中國大陸目前為我國對外投資比重最高的地區，台商到中國大陸設廠的家數與日俱增，兩岸經貿往來愈加頻繁，所涉及的交易事項也愈趨複雜，降低台商租稅風險係刻不容緩的事情，故擬研究兩岸移轉訂價稅制。 本研究於研究期間適逢中國大陸在2009年1月8日發布特別納稅調整實施辦法，該辦法回溯自2008年1月1日生效，主要內容有關聯訊息披露、同期文檔準備、轉讓定價審計、資本弱化、成本分攤協議、預約定價安排、一般反避稅管理、受控外國企業等規定，不但囊括了三大反避稅條款，還加上一般反避稅的補充性條款。 該辦法之嚴密周詳超乎預期，但與我國移轉訂價稅制並不完全一致，縱使跨國企業本身自認已做到誠實納稅，仍有可能遭到調整補稅，產生國際間重複課稅的情況，為避免台商遭受巨大之租稅風險，故本研究比較兩岸移轉訂價稅制之差異，並提出因應之道，留予台商參考。 台商未來要能夠在兩岸愈來愈完備的移轉訂價稅制下全身而退，一定要有完備的因應之道，不能再一昧追求最低稅負，而是應該追求最適稅負，必須要重新檢視營運及交易流程，了解各個關係企業所承擔的功能及風險，以訂定合理的移轉價格，並妥善準備移轉訂價報告。 / China is currently the highest proportion of foreign investment in my country, Taiwanese enterprises set up more and more factories in China. The cross-strait trades become more frequent, involving transactions become more complex. To reduce the tax risk of Taiwanese enterprises is imperative. Therefore, this study is to investigate Taiwan and China’ transfer pricing system. This study period coincides with the China promulgated the Implementation Measures of Special Tax Adjustments on January 8, 2009, retroacting back to January 1, 2008. The measures mainly contain information disclosure in associated parties, contemporaneous documentation prepared, transfer pricing audit, thin capitalization, cost contribution agreement, advanced pricing arrangement, the general anti-avoidance management, controlled foreign companies, etc. Such rules encompass not only the three major anti-avoidance provisions, but also general anti-avoidance complementary provisions. The China’s transfer pricing system is stringent than expected, but is not exactly the same with ours. Even though multinational companies consider themselves have compiled with the tax law honestly, they still may be adjusted by both fiscal authorities, resulting in the situation of international double taxation. To avoid Taiwanese enterprises suffering a great deal of tax risk, this study compared the differences of both countries’ transfer pricing system and proposed the method in respond to the system, leaving a reference to Taiwanese enterprises. Taiwanese enterprises want to be able to survive in increasingly strict transfer pricing system, must have a cautious response. Taiwanese enterprises can no longer be continuous to chase the lowest tax burden, but rather the pursuit of the optimal tax. They must re-examine the operation and transaction process, understand the function and risk in all affiliates, set a reasonable price and well prepared for the transfer pricing report.

