MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7125809049 · doi:10.35586/jyur.v11i2.9272

IMPLEMENTASI ONE ROOF SYSTEM DI PENGADILAN PAJAK: TANTANGAN DAN SOLUSI DALAM MEWUJUDKAN PERBAIKAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PAJAK

2025· article· W7125809049 on OpenAlexaff
Doni Budiono

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Yuridis · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsAcsenda School of Management
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic accountingPolicy makingConsumer protection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 26/PUU-XXI/2023 tentang “one roof system” di Pengadilan Pajak merupakan momentum penting untuk mencapai keadilan bagi wajib pajak. Putusan ini menegaskan kembali esensi Pengadilan Pajak dan Mahkamah Agung sebagai lembaga penegak hukum untuk mencari keadilan, bukan sekadar alat pemerintah untuk mengamankan pendapatan negara. Terbitnya putusan ini menjadi sarana reformasi untuk memperbaiki permasalahan dalam penyelesaian sengketa pajak mulai dari tingkat Direktorat Jenderal Pajak (DJP), Pengadilan Pajak, hingga Mahkamah Agung. Penelitian ini membahas dua rumusan masalah utama: Pertama, apakah dengan terbitnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 26/PUU-XXI/2023 tentang “one roof system” di Pengadilan Pajak sudah cukup untuk memberikan perbaikan penyelesaian sengketa pajak. Kedua, Apa saja permasalahan yang dihadapi dalam penyelesaian sengketa pajak dari tingkat DJP, Pengadilan Pajak, hingga Mahkamah Agung, serta solusinya. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan perbandingan hukum. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penerapan “one roof system” di Pengadilan Pajak memberikan dampak positif pada transparansi dan akuntabilitas proses penyelesaian sengketa pajak. Namun, penerapan sistem ini saja belum cukup. Masih terdapat berbagai tantangan yang harus diselesaikan agar keadilan bagi para pencari keadilan dapat terwujud sepenuhnya dalam sistem penyelesaian sengketa pajak.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0540.022

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal YuridisSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207