기업회계 및 세법상 무형자산 범위 재설정에 관한 연구: 미국･영국･일본과의 비교를 중심으로

초록

The era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution has a relatively large impact on corporate value of intangible assets over tangible assets. As a result, domestic and foreign companies are focusing on investing in intangible assets rather than on tangible assets. Despite the increased importance of such intangible assets, the current accounting standards in Korea and the Individual Tax Act provide differently for the scope of intangible assets. The scope of these intangible assets is relatively narrow compared to the guidelines of major foreign countries and the OECD. This reduces the convergence of domestic intangible asset ranges and the international comparability. In addition, inconsistencies in terms related to intangible assets are increasing taxpayers’ tax cooperation costs and also creating problems that are less comprehensible to stakeholders. Thus, this study identifies the scope of intangible assets under tax law and presents problems and improvements to the scope of intangible assets in major foreign countries by comparing them. Problems with the scope of domestic intangible assets include: First, there is a lack of convergence between accounting standards and tax laws by defining different ranges of intangible assets between domestic accounting standards and individual tax laws. Second, the scope of intangible assets in Korea is relatively small as the scope of which can be recognized as intangible assets is narrow compared to the guidelines of major foreign countries and OECD. Third, the inconsistency in terms reduces stakeholders’ understanding of intangible assets. Fourth, taxpayers’ tax cooperation costs are increasing. To improve the problem with the scope of such intangible assets, the study presented the following improvements to the scope of such intangible assets: First, by unifying the scope of intangible assets in accounting standards and tax laws, convergence between domestic accounting standards and individual tax laws should be enhanced. Second, the terms for intangible assets should be unified. Third, a prior consultation system should be in place to adjust the difference in recognition of intangible assets between taxpayers and tax authorities. Fourth, it is necessary to include the scope of intangible assets under the Corporate Tax Act in order to expand the scope of intangible assets. This would increase the convergence and comparability between domestic and foreign regulations for the scope of intangible assets. It is also expected that unnecessary lawsuits between taxpayers and tax authorities will be reduced. The unification of the terms for intangible assets would increase the understanding of the intangible assets held by the entity, which would result in the value of the intangible assets held by the entity being properly assessed in the capital market.

키워드