The Legality of Taxpayer Account Freezing by the Directorate General of Taxes: A Case Study of Indonesian Tax Court Decision No. PUT-010548.99/2023/PP/M.VB
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58258/3xy77j33Keywords:
Bank Account Freezing, Legal Certainty, Minority Shareholder, Tax Collection, Tax GuarantorAbstract
The authority of the Directorate General of Taxes (DGT) to freeze bank accounts constitutes an important enforcement mechanism in tax collection. However, its implementation raises significant legal concerns when imposed on parties whose status as tax guarantors is not clearly established. This study examines the legal validity of freezing the bank account of PT Luxe Utama Indonesia in relation to the tax liabilities of PT Andaman Delmar, as decided in Indonesian Tax Court Decision No. PUT-010548.99/2023/PP/M.VB of 2024. The research aims to analyze whether the account freezing complied with Indonesian tax collection law and to evaluate the application of the principles of legal certainty and justice in determining the legal responsibility of a minority shareholder. This research employs a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials consist of primary legal sources, including legislation and court decisions, supported by secondary legal materials such as legal doctrines, scholarly articles, and textbooks. The collected materials were analyzed qualitatively through deductive legal reasoning. The findings demonstrate that the account freezing lacked a sufficient legal basis because PT Luxe Utama Indonesia was merely a 10% minority shareholder and was neither a director nor a controlling shareholder of the bankrupt company. Furthermore, the company was not proven to qualify as a tax guarantor under the applicable legal framework. The Tax Court correctly annulled the freezing order and reaffirmed the principle of limited liability, emphasizing that tax collection measures must respect corporate legal personality, bankruptcy procedures, and the protection of private property rights. The study concludes that tax enforcement authorities must exercise their powers within the limits prescribed by law to ensure legal certainty, proportionality, and justice while safeguarding the rights of parties who are not legally responsible for corporate tax debtsReferences
Amalia, L., Abbas, M., & Akbar, M. G. G. (2022). Kekuatan hukum perjanjian utang piutang yang dibuat dalam bentuk akta di bawah tangan. Jurnal Justisi Hukum, 7(1), 1–15.
Djumhana, M. (2012). Hukum perbankan di Indonesia. PT Citra Aditya Bhakti.
Fani Maghfiroh, F., et al. (2023). Transformasi ekonomi digital: Connection integration e-commerce dan s-commerce dalam upaya perkembangan ekonomi berkelanjutan. Jurnal FEBI, 2(1), 1–15.
Fuady, M. (1999). Hukum perbankan modern berdasarkan Undang-Undang Tahun 1998. PT Citra Aditya Bhakti.
Hermansyah. (2014). Hukum perbankan nasional Indonesia (2nd ed.). Kencana.
Idris, M. (2025). Analisis hukum terhadap wewenang PPATK dalam pemblokiran rekening dormant. Jurnal Hukum Al-Zayn, 7(1), 1–15.
Juliyano, M., & Sulistyawan, A. Y. (2019). Pemahaman terhadap asas kepastian hukum melalui konstruksi penalaran positivisme hukum. Jurnal Crepido, 1(1), 13–22.
Kristian, Y. (2018). Tindak pidana perbankan dalam proses peradilan di Indonesia. Prenadamedia Group.
Latumenten, P. (2017). Reposisi pemberian kuasa dalam konsep volmacht dan lastgeving berdasarkan cita hukum Pancasila. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 47(1), 1–20.
Mandey, E. D. (2021). Tindakan pendebetan sepihak oleh bank terhadap nasabah debitur. Lex Administratum, 9(5), 41–49.
Mubarak, R., & Trisna, W. (2021). Penentuan kerugian keuangan negara akibat penyalahgunaan kewenangan pejabat pemerintah. Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum, 8(2), 170–181.
Nurmariani, D., et al. (2025). Analisis hukum terhadap wewenang PPATK: Studi kasus pemblokiran rekening oleh PPATK. Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum, 3(6), 8128–8138.
Palilati, R. M. (2017). Perlindungan hukum konsumen perbankan oleh Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan, 5(1), 90–103.
Purwanti, T. I., Saragih, A. M., Widyaningrum, N., & Sendjaja, T. (2024). Implikasi Undang-Undang Nomor 4 Tahun 2023 tentang Pengembangan dan Penguatan Sektor Keuangan terhadap tugas dan fungsi PPATK. Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen Bisnis dan Inovasi, 11(3), 1672–1686.
Rade, S. D., Tadeus, D. W., & Gana, G. (2021). Kerahasiaan bank sebagai bentuk perlindungan data nasabah (Kasus pada PT Bank CIMB Niaga Tbk). Jurnal Sosial dan Sains, 1(8), 861–870.
Saija, R. (2017). Hitam putih hukum perbankan. Deepublish.
Shomad, T. (2017). Hukum perbankan. Kencana.
Sopian, R. M., Amalia, A., & Jainah, Z. O. (2024). Pertanggungjawaban pejabat pemerintah akibat terjadinya maladministrasi dalam pelayanan publik. Humanitas: Jurnal Humaniora, Sosial dan Bisnis, 2(10), 1121–1132.
Willyams, F. J., & Yusuf, H. (2024). Peran Otoritas Jasa Keuangan dalam mencegah tindak pidana perbankan dan pencucian uang di Indonesia. Jurnal Intelek Insan Cendikia, 1(9), 1452–1463.
Wilson Petrus Manalu. (2020). Pertanggungjawaban perbankan dalam pelanggaran prinsip kehati-hatian terhadap nasabah bank konvensional pada pemblokiran rekening secara sepihak. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 6(1), 53–60.
Wuisang, J. W., et al. (2026). Perlindungan hukum nasabah bank atas pemblokiran rekening dormant berdasarkan kebijakan Pusat Pelaporan dan Analisis Transaksi Keuangan. Jurnal Fakultas Hukum Unsrat, 14(5), 1–18.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Edy Susanto, Appe Hutauruk, Hotman Sinambela, Sunarno
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
