can carry out their duties more effectively and efficiently, and to help
improve the development and economy of the country.
So based on the above considerations, it is clear that the policy of the establishment of
PBB-P2 as local taxes are considered very appropriate. But it still can not avoid the
shortcomings and problems that occur, for example, because of the limited experience in the
area of information systems development and supporting infrastructure, there are still some
areas that are not yet ready to carry out this responsibility has not been prepared such as local
regulations and the lack of potential sources human resources which each region. For BPHTB
has been required since January 2011, it may arise losses (potential lost) due to there are some
areas that are not ready and not make local regulations. But for the PBB established no later
than January 2014, the local government should be able to take advantage of this transition

14. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
257
period to learn and prepare everything including local regulations and human resources in
order to really be ready. Such as that conducted by the mayor of Palembang, Mr. Eddy
Santana Putra, with a lot of outreach to the community is one of the goals that PBB pay
diligent and obedient.
To overcome this problem there are several ways that can be done such as, for example,
with better coordination between central and local government. Since this is a new policy
would be better if the central government more control over its implementation before the
local authorities really be ready to implement them. And for the performance issues of human
resources, can be overcome by the central government often provides learning / training or
socialization in each region. By taking various measures for the implementation of the policy
is expected to PBB-P2 and BPHTB as local taxes can be done effectively and efficiently and
the independence of the region can be realized in accordance with the expectations of the
Indonesian government.
3. CONCLUSION
From the above review, the conclusions that can be drawn between the other:
1. Transfer of Land and Building Tax Rural and Urban (PBB-P2) bring some positive
impact, ie:
o Creating local independence, where regions can maximize local revenue by
managing their own local tax.
o Boosting economic growth in the region.
o Improve accountability to the public.
o Improve the capacity of local human resources.
o Relieve central government job as the manager of PBB.
2. The weakness of the PBB-P2 is the transfer of the readiness and ability of each region
to facilitate the supporting infrastructure that is not the same. So there could be a lack
of accurate data collection so that the achievement of revenue targets are not as
expected.
REFERENCES
Adelina.Rima.2011. AnalisisEfektifitasdanKontribusiPenerimaanPajakBumidanBangunan
(PBB) TerhadapPendapatanAsli Daerah di Kabupaten Gresik.UniversitasNegeri Surabaya.

15. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
258
Mokamat.2009. AnalisisFaktor yang
MempengaruhiEfektifitasPenerimaanPajakBumidanBangunan di
KabupatenGrobongan.UniversitasDiponegoro Semarang.
Mardiasmo. 2009. AkuntansiSektorPublik. PenerbitAndi, Yogyakarta.
Sekaran, Uma. 2009. MetodologiPenelitianuntukBisnis.PenerbitSalembaEmpat, Jakarta.
Tasniwati.2010. TinjauanPeranPajakBumidanBangunansebagaiPajak Daerah.Universitas
Indonesia.
Undang-UndangRepublik Indonesia No. No. 32 Tahun 2004 tentangPemerintahDaearah
Undang-Undang No. 33 Tahun 2004
tentangPerimbanganKeuanganantaraPemerintahPusatdanPemerintah Daerah.
Undang-Undang No.28 Tahun 2009 tentangPajak Daerah danRetribusi Daerah

16. 2013 國際當代管理論壇
259
2013 當代管理論壇論文集(上冊)
主 編： 曾清枝 孔德明 朱子雄
發 行 人： 曾清枝
發 行 所： 大葉大學企業管理學系
地 址： 51591 彰化縣大村鄉學府路 168 號
電 話： (04)8511888 轉 3011
傳 真： (04)8511382
網 址： http://ba.dyu.edu.tw/
E-Mail ： ba5110@mail.dyu.edu.tw
出 版： 2013 年 6 月 初版
定 價： 600 元
著作權所有 翻印必究
I S B N ：978-986-6600-56-2