일제하 소득조사위원의 사회적 배경

경성세무감독국 관내 세무서의 조선인 위원을 중심으로

Income investigation committee was a type of taxpayer participation system adopted in 1934 by the Japanese Empire, and it was modeled after Preussen taxation law of 1851 and applied to colony with some revisions. While the income investigation committee of Japan was selected as a representative taxpayer organization by poll, and it determined independent tax base, the income investigation of committee of Korea was simply an appointed consulting organization. Its role on the actual management of the policy was to simply supplement the results of income investigation. Between 1934 and 1945, there were 210 members of income investigation committee of 1st to 3rd tax office under the jurisdiction of Gyeongseong tax intendant office (112 Koreans, 98 Japanese), which represent the brewery business, commerce, transport warehouse, agriculture, finance, and fishery. Korean members had the greatest number in brewery business, and commerce, manufacture, and agriculture were ranked as the second. Also, 129 members of the income investigation committee (61%) were former/current local Congressmen, and at least 1 local Congressman was assigned to each tax office. In the process of tax assessment and collection, income investigation committee member was in charge of 3 main roles. First role was to become regional partners of tax administration. Especially, there was great number of brewery businessman because they had regional cooperation system with tax offices by bootleg liquor control. Second role was to supplement the weakness of ‘taxation without representation’ system for the administration of exhibition and to expand the agreement pool within limited range. This is shown by appointment of 1 local Congressman for each tax office as a requirement. Third role was to serve as a window of civil petitions, such as tax evasion in locally influential community. Local Congressmen were already used to evading taxes by excluding their own tax documents by serving as house tax consulting representative, and civil petition cases were expanded by evasion of personal income tax, business profit tax, capital interest tax, and extraordinary profit tax, which income investigation committee members were involved.