Legal Discovery in Indonesia’s Tax Dispute Framework

There exists a normative disharmony between the Tax Court Law, the Judicial Power Law, and the General Provisions and Tax Procedures (KUP) Law, which adversely affects the independence and authority of the Tax Court in adjudicating tax disputes. This legal inconsistency generates juridical uncertainty regarding the Tax Court’s position within the Indonesian judicial system and the mechanisms for oversight of its decisions. This research aims to evaluate the current tax dispute framework in Indonesia and explore potential reforms by comparing the systems in the United States, Russia, and Australia. The research utilizes a This research is a normative legal research using a legislative, conceptual and comparative approach. The study reveals that the independence of Indonesia’s Tax Court is weakened by dual oversight from the Supreme Court and the Ministry of Finance. Despite reforms aimed at improving autonomy, challenges such as case backlogs, prolonged proceedings, high litigation costs, and limited regional access remain. These findings highlight the urgent need for systemic reform. Drawing on international examples from the United States, Australia, and Russia, the integration of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms could significantly improve efficiency, fairness, and public trust in the tax system. Aligning the Tax Court fully under the Supreme Court and adopting ADR would strengthen institutional integrity.