由於各國實施不同的租稅管轄權，造成重複課稅的現象產生，違反租稅公平原則，使從事跨國經貿投資的納稅義務人，承受較重的租稅負擔，影響其國際經貿的投資活動，所以，為了消除重複課稅等現象，各國簽訂租稅協定已經是國際間的潮流。另外，實質管理處所之認定與受控外國公司制度在台灣也逐漸被重視，加上租稅協定的簽訂，促使課稅資料的透明化，以往的交易模式也將增加稅務風險。 兩岸在經濟面的互動頻繁，因此，台灣與中國大陸於2015年8月簽訂兩岸租稅協議。本文先收集上市上櫃企業其大陸投資之股利匯回資料，並依各種不同情況之假設，分析台灣企業適用兩岸租稅協議前後之差異及影響，再探討貨物及勞務面於所得稅法第四十三條之四通過後對台商之利弊分析。結果顯示，不論是直接投資或間接投資中國大陸，在兩岸租稅協議通過後，股利匯回至台灣將可以提高台灣方面的稅收，也可提高股東的股東可扣抵稅額，減輕股東的稅負。

本文旨在探討受控外國公司規則對我國企業之影響。首先，本文對所得稅法第所得稅法第四十三條之三及第四十三條之四與其相關配套措施之關聯性與適切性進行分析，分析結果顯示兩者可能不具備有預期的高度密切關聯性，如果政府預期所得稅法第四十三條之三及第四十三條之四能夠在近期開始實施，可先考慮讓兩岸租稅協議和共同申報及應行注意標準與所得稅法第四十三條之三及第四十三條之四脫鉤；其次，根據本文的估算分析，顯示若開始實施受控外國公司規則，將對長年利用境外控股公司進行轉投資的我國企業增加頗大的稅負影響，可能嚴重影響企業資金的調度問題及對未來企業全球間的組織安排；再者，本文對於我國企業因受控外國公司規則所受之衝擊，予以提出因應措施，包括：對境外控股公司控股架構之調整及對境外控股公司獲利分配之調整，使其境外控股公司達到受控外國公司規則之豁免門檻要求或使其境外控股公司不符合受控外國公司之定義，不必將其未分配盈餘計入台灣母公司課稅；最後。綜上的分析結果顯示，若開始實施所得稅法第所得稅法第四十三條之三及第四十三條之四，可能會對台灣經濟造成重大的損失，或許政府並不預期所得稅法第所得稅法第四十三條之三及第四十三條之四在近期內開始實施。

依現行所得稅法規定，只要受控外國公司盈餘未匯回，即可享有「租稅遞延」的效果，由於近十年臺灣利用受控外國公司，對大陸間接投資金額占全部對外投資總額比重超過五成以上，又因上市公司投資金額較大且具有代表性，因此本論文以國內上市公司利用受控外國公司，間接投資大陸子公司為研究對象，探討國內上市公司是否有透過「受控外國公司」不分配盈餘，藉由稅法「漏洞」以產生遞延課稅之效果，及我國若是建立受控外國公司課稅制度，對我國上市公司投資大陸子公司其損益稅負之影響。 　　本文研究結果，發現國內上市公司利用受控外國公司投資大陸子公司，普遍存在有盈餘卻不分配且不匯回之現象，我國有建立受控外國公司課稅制度之正當性及必要性；且我國如建立受控外國公司課稅制度，以產業別而言電子產業受影響最大，以研發強度而言，研發強度在5%~7%及9%以上之企業有較大之影響。又雖然實施受控外國公司課稅制度後，對於中等規模(資本額50億至100億)之有效稅率增加幅度最大，但受影響而應繳納稅負之金額仍以大型規模之企業為最高。 　　因此我國建立受控外國公司課稅制度，能拉近不同特性企業間適用有效稅率的差距，對舉債投資得扣除利息費用，境外投資收益卻能遞延課稅，以及在台灣享有研發投資抵減利益，卻有高額境外所得保留在海外未匯回台灣課稅之公司，有一定衡平作用，則我國建立受控外國公司課稅制度，實已非僅財政收入之考量而已，相對而言，改善租稅公平才是具有更大的意涵，因此有其正當性及必要性。文末提出幾點建議，期能作為政府研擬受控外國公司課稅制度之參考。 關鍵詞：受控外國公司、租稅庇護所、多國籍企業 / According to the current provisions of the Income Tax Act, Taiwanese companies will benefit from the "tax deferral" by not unremitting overseas earnings of their controlled foreign corporations (CFCs). Since the last decade in Taiwan, many companies have been increasing investments in Mainland China via their controlled foreign corporations, the investment in Mainland China have accounted for over half the Taiwanese total foreign investments. Therefore, this study focuses on the Taiwanese listed companies which invest indirectly in Mainland China. Furthermore, the controlled foreign corporations have become a tax loophole; this study examines whether those listed companies leverage the tax loophole to gain the tax benefit through the "tax deferral of Chinese subsidiary earnings." Besides, this study estimates the potential impacts on the profit and tax costs of the mainland subsidiaries of Taiwanese listed companies, if the controlled foreign corporation (CFC) tax system will be established in the future. 　　The results of this study show that the majority of Taiwanese listed companies do not fully distribute and remit the Chinese subsidiary earnings back to Taiwan. Hence, it is necessary for Taiwan to establish the controlled foreign company tax system to close the tax loophole. As to the impacts on industries, the electronics industries will be most affected by the CFC tax system, if established. In addition, companies whose R&D intensity range from 5% to 7% and over 9% will also be significantly influenced. Although the effective tax rates of medium-sized companies will have the highest increase in effective tax rates, but large companies will have the highest increase in the amount of CFC tax. 　　