Tax Restitution Audits Are a Threat to the Business World

Delays in tax refunds, which are factored into cash flow, could potentially force companies to hold back on capital expenditures, postpone expansion, and adjust operations.

By Dimas Waraditya Nugraha

13 Apr 2026 18:53 WIB · English

JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The government’s efforts to close the potential leakage of state revenue through the plan to audit tax restitution have raised concerns among business actors. In addition to potentially disrupting liquidity, unmeasured audits can trigger legal uncertainty and disturbances in the investment climate.

The government’s focus on tax restitution has intensified in line with the increasing value of tax overpayment refunds in recent years. Last year, the value of restitution was recorded at Rp 361 trillion, in stark contrast to the tax revenue realization, which experienced a shortfall of Rp 271.7 trillion. Net revenue only reached Rp 1,917.6 trillion or 87.6 percent of the state budget target.

This situation has raised suspicions of systemic leakage and mis-targeting within the restitution mechanism. This underlies the decision of Finance Minister Purbaya Yudhi Sadewa to involve the Financial and Development Supervisory Agency (BPKP) to audit tax restitution for the period 2020–2025.

Unfortunately, this audit plan is not only seen as a step to strengthen state revenue, but also as a threat to business actors.

The Secretary General of the Indonesian Young Entrepreneurs Association (Hipmi), Anggawira, believes that tax restitution for business actors is not merely a refund of overpayments, but has become an important part of corporate liquidity management.

According to him, the value of tax restitution in the manufacturing sector, exporters, construction, oil and gas, plantations, logistics, and industries that rely on imported raw materials and capital goods investment is generally quite substantial and has been factored into cash flow projections.

“Delays in restitution can have a direct impact on business activities,” said Anggawira when contacted by Kompas, Monday (13/4/2026).

The postponement of tax restitution has the potential to cause companies to hold back on capital expenditures, delay expansions, and adjust operations such as reducing working hours or freezing recruitment. This impact will be felt more acutely by medium-sized enterprises that have limited access to financing compared to larger companies.

“In an economic situation that is still full of uncertainty, liquidity is very important for the business world,” said Anggawira.

Hipmi views the restitution audit as a legitimate and necessary step to maintain accountability and prevent abuse. However, an overly repressive approach is considered risky as it may create negative perceptions, especially among taxpayers who have been compliant.

According to Anggawira, the main concern of business actors is not the audit itself, but rather the lack of clarity regarding the mechanism and the length of the process. The business world, he stated, can accept the existence of additional audits as long as there are clear parameters, measurable completion times, and certainty regarding the process and results.

Hipmi also proposed that restitution audits be conducted on a risk-based basis. Taxpayers with a good track record of compliance and a clean restitution history should receive faster processing through an accelerated (fast track) scheme, while in-depth audits should focus on high-risk taxpayers.

Furthermore, the government is deemed necessary to establish a clear service level agreement (SLA) regarding audit completion deadlines. If the process exceeds the deadline without justifiable reasons, a compensation mechanism or automatic approval (deemed approval) is needed to provide certainty for business actors.

Meanwhile, the Chairman of the Taxation Committee of the Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo), Siddhi Widyaprathama, hopes that the audit will be conducted meticulously, transparently, and with a high regard for integrity. An overly repressive audit is feared to create uncertainty and undermine investor confidence.

Amid global geopolitical pressures that could disrupt supply chains and economic stability, Siddhi continued, the government needs to ensure that fiscal policies align with the needs of the real sector. Legal certainty and consistency in the application of regulations are crucial factors for business actors to maintain confidence in making long-term investments.

Restitution audits should not become a hidden instrument to pressure taxpayers into revoking their rights.

Apindo stated its support for the supervision and audits conducted by the tax authorities, but emphasized the importance of accountable implementation accompanied by efficient services.

“By maintaining a balance between fiscal function and real sector liquidity, we ensure the economic engine continues to run optimally,” Siddhi said.

The Vice Chairman of the Industry Sector of the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin), Saleh Husin, added that amid the unstable global economic conditions, the business world requires certainty and tranquility in conducting business.

“We must not introduce policies that create uncertainty and impact investment interest,” he said.

Senior Economist from Paramadina University, Wijayanto Samirin, reminded the government that the restitution audit should not become a covert instrument to pressure taxpayers into agreeing to the cancellation of their rights.

“If that happens, the investment climate will deteriorate. Businesses will adopt a wait-and-see approach and delay business expansion. It would seem we are sacrificing long-term interests to cover the short-term fiscal deficit,” he said.

Wijayanto assesses that the current policy dilemma is not straightforward. On one hand, the potential leakage of restitution needs to be addressed. However, on the other hand, disruptions to business liquidity also pose significant risks. Therefore, legal certainty and clear regulations ar