@thesis{thesis,
		author={Irwanto  Irwanto},
		title ={Comparative study of tax incentives in Indonesia, Malaysia, and the United States of America to support research and development},
		year={2020},
		url={http://repository.uph.edu/9963/},
		abstract={Studies found that R&D help promoting a country’s economic growth. It is important for Indonesia to consider this as a long-run solution to escape middle-income trap since Indonesia’s R&D spending has been below 1% every year. Further studies call for tax incentives as a solution to this problem.  The purpose of this study is to compare different tax incentives schemes for R&D, along with giving recommendation to implement those. The approach in this study is qualitative descriptive method with literature review and secondary data.
Indonesia provides R&D incentives as additional incentives to other schemes such as investment incentive schemes. However, a new regulation has been formed, PP No. 45 Tahun 2019, to provide R&D based tax incentives which gives 300% deduction on eligible R&D expenses. Yet, the eligibility has not been issued until now. R&D based tax incentive schemes in Malaysia have come to a fruitful success for its brink to reaching high-income country status. Malaysia provides 200% deduction for eligible R&D expenses, tax holiday and investment tax allowance for R&D companies and in-house R&D. Contrarily, the US treat eligible R&D expenses as deductible expenses and give tax credit of 20% or below, determined by historical financial data. This study concludes that Indonesia should define R&D for tax purpose, quickly assess which industry and activities are eligible for 300% super deduction and take Malaysia as an example in the assessment. Finally, Malaysia should slowly reduce unfavourable tax incentives, which are losing potential income, and give other tax incentives which can be a win-win solution to both parties.
/
Penelitian menemukan bahwa penelitian dan pengembangan (litbang) dapat menaikkan perekonomian suatu negara. Hal ini dapat dipertimbangkan Indonesia sebagai solusi jangka panjang guna menghindari middle-income trap. Penelitian selanjutnya menyebutkan bahwa insentif pajak merupakan solusi untuk hal tersebut. Oleh sebab itu, penelitian ini ditujukan untuk membandingkan insentif pajak litbang, dan merekomendasi implementasi. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan menggunakan metode pendekatan deskriptif kualitatif dengan tinjauan pustaka menggunakan data sekunder.
Indonesia menawarkan insentif pajak litbang sebagai tambahan dari skema insentif pajak lainnya, seperti skema insentif investasi. PP No. 45 Tahun 2019 telah diterbitkan sebagai insentif pajak litbang yang memberikan super deduction sebesar 300% terhadap biaya litbang. Tetapi, syarat fasilitas tersebut belum diterbitkan. Di sisi lain, Malaysia telah sukses dalam implementasi insentif pajak litbang, dibuktikan dari status negara yang hampir mencapai berpenghasilan tinggi. Insentif diberikan dalam bentuk super deduction 200%, tax holiday, dan tunjangan pajak investasi untuk perusahaan litbang dan kegiatan litbang. Sebaliknya, biaya litbang di Amerika Serikat adalah deductible expense dan kredit pajak sebesar 20% berdasarkan data histori keuangan. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa Indonesia harus menerbitkan definisi litbang untuk tujuan perpajakan, menentukan industri yang layak untuk fasilitas super deduction, dan mengambil Malaysia sebagai contoh penerapan insentif pajak litbang. Akhirmya, Malaysia direkomendasikan untuk mengurangi insentif pajak yang mengurangi pendapatan potensial, dan memberikan insentif pajak win-win solution untuk pemerintah dan wajib pajak.}
		}