Therefore, the establishment of CFC tax system will contribute to narrowing down the gaps in effective tax rates between different firm characteristics of companies. Moreover, the new tax system can help prevent companies from shirking their fair shares of tax payments. The establishment of CFC tax system is not just for fiscal revenues, but also for the improvement of tax fairness—the latter being more important. Finally, this study concludes with suggestions that may be the useful references for the government to design CFC tax system in the future. Key words：Controlled Foreign Corporation, Tax Haven, Multinational Enterprise

在知識經濟時代下，智慧財產作為企業乃至國家國家競爭力之根本，已成為定論。然而學界對於智慧財產之管理運用的研究，多集中於智慧財產本身之管理而鮮少觸及管理智慧財產之組織。管理智慧財產之組織可以內建於企業內部，也可以外置於企業外部，也就是智慧財產控股公司。藉由對智慧財產控股公司之組織架構進行研究，便可了解將智慧財產之所有權自原企業中分離，能為企業帶來何種管理上的效益，效益又有多大？智慧財產控股公司如何為企業帶來稅務上之效益，其所面臨之挑戰為何？ 由於美國最早對於智慧財產控股公司所生之相關稅務問題進行規範，規範之內容也堪稱廣泛與細緻，故美國之稅制深具比較、對照、參考之價值。 此外，企業之稅賦除所得稅之外尚包括營業稅等稅目。但是本文就智慧財產控股公司相關稅賦問題之研究範圍，限於營利事業所得稅及所衍生之個人綜合所得稅。 在理清智慧財產控股公司之管理及稅務上效益後，本文便能為我國政府及企業提出建言，使政府能了解新型態的跨國企業智慧財產管理架構以確認合法節稅與違法的逃漏稅之界線，又能使我國企業得以藉由智慧財產控股公司架構來促進管理及稅務效益。 / In the knowledge economy era, intellectual properties, without doubt, are the foundation of competitiveness of enterprises and countries. However, studies regarding management of intellectual properties usually focus on intellectual properties themselves rather than the organizations managing intellectual properties. The managing organizations can be built in the enterprises or out of the enterprises, i.e., the intellectual property holding company (IPHC). By studying the organization structure of IPHCs, we can understand what and how huge the management benefits are to separate the ownership of intellectual properties from the enterprises, how IPHCs bring tax benefits for the enterprises, and what the challenges are in front of IPHCs. Since the United States of America is the first one who stipulates the relating tax issues of IPHCs and is probably the broadest and the finest, the tax system of USA is of great value for comparison and reference. This thesis will thus explore the USA tax system. In addition, beside income tax there are still other tax items such as business tax can be levied on enterprises. But this thesis only focuses on business income tax and thus derivated individual income tax. After clarifying the management and tax benefits of IPHCs, this thesis then is able to advice Taiwan Government and enterprises so that the government can realize the new intellectual properties managing organization structure of multinational enterprises to differ legitimate tax saving from illegal tax evasion while the enterprises can obtain the management and tax benefits through the IPHC management structure.